Bulldozer sucks and upgrade itch is driving me mental.

[MatTheCat]

I have been wanting to upgrade for about a year now. My upgrade philosophy is to get an as powerful a machine (within reason) for the era as i possibly can as i will not be upgrading the CPU/mobo/RAM base for a very long time afterwards. I started out looking at the i7 950, but decided to wait for Sandybridge. When Sandybridge came, the performance was not too far ahead of the i7 950. But Bulldozer was scheduled to be launched in April 2011, so I waited again. Now that the official benchmarks are here, it seems that Bulldozer is not going to be the way to go. However, SB-E is now 'just around the corner'.

So my dilemna is this.

If SB-E is a head and shoulders winner beyond the i72600K series, then it is clearly worth the wait and upgrading to a 2600K when I could have done this 10 months ago, would piss me off a bit (waited for no reason). However, in an article posted on this forum I have read that the first batch of SB-E CPUs have problems which will not be fixed on release, thus the wise investor will wait until Q1 2012 for the proper finsihed article (with BF3 knocking at the door, this is totally out of the question). I have also read in the few 'leaked' SB-E previews, that for gaming performance SB-E barely outpaces its i72600K counterpart, even although these chips will be twice as expensive.

The final consideration is that I want a rig that can play BF3 more or less maxed out, with a consistent 60FPS. Since I am still playing and enjoying BF2 after more than 6 years, I cannot stress the importance of maxing BF3 out enough. I know that the BF3 beta scaled very poorly but this was also the case with the BFBC2 beta and so I expect performance figures to jump up on the full release of the game. My gfx card upgrade (I am only interested in single GPU) will be defo be postponed until AMD/ATI 7000 series release in Q1 2012.

Any advice from those of you well-informed in all things regarding CPU, would be well appreciated.

 

[qubit]

I think you should just go 2500K and be done with it. I'm considering this myself now that Bulldozer is such a disappointment and SB-E is so far out.

 

[Red_Machine]

I know how you feel, man.

When I put this rig together last christmas, I was intending to upgrade to Bulldozer in the summer. Which of course I can't do, having an nForce 980a AM3 board...
So I then decided to look at the Nehalem i7's, as performance was still way better than the Phenom II and the prices were dropping in anticipation of Bulldozer, but when Bulldozer failed to materialise, and reviews considtently showed it as being behind Intel, the prices got jacked up again.
Decided to go Sandybridge i5 2500k after that, but had other financial commitments to take care of, so that got put off. Now Bulldozer is finally on sale and the reviews are less than promising, which affirms my decision to go Intel, but now Sandybridge-E and Ivybridge are around the corner, so upgrading now just seems kinda pointless.

My advice: wait for Ivybridge. You'll be waiting till then to upgrade your GPU, anyways.

 

[Crap Daddy]

From what I see in your sig the E8400 is not suitable for BF3. The game will be out in a few weeks and you have to play it. Now, SB-E will bring maybe 10-15% more performance in gaming but for more money, considerably more. BF3 needs a strong GPU so your 5850 is not enough. For BF3 and all the other games out there the 2500K is the best bang/buck CPU out there. It's been this way since 9 months and will be the same until Ivy will be out - many months away considering Intel has no competition whatsoever - So go with the 2500K, it's very cheap for the performance it offers and get a powerful GPU (or 2)

 

[bbmarley]

a preview of sb-e from toms
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/core-i7-3960x-x79-performance,3026.html
you can have a look now to make your mind up now =D

i was also waiting for bulldozer but after checking reviews this morning just ordered another gpu for crossfire to be ready for bf3 myself lol
i could only get smooth gameplay on beta with low settings but hey thats eyefinity lol

 

[MatTheCat]

From what I see in your sig the E8400 is not suitable for BF3. The game will be out in a few weeks and you have to play it. Now, SB-E will bring maybe 10-15% more performance in gaming but for more money, considerably more. BF3 needs a strong GPU so your 5850 is not enough. For BF3 and all the other games out there the 2500K is the best bang/buck CPU out there. It's been this way since 9 months and will be the same until Ivy will be out - many months away considering Intel has no competition whatsoever - So go with the 2500K, it's very cheap for the performance it offers and get a powerful GPU (or 2)

I have looked at the other single GPU's and barring the GTX 580, no current single GPU gfx card delivers a huge performance increase over the 5850. Since the GTX 580 costs around £400 in the uk, I would consider the performance increase simply not worth it.

As far as GPU is concerned, I will be waiting for Cayman islands and make do with turning down a few BF3 settings for now. I know that the E8400 is not suitable for BF3, but then it isn't meant to be suitable for BFBC2 either, but it runs that game pretty smooth (although not without frame rate drops in crowded multiplayer maps).

 

[AsRock]

Wait longer lol.. There is no real need to jump on the current stuff wait till next year i might be waiting till 2013 depending on what Intel bring performance wise next year but i am running a quad and not my old e8400.

 

[Crap Daddy]

OK, wait for Caymans - next year I suppose but I strongly suggest going with the 2500K now. Believe me, I went from the same 8400 to the 2500K with the same GPU at the time, OCed GTX275 (maybe 5-10% slower than your 5850) and the performance jump in FPS was like 30-40%.

 

[HalfAHertz]

get a C2Q from ebay and stick with it till ivy. You have a decent mobo. No point to change platform right now...

 

[Nesters]

Dunno if you really need a strong CPU for BF3...

 

[lilhasselhoffer]

I have been wanting to upgrade for about a year now. My upgrade philosophy is to get an as powerful a machine (within reason) for the era as i possibly can as i will not be upgrading the CPU/mobo/RAM base for a very long time afterwards. I started out looking at the i7 950, but decided to wait for Sandybridge. When Sandybridge came, the performance was not too far ahead of the i7 950. But Bulldozer was scheduled to be launched in April 2011, so I waited again. Now that the official benchmarks are here, it seems that Bulldozer is not going to be the way to go. However, SB-E is now 'just around the corner'.

So my dilemna is this.

If SB-E is a head and shoulders winner beyond the i72600K series, then it is clearly worth the wait and upgrading to a 2600K when I could have done this 10 months ago, would piss me off a bit (waited for no reason). However, in an article posted on this forum I have read that the first batch of SB-E CPUs have problems which will not be fixed on release, thus the wise investor will wait until Q1 2012 for the proper finsihed article (with BF3 knocking at the door, this is totally out of the question). I have also read in the few 'leaked' SB-E previews, that for gaming performance SB-E barely outpaces its i72600K counterpart, even although these chips will be twice as expensive.

The final consideration is that I want a rig that can play BF3 more or less maxed out, with a consistent 60FPS. Since I am still playing and enjoying BF2 after more than 6 years, I cannot stress the importance of maxing BF3 out enough. I know that the BF3 beta scaled very poorly but this was also the case with the BFBC2 beta and so I expect performance figures to jump up on the full release of the game. My gfx card upgrade (I am only interested in single GPU) will be defo be postponed until AMD/ATI 7000 series release in Q1 2012.

Any advice from those of you well-informed in all things regarding CPU, would be well appreciated.

Patient sucker, aren't you.

Please don't take that as an insult, I'm currently in the same boat with a core 2 quad processor.

As I see it, there is very little hope for a break-out solution in the near future. Bulldozer is the same overhyped excuse that I thought it was going to be after the second set of delays. Sandy Bridge E is being pushed out early, to the tune of losing virtualization features. The coming 7xxx series of graphics cards is at best a potentially good situation, in a year...


That said, here's my planning:

I encode a lot. I play games with some frequency, but most of them can be run on a laptop. Those that cannot will need a heavy hitting CPU and plenty of PCI-e lanes for a good complement of graphics cards. As per the encoding, I need drive space.

This said, I can have 8 or more SATA ports (SATA II for mechanical drives and optical drives, SATA III for the limited number of SSDs I may someday have) with SB-E. I get two full x16 PCI-e version 2.0 lanes with SB-E. I can get 6 physical cores, with hyperthreading. I get better energy consumption that with Bulldozer. I can overclock mildly later, and considering SB performance the overclock may well stretch the system's life to 6 years.



If you're willing to spend the money on a SB-E set-up, knowing that hardware virtualization support will not be there, then do like I am. If you're absolutely itching for an upgrade, and can't wait the three more months for Ivy Bridge, then wait until the new SB processors come out (Intel trying to completely destroy AMD). They may push the price of a 2500k down, and make it an unquestionable buy.

Waiting for the 7xxx series of GPU is foolish. If you're going for a single GPU, then splurge on a 69xx series GPU. They are more than adequate to run anything you can throw at them, or at least anything that isn't heavily modded (I'm looking at you non-optimized Oblivion mods). In a few months when the 7xxx series comes out pick-up a discounted 69xx series GPU and crossfire the things so you can play in the highest realm of eyecandy for the next several years. Otherwise, the progression of GPU development will lead you to always want the next video card iteration...

 

[MatTheCat]

As I see it, there is very little hope for a break-out solution in the near future. Bulldozer is the same overhyped excuse that I thought it was going to be after the second set of delays. Sandy Bridge E is being pushed out early, to the tune of losing virtualization features. The coming 7xxx series of graphics cards is at best a potentially good situation, in a year...


That said, here's my planning:

I encode a lot. I play games with some frequency, but most of them can be run on a laptop. Those that cannot will need a heavy hitting CPU and plenty of PCI-e lanes for a good complement of graphics cards. As per the encoding, I need drive space.

This said, I can have 8 or more SATA ports (SATA II for mechanical drives and optical drives, SATA III for the limited number of SSDs I may someday have) with SB-E. I get two full x16 PCI-e version 2.0 lanes with SB-E. I can get 6 physical cores, with hyperthreading. I get better energy consumption that with Bulldozer. I can overclock mildly later, and considering SB performance the overclock may well stretch the system's life to 6 years.



If you're willing to spend the money on a SB-E set-up, knowing that hardware virtualization support will not be there, then do like I am. If you're absolutely itching for an upgrade, and can't wait the three more months for Ivy Bridge, then wait until the new SB processors come out (Intel trying to completely destroy AMD). They may push the price of a 2500k down, and make it an unquestionable buy.

Waiting for the 7xxx series of GPU is foolish. If you're going for a single GPU, then splurge on a 69xx series GPU. They are more than adequate to run anything you can throw at them, or at least anything that isn't heavily modded (I'm looking at you non-optimized Oblivion mods). In a few months when the 7xxx series comes out pick-up a discounted 69xx series GPU and crossfire the things so you can play in the highest realm of eyecandy for the next several years. Otherwise, the progression of GPU development will lead you to always want the next video card iteration...

What is this 'virtualisation support'? And should I decide to buy an early SB-E CPU without said virtualisation support, is the nature of the problem one that can be fixed through firmware updates, or can the issue only be addressed through new hardware (mobo/cpu)?

Also, I would say that your advice on the GPU is a little bit questionable. considering I already have a hefty stable overclock on my 5850, there is no way in the world would it make sense for me to upgrade to any single GPU 6*** series card. The performance increase is like 10-15% if even that. When I upgraded my old 4870 to my current 5850, in some games it was basically a frame rate doubler. This is more the sort of performance that I am looking for in a GPU upgrade.

get a C2Q from ebay and stick with it till ivy. You have a decent mobo. No point to change platform right now...

I have considered that but wouldnt be keen on taking a 2nd hand CPU from someone I dont know, and the cheapest i could find a C2Q 9600 Quad for is the best part of 300 quid! Now this really would be money down the toilet.

 

[Frick]

I have considered that but wouldnt be keen on taking a 2nd hand CPU from someone I dont know, and the cheapest i could find a C2Q 9600 Quad for is the best part of 300 quid! Now this really would be money down the toilet.

Here you can usually find lower end quads for about €100. I'm still not sure it's worth it.

 

[MatTheCat]

Here you can usually find lower end quads for about €100. I'm still not sure it's worth it.

No.

Anything other than a Q9600, Q9650 would in many respects be a downgrade due to the inevitably lower clock speeds and the great number of still only single or double threaded games/applications.

But even for a Q9600, I would only be looking to pay about 100 quid cos it simply aint worth more than that to me. As for fleabay, I have negative experiences of that place. It is an emporium of thrift and avarice, populated by scavengers scouring it for the inevitable bargain and generally looking to buy things for way below the market rate, whilst everyone who is trying to sell something are all looking to get paid way beyond what might be considered a reasonable price.

Here is an example of someone trying to sell thier 2nd hand Q9600!

Bids starting at £200! WTF?

 

[lilhasselhoffer]

What is this 'virtualisation support'? And should I decide to buy an early SB-E CPU without said virtualisation support, is the nature of the problem one that can be fixed through firmware updates, or can the issue only be addressed through new hardware (mobo/cpu)?

Also, I would say that your advice on the GPU is a little bit questionable. considering I already have a hefty stable overclock on my 5850, there is no way in the world would it make sense for me to upgrade to any single GPU 6*** series card. The performance increase is like 10-15% if even that. When I upgraded my old 4870 to my current 5850, in some games it was basically a frame rate doubler. This is more the sort of performance that I am looking for in a GPU upgrade.

I missed the GPU. If you've got a 5850 and a decent overclock the only things that the 69xx series offers are better power consumption, eyefinity, and app support. If these things aren't a game changer then the money would be better saved. My error.

Virtualization... the easiest way to describe it is that a gaming rig generally won't do it. Virtualization allows you to run multiple remote computers from one physical one (a vast oversimplification). If your rig is only for gaming then it will not influence you.

That said, the reports indicate this is a hardware failure. Firmware changes won't fix hardware.


This said, the lack of virtualization is only for hardware virtualization. If you really wanted virtualization then there's still software support.

 

[MatTheCat]

@lilhasslhoffer.

Since you have stated that you already decided that you are going to go with SB-e when it comes, what is your opinion on the 'leaked' benchmarks which show that gaming performance is only slightly in front of the 2600K?

 

[Wrigleyvillain]

Dunno if you really need a strong CPU for BF3...

Perhaps not...but more cores than two.

 

[LiveOrDie]

get a C2Q from ebay and stick with it till ivy. You have a decent mobo. No point to change platform right now...

Don't bother with a C2Q there slow as crap i picked one up for a friend to replace his C2D 3ghz chip and after seeing it didn't help performance much at all he upgrade to a i7 a month later, Go for the 2600k you wont be disappointed with the performance boost.

 

[qubit]

@MatTheCat

You can now get GTX 580's for around £330-£350 if you look out for deals and "own brand" versions. As a 580 owner I can tell you, the performance is well worth it.

 

[lilhasselhoffer]

@lilhasslhoffer.

Since you have stated that you already decided that you are going to go with SB-e when it comes, what is your opinion on the 'leaked' benchmarks which show that gaming performance is only slightly in front of the 2600K?

My opinion is that the benchmarks are real.

I base my opinion on the following:
1) They have the exact same architecture as SB.
2) Most gaming programs utilize one, or at most a couple of threads.
3) Tests indicate that visual performance with a bridge repeater chip (multi-GPU without enough PCI-e lanes) is similar to (there is a hit) having enough lanes.
4) Intel does not have to compete with AMD.

*Have put opinion in italics because all of this is specualtion from the peanut gallery, and not based on any reasonable facts.*


AMD's bulldozer is underwhelming in its current configuration. Intel, without direct competition, generally languishes. They're looking at Ivy Bridge, and only releasing the SB-E to satisfy the limited number of people who would be willing to pay for such an expensive system with the impending release of IB. SB-E will be somewhat pushed to the side, but I believe this might make the pricing somewhat more reasonable.

Gaming aside, the enthusiast platform caters to a different set of users. It will process video like a champ (extra instruction sets, more cores and threads), have the extra slots for GPU based computing, have a boat load of RAM slots, and enough storage options to make most servers blush. It has my name on it, but most people won't see the benefits above the current SB offerings.

In short, SB-E offers more than gaming. If gaming is all you're looking for, then get current SB and save your money. If you want a computer that can actually do some amazing work, the SB-E. If you're very patient, skip both and get IB.

 

[MT Alex]

http://static.techspot.com/articles-info/448/bench/CPU_02.png

Dunno if you really need a strong CPU for BF3...

I'm calling BS.

 

[TheMailMan78]

I have been wanting to upgrade for about a year now. My upgrade philosophy is to get an as powerful a machine (within reason) for the era as i possibly can as i will not be upgrading the CPU/mobo/RAM base for a very long time afterwards. I started out looking at the i7 950, but decided to wait for Sandybridge. When Sandybridge came, the performance was not too far ahead of the i7 950. But Bulldozer was scheduled to be launched in April 2011, so I waited again. Now that the official benchmarks are here, it seems that Bulldozer is not going to be the way to go. However, SB-E is now 'just around the corner'.

So my dilemna is this.

If SB-E is a head and shoulders winner beyond the i72600K series, then it is clearly worth the wait and upgrading to a 2600K when I could have done this 10 months ago, would piss me off a bit (waited for no reason). However, in an article posted on this forum I have read that the first batch of SB-E CPUs have problems which will not be fixed on release, thus the wise investor will wait until Q1 2012 for the proper finsihed article (with BF3 knocking at the door, this is totally out of the question). I have also read in the few 'leaked' SB-E previews, that for gaming performance SB-E barely outpaces its i72600K counterpart, even although these chips will be twice as expensive.

The final consideration is that I want a rig that can play BF3 more or less maxed out, with a consistent 60FPS. Since I am still playing and enjoying BF2 after more than 6 years, I cannot stress the importance of maxing BF3 out enough. I know that the BF3 beta scaled very poorly but this was also the case with the BFBC2 beta and so I expect performance figures to jump up on the full release of the game. My gfx card upgrade (I am only interested in single GPU) will be defo be postponed until AMD/ATI 7000 series release in Q1 2012.

Any advice from those of you well-informed in all things regarding CPU, would be well appreciated.

Mat I'm gonna say this once.

1. BF3 Beta benchmarks mean JACK. It wasn't DX11 so it wasn't CPU intensive as it will be in the final version.

2. If you are gonna upgrade now to any platform get a 2600k. Don't BS with the 2500k.

3. 580 is shit for the price. You are better off with a 570 if you have to have Nvidia or a 6950 if you want AMD. 2gb or go home.

 

[brandonwh64]

Mat I'm gonna say this once.

1. BF3 Beta benchmarks mean JACK. It wasn't DX11 so it wasn't CPU intensive as it will be in the final version.

2. If you are gonna upgrade now to any platform get a 2600k. Don't BS with the 2500k.

3. 580 is shit for the price. You are better off with a 570 if you have to have Nvidia or a 6950 if you want AMD.

Mailman speaks good advice!

 

[Frizz]

http://static.techspot.com/articles-info/448/bench/CPU_02.png

Dunno if you really need a strong CPU for the BF3 Map Metro...

fixed

 

[MatTheCat]

Mat I'm gonna say this once.

1. BF3 Beta benchmarks mean JACK. It wasn't DX11 so it wasn't CPU intensive as it will be in the final version.

2. If you are gonna upgrade now to any platform get a 2600k. Don't BS with the 2500k.

3. 580 is shit for the price. You are better off with a 570 if you have to have Nvidia or a 6950 if you want AMD. 2gb or go home.

Yup.

Decided.

2600K it is.