Bulldozer

[Aidan]

I'm actually very interested.

On the OTHER hand...

I'm also very interested to see what intel pumps out around the time the quad octocore (32 core / or 4 x is released.

Hell, I could say I'm making a 68 core processor in the future.

-Doesn't mean it's going to happen.
-Doesn't mean it's going to be the best option come launch.
-Who the fuck needs 32 Cores? Servers? It better be. Yeah, yeah.. I know, there's an 8 core. I don't even use six right now let alone 8. Of course products become more powerful, and are more demanding in terms of processing.

I can't see anyone's performance desktop kickin an FX8000, with their HD9690 and GTX960 in SLIFIRE

Bulldozer is sounding great, but it sounds like AMD is getting carried away.

"LOOK AT HOW MANY CORES WE CAN DO!"

Why not focus on bettering the architecture of each core to increase performance, and lessen the amount of cores?

Ahh, that's right.. less multitasking capabilities..

Come five years, I can actually see myself using an AMD machine.

[Gishank]

AMD's processors excel in some areas where Intel's don't, generally speaking however Intel's are more powerful, true - but at the end of the day unless you're doing very very intensive tasks you won't notice the difference between two processors of the same grade.

At the end of the day AMD's processors are substaintially cheaper and better value for money compared to Intels.

[Aidan]

For the time being, I shall still remain an intel / NShitia user.

FOR THE TIME BEING.

[clyzm]

Bulldozer sounds great for people who actually need it. And so does every high end/enthusiast computer hardware.

For the rest, it's that argument of "well look at me i'm better than you cus i have 8 cores / no you're not you won't even need it"

It is a generally well known fact that the highest end of computing technology available to consumers is the server/workstation field. It is also known most of these people aren't casual PC users. What are you arguing here?

[Aidan]

The low end bulldozer has 8 cores. No lower. That's what I'm reading.

There's an 8 core, a 12 core, and a 32 core.



8 Core being entry. A lot of gaimrz are going to be buying the 8 core and ranting on the internet about how they need all 8 cores all the time.

But hey. If it's a great price, why the hell not. We aren't even sure what these CPU's are clocked at yet.

[Tantalus]

If it's anything like their tri-core, four of those cores will be obsolete and failed.

[Aidan]

Ahh yes.. Phenom X3 ...lol

Yeah, AMD really does cut corners eh?

[Aidan]

Lol, bulldozer overhyped way too much

http://arstechnica.com/business/news/20 ... future.ars

Leaked benchies..

AMD now calls their Bulldozer cores "moduals" as they perform at staggeringly low clock speeds.

In other words..

It's going to run as fast as any other damn processor out there. Given it's new architecture, it COULD however be more efficient to make up for the loss of clock speeds.

[Tantalus]

It's going to run as fast as any other damn processor out there. Given it's new architecture, it COULD however be more efficient to make up for the loss of clock speeds.

AMD can't do architecture advantage.

[Aidan]

It's going to run as fast as any other damn processor out there. Given it's new architecture, it COULD however be more efficient to make up for the loss of clock speeds.

AMD can't do architecture advantage.

This is true.. Intel has always had the archeture advantage..

If they can't even do 2Ghz/core (let alone 1.9Ghz) then Bulldozer is looking like a flop so far.

Half of the <s>cores</s> moduals are probably going to fail anyway.

Phenom, etc.

[Aidan]

Lol @ AMD rescheduling FX launch until October, when Intel is almost ready to launch SandyBridge-EX.


Not much of a bulldozer anymore.

[Aidan]

HORRIBLE REVIEWS EVERYWHERE. DO NOT BUY.


Massive Power consumption, and far less performance than Sandy Bridge.

http://www.ozeros.com/2011/10/review-am ... r-fx-8150/

http://www.overclockers.com/amd-fx-8150 ... sor-review

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2011/10/ ... nce_review

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2011/10/ ... ce_review/

http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/4353/ ... ndex1.html

http://www.overclock3d.net/reviews/cpu_ ... u_review/1

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/fx- ... 043-1.html

http://hexus.net/tech/reviews/cpu/32110 ... r-fx-8150/

http://www.hardware.fr/articles/842-1/a ... e-am3.html