amd Rumor: AMD Centurion FX clocked at 5GHz

[Phouchg]

Yeah, but does it catch on fire like the good old days ?

Intel FTW. Intel FOR LIFE.

Well, I've had VRM caps exploding on an ECS P55 board (they weren't all polymer still, for the likes of ECS and Biostar). i3-530 itself lived to see another day. Well, another board, as it were. They probably don't, no.

Haswell's FIVR, on the other hand, wouldv'e probably gone quiet along with the board.

[Noir Angel]

I had 2 failures with AMD and one with Intel, but I found (back in the Pentium 4 / Athlon 64 days anyway) that when an AMD platform failed, the CPU tended to take the board with it. Not had that with any of my Intel stuff yet. All told though I've never seen any real evidence that one suffers more failures than the other it's just pot luck.

[Luc2k]

We have a guy arguing that benchmarks are part of some conspiracy to heap scorn on AMD and you're calling ME a fanboy. Get some damn perspective pal :laugh:

I say benchmarks don't lie and you somehow twist that into me saying they do. You are doing exactly what I said you're doing, taking a factual things like the reviews/benchmarks or my straight statement and exaggerate or completely misrepresent.

To sum it up, there is no conspiracy, the benchmarks are true, however YOU are lying.

[Noir Angel]

I say benchmarks don't lie and you somehow twist that into me saying they do lie. You are doing exactly what I said you're doing, taking a factual things like the reviews/benchmarks or my straight statement and exaggerate or completely misrepresent.

To sum it up, there is no conspiracy, the benchmarks are true, however YOU are lying.

No, what I said was that you're sitting there accusing me of blind fan loyalty whilst another member (Read: ANOTHER member. NOT YOU) is making the argument that they have been fabricated. You're focusing on me for a reason I can't quite figure out when we have another member reeling off insane conspiracy theories.

First learn to read, then go on the attack please.

[Alwaysonacoffebreak]

We have a guy arguing that benchmarks are part of some conspiracy to heap scorn on AMD and you're calling ME a fanboy. Get some damn perspective pal :laugh:

Nobody with a PhD in any form of IT would make the argument that benchmarks are part of some conspiracy vendetta to favour one company over another. The condescending overtone of your post also makes a mockery of the idea that there's anything remotely approaching intellectualism in your mind.

Yep. Because you blues have never heard of Intel compilers crippling AMD performance before and that's just made up..oh wait..Let's take back a "few" years when Intel compilers actually crippled SSE and SSE2 when the program was run on anything than Intel CPU while the competition CPU was well capable of taking advantage of those sets, that's also only a conspiracy right? Maxon software (namely Cinebench) is using only Intel compilers to this day and somehow AMD CPU's are so messed up in multi-core tests in there while on a different OS on a same type of an bench they basically rape Intel in multi-threaded workflow (In the same price class CPU's), that's also conspiracy right?

Love how you spread "facts" - I think you should learn the meaning of that word.

[Noir Angel]

I've used Windows on AMD processors before and never seen any software that does this. And in reality given how spotty the quality of software on Linux is I don't really care what Linux benchmarks say. Given that most benchmarks aren't done with software that goes through an Intel compiler it's of little relevance (and just FYI those show Intel at an advantage as well).

Also: Raping? lol. I read through those Linux benchmarks and the margins were a couple of percent at best. However in the Linux tests that the Intel CPUs were better for they were better by very big margins.

[Alwaysonacoffebreak]

So your only point is you haven't seen it so it's not true? Whahh. Guess FTC and other "agencies" were also wrong about it when they forced Intel to remove the vendor check from their compilers (Which they haven't done to this day actually). Toms done a good job on you tho I'd suggest you read on other sites as well :)

Intel advantage is in single-threaded programs, multi-threaded in most of the cases is purely on AMD's side. Pick what you need and be done with it but for god sake stop spreading some pointless bs.

"I don't care what Linux benchmarks say" Yeah because we're here to compare windows benchmarks not the actual CPU capability. And someone actually takes you seriously on these things. Meh.

Funny. Very big margins..Somehow even the article author there doesn't agree with you and says the 8350 is well off with 3770k in most benchmarks.

[Luc2k]

No, what I said was that you're sitting there accusing me of blind fan loyalty whilst another member (Read: ANOTHER member. NOT YOU) is making the argument that they have been fabricated. You're focusing on me for a reason I can't quite figure out when we have another member reeling off insane conspiracy theories.

First learn to read, then go on the attack please.

So you feel like some kind of counter balance or what? If somebody talks **** you correct them with facts. The reason I'm focusing on you is because the last time we talked about this, you stated wildly inaccurate things like power consumption being 3 times higher for example. Even your own source proved you wrong. When I kept calling you on it, what did you do? Did you stick to the real merits of Intel over AMD? Of course not, you kept going about motherboard performance and game performance when the CPUs actually use all the cores with no source in sight.

Until you stick to actual facts (with sources) about why one should go Intel rather than AMD, of which there are plenty, I will call you out as a fanboy.

[Noir Angel]

Actually I admitted that error, and motherboards do make a difference I provided a source for that.

[Hitman2000]

been using intel exclusively since around '07 when AMD stopped being competitive.

But would love to see AMD stay in the game, they have a lot of work to do, but we need them to keep Intel in some sort of check atleast with pricing.

[Phouchg]

Grapevine says both have been spotted available on retail channels, TigerDirect, to be exact, going at $829 for FX-9590 and measly $319 for FX-9370.

Not anymore, as I've checked, but who knows - maybe they'll reappear soon.

 

Source (cpuworld.com)

[Crisp]

So AMD have had their 8 core FX chips out a while now (with nothing optimized for them), and seeing how the new consoles will also run an 8 core CPU, it's no surprise that Intel is now bringing out an 8 core chip to, but the best part? It's going to have a TDP of 130-140watts (125w from FX), so yeah, I guess most of the fangirls in this thread will buy it in a heart beat and not blink and eye to their "electric bill".

 

Never heard so much AMD bashing tripe in my life.

[Praetor]

Yep. Because you blues have never heard of Intel compilers crippling AMD performance before and that's just made up..oh wait..Let's take back a "few" years when Intel compilers actually crippled SSE and SSE2 when the program was run on anything than Intel CPU while the competition CPU was well capable of taking advantage of those sets, that's also only a conspiracy right? Maxon software (namely Cinebench) is using only Intel compilers to this day and somehow AMD CPU's are so messed up in multi-core tests in there while on a different OS on a same type of an bench they basically rape Intel in multi-threaded workflow (In the same price class CPU's), that's also conspiracy right?

Love how you spread "facts" - I think you should learn the meaning of that word.

 

 

Unfortunately, this is true http://www.osnews.com/story/22683/Intel_Forced_to_Remove_quot_Cripple_AMD_quot_Function_from_Compiler_

"God knows how many benchmarks have been skewed in favour of Intel simply because people unknowingly used Intel's compiler in good faith. Intel's compiler is seen as the cream of the crop and delivers superior performance, but apparently only if you stick to GenuineIntel."

 

Mind you that it's not about unoptimized paths, but deliberately crippling the compilation if vendor string isn't GenuineIntel.

 

I'm a big fan of CPUs; had Cirix, Intel and AMD (current) and this kind of anti-competitive behavior disgusts me.

[Praetor]

I had 2 failures with AMD and one with Intel, but I found (back in the Pentium 4 / Athlon 64 days anyway) that when an AMD platform failed, the CPU tended to take the board with it. Not had that with any of my Intel stuff yet. All told though I've never seen any real evidence that one suffers more failures than the other it's just pot luck.

 

i've seen both sides (Intel and AMD, CPUs wise) dieing and taking / not taking the board with it, it's a matter of luck i guess.

[Alwaysonacoffebreak]

So AMD have had their 8 core FX chips out a while now (with nothing optimized for them), and seeing how the new consoles will also run an 8 core CPU, it's no surprise that Intel is now bringing out an 8 core chip to, but the best part? It's going to have a TDP of 130-140watts (125w from FX), so yeah, I guess most of the fangirls in this thread will buy it in a heart beat and not blink and eye to their "electric bill".

 

Never heard so much AMD bashing tripe in my life.

 

LOL! Somehow all of that topic on that page went from Intel's CPU's to AMD's Jaguar cores being weak because they are underclocked and power optimized. Oh god, if you want to bash you'll find the most stupid reason to do so anyway...

 

Ah don't worry, they'll find new arguments about the TDP now that Intel has something similar as the FX 125W, now the TDP don't matter anymore :)

[guitmz]

My laptop has an i5 but on the pc i'm building, i bought an FX-8320 

 

FUC* ME RIGHT????

[Phouchg]

^ Yep, we don't want to know you anymore. You've made your choice. You're an outcast now, one to be avoided, to be condemned and disparaged.

[Crisp]

150W TDP... Products like this should be banned, energy is finite and I don't see why it should be going to waste on something so useless as 'slightly faster graphics'.

I'm not talking out of my ass, i'm talking design wise, IMO 125w is unacceptable these days, it's just too much, that's what my 7 year old q6600 uses.

I did mention electricity bill :p

 

aprox $36 per year, mind you, this is considering average price per watt, the higher the price of electricity, the higher the difference. I would rather spend those $40 and get better memory and/or harddrive... now... considering I did the same when I bought my q6600 g0 ( 95w vs 125w b3 stepping) and i've had it running since 2007 (7 years) thats $36x7 = $252 ... ( In my case anyway)...

But anyway, who says facts are useful ? Current lineup, go intel! and AMD gooo spend on RnD, sell your kidneys but do it!

*costs exaggerated for example to be clear.

 

Guys?

 

150 watts... compared to FX CPU's running at 125 watts...

 

These new CPU's should be banned right? Think of your high electric bill, Guppy.