• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Bulldozer?

N

NAGZS

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

so much for amd's comeback :/
 
NAGZS said:
Sooo, then the bulldozer got completely destroyed, not even worth looking at? 😱

so much for amd's comeback :/
Click to expand...

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.
 
Last edited:
tulx said:
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.
Click to expand...

pffft. it's not very good in multithreaded tasks when 4 out of 8 of my cores are bad.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top