- Joined
- Apr 7, 2011
- Messages
- 1,181 (0.44/day)
- Likes
- 495
| System Name | Desktop |
|---|---|
| Processor | Intel i7-3930k |
| Motherboard | ASUS Sabertooth X79 |
| Cooling | Intel AIO |
| Memory | 8x4GB DDR3 1866MHz |
| Video Card(s) | EVGA GTX 970 SC |
| Storage | LSI 9266-8i|3xHitachi SAS 15K600 450GB RAID5|6x WD RE Enterprise 4TB in RAID 10|HP Ultrium 1760 Tape |
| Display(s) | HP ZR24w |
| Case | Fractal Define XL Black |
| Audio Device(s) | Schiit Modi Uber>Schiit Asgard 2>Sennheiser HD600 |
| Power Supply | Corsair HX850 |
| Mouse | Logitech G603 |
| Keyboard | Logitech G613 |
| Software | Windows 10 Pro x64 |
Can you point me where AMD confirmed (not some made-up stories) that they are pulling out?
And I fail to see what Rory has anything to do with BD/PD or even SR. He was not in charge when those plans were made. These things take huge amount of time and you don't know for certain what performance you will get.
Give the man some time, no one can change a company in a year.
I bet people will expect 50% more performance with PD like it's a completely new architecture and not just a tweaked BD.
However I slightly disagree with the second, any CPU that isn't faster than the previous generation is a failure (The same way Pentium 4 was a failure, the situation here is very similar).
I can tell you now that I compared a 3930k (at stock clocks) vs my 1090T (which has similar performance as the 8150) in PS Lightroom (which is quite a simple program), the difference is massive.
You can check all the benchmarks and the 2600k beats the 8150 in almost everything, sometimes they are very close but don't forget that the 2600k is using much less power for that performance.
And when you start overclocking the power consumption of the 8150 is very high (which also puts a strain on the VRM).
If BD was faster than Phenom II in multithread and even slightly faster in single thread then IMO it wouldn't be a failure.
But since it isn't faster (except MT), those who use a Thuban have no CPU to upgrade to.
Now imagine if Haswell turned out to be slower in single thread than SB/IB and about the same in multithread + having high power consumption. Would you call it a solid CPU? I very much doubt it.
And I fail to see what Rory has anything to do with BD/PD or even SR. He was not in charge when those plans were made. These things take huge amount of time and you don't know for certain what performance you will get.
Give the man some time, no one can change a company in a year.
I bet people will expect 50% more performance with PD like it's a completely new architecture and not just a tweaked BD.
However I slightly disagree with the second, any CPU that isn't faster than the previous generation is a failure (The same way Pentium 4 was a failure, the situation here is very similar).
I can tell you now that I compared a 3930k (at stock clocks) vs my 1090T (which has similar performance as the 8150) in PS Lightroom (which is quite a simple program), the difference is massive.
You can check all the benchmarks and the 2600k beats the 8150 in almost everything, sometimes they are very close but don't forget that the 2600k is using much less power for that performance.
And when you start overclocking the power consumption of the 8150 is very high (which also puts a strain on the VRM).
If BD was faster than Phenom II in multithread and even slightly faster in single thread then IMO it wouldn't be a failure.
But since it isn't faster (except MT), those who use a Thuban have no CPU to upgrade to.
Now imagine if Haswell turned out to be slower in single thread than SB/IB and about the same in multithread + having high power consumption. Would you call it a solid CPU? I very much doubt it.
Anyway its a server road map, doesn't say anything about desktops there.
