Bulldozer?

[NAGZS]

I heard it was released on the 12th, but it hasn't hit stores yet it seems, although I could be wrong.

Also, there seem to be reviews on it already, so does anyone know how it pared up with sandy bridge 2500k and 2600k?

 

[Puppies04]

Yes it has hit the stores look for amd "FX" CPUs. It gets pwnd in almost everything compared to sandybridge. Try reading this forum a little and you will see what i mean.

 

[busydude]

Wow! what a weird time to come out of hibernation.

 

[Puppies04]

lol

 

[T_Yamamoto]

lol

 

[Rhezuss]

Well guys, not everyone is aware of everything by the minute like us geeks

OP, like Puppies said, look for AMD "FX" CPUs and you'll surely find something.

 

[NAGZS]

Sooo, then the bulldozer got completely destroyed, not even worth looking at?

so much for amd's comeback :/

 

[NAGZS]

WOH ,WOH ,WOH ,WOH ,WOH ,WOH ,WOH. intel released 2700k? I only got off the forum for a month o.o

 

[NAGZS]

And while im at it, anyone know how the 2700k compares to the 2500k in percent?

 

[dpk33]

And while im at it, anyone know how the 2700k compares to the 2500k in percent?

I believe it's a 2600k with a 100mhz bump in clockspeed. I may be wrong.

 

[AdamK47]

And while im at it, anyone know how the 2700k compares to the 2500k in percent?

2700 / 2500 = 1.08, or 108%

 

[nanaki333]

wait... bulldozer is out?

 

[tulx]

Sooo, then the bulldozer got completely destroyed, not even worth looking at?

so much for amd's comeback :/

That is not true. Bulldozer is very good in multithreaded workloads and bad in singlethreaded workloads. Whether it is a failure or not depends on what you want to do with your computer. For server-like work (virtualisation) or encoding and formating, it is arguably better than a 2600k from Intel. Of course, there are more things to consider, since you don't just choose between two CPU's, but between two platforms.
Writing off FX as a failure is a very bigoted and probably biased thing to do. Hence, I would not listen to posts about FX which start with "OLOLOLOL FAIL!!"
Think what you want your PC to do and decide.
You also might want to wait for a stepping update on FX if you have time.

 

[nanaki333]

That is not true. Bulldozer is very good in multithreaded workloads and bad in singlethreaded workloads. Whether it is a failure or not depends on what you want to do with your computer. For server-like work (virtualisation) or encoding and formating, it is arguably better than a 2600k from Intel. Of course, there are more things to consider, since you don't just choose between two CPU's, but between two platforms.
Writing off FX as a failure is a very bigoted and probably biased thing to do. Hence, I would not listen to posts about FX which start with "OLOLOLOL FAIL!!"
Think what you want your PC to do and decide.
You also might want to wait for a stepping update on FX if you have time.

pffft. it's not very good in multithreaded tasks when 4 out of 8 of my cores are bad.

 

[g0dMAn]

pffft. it's not very good in multithreaded tasks when 4 out of 8 of my cores are bad.

You have an FX 8-series with 4 bad cores?

 

[Rvenger]

pffft. it's not very good in multithreaded tasks when 4 out of 8 of my cores are bad.

Didn't you get an RMA for that yet?