Come on. you know as well as anyone that its the principle. Whoever has the fastest cpu right? We all now PC building is an interesting and fun hobby. that's why I upgrade my hardware anyways.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
AMD FX-Series "Bulldozer" will ship end of June
- Thread starter octoploid
- Start date
random305867
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2011
- Messages
- 198
I stand corrected... I guess there will always be idiots like this to keep AMD alive. I guess in this guys logic benchmarks are a myth, and 8 is a bigger number than 4 so 8 must be better... right?
Its too bad people like that exist.
As most people on here, I am a fan of whatever processor give the best performance for a good price. Right now that is Intel. I am genuinely scared that AMD isn't going to catch up, because competition is good for everyone.Until recently, I was running a Crossfire at 8x/8x, an Nvidia card (PhysX) at 16x, and a 1x SATA card. Even something as simple as this would consume more lanes than 1155 allows.
Even 8x/8x/8x would be impossible considering that most 1155 motherboards are using lanes on USB3 and SATA3 controllers. I am ignoring the NF200 chip workaround, but still. 24 is not enough and will lose at least 1 sale for Intel.
heatlesssun
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Messages
- 44,154
This isn't true however when you start talking high-end multi-GPU setups.
Hedghawg71
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2010
- Messages
- 193
Well the way I fixed that is running one pretty decent card in one 16x lane and being done with it. If you play at anything 1920 X 1200 or below there isn't much real use in the second card being as the cards out now have a little fur on their balls now. BUT if I get the itch down the road, the second card will work nicely as an upgrade.
evanisthecoastie
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2006
- Messages
- 4,708
I stand corrected... I guess there will always be idiots like this to keep AMD alive. I guess in this guys logic benchmarks are a myth, and 8 is a bigger number than 4 so 8 must be better... right?
Its too bad people like that exist.
its not a bad thing, they exist for our enjoyment.
Its always fun to see someone sling fanboy around, and not read their own statements. he completely missed the irony of his post.
Yeah I know, but i'm just suggesting that maybe we should be a bit more realistic. After all, it would mean more money for future upgrades.
These days, I have Micro Center build my PC's. The magic and fun of building your own PC's have pretty much left me. The last system I ever built on my own was a AMD Athlon 64 FX51 with an eVGA 6800GT. I just don't have time to trouble shoot if something causes the system to not POST. Been there, cussed up a storm, and am done with it.
For most of us, it is really not an issue. I've got twin 5850 BE's in CFX and have not run into a CPU bottleneck yet in any game. Sure I could be getting 90fps rather than 60fps if I used a Gulftown or Bloomfield to game on rather than folding, but that isn't a big deal since frame rates above 60fps are usually very hard to notice.
However, I agree with you about high end multi video card rigs. I've just never had the spare funds where that was a problem.
Man, chill out on the Intel Hater-ade....I think Bulldozer will crush SandyBridge too, but no need to crap on a good chip.
I'll tell you what is a failure in waiting for
You suckers will be waiting longer for a Overclocking 1155 Mobo that can run 2 graphics cards @ once than I will for Bulldozer
1155 has been out since late January (They previewed their hardware 6 months b4 this), and still failed [H]ard. There's more CPU's available for that Socket than Total working Motherborads
You can only find 2 motherboards (In stock currently) for it on Newegg. They also are H61 or H67. So that means NO OVERCLOCKING! If you have that junk with a 2500K-2600K chip.
Sandy Bridge is still junk. OEM's, be hating that junk Intel came up with, and shipped it right back to'em LMAO!, and you fanboys think Intel can make a 8 core SB CPU to compete with BD FX 8 Cores?
AMD is gonna take over the market by not releasing junk like Intels been doing for years, get used to it.
Bulldozer 8 Core is coming before SB 8 core ever will, let alone when is the 4 Core SB Mobos getting fixed?
2 Sata ports anyone? My SATA 6 ports work fine on my Phenom 2
Yeah, I get to carried away with things. I gotta learn to post less.
heatlesssun
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Messages
- 44,154
You're correct in your assesment, there's really no need to with the fastest CPUs for gaming unless you're going to with the fastest and more than one GPU as well.
I stand corrected... I guess there will always be idiots like this to keep AMD alive. I guess in this guys logic benchmarks are a myth, and 8 is a bigger number than 4 so 8 must be better... right?
Its too bad people like that exist.
Why would I use logic when talking to someone like you?
Why would I use logic when talking to someone like you?
A modicum of education and respect perhaps ?
I wouldn't say that Magny-Cours is bad as a desktop cpu... It takes just a little effort, a sizable chunk of change, overclocking, and excellent cooling, to make it into a a really worthwhile chip. I have visited some forums that deal with overclocking them, and wow.
D
Deleted member 82943
Guest
dont worry I think sandy bridge will be competitive against BD unless games start taking advantage of fusion and there's some legit voodoo going on.
Since BD does not have an IGP ( no Fusion yet ), how can that scenario change it's competitive stance vs. SB ? At most, SB can further improve if some calculations are done by the GPU ( physics ? ) through OpenCL.
sirmonkey1985
[H]ard|DCer of the Month - July 2010
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2008
- Messages
- 22,414
problem is only magny-cour ES chips are overclockable. but overclockable is an understatement. if you can get your hands on a pair of them. hell if you can get your hands on 4 of them. you can pretty much destroy any xeon processor out there. the magny cours are dual Istanbul 6 core processors under the same IHS. they will do 3Ghz at 1.27v. and i've seen them as high as 4Ghz at 1.4v. the problem with them is that they create an asinine amount of heat due to the design of the processor. i really wish AMD would get off this horse about not overclocking opteron processors because theres a shit ton of potential with the processors they release under the opteron name on the C32 and G34 sockets.
Actually, the real issue with releasing benchmarks early is that OEMs have products that are in the supply chain and anything that stalls current demand causes returns to the manufacturers. And that is not fun. You don't want to do anything that makes people sit on the sidelines. There are people with money in their hands today that will buy a PC this weekend. They might not need BD-level performance, but if they think there is something "just around the corner" they will wait because they expect prices to come down. Look at car sales once pictures of the new models start showing up. Everyone knows new models are coming out, but things stall when it becomes real.
Actually, greater than 95% of the market are buying the mainstream, not high end parts, so current business is far more important than some high end benchmarks.
They are real cores.
Why, because the 8-core Intels will be too expensive? I am willing to bet that those will be a very small part of the market, mostly for benchmarks. Just like the $1000 part is for intel today, great for benchmarks, but nobody really ever buys them.
Most of the market is buying in the <$200 price range, probably <$100 price range. I would not look at the high end of the market as a determination for who is successful or making money.
I would rather have 10% of the <$300 market than 100% of the $1000 market - far more revenue, far more margin, and far more market share.
drescherjm
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2008
- Messages
- 14,941
I was not sure if the teletran8 was an AMD supporter thinking the bulldozer chip would be the best thing since sliced bread or an Intel supporter trying to explain how ridiculous this idea is. I actually started picking the post apart but then deleted my reply..
Last edited:
Now that they no longer have to spend billions in capital every year in upgrades to their FAB's, they can sell them at whatever price they are profitable at. Look at the Radeon, they can create a GPU that is 90% the performance of an Nvidia GPU at 75% the dye size and sell it for 2/3rds the price. AMD can do the same with the CPU's. If they hit 80% the performance per core, with each pair of cores costing only 20% more dye space per core, They can make an 8-16-32 core CPU at ridiculously smaller sizes in comparison to Intel. That means they don't need to be able to match the high end of Intel in either price or even high end competitiveness to be successful.
These ARM manufacturers are selling their CPU's for mere dollars, the Atom when it first launched was an $8 CPU. The fact is selling a $800 CPU is pointless and is mostly used as Halo product. Hell the testing, the R&D on the retail coolers, the packaging, probably eat up most of the profit in the short term for these kind of processors because the purchase rate of them are incredibly small.
drescherjm
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2008
- Messages
- 14,941
However their 8 core will be competing against a 4 or 6 core Intel chip with HT not an 8 core with HT. That is unless AMD found some way to get 30%+ more single threaded IPC. Or AMD can clock their 8 core > 30% faster than SB stock speed and still get inside the 140W power envelope.
Welly Well look what I woke up to reading after all you Bulldozer AMD haters tried giving me crap yesterday. Full article click the link, and wrap your tiny brain around it. Basically it says what I was saying SB is junk and OEMs don't want any of it. Imagine that Intel fanboys SB IS FAIL!
AMD has told Fudzilla that they got more calls than usual after Intels Sandy Bridge chipset recall. Intels hell will serve someone well.
AMD didnt want to get into details, but you can expect that they sold more than their usual share of CPUs, as long as they had enough in stock.
Motherboard manufactures at Cebit were not too happy about Intels slip up and you can imagine that Taiwanese motherboard companies didnt really like the announcement date. Just to refresh your memory, Intel chose first days of Chinese New Year holiday to do the recall announcement.
Most motherboard companies got the B3 version of the chipset and they have started to ship them. If someone flew them to customers they might resurface very soon in a shop nearby.
We dont know the real damage of this recall, but we believe that it will be significant and even after B3 boards hit the market, people might be reluctant to get one. The real question is how much is the reputation of Core i Sandy Bridge parts damaged.
Sounds to me like the Motherboard manufacturers @ Cebit have seen the writing on the wall. AMD's Bulldozer platform is a better investment than SB will ever be this year. SB is junk.
Imagine that Intel fanboys SB IS FAIL!AMD has told Fudzilla that they got more calls than usual after Intels Sandy Bridge chipset recall. Intels hell will serve someone well.
AMD didnt want to get into details, but you can expect that they sold more than their usual share of CPUs, as long as they had enough in stock.
Motherboard manufactures at Cebit were not too happy about Intels slip up and you can imagine that Taiwanese motherboard companies didnt really like the announcement date. Just to refresh your memory, Intel chose first days of Chinese New Year holiday to do the recall announcement.
Most motherboard companies got the B3 version of the chipset and they have started to ship them. If someone flew them to customers they might resurface very soon in a shop nearby.
We dont know the real damage of this recall, but we believe that it will be significant and even after B3 boards hit the market, people might be reluctant to get one. The real question is how much is the reputation of Core i Sandy Bridge parts damaged.
Sounds to me like the Motherboard manufacturers @ Cebit have seen the writing on the wall. AMD's Bulldozer platform is a better investment than SB will ever be this year.
SB is junk.drescherjm
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2008
- Messages
- 14,941
I am not an AMD hater. Over the last 15 years I have purchased over 100 AMD processors and less than 1/4 of that of Intel procesors at home and at work. I have had AMD stock on more than 1 occasion during this time and I have never owned Intel stock.
SB is not junk. Yes they did have a problem with their motherboards. AMD has had the exact same problems with nVidia based motherboards and there was no recall.
I am not 100% happy with SB. Intel has done a lot to segment the market (limiting overclocking and virtulization with their chips and their chipsets).
My opinion is SB will be faster and more energy efficient than buldozer for most desktop loads and buldozer will be faster for server type loads that use more than 6 threads.
Welly Well look what I woke up to reading after all you Bulldozer AMD haters tried giving me crap yesterday. Full article click the link, and wrap your tiny brain around it. Basically it says what I was saying SB is junk and OEMs don't want any of it.
AMD has told Fudzilla that they got more calls than usual after Intel’s Sandy Bridge chipset recall. Intel’s hell will serve someone well.
AMD didn’t want to get into details, but you can expect that they sold more than their usual share of CPUs, as long as they had enough in stock.
Motherboard manufactures at Cebit were not too happy about Intel’s slip up and you can imagine that Taiwanese motherboard companies didn’t really like the announcement date. Just to refresh your memory, Intel chose first days of Chinese New Year holiday to do the recall announcement.
Most motherboard companies got the B3 version of the chipset and they have started to ship them. If someone flew them to customers they might resurface very soon in a shop nearby.
We don’t know the real damage of this recall, but we believe that it will be significant and even after B3 boards hit the market, people might be reluctant to get one. The real question is how much is the reputation of Core i Sandy Bridge parts damaged.
Sounds to me like the Motherboard manufacturers @ Cebit have seen the writing on the wall. AMD's Bulldozer platform is a better investment than SB will ever be this year.
Bulldozer is having chipset issues right now... sounds like SB... lmfao. Except I dont actually have any issues with my chipset and my $300 CPU is running 4.8Ghz. I'm actually using it... and Bulldozer is... where? not on the market.. not for sale... vaporware..
Oh yea and the first bulldozer chips will be FX chips, remember the $1000 CPUs. Against a $300 CPU? hmm not looking good... Not seeing any value in Bulldozer... oh but wait... AMD the company that has been in second in performance for the last 10 years has an article on Fudzilla about how they are x amount faster than i7s... really? You are gonna believe the runner up in the CPU battle for the last 10 years and take that as gospel?
...so listen, I've got some beach front property that will go real nice with your bulldozer
I have owned AMD in the past, but this thing has been in development way too long. Its going to be a few years late to the party, over priced and over hyped. AMD is still there for the budget crowd and thats as good as it's gonna get.
Depends on the Circumstance. In the end more cores equal a better precieved user experience anyways, so chances are AMD will do better against in sales a 4 core I7 with an 8 core BD and will be smaller.
AMD doesn't have to compete with the 8 core HT Intel processor. Not at all. Because it is just not worth it. Intel can sell it because they will have less of an issue leveraging their Server market for the King of the Hill Desktop CPU. But the fact is that CPU's real competition is in the Server market and it with have a Xeon name, its competition will be a 12 and 16 core BD Server chip, that again will be smaller, and for servers those cores will see a near linear performance improvement.
Welly Well look what I woke up to reading after all you Bulldozer AMD haters tried giving me crap yesterday. Full article click the link, and wrap your tiny brain around it. Basically it says what I was saying SB is junk and OEMs don't want any of it.
AMD has told Fudzilla that they got more calls than usual after Intels Sandy Bridge chipset recall. Intels hell will serve someone well.
AMD didnt want to get into details, but you can expect that they sold more than their usual share of CPUs, as long as they had enough in stock.
Motherboard manufactures at Cebit were not too happy about Intels slip up and you can imagine that Taiwanese motherboard companies didnt really like the announcement date. Just to refresh your memory, Intel chose first days of Chinese New Year holiday to do the recall announcement.
Most motherboard companies got the B3 version of the chipset and they have started to ship them. If someone flew them to customers they might resurface very soon in a shop nearby.
We dont know the real damage of this recall, but we believe that it will be significant and even after B3 boards hit the market, people might be reluctant to get one. The real question is how much is the reputation of Core i Sandy Bridge parts damaged.
Sounds to me like the Motherboard manufacturers @ Cebit have seen the writing on the wall. AMD's Bulldozer platform is a better investment than SB will ever be this year.
You need to take some of your own advice..
I dont have to click on one of those links to tell that you are just stating the obvious. AMD sold more CPUs than usual since the recall? Mobo manufacturers/distributors were upset? Intels rep has been tarnished this generation of CPUs? Gee you think? All that still doesnt change the fact that i, and plenty of other people are currently enjoying our SB rigs problem free and are extremely happy with the performance (all 5ghz of it)
I would hardly call SB "junk" or "fail." You wanna start talking about fail then start with a chip that was supposed to be release 2 years ago and still wont be release for another quarter.
D
Deleted member 82943
Guest
I thought it did. Hmm well i still think the ipc of the sb chips will be better than that of the BD chips just a hunch tho but if true itd make sb still better for games
Actually they didn't. That is the bitter irony. Because when SB was halted, everybody had to hang on for another 2 months on Arrandales, the previous generation of CPUs+ IGPs.
Since Llano was delayed from early 2011 to mid 2011 ( july now ), they couldn't take advantage of the situation and all they could do was to fight with youtube demos.
heatlesssun
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Messages
- 44,154
I don't disagree with this really but all I was trying to say is that AMD needs higher average selling prices on their CPUs. I don't think AMD would agrue with that.
No one is going to argue that selling the same product for more and still selling the same amount is bad. What I am saying is that there is a comfy spot in terms of die size and asp, and that is what AMD should try to hit, because just looking for a CPU that is competitive enough for AMD to sell in the desktop market, even above $300 is kind of pointless. The sales on those CPU's are small even for Intel. Now that they are pretty much Fabless the goal should be market share and not ASP's, because now they are more flexible and don't need to eak out every dollar of profit to build yet another 2 billion dollar fab the next year.
Hell look at the guys here, this is supposed to be hard core right? So why are so many people using middle of the pack I7s? Because it doesn't matter what binned product they are using almost all have similar upper limits. Even the people who are trying to eak out every bit of performance in their computers, are using what we call mid range to low high end chips. If your only purchasing $300 CPU's, then why does AMD need to sell anything higher? If everyone else is purchasing $150-$200 CPU's why would AMD selling a $800 CPU really help out raising the ASP, when it is in that range that AMD's competitiveness is at its best, and its portfolio is at its strongest?
sirmonkey1985
[H]ard|DCer of the Month - July 2010
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2008
- Messages
- 22,414
it comes down to volume vs making an extra buck by increasing prices. over the long run volume sales are where the real money is. even though we sit here talking about i7's and phenom II x6's. they make up a very small percentage of what Intel and AMD actually sell.
Welly Well look what I woke up to reading after all you Bulldozer AMD haters tried giving me crap yesterday. Full article click the link, and wrap your tiny brain around it. Basically it says what I was saying SB is junk and OEMs don't want any of it.
AMD has told Fudzilla that they got more calls than usual after Intel’s Sandy Bridge chipset recall. Intel’s hell will serve someone well.
AMD didn’t want to get into details, but you can expect that they sold more than their usual share of CPUs, as long as they had enough in stock.
Motherboard manufactures at Cebit were not too happy about Intel’s slip up and you can imagine that Taiwanese motherboard companies didn’t really like the announcement date. Just to refresh your memory, Intel chose first days of Chinese New Year holiday to do the recall announcement.
Most motherboard companies got the B3 version of the chipset and they have started to ship them. If someone flew them to customers they might resurface very soon in a shop nearby.
We don’t know the real damage of this recall, but we believe that it will be significant and even after B3 boards hit the market, people might be reluctant to get one. The real question is how much is the reputation of Core i Sandy Bridge parts damaged.
Sounds to me like the Motherboard manufacturers @ Cebit have seen the writing on the wall. AMD's Bulldozer platform is a better investment than SB will ever be this year.
seriously dude you need to shut it already. i'm a long time AMD person. but you are giving us all a bad name. stick to 4chan where you belong.
heatlesssun
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Messages
- 44,154
It's not so much that the volume of expensive chips is important, it's the fact that you CAN sell expensive chips. Trying to undercut Intel has not been very sucessful for AMD, they've done their best in the CPU market when that had a great product, even better than Intels. Just five years ago the CPUs of choice for gamers came from AMD and they chips sold for price points similar to Intel and they made money. They have to sell attractive chips, that allows them to sell them at higher prices and that seemed to work for them.
FWIW that's Nvidia's problem and not AMD's.
D
Deleted member 82943
Guest
JF-AMD I think I said this before but how can you honestly say anything objective in the position you are in? You work for AMD. You are the marketing guy. That screams conflict of interest. I think you'll gain a lot more credibility if you were more objective and showed things when AMD makes mistakes but that would put your job as the marketing guy at risk...it's a catch-22.
If you look at ASPs for both Intel and AMD, it is fairly obvious that CPUs below $150 bring 95% of the revenue.Problem is that the remaining CPUs bring 95% of the profit and with AMD out of that area, no wonder they are struggling to stay in black.