Bulldozer Possibly Pushed back till October

Rauelius said:
All I know is that AMD has shed a ton of fans and this time it may be greater then the time(s) before. Waiting for the Phenom 1, me and my friends were waiting, but all the delays forced us to go with Intel (and glad we did) with the Core 2 series...Now, I couldn't wait to upgrade and went with the i7 2600K because AMD has been sitting on their hands for 6 years.

Friends and family want to build gaming machines, and I want to recommend waiting for BD, but that makes no sense now. I usually say pick up an i3 2100 if your on a budget, or get the 2600k if your not. Even without the ability to OC the i3 is potent and inexpensive. AMD has nothing...These people don't need 6 threads when 4 will do fine, especially with the higher IPC on the SB parts. An i3 2100 and a GTX460 and your good for a while...With no news or performance figures, it makes no sense waiting.

Hell, I'm starting to step away from the Radeon products due to this BS with BD...Get your Crap together AMD!!!
Click to expand...

As much as I hate AMD and all...

Why the hell are you recommending a 2600k? Save $100 and get a 2500k. For the most part, no "average gamer" really has a use for hyper threading.
 
What some are not grasping is that there is always something on the horizon, there always has been.

But people continue to buy because they need something now. They aren't willing to wait indefinitely, but when indefinite becomes concrete, because there are benchmarks, prices, skus, etc. available, they wait.

I just bought a new bike. I needed this bike. I know that the 2012 models are coming up soon, they were all on display at interbike.But I busted my other one and I needed one now. If I knew that there were new models coming, and I could compare actual prices instead of just look at demo pics on websites, I might have found a way to wait a few more weeks. But because none of that stuff, while on the horizon, was REAL, Santa Cruz got my $2K. If I knew that there were new models coming I would have waited, but I could not wait for an indefinite amount of time.

The demand that companies are worried about is not from the entuhsiasts, but it is from all of the other people that say "hold on, if new stuff is coming out all of the prices will come down in a few weeks." If you knew that the $500 computer you are looking at might be $450 in two weeks, you would wait. If you think the $500 computer will be $450 sometime in the future, but don't know when, you bite the bullet. Having the computer for a few extra months is worth the $50. However it isn't worth $50 to get the computer 2 weeks early.
 
CaptNumbNutz said:
There is a textbook example of it taught to anyone who studies business in college.

It is called the Osborne Effect.

It is named after Adam Osborne who founded the Osborne Computer Corp in 1981. Their first computer, Osborne 1, was a success. He announced 2 new products they were working on as successors to the Osborne 1, sales immediately stalled on currently shipping Osborne 1's. Due to fierce competition in that market and drastic drop in sales as people anticipated the product, Osborne Computers went out of business soon after.

If the company is large enough and has enough capital, they can survive the Osborne effect. Apple and Intel are two companies that fit this description, AMD is not. Apple sort of has their own mini self inflicted version of the Osborne effect because they have a habit of releasing particular products (e.g. iPhone) at near the same time every year. This year was an exception for them, but I'm sure they see drops in sales in the couple months leading to the new release of their product.
Click to expand...

I'm aware of it, but even that article refutes it.

On 20 June 2005, The Register quoted Osborne's memoirs and interviewed Osborne repairman Charles Eicher to tell a tale of corporate decisions that led to the company's demise.[5] Apparently, while sales dipped after the initial announcement, they eventually began to pick up, and cash started flowing into the company. Then a vice president discovered some fully equipped motherboards for the older models, worth US$150,000.[clarification needed] Some time and a few bad decisions later, a staggering US$2 million, far more money than anybody anticipated, were spent for the CRTs, RAM, floppy disk drives, and to restore production of molded cases. It was then that the company folded due to debt.
Click to expand...

Companies of all types are constantly announcing new and improved products for the future. I want to see actual quantitative data that demonstrates demand stalling. For instance, we know that AMD is about to release BD. We've known this for quite some time now. Have the sales of Opterons and Phenoms been cannibalized?
 
Jellyfishpudding said:
Accelerated Processing Units with integrated graphics designed for MicroATX, laptops and mobile devices. The desktop versions, which are already on the market, don't appeal to power users but give those with lesser specs a leg up when coupled with whatever GPU is being used.
Click to expand...

Huh? That's what the event is about?
 
Rauelius said:
Hell, I'm starting to step away from the Radeon products due to this BS with BD...Get your Crap together AMD!!!
Click to expand...

Primary PC - Core i7 2600k @ 3.4Ghz/3.8Ghz- MSI P67A-GD65 - Sapphire& Powercolor Radeon 5850 in CFX - 12GB Mushkin Silverline DDR3 1333- Corsair A70 - Corsair 750TX - Antec Nine Hundred Two

Secondary PC - Phenom II x6 1090t @ 3.8/4.2Ghz-Asrock 970XTRM4-XFX & Powercolor Radeon 5770 in CFX-8GB Corsair XMS DDR3 1600- CM Hyper 212+-BFG Tech EX-1000-Antec Nine Hundred

Laptop - Core i5 460m @ 2.53Ghz/2.80Ghz - Intel HM55 Motherboard - nVidia Geforce GT420 - 8GB Super Talent DDR3 - Acer Heatsink Assembly - Acer 15.6" Shell - 6-cell Li-ion Battery

You have three gaming-capable machines and you're bitching about having to wait for BD? Really now. What's the hurry?
 
Forceman said:
Only problem with that comparison is that AMD has already announced their replacement, they just won't announce an actual launch date. You have to wonder if that uncertainty is better or worse than the drop in sales caused by announcing a firm release date (assuming there is one, since announcing a product and announing a release date for an already announced product are two different things). Witness how many "what should I buy now" threads lead to responses like "wait and see what BD brings" - so they've already impacted sales - I just don't see how pinning a launch date is going to change that. Heck, announcing a date farther in the future may even help their sales - if you know BD isn't coming until Jan, there isn't much point waiting and you might go ahead and buy an X6 now.
Click to expand...

You are right. It is a fine balancing act. They have to announce new products or they aren't worth investing in. They then lessen the Osborne Effect by not publicly announcing the official release date, while providing status updates of product developments to their investors. You can never really get away from the Osborne Effect (especially in the current age of digital media), you can only lessen its impact. When a company is in a commanding lead in its particular market, there is even less overall impact leading up to a launch since they still have such a high desire for their products. But when a little dog in the same market does it, having even a miniscule month or two sales decline would be catastrophic.


Let me do a hypothetical...

Company A has 80% of market, has high demand for their products, and is sitting on plenty of cash reserves. They announce a new product, the SexontheBeach Blowjob Edition, that will be better than their previous product and will for sure come out in 6 months to the day. The sales of their current Lickadicks drop a statistically significant amount leading up to the release of the new product, but people still need Lickadicks and product still ships. Revenue for that time period drops a significant amount, but not enough to put the company in the red.

Company B has 20% of market, has high demand for their products, but has little to no cash reserves and/or paying off debt. They announce a new product, 8PornstarOrgy Charlie Sheen Edition, that could be as awesome as its namesake after 2 pounds of cocaine or crash just as hard. If they announce launch date now, their sales will drop on their current line of Thaihookers that are cheap and get the job done because customers suddenly know exactly when the possibly awesome 8PornstarOrgy will replace the mediocre Thaihookers. They also have second option of buying from Company A if the 8PornstarOrgy product doesn't pan out. Any statistical drop in sales could put them in the red since they are so close to it anyways and lead to domino effect of blue-balled investors taking their money elsewhere to get their happy endings. Best choice for Company B is to sell as many Thaihookers as possible to keep the company in black until they release the 8PornstarOrgy.
 
Last edited:
CaptNumbNutz said:
You are right. It is a fine balancing act. They have to announce new products or they aren't worth investing in. They then lessen the Osborne Effect by not publicly announcing the official release date, while providing status updates of product developments to their investors. You can never really get away from the Osborne Effect (especially in the current age of digital media), you can only lessen its impact. When a company is in a commanding lead in its particular market, there is even less overall impact leading up to a launch since they still have such a high desire for their products. But when a little dog in the same market does it, having even a miniscule month or two sales decline would be catastrophic.


Let me do a hypothetical...

Company A has 80% of market, has high demand for their products, and is sitting on plenty of cash reserves. They announce a new product, the SexontheBeach Blowjob Edition, that will be better than their previous product and will for sure come out in 6 months to the day. The sales of their current Lickadicks drop a statistically significant amount leading up to the release of the new product, but people still need Lickadicks and product still ships. Revenue for that time period drops a significant amount, but not enough to put the company in the red.

Company B has 20% of market, has high demand for their products, but has little to no cash reserves and/or paying off debt. They announce a new product, 8PornstarOrgy Charlie Sheen Edition, that could be as awesome as its namesake after 2 pounds of cocaine or crash just as hard. If they announce launch date now, their sales will drop on their current line of Thaihookers that are cheap and get the job done because customers suddenly know exactly when the possibly awesome 8PornstarOrgy will replace the mediocre Thaihookers. They also have second option of buying from Company A if the 8PornstarOrgy product doesn't pan out. Any statistical drop in sales could put them in the red since they are so close to it anyways and lead to domino effect of blue-balled investors taking their money elsewhere to get their happy endings. Best choice for Company B is to sell as many Thaihookers as possible to keep the company in black until they release the 8PornstarOrgy.
Click to expand...
You sir, should teach collegiate economics! The students will probably ace your class, as with most college students, sex is the only way to keep their attention...
 
JF-AMD said:
What some are not grasping is that there is always something on the horizon, there always has been.

But people continue to buy because they need something now. They aren't willing to wait indefinitely, but when indefinite becomes concrete, because there are benchmarks, prices, skus, etc. available, they wait.

I just bought a new bike. I needed this bike. I know that the 2012 models are coming up soon, they were all on display at interbike.But I busted my other one and I needed one now. If I knew that there were new models coming, and I could compare actual prices instead of just look at demo pics on websites, I might have found a way to wait a few more weeks. But because none of that stuff, while on the horizon, was REAL, Santa Cruz got my $2K. If I knew that there were new models coming I would have waited, but I could not wait for an indefinite amount of time.

The demand that companies are worried about is not from the entuhsiasts, but it is from all of the other people that say "hold on, if new stuff is coming out all of the prices will come down in a few weeks." If you knew that the $500 computer you are looking at might be $450 in two weeks, you would wait. If you think the $500 computer will be $450 sometime in the future, but don't know when, you bite the bullet. Having the computer for a few extra months is worth the $50. However it isn't worth $50 to get the computer 2 weeks early.
Click to expand...

so you agree, this black hole of info isn't helping AMD's Bulldozer?

I can buy the solid choice, Intel Sandy Bridge now, and have a good chance of Ivy Bridge being a dropin upgrade down the line, if it doesn't pan out.

Or, I can wait on AMD's Bulldozer, which may or may not mean a thing at some unknown time in the future.
 
jeremyshaw said:
so you agree, this black hole of info isn't helping AMD's Bulldozer?

I can buy the solid choice, Intel Sandy Bridge now, and have a good chance of Ivy Bridge being a dropin upgrade down the line, if it doesn't pan out.

Or, I can wait on AMD's Bulldozer, which may or may not mean a thing at some unknown time in the future.
Click to expand...

That is all true. You as a customer have options.

The black hole of info doesn't help Bulldozer, but it does help AMD's bottom line. They lose a small percentage of sales to people just waiting for the new product or go to the competitor. This part can't be helped. They have to announce new products so investors keep investing, that's how a publicly traded corporation works. However, they will lose even more sales if people have a firm date of when their next product comes out. AMD is on the borderline between losing money and making money, and when they can prevent a significant loss they will.

See my previous post for a better explanation.
 
jeremyshaw said:
so you agree, this black hole of info isn't helping AMD's Bulldozer?

I can buy the solid choice, Intel Sandy Bridge now, and have a good chance of Ivy Bridge being a dropin upgrade down the line, if it doesn't pan out.

Or, I can wait on AMD's Bulldozer, which may or may not mean a thing at some unknown time in the future.
Click to expand...

From my understanding, JF-AMD has long recommended that folks go with what they want. If you want a new processor, and can't wait, then get Intel.
 
heflys20 said:
From my understanding, JF-AMD has long recommended that folks go with what they want. If you want a new processor, and can't wait, then get Intel.
Click to expand...

Correct. I have always maintained that people should buy what they want, but I have never advocated intel ;)

There is a big difference between want and need.

A lot of people on these boards want new processors, but the real demand in the market is from people who need new systems (theirs have died, they are limping along on 5 year old outdated systems, etc.) That is the demand that you don't want to stall because the volume of the market is the real impact.

True to everyone above, the "black hole" that you imply does not help BD, but at the same time, filling that black hole with specifics would have a more devastating impact on OEM supply chains and would ultimately net less overall revenue. There are hundreds of thousands of PCs sold each week, messing with that has a huge impact.
 
CaptNumbNutz said:
Let me do a hypothetical...

Company A has 80% of market, has high demand for their products, and is sitting on plenty of cash reserves. They announce a new product, the SexontheBeach Blowjob Edition, that will be better than their previous product and will for sure come out in 6 months to the day. The sales of their current Lickadicks drop a statistically significant amount leading up to the release of the new product, but people still need Lickadicks and product still ships. Revenue for that time period drops a significant amount, but not enough to put the company in the red.

Company B has 20% of market, has high demand for their products, but has little to no cash reserves and/or paying off debt. They announce a new product, 8PornstarOrgy Charlie Sheen Edition, that could be as awesome as its namesake after 2 pounds of cocaine or crash just as hard. If they announce launch date now, their sales will drop on their current line of Thaihookers that are cheap and get the job done because customers suddenly know exactly when the possibly awesome 8PornstarOrgy will replace the mediocre Thaihookers. They also have second option of buying from Company A if the 8PornstarOrgy product doesn't pan out. Any statistical drop in sales could put them in the red since they are so close to it anyways and lead to domino effect of blue-balled investors taking their money elsewhere to get their happy endings. Best choice for Company B is to sell as many Thaihookers as possible to keep the company in black until they release the 8PornstarOrgy.
Click to expand...

It was only 60-90 days ago that AMD announced that Bulldozer will be released in 60-90 days. That is still fairly vague, but it does at least give you the window of a month. Is this any better or worse than saying that BD will be released in exactly 90 days? They both carry equal probability that the 90 day target won't be met. Or, for instance, doesn't saying Q4 mean that your current product will be obsolete by the last day of the quarter? What is so materially (from a consumer's standpoint) different between saying Q3 or Oct 1st? As a buyer, they both mean that current products are obsolete on Oct 1st.

Again, I think the release dates are vague to shield the company and its execs from legal liability.

I think the myth of the Osborne Effect is one of those things that has propagated to such an extent that people don't examine what actually brought Osborne's company down. It's like the way you are taught in Econ 101 that markets are efficient or free trade is good while the caveats to these assertions are glossed over. Osborne went bankrupt for a multitude of reasons. AMD's quarter ended in early July, so in a month from now we can look at their 10-Q and see if the announcement in July that their current lineup was 60-90 days from obsolescence gutted the sales of Phenoms and Opterons.
 
I think the problem is that when they made the announcement they were not sure if the B2 silicon would perform good enough to be competitive. And the question was would they have to have more revisions. Then after getting a revision that performed well, how would it yield? Besides the time needed for validation.
 
BigDH01 said:
It was only 60-90 days ago that AMD announced that Bulldozer will be released in 60-90 days.
Click to expand...


60-90 days ended in August. 60-90 days stament was published on June 1. 90 days from June 1 ended on 30th August.
 
Paran said:
60-90 days ended in August. 60-90 days stament was published on June 1. 90 days from June 1 ended on 30th August.
Click to expand...

:(. Well, we can still compare Q2 sales to Q3 sales in about a month to see if announcing the 60-90 day planned obsolescence killed revenue. Given that much of this thread was spent discussing the fact that people generally don't know or care what CPU their computer has, I highly doubt there was much of an impact, if any.

BTW, thanks for the correction. I was thinking July for some reason.
 
If you're tired of waiting for whatever the reason just grab a 2600K and OC it.
 
Well, we can still compare Q2 sales to Q3 sales in about a month to see if announcing the 60-90 day planned obsolescence killed revenue.
Click to expand...

I do not know if anyone can conclude that however. Remember that the $125 i3 2100 is kicking the crap out of most of the X4s and X6s in a lot of benchmarks and basically making all AMD > $100 desktop CPUs a bad value unless you already own a AM3 motherboard, will be doing video editing or want to overclock.
 
drescherjm said:
I do not know if anyone can conclude that however. Remember that the $125 i3 2100 is kicking the crap out of most of the X4s and X6s in a lot of benchmarks and basically making all AMD > $100 desktop CPUs a bad value unless you already own a AM3 motherboard, will be doing video editing or want to overclock.
Click to expand...

Except, not really. Only benchmarks i3 beats x4s and x6s is where performance doesn't matter.
 
drescherjm said:
I do not know if anyone can conclude that however. Remember that the $125 i3 2100 is kicking the crap out of the X6s in a lot of benchmarks and basically making all AMD > $100 desktop CPUs a lesser value unless you already own a AM3 motherboard.
Click to expand...

If the Osborne Effect is as powerful as people seem to think it is (driving companies into bankruptcy), we should see an immediate and drastic fall in sales.

If it's tough to extract its effects from other background noise (competition), then I think using it as an excuse not to give an exact date is somewhat dubious.

We could also go back in time and take a look at every other product announcement that AMD has made to look for the effect, but I'm at work now :(.
 
drescherjm said:
I think the problem is that when they made the announcement they were not sure if the B2 silicon would perform good enough to be competitive. And the question was would they have to have more revisions. Then after getting a revision that performed well, how would it yield? Besides the time needed for validation.
Click to expand...

And everything that doesn't perform fast enough gets dumped into the server market ?
And the thing we are waiting for today is the amount of chips available for retail to rackup enough so people can't yell paperlaunch ?
 
And everything that doesn't perform fast enough gets dumped into the server market ?
Click to expand...

1. BD is a server processor by design.
2. It's a lot easier to clock to 2.0 GHz than it is to have a 4.2 GHz turbo.
 
BigDH01 said:
then I think using it as an excuse not to give an exact date is somewhat dubious.
Click to expand...

What happens if AMD does not even know the exact date? They probably do now however in June I would bet that they did not know when BD would be fixed.
 
sirmo said:
Except, not really. Only benchmarks i3 beats x4s and x6s is where performance doesn't matter.
Click to expand...

You know, I've been saying the i3-2100 was better for a while too because I know it wins in gaming benchmarks. But I went to Anand's bench to refute your statement and Ill be damned if you're not right.

In almost all non-gaming benchmarks, the X6 beats it handily. Even the X4 win most but the i5-2500 just shreds anything named Phenom but it is $40 more. So shame on me for only looking at gaming benchmarks. For penance, I will sit thru 3 episodes of Desperate Houswives and let the wife have the remote.

JF makes a good point Ill have to concede. Most of the guys like me bitching and desperately wanting BD are guys like me who have an overclocked X6 in a gaming rig. Not exactly starving for cpu horsepower, just wanting the new toy.

So while I still think all the waiting and silence sucks, I'm gonna sit back and chill. Its obvious AMD is never going to hire me on to their marketing staff so I might as well quit stressing over it.
 
Last edited:
drescherjm said:
What happens if AMD does not even know the exact date? They probably do now however in June I would bet that they did not know when BD would be fixed.
Click to expand...

That's basically my argument. They don't really know when it's going to be ready, so they don't set a date because it opens them up to liabilities from customers and shareholders. I'm arguing that it is not because of the touted Osborne Effect. If they do know now exactly when it will be released, I hardly doubt that giving that date to a couple of enthusiasts is going to kill sales.
 
MacLeod said:
You know, I've been saying the i3-2100 was better for a while too because I know it wins in gaming benchmarks. But I went to Anand's bench to refute your statement and Ill be damned if you're not right.

In almost all non-gaming benchmarks, the X6 beats it handily. Even the X4 win most but the i5-2500 just shreds anything named Phenom but it is $40 more. So shame on me for only looking at gaming benchmarks. For penance, I will sit thru 3 episodes of Desperate Houswives and let the wife have the remote.
Click to expand...

Gaming is what huge majority of this forum does with their uber rigs.
For any non gaming related stuff I have 2 core intel CULV subnotebook
 
Michaelius said:
Gaming is what huge majority of this forum does with their uber rigs.
For any non gaming related stuff I have 2 core intel CULV subnotebook
Click to expand...

That's true but the i3 doesn't win by a whole lot and all those benchmarks are at medium resolutions with low settings. The reason I always pointed to the i3 was that its $40 cheaper and 4 less cores but edged out the Phenom so you would be better off buying an i3 and putting that $40 towards a faster GPU.
 
Here's what we know so far according to recent news.

AMD has at least four BD CPU's planned for release this year. They are reportedly as follows

FX-8150, 8 cores, 3.6GHz stock, 4.2GHz Turbo mode, 8MB L2, 8MB L3, Black Edition

FX-8100, 8 cores, 2.8GHz stock, 3.7GHz Turbo mode, 8MB L2, 8MB L3, Black Edition

FX-6100, 6 cores, 3.3GHz stock, 3.9GHz Turbo Mode, 6MB L2, 6MB L3, Black Edition

FX-4100, 4 cores, 3.6GHz stock, 3.8GHz Turbo mode, 4MB L2, 4MB L3, Black Edition

AMD has named September numerous times for the target release of these initial CPU's and even went so far as to sneak in "September 19th" in a promotional video/ad for the upcoming FX processor series.

In mid-August a statement made by a representative at AMD assured that BD was "on target."

The FX-8150 processor was demo'd at GamesCom on August 17th. Reporters who covered the event came away with images of the setup, the final retail box, and September 19th as the target release date, as communicated by representatives of AMD.

Confirmed reports of an unnamed volume of BD CPU's were shipped on Tuesday, August 23rd destined to land in retail outlets on or shortly before September 19th.

===============

That's it folks. Notice the word "October" does not appear in this timeline. The two sources who have named an October delay do not work for AMD and do not possess the credentials to make such a statement, which is why whomever introduced this info chose to remain anonymous. Until AMD says otherwise, and they haven't yet, I fully expect to see at least some volume of BD processors available on or shortly before September 19th. Currently, there is not one shred of official information that points toward the target September release going off track.

Until AMD says it, AMD didn't say it. Plain and simple.
 
MacLeod said:
That's true but the i3 doesn't win by a whole lot and all those benchmarks are at medium resolutions with low settings. The reason I always pointed to the i3 was that its $40 cheaper and 4 less cores but edged out the Phenom so you would be better off buying an i3 and putting that $40 towards a faster GPU.
Click to expand...

Higher resolutions and the graphics cards become the bottleneck, not the processors so you are correct sir. I would gather to say most want their processors for gaming on these forums so everything else is just, meh...whatever works. I would take a new core i3 processor w/hyperthreading over an AMD 4/6 core processor any day of the week, unless you need more cpu cores for graphics/multimedia work.
 
fps4ever said:
Higher resolutions and the graphics cards become the bottleneck, not the processors so you are correct sir. I would gather to say most want their processors for gaming on these forums so everything else is just, meh...whatever works. I would take a new core i3 processor w/hyperthreading over an AMD 4/6 core processor any day of the week, unless you need more cpu cores for graphics/multimedia work.
Click to expand...

I currently game at 1080p with high details, and will soon be gaming at 3x 1080p eyefinity. The GPUs at that point are the clear bottleneck. With gaming being the only place the i3 beats the 6 core AMDs, I'd choose the 6 core AMD since I can OC it, its faster at everything else, and won't be any slower in my games. Also- a 6 core AMD isn't really any more expensive right now, so I'd get overall better performance since I won't notice a difference in gaming, but if I happen to do some encoding or something it would be faster. Explain to me the logic behind any scenario where an i3 would actually give me an improved experience.
 
Flyinfinni said:
I currently game at 1080p with high details, and will soon be gaming at 3x 1080p eyefinity. The GPUs at that point are the clear bottleneck. With gaming being the only place the i3 beats the 6 core AMDs, I'd choose the 6 core AMD since I can OC it, its faster at everything else, and won't be any slower in my games. Also- a 6 core AMD isn't really any more expensive right now, so I'd get overall better performance since I won't notice a difference in gaming, but if I happen to do some encoding or something it would be faster. Explain to me the logic behind any scenario where an i3 would actually give me an improved experience.
Click to expand...

Like I said games...did I say anything different? Also, how many people have a 3 way eyeinfinity setup that needs all that horse power????? You are trying to compare apples to oranges me thinks. Some of US don't need 6 cores to get the same performance YOU require when all we do is play games, use the web and office!
 
Flyinfinni said:
I currently game at 1080p with high details, and will soon be gaming at 3x 1080p eyefinity. The GPUs at that point are the clear bottleneck. With gaming being the only place the i3 beats the 6 core AMDs, I'd choose the 6 core AMD since I can OC it, its faster at everything else, and won't be any slower in my games. Also- a 6 core AMD isn't really any more expensive right now, so I'd get overall better performance since I won't notice a difference in gaming, but if I happen to do some encoding or something it would be faster. Explain to me the logic behind any scenario where an i3 would actually give me an improved experience.
Click to expand...

You forgotten to add your 6 core will burn 180W when overclocked compared to something like 60 on i3 ;)
 
Michaelius said:
You forgotten to add your 6 core will burn 180W when overclocked compared to something like 60 on i3 ;)
Click to expand...

Agreed, however I doubt that is a care for him with the 3 X eyefinity.

Things in this regard will be much better with 32nm especially after the process matures.
 
fps4ever said:
Like I said games...did I say anything different? Also, how many people have a 3 way eyeinfinity setup that needs all that horse power????? You are trying to compare apples to oranges me thinks. Some of US don't need 6 cores to get the same performance YOU require when all we do is play games, use the web and office!
Click to expand...

I said even at 1080p at high detail settings, you'll never notice the difference between the i3 and Phenom. I don't NEED 6 cores either. All I'm saying, is for similar money, if it doesn't make a noticeable difference for gaming (which is what we care about most) why not get the one thats capable of more should the need arise? Also, as games progress, they will use more CPU cores, and as that happens, the performance advantage will shift. I just don't see the advantage of an i3. Unless you are gaming at low resolutions with medium quality settings, the AMD is going to be the better, more forward looking processor. BTW- how does an OCed phenom compare to an OCed i3? Oh right- can't OC the i3. That takes so much of the fun out of building!

Michaelius said:
You forgotten to add your 6 core will burn 180W when overclocked compared to something like 60 on i3 ;)
Click to expand...

That is a good point and something to take into consideration. I always look for lowing power consumption when performance is equal and price is equal (part of why I have AMD 6850s rather than 460s). Although- how many people on this board actually care about power consumption? I actually do care about it, but I think in general here most don't. Thats actually also part of why I went with an i5-750 rather than a Phenom II 965 when I built this system- similar performance and price, but lower power to the i5.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top