OneMoarif I went out and built another pc today and was gonna spend >600 bucks. it would be intel because I know in ~4 years that THAT 3750k I bought today will still be-able to offer good (gaming)performance. with amd its a crap shoot if you don't believe me pull of some benchmarks of a Q8400 Vrs a Phenom II 940 yes most titles are very playable and there is less then a 20Fps difference but 20Fps can make the difference between playable and a slideshow ...

< some people are still running phenomIIx4 core cpu's , some have dual graphics attached to them and this one guy would like to say shut up, learn how to setup and Oc a pc right, my Pc has zero issues playing any game maxed out and i have no issues at this time with stuttering or low fps on any something the intel Epeen crew need to consider is many are doing ok on what Amdbashers are now allegeing to be totally inadequate, stop arguing about Bs Amd work fine on the crappy ports and even pc orig games out today

i bet i could pop over to the intel hits 7Ghz thread and not sea the same people moaning about Ocing on Ln2 there or its relevance.

OneMoarif I went out and built another pc today and was gonna spend >600 bucks. it would be intel because I know in ~4 years that THAT 3750k I bought today will still be-able to offer good (gaming)performance. with amd its a crap shoot if you don't believe me pull of some benchmarks of a Q8400 Vrs a Phenom II 940 yes most titles are very playable and there is less then a 20Fps difference but 20Fps can make the difference between playable and a slideshow ...
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I used to be a AMD guy like you but then .... I got a 2500k ..... and a wakeup call

I've had my Athlon II X4 620 for over 3 years now. Not a single game it can't run maxed out. I run dual GPUs and don't suffer from poor frame rate or bottlenecking. I will most likely still run this CPU for another year. When I do replace it'll be because of my itch to upgrade rather than the performance.

So yh, 3+ years running a CPU that cost me £70 back in the day and still going strong. AMD is really ripping me off :)

Name one midrange to high end AMD CPU that did not last 4 years from its release? - That is right you can't. Sit down.

Super XPYou can also add AMD's lack luster cache structure that they've been messing with per each generation but choose not to fix. If AMD can re-design both the IMC and cache, they'll be way better off in both efficiency and performance.

Mate, they need to design better 90% of the things in their CPU's :laugh: Let us spice up the things.

Situation right now reminds me of the late K7 days. Thunderbird, Palomino, Thoroughbred A/B and Barton... Same old guys, same old critters in terms of performance margin... I had them all, they actually so sucked tech wise, although P4 sucked also altough they are now like these tractors(couldn't hold my self with this deja vu), I loved the Tualatin much.

They need to scrap everything again. That's my only suggestion... Their hybrid path they currently are introducing is for the sake of servers, to introduce a universal computable machine model doing simple math on GPU and complex on x86 part, no additional TESLA or Larrafailbree, but they are rushing too fast in my opinion, they have not the balls for it now. To me it is all useless, they are half baked stillborns from Frankensteins lab.

And currently no useful software is made for it either OS wise. If M$ or Linux will introduce a heterogeneous OS that really uses data smartly and decides witch calculation it will be like, at last a OS from the new century. A winrar extraction, antivirus or even the heck pr0n video - hey GPU wake up and work, or even a dedicated ARM part in the CPU whatever it will be like just a simple math and same with the doing complex math CPU. Then yes yes - only apu's FTW. CPU is a dinosaur from stone age to me then as for a buyer.
So the salt is, that the data scheduler in the APU must be very tightly binded with the OS kernel. And apps should be compiled that way also with certain flags. And yes, we have a revolution. Greener world, less electricity bill, and the heck a faster cooler computer. So we are mimicking what mobile devices will actually do in near future. Still now for all mobile OS'es, GPU only does the UI part and still taxing with large I/O and memory overhead, so OS wise it is like a workaround still, not a new approach. Intel is an idiot and makes it even worse, for android introducing a recompiler on the fly to use ARM apps on their stupid/hot x86 crippled Atom. It is complete a nonsense evolution wise.

Intel can afford that due to their fab technology that currently only they had in the world. They can build a CPU like that any moment actually. But they are lazy, as there is NO competitor, they just die-shrink what they have = invest zero money in R/D and sell! = profit still counts as win, despite the stupid way how it was achieved.

AMD could do this and evolve only notebook mobile solutions and save money and R/D for desktops, and make simple behemoth chips like K8 was. It is funny to see that this chip still performs worse than a proper K10.5. I still think that the best thing was using GPU integrated in North Bridge for office home theater systems. Beat me if I am wrong...

Ferrum MasterBeat me if I am wrong...

great sugestion:wtf::p 90% of what Amd have designed is right, its the last 10% they need to perfect, and coders wont necessarily have to code specifically for either gpu or cpu if Amd get their(HSA) hypervisor Api in place and doing its job right as they plan to.:)

OKAY, let me beat you :nutkick:
You make some valid points, but let me elaborate by providing a link and on why this unique CPU Architecture was the right choice for AMD's future.

Taking some lessons from the graphics arm of the company and their successful Radeon brand, AMD is applying that train of thought to processors.

For the past several decades we saw processor design follow a fairly simple routine.* A new generation of architecture is released, and there are a few minor updates to the architecture other than moving to smaller process nodes.* Around the seven year mark a brand new architecture is then introduced, updates are applied, and then the cycle starts over again.* These massive jumps in technology are complex and expensive, and they take tens of thousands of man hours to complete.* While the advantages of going with a clean sheet design are many, if a basic decision is made that turns out to be flawed or counterproductive, then years of design work are wasted.* AMD appears to be trying to move away from this design paradigm, as the risks of making such a poor decision is nearly catastrophic for the company.* Instead, AMD is looking at a more conservative, though accelerated, route.* Essentially AMD is looking at major, yearly updates for their processor architectures.* Instead of small updates over the years culminating in a massive redesign, they are taking many smaller steps in between.* Much like AMD did with their process technology, they are applying this to the design methodology.* This means small, meaningful changes on a very regular basis.* This philosophy allowed AMD to stay within spitting distance of Intel and their formidable process lead, and their products (historically) have been in the same rough performance range with similar TDPs

www.pcper.com/reviews/Editorial/AMD-Vishera-and-Beyond-New-Design-Philosophy-Dictates-Faster-Pace

AMD will fix this new Micro-Architecture, and by the time Excavator or even Crane comes out, AMD should be either on par or faster than Intel IMO.

theoneandonlymrkgreat sugestion:wtf::p 90% of what Amd have designed is right, its the last 10% they need to perfect, and coders wont necessarily have to code specifically for either gpu or cpu if Amd get their(HSA) hypervisor Api in place and doing its job right as they plan to.:)

I still suppose their APU is very very costly to make, they aren't making proper money from desktop users at all from this all FM platform in my opinion. There for I still think these processors are just a beta versions fed to the market for debugging purposes to say we are still alive(for investors). The real thing still is in the blueprints. But you know, no money no R/D no tech talents etc. They are profiting only from server cpu's. If they will suck more... ARM will soon catch them... and you know what might happen.

Supervisor? Yeah a wet dream, it would be nice I still haven't got my degree :(, life sucks in some places man. :wtf:

But we all have to agree... software in the current generation wise is bullcrap, and all overbeefed hardware is compensation for the poor coding style. It is some kind of illness and plague. BTW I've read some conspiracy stuff elsewhere that most software is written poorly for AMD due to intel bribes and is truly intentionally written poorly for AMD's memory stack. :D

Super XPAMD will fix this new Micro-Architecture, and by the time Excavator or even Crane comes out, AMD should be either on par or faster than Intel IMO.

Yeah I've told already that these current CPU's are half baked stillborns from Frankensteins lab. :D

Dent1I've had my Athlon II X4 620 for over 3 years now. Not a single game it can't run maxed out. I run dual GPUs and don't suffer from poor frame rate or bottlenecking. I will most likely still run this CPU for another year. When I do replace it'll be because of my itch to upgrade rather than the performance.

So yh, 3+ years running a CPU that cost me £70 back in the day and still going strong. AMD is really ripping me off :)

Name one midrange to high end AMD CPU that did not last 4 years from its release? - That is right you can't. Sit down.

I'm a little sceptical that you are not experiencing CPU's limitations with a X4-620. Every test on the the web I can find shows otherwise. Even the cheap i3 is about 25-40% faster in games (measuring minimum frame rates, and that's what's most important for gamers).
TH did a quite unbiased test on this after AMD fans raged about their infamous "sandy bridge has game" article.

I'm happy that you are satisfied with your CPU (it's a good one after all), but looking at the additional power costs you had to pay in those years and the performance you got as a return, perhaps it doesn't look that outstanding anymore if you compare it to the competition.

IkarugaI'm a little sceptical that you not experiencing CPU's limitations with a X4-620.

Mate, it all depends on the game itself. So the subjective user experience for each of us and the taste and style how we are using our PC's. In many scenarios AMD is sufficient enough.

Ferrum MasterMate, it all depends on the game itself. So the subjective user experience for each of us and the taste and style how we are using our PC's. In many scenarios AMD is sufficient enough.

I'm with you of course, and I understand and agree as well, but I replied to his post and look at the sentence and what it means:

Dent1Not a single game it can't run maxed out. I run dual GPUs and don't suffer from poor frame rate or bottlenecking.

He has a very good CPU indeed, and it's awesome that he is happy with it. I'm just pointing out that perhaps other good things can be also out there:)

IkarugaI'm a little sceptical that you are not experiencing CPU's limitations with a X4-620. Every test on the the web I can find shows otherwise. Even the cheap i3 is about 25-40% faster in games (measuring minimum frame rates, and that's what's most important for gamers).
TH did a quite unbiased test on this after AMD fans raged about their infamous "sandy bridge has game" article.

I'm happy that you are satisfied with your CPU (it's a good one after all), but looking at the additional power costs you had to pay in those years and the performance you got as a return, perhaps it doesn't look that outstanding anymore if you compare it to the competition.

Those reviews were done at 1920x1080. Back when I bought my Athlon II X4 over three years ago very few people played at that resolution.

1920x1080p is only now becoming popular and it's still isnt the norm. I game 1440x900.

Also that review has just a single 6850, whereas currently I'm running a two 5850s (CF); And my CPU is OC'd. So my experienced might be enhanced.

My point was that even a midrange CPU 3+ years ago is still going strong. For OneMoar to imply that AMD CPUs can't last 4 years is nonsense.

Dent1Those reviews were done at 1920x1080. Back when I bought my Athlon II X4 over three years ago very few people played at that resolution.

1920x1080p is only now becoming popular and it's still isnt the norm. I game 1440x900.

Also that review has just a single 6850, whereas currently I'm running a two 5850s (CF); And my CPU is OC'd. So my experienced might be enhanced.

My point was that even a midrange CPU 3+ years ago is still going strong. For OneMoar to imply that AMD CPUs can't last 4 years is nonsense.

The lower the resolution, the higher the CPU-limitation will show, but let's forget it:)
I did not meant to offend you, and I'm really rooting for AMD to be successful and do some awesome CPUs like the SB/IB series, because the greater the competition is, the better for us:toast:

IkarugaThe lower the resolution, the higher the CPU-limitation will show, but let's forget it:)

Yes I'm aware lower resolution put less stres on the GPU.

Generally speaking, minimum, maximum and average frame rate will still increase as you lower the resolution. e.g. Crysis 52.9 FPS at 1024x768 and only 26.2FPS at 1900x1200

www.techpowerup.com/reviews/HIS/HD_5850/10.html

IkarugaI did not meant to offend you, and I'm really rooting for AMD to be successful and do some awesome CPUs like the SB/IB series, because the greater the competition is, the better for us:toast:

I'm not offended

Dent1Generally speaking, minimum, maximum and average frame rate will still increase as you lower the resolution. e.g. Crysis 52.9 FPS at 1024x768 and only 26.2FPS at 1900x1200

I just replied to what you said. What I meant is that they actually favored AMD with the high resolution, because the gap looks smaller.

I had an Athlon 64 for a long while, and boy did it serve me well. It crunched though games like butter. DOOM 3 being one of them along with Half Life II or do I have my time line wrong.

I loved the Llano chips, and am on the fence as to whether I built my HTPC with Trinity or save a couple bucks and jump into an FM1.

I think the answer is Llano / FM1.

Oh Yeah some more good PR from AMD. Nothing like some fluff to sell there junk.

Super XPOKAY, let me beat you :nutkick:
You make some valid points, but let me elaborate by providing a link and on why this unique CPU Architecture was the right choice for AMD's future.



www.pcper.com/reviews/Editorial/AMD-Vishera-and-Beyond-New-Design-Philosophy-Dictates-Faster-Pace

AMD will fix this new Micro-Architecture, and by the time Excavator or even Crane comes out, AMD should be either on par or faster than Intel IMO.

Only if intel goes on vacation until then.... It haswell lives up to their claims....like most of intels cpus do then pile driver crane and steam shovel will be a moot point. Sorry......a delorean with carbon fiber is still a delorean. Amd should not market their apu or cpus as performance parts. They need the best value or the greener angle. The gpus are their performance parts.

ensabrenoirOnly if intel goes on vacation until then.... It haswell lives up to their claims....like most of intels cpus do then pile driver crane and steam shovel will be a moot point. Sorry......a delorean with carbon fiber is still a delorean. Amd should not market their apu or cpus as performance parts. They need the best value or the greener angle. The gpus are their performance parts.

I know most of what we know of haswell is rumors so far, but I read somewhere that haswell was only going to be a small net increase in performance because intel would drop the tdp again. At least as stock.

james888I know most of what we know of haswell is rumors so far, but I read somewhere that haswell was only going to be a small net increase in performance because intel would drop the tdp again. At least as stock.

I think haswell biggest problem will be that it will out perform 2011:banghead: which im in the middle of a new build. Intel dosent want to but its competing against itself and its gonna cost them money. So were getting neutered products. And yes an eight core sb e wouldve most likely been a 200watt part

Good article, but as for the overclock-Meh. Wake me when they get to 10GHz. Marketing to the 1% of the people that are actually extreme overclockers, does nothing for real consumers.

*moving on*

tricksonOh Yeah some more good PR from AMD. Nothing like some fluff to sell there junk.

Yes because you rather have Intel as the only player in the game so they can wonderfully continue to Un-Innovate. So while AMD's pushing innovation through the roof whether it be successful or not, Intel will continue to copy them. Thank you AMD for giving Intel a kick in the aris once in a while.

AMD's two unfortunate situations within the CPU industry cost them time and money. But they've recovered. 1) Barcelona & 2) Bulldozer. Barcelona being a modified design based on a previous, where as Bulldozer coming from outer space and hand crafted by Aliens. :rolleyes: All AMD needs to do now is rectify this space age design and flourish.

Few posts have been cleaned due to someone not being able to not insult others in their post.

tricksonEdit: Said some nasty things that were edited.

Angry much, jeez. Tone it down a notch or two, will you? Oh, Trinity OCs on LN2 like a mother. It's how much it OCs on LN2 because I'm willing to bet that it's going to scale just as well on air, meaning it will OC better than Llano. I agree that LN2 benchmarks are bullshit to begin with because honestly it's just a "look what I can do," move. So all in all, we should reserve judgement for when Trinity actually comes out and our friends here at TPU can do their job and provide a very sexy review on the CPU. Until then, claims are claims, nVidia did the same thing before the 680 came out and it didn't prove to be as powerful as they hyped it up to be, granted it is a very fast GPU.

So lets just hope this is an indication that AMD is starting to produce better CPUs and leave it at that. No cursing, no flaming, and an honest answer about what this article says says, because I really hope AMD can deliver. Maybe I just like the underdog, but just remember, just because AMD chips aren't as fast as Intel's in all circumstances by no means says that AMD produces a bad processor. It's important that everyone understands that. AMD and Intel are both companies that are worthy of praise, regardless of which one might be better. Respect is the name of the game.

This is the best thing since sliced bread.

Super XPYes because you rather have Intel as the only player in the game so they can wonderfully continue to Un-Innovate. So while AMD's pushing innovation through the roof whether it be successful or not, Intel will continue to copy them. Thank you AMD for giving Intel a kick in the aris once in a while.

AMD's two unfortunate situations within the CPU industry cost them time and money. But they've recovered. 1) Barcelona & 2) Bulldozer. Barcelona being a modified design based on a previous, where as Bulldozer coming from outer space and hand crafted by Aliens. :rolleyes: All AMD needs to do now is rectify this space age design and flourish.

I've addressed this issue a million times but I'll do it again;

If Intel were the only maker of CPU's, you would still see new technology as time went on, otherwise nobody would ever upgrade, meaning Intel would bleed dry. Monopolies only really work in fields where people have to buy a product multiple times; things like Electricity, Internet, Oil. Monopolies in those areas cause the consumer to get screwed because people NEED to buy Gasoline to get to and from jobs, they need to heat their homes, and power their lights and refrigerators.

If Intel knocked AMD out, they would have to compete with a much larger and more powerful foe--Intel. Intel never directly compares to AMD, because they don't really have to worry about it. It's not like with, say Aspirin, where you see commercials of them going "Tylenol is x% more effective than Advil!" If there were no performance gains to be had, people would stop buying Intel's products across the board. This would destroy Intel in no time flat. Every day people don't drive Intel and AMD to innovate, and the competition probably has minimal effect too (duopolies are just as--if not more--dangerous as monopolies). The best analogy is The Joker and Batman in The Dark Knight--Intel needs AMD around, to keep them from destroying themselves.

The industry as a whole drives these companies to innovate. Software Developers, Web Developers, Film Editors, Audio Engineers, these people need more powerful hardware a shit load more than your Grammy does.

Also, 'Space Age' design? There's no way you actually believe that, nobody could be that ridiculous...