Discussion in 'News' started by btarunr, Nov 27, 2011.
Thats pretty sad to think a "CPU" is worse then the destroyers of countries -_-
Nothing even comes close to Chinese politicians..
Second you on that one.
Will their Bulldozer revision still be Socket AM3+? I would be pissed if it wasn't.
Also I think they do this crap on purpose. Probably get more sales.
I mean Phenom first had the TLB Bug (which I bought) and they later released phenoms that fixed that (so then I bought that) and now I buy the first iteration of Bulldozer (FX6100) mild improvement over my 965 but will of course be forced to buy their better performing version of FX (piledriver).
I guess I'm the sucker they are trying to suck in with this crap.
In my defense the 6100 was only $100 bucks I figure I'll keep it and sell my 965 for about the same and make my money back :/
Apparently not too many people watched Sarah Michelle Gellar's new show.
I'm guessing you have, which would be a far bigger fail than anything AMD and Intel could do.
Yeah, it's bad. I think the act of myself even watching it is pretty fail. Why did I do it?
THis is EXACTLY what I was referring to you having failed at. Oh well, just yet another fail.
It's interesting to see the numbers, any way.
There is another corollary to all this: that x86 is asymptotically reaching its peak. You just cannot get better performance per clock under x86. It is as optimised as you can get it. The only way to improve performance now is via additional cores, higher clock or "new" instructions that aren't (really) x86 any more... but basically new op codes to address today's programming algorithms. Old programs will not run faster on the new CPUs.
There is only one thing that hasn't saturated yet: performance/power consumption. So let's see some big steps in this direction.
What a conundrum Intel must face: you know, the 5-10 year strategy. x86 cannot get better per core. Should they ditch x86 in the long term? That is an ugly question. Better get the punters to buy into n-core n>100 processors and design software and compilers to optimise across multiply cores etc. They must be lobbying Microsoft very hard that Windows 9 is "best" on 16 cores or something.
That's all that Intel (or x86) has got left. Increase cores and reduce power consumption.
Leaving a niche for ARM and a possible different strategy.
Who's Sarah Michelle Gellar?
im happy bulldozer won somthing
2 things. Don't forget the overclock world record.
the only reason bulldozer is more fail than our politicians is because the amount of hype brought to you by sites like TPU. why does everyone cheer loudly for AMD? they are a terribly run company that since athlon X2 have not put out a decent chip to match intel. let's face it, they suck. intel ftw.
Can't argue that, but in my case, I was cheering for the underdog. That just didn't work out in my favor.
+1 to Easy Rhino. Intel FTW, AMD is just accumulating another fail for their failed book of failing failures.
and this is coming from the guy who saved up for the athlon x2 3800+ . i knew the purchase of ati would ruin the company. so fail.
None of that hype was brought to anyone via TPU. TPU never hyped BD, merely re-interated info from other tech sites. I cannot compare those sites to TPU, at all. All those other sites, clearly by reviews posted on BD and SB-E with ES processors on launch day, are far differnt than TPU. Note that TPU doesn't have any current CPU reviews.
Everyone has to hope that someone can face Intel. Yes, current AMD chips are far from the best performing, but it's a lack of real information that had everyone expecting more...and TPU was never the source of the erroneous info.
I couldn't call Intel the best option either, as all their current high-end products are broken. Both X79 chipsets and CPUs are not fully functional.
How is it Intel is winning? Performance? OK, I'll give you that, but again, they are asking $650 and $1250 for broken CPUs, and boards for those broken CPUs are $300+. That's winning?
Buying ATI is the one thing keeping AMD afloat these days. With that post, it's clear you are just trolling. :shadedshu Thank you, come agian?
ZOMG... if you'll excuse me, im gonna laugh myself to sleep
lul wut? rewriting news that hypes a chip is the exact definition of hype. there were plenty of critical reviews of bulldozer before it came out and i dont believe any of those were rewritten on tpu im not targeting the news division at tpu, im commenting on the forums as well.
reposting erroneous news stories from other sites is posting erroneous info. but again, my focus isnt on just news, but also the forums.
thankfully i never mentioned how poor intel is at some things either. it also has nothing to do with what im talking about.
exactly, and it ruined AMD. what's your point?
your ignorance does not make me a troll.
If ATi keeps AMD upside, why were they ruined? I really don't understand what you're saying here.
And I still think AMD systems are worth it if you're on a tight budget and is a fairly uncomplicated user. My system was dirt cheap and is almost overkill for me.
And while it's true they have not competed directly with Intel for some while, their chips have not been garbage either. Tons of people here have had AMD setups because the price/performance was good.
Actually, you said "sites like TPU", and didn't actually seem to include TPU, but thanks for clarifying. That's what makes you a troll.
AMD is like Ford was...Not the best, but cheap enough that everyone can afford them. And they are by far, very successful at that, in such a way that their current products are even hard to come by in some instances. I still today, 6 weeks after the launch, cannot get an FX-8150 locally...not because they haven't arrived, but becuase they are in such high demand. That's the epitome of success.
AMD is NOT in ruins. They are in the situation they are today, in a large way, because of Hector Ruiz. Sure, stock value is nto what it used to be, but such is the price of success...sometimes you need to make sacrifices to get that success. AMD either had to invest in ATI, or R&D for GPUS. choice was pretty easy, IMHO.
i judge success by profit. you make a great product then it will sell. AMD makes fine chips, but they can't make much profit because they are a terribly run company. they became terrible when they bought ATI. sure, AMD is still afloat because of their GPU sales, but the quality of their CPUs went way down. it isn't the fault of the engineers it is the fault of poor management.
I agree, but to me, all of those people are gone, IMHO. Those individuals where the failure, not the company itself. At least they are making changes in an attempt to "fix" things. I like to place blame directly on the source.
I'm happy with my FX6100 (especially at the price tag of $100 bucks).
I have 6 cores at 4.5Ghz with 1.45 volts.
Compared to my Phenom 965 which was quad core at 4.0ghz with 1.475 volts maxed out.
Not the greatest improvement and not worthy of a medal but with headroom for higher clocks I am satisfied. Oh and 95 Watt Max TDP
perhaps, but poor management practices seem to stick around longer than the poor managers that put them into practice. i hope we see a significant turn around in the coming years by AMD or I see a split in their future.
Separate names with a comma.