What's new
Carbonite

South Africa's Top Online Tech Classifieds!
Register a free account today to become a member! (No Under 18's)
Home of C.U.D.

Bulldozer

Aaaai BD.

/facepalm

Maybe one day AMD. Just maybe.
 
...

ha

haha

BWHAHAHAHAHAHA

OK. With that out of the way I still think that BD is a viable option due to AMD's way of handling upgrades. Chances are 99.9 that with an AM3+ board you should be able to handle cpus from AMD for years to come. Whereas Intel...well...they milk the hell outa people.

I was honestly hoping for BD to be much better to give Intel some stick and force them to drop prices etc...will just have to wait and see what happens.
 
Needs to be way cheaper...as in below 2k. But these are probably orders that happened when the rand was weak against the dollar, so probably inflated a bit much as well...
 
Needs to be way cheaper...as in below 2k. But these are probably orders that happened when the rand was weak against the dollar, so probably inflated a bit much as well...

You know as well as I do, we won't see sub R2k pricing on the top end model.
 
Watch for reviews, you're in for some interesting suprises.

The only interesting thing is that it took 4 years for AMD to build a CPU that can barely compete with an architecture that Intel is about to radically improve in a couple of months, which will make Bulldozer look like yet another Phenom.
What's unsurprising is that AMD CPUs continue to suck in terms of performance. Also that I called this one right - not happy about that in terms of competition, but we can only blame AMD for that.
 
/FACEPALM

AMD fanboys unite in stubbornness - run out now and set up camp outside your local computer shop, to collect your package of complete & utter fail once the NDA is lifted.

Hate to say it, but I DID tell you so.

I was at least hoping it'd be 3D stable over 8GHz, as surely that kind of overclocking scalability would give it the edge in Vantage - but considering how badly it loses out to a stock 980X when already running at 4.6, there goes that idea as well.

Maaaaybe it'll become the new King of the Hill in 3DMark11 for a while - time will tell.

All aboard the fail train.
 
Last edited:
From most of the reviews I've looked at, no one clocked further than 4.6Ghz on air, some even less, I was hoping for at least 5Ghz. Is this because the reviewers only had limited time with CPUs? Most 2500k/2600k clock higher on air...
AMD_FX-8150-196th.jpg

imageview.php

This was under H100
4900.jpg

Thermalright Arrow
http://limages.vr-zone.net/body/13694/4pointseven.png.jpeg
 
Yes, I was being sarcastic. I'd call struggling to keep up with an 1100T an interesting surprise. I didn't say it was a NICE surprise ;)
 
haha. Reading the threads over at Extreme and OCN...it's HILARIOUS how Intel fanbois are bashing the hell outa the AMD side haha.
 
I rate you guys are been pretty harsh on the BD, For the following reasons

1. I don’t think AMD ever stated that the bd would be a 2600k or 980x killer (assumptions where made by us the consumer)
2. The CPU is great for people who currently have a amd setup and are looking for next generation performance.
3. Its a true 8 core cpu (Benchies maybe down as software cannot fully utilize 8 cores at the moment)
the above statement holds true according to past experiences with when quad cores where released, as the software at the time
could not make use of all four cores.
4. The next batch will be cheaper due to R/D

disadvantage

I would say that amd did ok with this chip they produced a cpu that can match the sandy architecture, lets not forget their major market share now is in the gpu department and their
New apu cpus which are awesome for media and low end gaming rigs. They are currently looking into laptop apu cpus which I rate will personally steal the market from intel.

Hence

One can deduce that AMD are currently going through a experimental phase, while trying to achieve more while still producing quality products.

I still prefer Intel at the moment as they have implemented a higher end company objective seemingly forgetting about the entry level to mid range market.


I still prefer Intel at the moment as they have implement a higher end company objective seemingly forgetting about the entry level to mid range market.
 
You're kidding me right? Clock for clock performance is DOWN from the 1100T.
 
Will be interresting to see what happens when Sandy E hits. Hexacore and 15mb cache in top model able to turbo up to 3.9 without tweaking? Also the architechture of the new Sandy E mobo's looks quite promising with quad channel DDR and I think 40 PCI lanes?
 
Will be interresting to see what happens when Sandy E hits. Hexacore and 15mb cache in top model able to turbo up to 3.9 without tweaking? Also the architechture of the new Sandy E mobo's looks quite promising with quad channel DDR and I think 40 PCI lanes?

Correct. Im also very interested to see comparative benchies.
 
Next question: How many of you can afford the platform? This will be an introduction to $400 motherboards. Combine a R4,500 motherboard with a R10,000 CPU, R2,000 for a quad channel kit of RAM... We're not far from R20k. Money much much MUCH better spent on even a rubbish card such as the GTX 590.
 
Yes was hoping for little less than that. The problem in comparing these technologies is in the fact that software to test and utilize hexa and quad core doesn't exist yet. So my concern is what banchies will be run in comparison of the 2. Ojo I see your point. Thing is for me it is about the tech of the mobo can maximally utilize the tech of the cpu. With amd they are sticking to the same tech of the mobo. What I like about the Sandy E idea is that the tech of the mobo will not only maximise the cpu's potential but will optimize multi gpu configs. Which is fantastic IF nvidia can sort out their multi gpu scaling issues..
 
Next question: How many of you can afford the platform? This will be an introduction to $400 motherboards. Combine a R4,500 motherboard with a R10,000 CPU, R2,000 for a quad channel kit of RAM... We're not far from R20k. Money much much MUCH better spent on even a rubbish card such as the GTX 590.

100%

Seeing as an i5 2500k with a gtx 580 can run basically everything, an upgrade like this would not only be pointless, but pretty damn stupid.
 
This might be something to keep in mind for all those who are "happy" that Zambezi = FAIL...

Anandtech said:
The good news is AMD has a very aggressive roadmap ahead of itself; here's hoping it will be able to execute against it. We all need AMD to succeed. We've seen what happens without a strong AMD as a competitor. We get processors that are artificially limited and severe restrictions on overclocking, particularly at the value end of the segment. We're denied choice simply because there's no other alternative. I don't believe Bulldozer is a strong enough alternative to force Intel back into an ultra competitive mode, but we absolutely need it to be that. I have faith that AMD can pull it off, but there's still a lot of progress that needs to be made. AMD can't simply rely on its GPU architecture superiority to sell APUs; it needs to ramp on the x86 side as well—more specifically, AMD needs better single threaded performance. Bulldozer didn't deliver that, and I'm worried that Piledriver alone won't be enough. But if AMD can stick to a yearly cadence and execute well with each iteration, there's hope. It's no longer a question of whether AMD will return to the days of the Athlon 64, it simply must. Otherwise you can kiss choice goodbye.

Source
 
100%

Seeing as an i5 2500k with a gtx 580 can run basically everything, an upgrade like this would not only be pointless, but pretty damn stupid.

Was thinking of multi screen setups where 2 or more gpu's are needed at higher res. Think gaming is moving in that direction where more gpu power will be needed for this purpose.
 
Well you're talking to Mr AMD who is thoroughly disgusted :)

Same here, was expecting a lot more from Zambezi. Its sad that the new architecture struggles to keep up with the old one, but who knows what will happen as it matures. Guess we can only hope :/
 
Was thinking of multi screen setups where 2 or more gpu's are needed at higher res. Think gaming is moving in that direction where more gpu power will be needed for this purpose.

I seriously doubt that a significant portion of the market will ever be able to afford multi screens and gpu's such as yourself. So I doubt developers would drive gaming into a direction where consumers wont be able to afford the product.

I personally think gaming is moving into the console direction...sadly. Majority of PC games are console ports anyway...

So building a 40k rig just to play battefield 3...I dunno, just does not make financial sense to me.
 
^^^ This man. He speaks sense.

You will always have people driving the front lines of the best tech - and sure enough games will have options to reward those guys. But overall the games will be aimed to deliver high quality at an affordable machine level. Cater to the masses. Business is business after all.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom