Discussion in 'News' started by btarunr, Jul 14, 2011.
Ahh Netburst. What a piece of shit
Naaah, if you had the cooling for it some CPU's were pretty good.
I have a 965 EE in the closet. Even under water it sucked.
I personally suspect that one of the reason phenom performance lags intel so much is do to the decoder being less efficient, it they improved this, the chips performance increase could be huge.
It also doubles as a space heater.
Poor AMD if it doesn't fix the blocking factor, just like Intel got rid off NetBurst & gained the market share in performance; i'll feel sorry & besided - there's another issue involved: Intel's monopolistic reign if AMD winds up dead. Gotta wait til some benchies proove otherwise, but for now only thing AMD & Intel fans (me included, though not entirely AMD or Intel fan but rather tech abuser ) need to do is - fear; fear of monopoly & sky high prices if Intel wins. Is there a news on when exactly Dozer releases or what?
Woah,it's faster than the 1100T.
You do have a point there,even if BD kicks SB ass,Intel will still outsell them because they have their ways of squeezing AMD out of the market. However i've been told if AMD ever went under,there would be several lawsuits(though I think Intel would just pay them off) and the FTC splitting up Intel before they get a chance to sucker consumers with sky high prices,and the government possibly giving AMD a bailout. After Netburst Intel has gained themselves almost all of the market share and huge sum of profits,Intel is most likely going to win with faster processors every time. AMD simply doesn't have the R&D funding to beat Intel & force further innovation anymore. Without AMD we would still be on Netburst.
Okay there are multiple things wrong here. If Intel ever did develop a monopoly they would be subject to a number of Anti-Trust laws, and within years it would be resolved. As for the price, Intel's CPU's offer performance that greatly exceeds the current lineup of AMD CPU's, and are priced accordingly. Yes, you can get a Thuban x6 and in some applications it will be on par for a 2500k or 2600k, but 9/10 times the SB CPU's decimate it in performance. So if it performs significantly better, why would it be cheaper?
The new SB-E CPU's announced have high price points because there is NOTHING else at that price point from AMD, and Intel isn't really sure how Bulldozer will affect how competative their pricing is. If BD does well, SB\SB-E CPU's will drop in price accordingly. It boils down to economics, why sell the best possible product at the lowest possible price when you can space out your products to maximize profits? Millions of companies have done this before Intel, and millions will do it after.
Had to add - my 2 cents/IMHO; my bad guys. Maybe i just fear for the worst way too much; gotta wait til CPU hits the PC store shelves & benchmarked rather then speculate what will or will not happen. Thanx. It's just that anticipation sometimes kills even pretty much patient person like me. Hope the CPU will arrive by end of August so PC store near me have it by the time i'll upgrade.
NetBurst wouldn't be that bad overall if Intel didn't made Prescott and just shrinked Gellatin cores to 90nm for top P4HT and Northwood (with at least 256kb L2) for Celerons and cheaper P4s. Then we would definitely see >4GHz dual-core 65nm cpus and those would be much faster per MHz than 9xx
and as for Pentium D, those cpus were quite cheap. I got 805 + Asus SLI mobo for less than X2 3800+ was priced Maybe 805 was not as fast and not as power efficient but it was faster overal than similary priced Athlons X1 and @3.8GHz didn't lacked performance at anything. Just like today Phenoms II, not as fast and not as good but at least cheap
this gets so annoying, you don't have to make ferraris to be competitive, you just have to build a better toyota camary.
There isn't going to be any monopoly
Though i have to add that few things doesn't change over the time when those sites present Dozer, namely: 8MB of L3 cache, DDR3 1866MHz mem controller & Black Edition moniker for 8/6/4-core CPUs, but Black Edition is the obvious one. lol If this will be true for all those CPUs once they released - it's quite understandable why it takes for AMD so long to launch it & why there are delays like that; B2/C0 revisions (& not B1 as in Engineering Sample's case) have to be as fast (if not faster) as 2600K/980X in both synthetic & gaming benchies; plus SLI tech in AMD core-logic: someone there beleives he/she/they could get market share once the Dozer is out & benchmarked, whether it wins or loses.
BD will beat a 2600K in mulithreaded benchmarks but it has no shot in gaming thanks to intel's superior IPC
Just for you Ser..
Guy over in Japan i believe just received his C0 Bulldozer.
I will be skipping them as they will be phased out shortly after release, which really makes me wonder why AMD is bothering other than a desperate effort to stay relevant.
Over at XS all they really can say is GF's 32nm process is absolute shit.
Time will tell.
Yeah, I read over there. They know as much as anyone else on this subject. It means nothing.
I would agree, it's too early to be making assumptions, only when you get a retail product can you start to evaluate.
That looks f***ed up for all revisions, excluding C0; how come they (XS) know this? Is it how people find out info these days? Did they stole the rev. B1/B2/C0 CPUs or something?
Jokes aside, this wouldn't look good if FX-8120 will be rev. B2 CPU; make it & it's older 8150 bro C0 along with 6100 & 4100. The rest doesn't need to be changed, i.e. L1/L2/L3 caches, DDR3 1866MHz mem controller, etc...... Unless it's speculations again.
People know because everyone has a computer these days as well as a cell phone. News travels fast
Separate names with a comma.