|
On October 13 2011 04:39 JingleHell wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2011 04:27 Djzapz wrote:On October 13 2011 04:09 JingleHell wrote:On October 13 2011 04:06 Djzapz wrote:On October 13 2011 04:00 JingleHell wrote:On October 13 2011 03:58 Djzapz wrote:
Dear lord AMD, you almost managed to take a step backward...
Hopefully Intel will keep their prices honest -_- BWAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA. I LOL'ed IRL. For one, "keep"? That's a good one. For two, yeah right. Right now they charge more for an i5 2500 non-k than a 2300. Same piece of silicon. Well it's probably binned, isn't it? Regardless, hardware manufacturers have been doing that even when competition was pretty even. Like between NVIDIA and ATI, they would literally shut down some pipelines on their cards to sell them cheaper. Sometimes you could even turn them back up. Recently there was a GTX465 that was just a gimped GTX470 that you could flash back to GTX470 firmware. Anyway, $170 for a 2500k that'll last me for years is pretty alright. They could almost act like a monopoly at this point and they'd get slapped fees for it but that'd probably be covered by their profits. By "keeping their prices honest", I meant that I hope they won't start acting like a monopoly. So because everybody is ripping you off in the same ways it's ok they rip you off? And they're not always better binned, depending on demand. And if you think they aren't acting like a monopoly, look at 1366 pricing. And GTX 465 was the most insulting piece of hardware released in the last 2 years. Although reference 6950s were kind of a nice gesture. I don't see how it's so outrageously wrong of me to call Intel "honest" when their pricing for LGA1155 has been relatively honest if we compare it to the industry... No reason to full caps "bwahaha..." at me unless you really want some attention. As for 1366 pricing, it's for stupid people or enthusiasts, but I would agree that it's not particularly honest. They could be so, so much worse. If all the casinos use rigged slot machines for net payouts 20% below what they should be, does that make any individual casino honest? And just because they could be worse also doesn't make them honest. When Ivy Bridge comes out, we'll see if you still think they're honest.
Relatively honest stands. GGPLAY.
|
is there a difference between 8120 and 8150 as in does 8150 overclock higher or is it just a higher clocked version of 8120?
|
On October 13 2011 04:46 Antisocialmunky wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2011 04:27 Djzapz wrote:On October 13 2011 04:09 JingleHell wrote:On October 13 2011 04:06 Djzapz wrote:On October 13 2011 04:00 JingleHell wrote:On October 13 2011 03:58 Djzapz wrote:
Dear lord AMD, you almost managed to take a step backward...
Hopefully Intel will keep their prices honest -_- BWAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA. I LOL'ed IRL. For one, "keep"? That's a good one. For two, yeah right. Right now they charge more for an i5 2500 non-k than a 2300. Same piece of silicon. Well it's probably binned, isn't it? Regardless, hardware manufacturers have been doing that even when competition was pretty even. Like between NVIDIA and ATI, they would literally shut down some pipelines on their cards to sell them cheaper. Sometimes you could even turn them back up. Recently there was a GTX465 that was just a gimped GTX470 that you could flash back to GTX470 firmware. Anyway, $170 for a 2500k that'll last me for years is pretty alright. They could almost act like a monopoly at this point and they'd get slapped fees for it but that'd probably be covered by their profits. By "keeping their prices honest", I meant that I hope they won't start acting like a monopoly. So because everybody is ripping you off in the same ways it's ok they rip you off? And they're not always better binned, depending on demand. And if you think they aren't acting like a monopoly, look at 1366 pricing. And GTX 465 was the most insulting piece of hardware released in the last 2 years. Although reference 6950s were kind of a nice gesture. I don't see how it's so outrageously wrong of me to call Intel "honest" when their pricing for LGA1155 has been relatively honest if we compare it to the industry... No reason to full caps "bwahaha..." at me unless you really want some attention. As for 1366 pricing, it's for stupid people or enthusiasts, but I would agree that it's not particularly honest. They could be so, so much worse. I'm more annoyed by lack of overclocking on most of their chips now. The days of grabbing a $100 chips and overclocking the pants off it are over until AMD's Bulldozer beta test is done and they release the real deal.
AMD has been brute forcing it's way in the market for a long time now. Even with GPUs, they spend so much R&D resources on the FPU, ALU, and pipeline configuration while largely neglecting memory management. They're forced to put so much power through the execution to make up for such HUGE memory shortfalls that there is very little room to overclock. They're essentially selling pre-overclocked chips in order to remain competitive.
|
Overall Bulldozer is an absolute disappointment in the desktop market. It just doesn't have the per core per cycle performance needed to compete. It just does not work out. Being worse than a phenom II is just not acceptable. Would be better just to shrink the k 10.5 core down to 32nm and add 2 more cores, it would be a lot more powerful and probably less work in the design, 8 core 32nm phenom II would perform better in single threaded workloads and even threaded tasks.
On the bright side, window 8 will most likely increase performance by a few percent. Once Globalfoundries sort out the silicon the CPU will be able to clock a lot higher. Bulldozer is a great server processor, 16 core interlango might gain back some shares in that department which might put more funding on the next generation of bulldozer. The CPU is also extremely scalable in terms of cores and clock, its kinda like a p4 in that regards. If they can get a 10% increase in per cycle performance in enhanced bulldozer and get the clock up they might be able to compete with ivy bridge on the mid range market.
I still have some hope for AMD but as of right now, theres no reason to not buy a 2500k if you have the money as a gamer. Eventually software will all become more threaded but as of right now; 4 cores 4 threads is all anyone needs as a gamer. AMD just looked too far ahead this time and didn't deliver for the now. Hopefully the FX IIs if they come out would be like phenom IIs to the phenoms. Intel's monopoly will mean bad news for the consumer.
|
Overall Bulldozer is an absolute disappointment in the desktop market. It just doesn't have the per core per cycle performance needed to compete. It just does not work out. Being worse than a phenom II is just not acceptable. Would be better just to shrink the k 10.5 core down to 32nm and add 2 more cores, it would be a lot more powerful and probably less work in the design, 8 core 32nm phenom II would perform better in single threaded workloads and even threaded tasks.
On the bright side, window 8 will most likely increase performance by a few percent. Once Globalfoundries sort out the silicon the CPU will be able to clock a lot higher. Bulldozer is a great server processor, 16 core interlango might gain back some shares in that department which might put more funding on the next generation of bulldozer. The CPU is also extremely scalable in terms of cores and clock, its kinda like a p4 in that regards. If they can get a 10% increase in per cycle performance in enhanced bulldozer and get the clock up they might be able to compete with ivy bridge on the mid range market.
I still have some hope for AMD but as of right now, theres no reason to not buy a 2500k if you have the money as a gamer. Eventually software will all become more threaded but as of right now; 4 cores 4 threads is all anyone needs as a gamer. AMD just looked too far ahead this time and didn't deliver for the now. Hopefully the FX IIs if they come out would be like phenom IIs to the phenoms. Intel's monopoly will mean bad news for the consumer.
Very nice analysis. I think what you said about AMD looking too far ahead is absolutely right, however it might pay off in the future. Here's to hoping!
|
I went with Phenom x6 because it was on sale at the local fry's electronics a year ago. I'm kind of regretting it now though, intel is destroying AMD at nearly every price point.
|
On October 13 2011 05:02 Drowsy wrote:
I went with Phenom x6 because it was on sale at the local fry's electronics a year ago. I'm kind of regretting it now though, intel is destroying AMD at nearly every price point.
yes same. I bought the phenom x6 4 months ago and now i wish i got intel. so sad t.t
|
On October 13 2011 05:02 Drowsy wrote:
I went with Phenom x6 because it was on sale at the local fry's electronics a year ago. I'm kind of regretting it now though, intel is destroying AMD at nearly every price point.
???
Do people post not knowing what they are talking about???
Intel is clearly winning the High-end desktop market... But thats about it
AMD's Llano and Brazos family CPU/APU's are doing very well in low-mid markets. And while the bulldozer is bleh for desktops.. It should serve to help out the server side market share gap as well.
And keep in mind... The high-end CPU market is the smallest CPU market segment.
EDIT: Yes, Intel is clearly winning overall.. But in almost every segment AMD being destroyed?... C'mon....
|
On October 13 2011 05:06 B00ts wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2011 05:02 Drowsy wrote:
I went with Phenom x6 because it was on sale at the local fry's electronics a year ago. I'm kind of regretting it now though, intel is destroying AMD at nearly every price point. ??? Do people post not knowing what they are talking about??? Intel is clearly winning the High-end desktop market... But thats about it AMD's Llano and Brazos family CPU/APU's are doing very well in low-mid markets. And while the bulldozer is bleh for desktops.. It should serve to help out the server side market share gap as well. And keep in mind... The high-end CPU market is the smallest CPU market segment.
And what kind of segment do you think the person you quoted fit into?
|
On October 13 2011 05:07 nam nam wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2011 05:06 B00ts wrote:On October 13 2011 05:02 Drowsy wrote:
I went with Phenom x6 because it was on sale at the local fry's electronics a year ago. I'm kind of regretting it now though, intel is destroying AMD at nearly every price point. ??? Do people post not knowing what they are talking about??? Intel is clearly winning the High-end desktop market... But thats about it AMD's Llano and Brazos family CPU/APU's are doing very well in low-mid markets. And while the bulldozer is bleh for desktops.. It should serve to help out the server side market share gap as well. And keep in mind... The high-end CPU market is the smallest CPU market segment. And what kind of segment do you think the person you quoted fit into?
Wow.
He said "every price point"... Not "my price point".... I'm talking about what was said, not who said it.
|
On October 13 2011 05:06 B00ts wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2011 05:02 Drowsy wrote:
I went with Phenom x6 because it was on sale at the local fry's electronics a year ago. I'm kind of regretting it now though, intel is destroying AMD at nearly every price point. ??? Do people post not knowing what they are talking about??? Intel is clearly winning the High-end desktop market... But thats about it AMD's Llano and Brazos family CPU/APU's are doing very well in low-mid markets. And while the bulldozer is bleh for desktops.. It should serve to help out the server side market share gap as well. And keep in mind... The high-end CPU market is the smallest CPU market segment. EDIT: Yes, Intel is clearly winning overall.. But in almost every segment AMD being destroyed?... C'mon....
Intel does have like 80% of the market to AMD's 10% or so.
|
On October 13 2011 05:06 B00ts wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2011 05:02 Drowsy wrote:
I went with Phenom x6 because it was on sale at the local fry's electronics a year ago. I'm kind of regretting it now though, intel is destroying AMD at nearly every price point. ??? Do people post not knowing what they are talking about??? Intel is clearly winning the High-end desktop market... But thats about it AMD's Llano and Brazos family CPU/APU's are doing very well in low-mid markets. And while the bulldozer is bleh for desktops.. It should serve to help out the server side market share gap as well. And keep in mind... The high-end CPU market is the smallest CPU market segment. EDIT: Yes, Intel is clearly winning overall.. But in almost every segment AMD being destroyed?... C'mon....
low-mid is what? I don't know much about laptops, but for desktop sandybridge processors destroy AMD in the 50$, 65-80$, 125$, and 175$ departments as well unless you for some reason need a ton of cores without much single-thread performance.
|
On October 13 2011 05:05 strength wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2011 05:02 Drowsy wrote:
I went with Phenom x6 because it was on sale at the local fry's electronics a year ago. I'm kind of regretting it now though, intel is destroying AMD at nearly every price point. yes same. I bought the phenom x6 4 months ago and now i wish i got intel. so sad t.t
Why would you be disappointed now? This doesn't change anything about your purchase. If your purchase was good then it is fine now....
|
On October 13 2011 04:53 Djzapz wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2011 04:39 JingleHell wrote:On October 13 2011 04:27 Djzapz wrote:On October 13 2011 04:09 JingleHell wrote:On October 13 2011 04:06 Djzapz wrote:On October 13 2011 04:00 JingleHell wrote:On October 13 2011 03:58 Djzapz wrote:
Dear lord AMD, you almost managed to take a step backward...
Hopefully Intel will keep their prices honest -_- BWAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA. I LOL'ed IRL. For one, "keep"? That's a good one. For two, yeah right. Right now they charge more for an i5 2500 non-k than a 2300. Same piece of silicon. Well it's probably binned, isn't it? Regardless, hardware manufacturers have been doing that even when competition was pretty even. Like between NVIDIA and ATI, they would literally shut down some pipelines on their cards to sell them cheaper. Sometimes you could even turn them back up. Recently there was a GTX465 that was just a gimped GTX470 that you could flash back to GTX470 firmware. Anyway, $170 for a 2500k that'll last me for years is pretty alright. They could almost act like a monopoly at this point and they'd get slapped fees for it but that'd probably be covered by their profits. By "keeping their prices honest", I meant that I hope they won't start acting like a monopoly. So because everybody is ripping you off in the same ways it's ok they rip you off? And they're not always better binned, depending on demand. And if you think they aren't acting like a monopoly, look at 1366 pricing. And GTX 465 was the most insulting piece of hardware released in the last 2 years. Although reference 6950s were kind of a nice gesture. I don't see how it's so outrageously wrong of me to call Intel "honest" when their pricing for LGA1155 has been relatively honest if we compare it to the industry... No reason to full caps "bwahaha..." at me unless you really want some attention. As for 1366 pricing, it's for stupid people or enthusiasts, but I would agree that it's not particularly honest. They could be so, so much worse. If all the casinos use rigged slot machines for net payouts 20% below what they should be, does that make any individual casino honest? And just because they could be worse also doesn't make them honest. When Ivy Bridge comes out, we'll see if you still think they're honest. Relatively honest stands. GGPLAY.
Relatively honest may stand, but go back to your original statement that you took offense at me laughing at. Hopefully Intel will keep their prices honest
On October 13 2011 05:06 B00ts wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2011 05:02 Drowsy wrote:
I went with Phenom x6 because it was on sale at the local fry's electronics a year ago. I'm kind of regretting it now though, intel is destroying AMD at nearly every price point. ??? Do people post not knowing what they are talking about??? Intel is clearly winning the High-end desktop market... But thats about it AMD's Llano and Brazos family CPU/APU's are doing very well in low-mid markets. And while the bulldozer is bleh for desktops.. It should serve to help out the server side market share gap as well. And keep in mind... The high-end CPU market is the smallest CPU market segment. EDIT: Yes, Intel is clearly winning overall.. But in almost every segment AMD being destroyed?... C'mon....
I assume your definition of high end desktop market includes 100% of desktops that use only desktop hardware?
Because at the low end, where people need at most a dual, SB Pentium wins over anything AMD can offer at the same price. At the mid-range, SB i5 shreds... everything. And the high end you already conceded.
If you mean relative, say relative.
|
On October 13 2011 05:12 Shikyo wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2011 05:06 B00ts wrote:On October 13 2011 05:02 Drowsy wrote:
I went with Phenom x6 because it was on sale at the local fry's electronics a year ago. I'm kind of regretting it now though, intel is destroying AMD at nearly every price point. ??? Do people post not knowing what they are talking about??? Intel is clearly winning the High-end desktop market... But thats about it AMD's Llano and Brazos family CPU/APU's are doing very well in low-mid markets. And while the bulldozer is bleh for desktops.. It should serve to help out the server side market share gap as well. And keep in mind... The high-end CPU market is the smallest CPU market segment. EDIT: Yes, Intel is clearly winning overall.. But in almost every segment AMD being destroyed?... C'mon.... low-mid is what? I don't know much about laptops, but for desktop sandybridge processors destroy AMD in the 50$, 65-80$, 125$, and 175$ departments as well unless you for some reason need a ton of cores without much single-thread performance.
No just no
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-sandy-bridge-cpu,3030-2.html
The Athlon II x3 is still the king below 100$ and the cheap Phenoms can still be interesting especially if you plan to OC.
|
On October 13 2011 05:10 Djzapz wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2011 05:06 B00ts wrote:On October 13 2011 05:02 Drowsy wrote:
I went with Phenom x6 because it was on sale at the local fry's electronics a year ago. I'm kind of regretting it now though, intel is destroying AMD at nearly every price point. ??? Do people post not knowing what they are talking about??? Intel is clearly winning the High-end desktop market... But thats about it AMD's Llano and Brazos family CPU/APU's are doing very well in low-mid markets. And while the bulldozer is bleh for desktops.. It should serve to help out the server side market share gap as well. And keep in mind... The high-end CPU market is the smallest CPU market segment. EDIT: Yes, Intel is clearly winning overall.. But in almost every segment AMD being destroyed?... C'mon.... Intel does have like 80% of the market to AMD's 10% or so.
Intel owns around 80%, AMD around 20%. (source)
|
On October 13 2011 05:18 Boblion wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2011 05:12 Shikyo wrote:On October 13 2011 05:06 B00ts wrote:On October 13 2011 05:02 Drowsy wrote:
I went with Phenom x6 because it was on sale at the local fry's electronics a year ago. I'm kind of regretting it now though, intel is destroying AMD at nearly every price point. ??? Do people post not knowing what they are talking about??? Intel is clearly winning the High-end desktop market... But thats about it AMD's Llano and Brazos family CPU/APU's are doing very well in low-mid markets. And while the bulldozer is bleh for desktops.. It should serve to help out the server side market share gap as well. And keep in mind... The high-end CPU market is the smallest CPU market segment. EDIT: Yes, Intel is clearly winning overall.. But in almost every segment AMD being destroyed?... C'mon.... low-mid is what? I don't know much about laptops, but for desktop sandybridge processors destroy AMD in the 50$, 65-80$, 125$, and 175$ departments as well unless you for some reason need a ton of cores without much single-thread performance. No just no http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-sandy-bridge-cpu,3030-2.htmlThe Athlon II x3 is still the king below 100$ and the cheap Phenoms can still be interesting especially if you plan to OC.
I'd love to see the criteria on that.
|
On October 13 2011 05:18 Boblion wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2011 05:12 Shikyo wrote:On October 13 2011 05:06 B00ts wrote:On October 13 2011 05:02 Drowsy wrote:
I went with Phenom x6 because it was on sale at the local fry's electronics a year ago. I'm kind of regretting it now though, intel is destroying AMD at nearly every price point. ??? Do people post not knowing what they are talking about??? Intel is clearly winning the High-end desktop market... But thats about it AMD's Llano and Brazos family CPU/APU's are doing very well in low-mid markets. And while the bulldozer is bleh for desktops.. It should serve to help out the server side market share gap as well. And keep in mind... The high-end CPU market is the smallest CPU market segment. EDIT: Yes, Intel is clearly winning overall.. But in almost every segment AMD being destroyed?... C'mon.... low-mid is what? I don't know much about laptops, but for desktop sandybridge processors destroy AMD in the 50$, 65-80$, 125$, and 175$ departments as well unless you for some reason need a ton of cores without much single-thread performance. No just no http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-sandy-bridge-cpu,3030-2.htmlThe Athlon II x3 is still the king below 100$ and the cheap Phenoms can still be interesting especially if you plan to OC.
Lol is this a joke? You're linking to tomshardware...
Most games only utilizes two cores and a Pentium G840 destroys a second generation Athlon.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4524/the-sandy-bridge-pentium-review-pentium-g850-g840-g620-g620t-tested/3
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/pentium-g850-g840-g620_4.html#sect0
|
G620 wrecks their listed "top price/performance", and the price point competition is G840 or 850 I believe? Especially since they're saying gaming CPU...
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/202?vs=406
x3 455 is just a hot deal, to only lose by 8-10% to a cheaper CPU...
For benchmarks, link somewhere with maybe a little less bias? Toms is only good for brand-neutral information.
|
Sigh... I really wanted this to be good, at least close to sandy bridge, and I am very disappointed. I'm also not very surprised about this either, seeing how even some of Intel's lowest end processors (pentium and i3) were better than AMD's now last gen processors (phenom II). The improvement in performance over the last gen of processors that AMD made isn't very impressive either, according to anardtech bench ( http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/434?vs=203 ) the highest end bulldozer only gets 2 fps more than the highest end phenom II hex core in Starcraft 2; and is actually slightly, but within the margin of error, slower in some games (Dirt 3 and Crysis). I'm very unimpressed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
