LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksRead more.What do you really think of AMD's latest CPU architecture?
Read more.What do you really think of AMD's latest CPU architecture?
Disappointed, so no. If it was priced below the i5, I would possibly think about it.
Maybe in a few years, when everything is multi-threaded, we'll see this as a real solid chip, and ahead of its time, but at the moment, it doesn't seem to give a great step forward in real world use.
Perhaps... I'm a gamer in need of a new build. I'm looking at an i5 atm as, in games, single thread > multi-thread. I'm just worried about the future, when games become multi-threaded... :/
No, i think i have made that clear on other threads ^_^
An intel CPU wont perform BADLY in a multithreaded app, even in comparison to the FX, the main thing is they also perform well in single threaded apps which FX doesnt. FX is only good when its used by a heavily multithreaded game/app.
EvanJackPenn (14-10-2011)
Apparently BD is a let down, but not a massive one (not as bad as original Phenom). With the right pricing, it can stand its own ground. With the current pricing none model is appealing, that will change either with a generous 15% price reduction or the introduction of FX-8100, or both. Until then, however, SB 2700K will have emerged pushing down 2500K/2600K price-wise. If that doesn't happen (price reduction of 2500K/2600K), BD FX8100 will be my 1st choice. Something to help the competition grow, something to punish the strong party's arrogance. Needless to say, that this cpu will be brought to its knees aiming for the sweet 5K MHz spot under custom hi-end w/c.
PS 1: Intel kept on selling those Prescott's because of marketing (and monopoly tactics). 3.4 Ghz were selling. Under this viewpoint, situation for AMD is not that bad. Who's got the higher frequency CPU? AMD 3.6 GHz (scalable to 4.2). Who's got the most physical cores? AMD 8 cores. Aren't those attributes enough as a selling point for the average PC user? Well sort of... because I don't think AMD rules the retailers.
PS 2: I don't want to hear those claiming BD is not a proper 8core cpu. IT IS... with limited L1 cache attributed to each core to be honest.
Last edited by chemeng; 14-10-2011 at 05:13 PM.
It's more the shared floating point unit that's the issue, methinks.Originally Posted by chemeng
yep, i ll buy because about 10-15% all benchmarks are made to advantage Intel. Indeed Intel have better CPUs anyway but they are still helped by benchmark vendors. I think Intel rain with money there.
All benchmarks gives biger proportion of the scores to the softwares where Intel is better. Also they does not reflect real computing. I didnt use for example for years video editing !!!!!!!
It's an interesting choice really. People who do lots of work that requires multi-threaded goodness could benefit from it but gamers won't, in the short term anyway. If you plan on keeping the CPU for more than 2 years, a bit longer than the average gamer I'd think, then the choice gets blurred quickly.
The platform has much better support for SATA3(6Gbps) as well as PCIe 16x/16x crossfire and SLI support for the future. So as a platform you have something able to take many more upgrades going forward than Intel's current 1155 chipset offerings with the added benefit of being cheaper.
You also have the issues of scheduling for the new modules AMD has created and apparently a bug in the process of being fixed(more than likely false I imagine). Windows 8 Beta shows good improvements and thanks to family working for Microsoft I'll be an early adopter of Windows 8. The future looks bright for this architecture but I'm not sure if it is bright enough to warrant me purchasing the platform.
I am undecided. I might be able to wait for AMD's Piledriver release next year and Intel's Ivy Bridge but I am unsure. It's not like my current CPU is a bottleneck anyway.
I have a Z68 board with a G620 'Pentium' chip waiting to be upgraded, so my upgrade path is clear; however I struggle to see the argument for 'Bulldozer' / FX.
In this age of increased consideration of power use (from the practical perspective of cooling and heat & noise dissipation, through to eco concerns and simply paying for electricity) i'd need to see some better benchmarks demonstrating at least 'adequate' levels of CPU grit for much, much lower wattage-draw. The recent FX launch is all in the wrong direction for me.
Not being a heavy gamer I am more interested in AMD’s value offerings and putting the money saved into a bigger SSD. My next build will be ITX system for my daughter. Office, facebook and sims 3 is all it needs to cope with. I’m therefore much more interested in the A series chip offerings.
No I won't be buying an FX chip. The price needs to be 25% lower for a start and the power consumption needs to be lower.
That said, I hope some people do buy it... for AMD's sake! If I was forced to buy an AMD chip right now, I would go for a Llano/A series chip.
I currently have a mid to high end AM3+ board with a 720BE on it (3 core). It is a very interesting question for me. I will in the near future want a little more grunt than my CPU offers and I only really own AMD stuff so AMD is the obvious choice. Do i get an phenom II x6 or go for the FX 8150. I don't know ... I may go for option 3 and wait for piledrive as my tri core shoudl last me til then based on what I do.
I feel the architecture AMD has developed looking at it has an incredibly amount of potential. To draw a comparison (which I am sure many have already thought of), compare bulldozer to the first iteration of fermi.
Fermi had a lot of hype around it but the power consuption noise etc were horrendously plus all this additional tesselation performance gave you no real boost in current games. (similar to all the cores of bulldozer not helping you out with current software). But the GTX 5xx series has substatially closed the gap between AMD and nvidia. I think or hope at least piledriver will be like that for AMD.
I agree - although i'm no engineer and have a lay-person's understanding of it, it appears to have been a cleverly engineered and forward-thinking chip design that has perhaps been relateively-poorly produced by the fab plants....
- Another poster, from another forum.I'm commenting on an internet forum. Your facts hold no sway over me.
System as shown, plus: Microsoft Wireless mobile 4000 mouse and Logitech Illuminated keyboard.
Sennheiser RS160 wireless headphones. Creative Gigaworks T40 SII. My wife. My Hexus Trust
Even if I didn't have a i7 2600K machine I just finished I would still not be considering Bulldozer, I don't really heavily multitask enough in any of the niche scenarios to make it worth the enormous power budget and appalling single thread performance. Fact is most people will notice the single thread performance difference a lot more often that they will 7Zip or some *some* encoding tasks.
Same here MSIC. Like nvidia with fermi they had to get something out even if it wasn't ready.
Also, excuse my appalling spelling and grammar in my previous post as well please hehe.
Performance-wise it is more than what I need, but I see no reason to buy it when price comparable Intel chips are beating it in most applications and benchmarks while using a lot less power. The fact that they can be overclocked blurs the lines slightly, but not nearly enough considering the power draw. It's a resounding 'no' from me
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
