- Nov 29, 2009
- 9,675 (2.41/day)
|System Name||Orange! // ItchyHands|
|Processor||3570K // 10400F|
|Motherboard||ASRock z77 Extreme4 // TUF Gaming B460M-Plus|
|Cooling||Stock // Stock|
|Memory||2x4Gb 1600Mhz CL9 Corsair XMS3 // 2x8Gb 3200 Mhz XPG D41|
|Video Card(s)||Sapphire Nitro+ RX 570 // Asus TUF RTX 2070|
|Storage||Samsung 840 250Gb // SX8200 480GB|
|Display(s)||LG 22EA53VQ // Philips 275M QHD|
|Case||NZXT Phantom 410 Black/Orange // Tecware Forge M|
|Power Supply||Corsair CXM500w // CM MWE 600w|
That is what I get when I skim through posts :shadedshuDude read my post again. As far as Phenom II and Bulldozer you just agreed with me
Also, if we are in agreement the 9650, Phenom II and Bulldozer perform about the same (atleast in single threaded games) That means it's impossible for Phenom II to be 25% faster than Bulldozer as Hustler suggested
Well, there will always be fanboys everywhere, and aggressive weeding is needed every so often.
Either way, AMD needs to boost their singlethreaded heavily to compete with Sandy Bridge past the $150 dollar mark, but I think AMD has given up in that segment and focus their resources in server and also low to mid end. Bulldozer while lacking in high end gaming does very well in mid and below, trading blows with the i3 and non-k i5 when overclocked. Power consumption still needs to be improved by 50% to make it truly competitive, no just on benches.