83 replies to this topic

[Athlonite]

and to top it off when AMD/MS release the patch for the FX it should perform even better

so I think +Dr_Asik you just got smoked

[alwaysonacoffebreak]

Athlonite, on 24 April 2012 - 10:41, said:

and to top it off when AMD/MS release the patch for the FX it should perform even better

so I think +Dr_Asik you just got smoked

Don't worry he'll be back soon stating that those benchmarks "show nothing and are usless". They always will

Altho I think MS already released 2 patches altho they didn't change much ~1-2% gain. Not too sure if they are working on a new one.

[majika]

Well, I have to say I am plesantly surpprised with the performance of my AMD FX-8120.

Some of the best features are its brute speed when it comes to multiplexing and Transcoding Hi-Def Video. Its also fast as hell when processing .FLAC Audio. All is indeed very good news it also over clocks well. I am just waiting for a pair HD7950 to come through the post.



Check out this rather large system spec. under full load



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

[alwaysonacoffebreak]

majika, on 24 April 2012 - 11:50, said:

Well, I have to say I am plesantly surpprised with the performance of my AMD FX-8120.

Some of the best features are its brute speed when it comes to multiplexing and Transcoding Hi-Def Video. Its also fast as hell when processing .FLAC Audio. All is indeed very good news it also over clocks well. I am just waiting for a pair HD7950 to come through the post.

Does the Gigabyte 990 perform good? I made the stupidest mistake when I bought an 970 series from Gigabyte also, running on PCI-E on 4x lol

Now Im between Formula V and the one you got now (990 GB), if the GB one is okay I'll go with that because the price differnce is almost 100 euros

[tsupersonic]

Got this from Legitreviews review of the i7-3770k and Techspot's review of the Core i7 3770k You should compare whatever is the latest/greatest from Intel with whatever is the latest/greatest from AMD - these are recently released CPU's from both companies. What more do you want - compare the Bulldozer to the Core 2 lineup? Every review I have seen says i7 for pure performance, and yes that comes with price.

Trust me, I want AMD to succeed, and competition is a great thing to have between two companies - brings better CPU's, lower prices, etc.. If you can't admit AMD is getting whopped now, then you are just not looking clearly at the benchmarks...

[alwaysonacoffebreak]

Quote

What more do you want - compare the Bulldozer to the Core 2 lineup?

Thats exactly what you are doing right now. Ironic isn't it.

[tsupersonic]

alwaysonacoffebreak, on 24 April 2012 - 14:30, said:

Thats exactly what you are doing right now. Ironic isn't it.

How so? Core 2 was released around Summer '06, and important to note it's no longer being produced nor is it anywhere on Intel's current roadmap. Bulldozer was released in October 2011, with CPU's still being produced today. Intel's i7 Sandy Bridge was released January 2011, with CPU's being produced today. Sandy Bridge-E was released in November 2011, and still being produced today. If you look at the charts, there are Sandy Bridge-E CPU's kicking AMD's ass.

I'm comparing the two current flagship models from both brands.

[alwaysonacoffebreak]

Sure, what ever lets you sleep at night.

[tsupersonic]

alwaysonacoffebreak, on 24 April 2012 - 14:43, said:

Sure, what ever lets you sleep at night.

So what do you want to see a comparison of?

Believe me, I'm not losing any sleep at night over AMD vs. Intel or other technology related comparisons. I could care less who's better, and in the end consumers win. I just want what's best performance wise at a good price. It is just apparent you love AMD a little too much.

[alwaysonacoffebreak]

tsupersonic, on 24 April 2012 - 14:57, said:

So what do you want to see a comparison of?

Believe me, I'm not losing any sleep at night over AMD vs. Intel or other technology related comparisons. I could care less who's better, and in the end consumers win. I just want what's best performance wise at a good price. It is just apparent you love AMD a little too much.

It's not about me loving them or not.

Comparsion? I don't want to see any as I already saw from graphs that you posted that the 8150 can easily hold up with the 2500k and 2600k (which are 8150's Generation CPUs).

[Site Lab]

Finally, someone else sees that AMD cpu's are just as good as the Intel equivalents

[alwaysonacoffebreak]

Darn. where's the delete button

[Site Lab]

Also, PRICE!

Cheapest FX AMD Motherboard, Ram + CPU vs Similar Priced Intel Motherboard, Ram + CPU. (i3)

GIGABYTE GA-970A-DS3 AMD 970A (Socket AM3+) DDR3 PCI-Express ATX Motherboard £ 44.99
AMD Bulldozer FX-4100 3.60GHz (3.80GHz Turbo) Socket AM3+ 4-Core Processor £ 70.79
8GB Exceleram Value Series (1x8GB) DDR3 PC3-10666C9 1333MHz 1.5v SODIMM Memory - E30804S £ 27.99

£172.52 w/VAT

Intel Core i3-2100 3.10GHz (Sandybridge) Socket LGA1155 Processor - Retail £ 69.95
MSI Z68A-G43-G3 Intel Z68 (REV B3) Socket 1155 DDR3 PCI-Express Motherboard £ 59.99
8GB Exceleram Value Series (1x8GB) DDR3 PC3-10666C9 1333MHz 1.5v SODIMM Memory - E30804S £ 27.99

£189.52 w/VAT

FX-4100 is a quad-core, 3.60GHz processor. The i3-2100 is a dual core, 3.10Ghz processor.

In passmark benchmarks, the i3 scores 3851 points and the FX scores 3988 points. The FX-4100 system is also £17 cheaper.

And the best bit is LINUX BENCHMARKS .

WINDOWS

This is all without the Bulldozer Patch that will hopefully increase the gap

[alwaysonacoffebreak]

Thankfully Linux is more friendlier to FX then Windows is

[Arceles]

Intel fanboys bashing amd, nothing new indeed... but they are indeed very mad because ivy bridge line up turned to be not quite good... and they can't even overclock because it heats like hell. To bad for them.