AMD Bulldozer

[hoofhearted4]

http://www.extremetech.com/computing/95633-amd-bulldozer-fx-pricing-revealed-a-lot-cheaper-than-sandy-bridge

 

 

personally idc if it is as powerful as the i5s or i7s. if i can really get an 8 core processor for that cheap, ill be happy. i was expecting $300-$350, not as cheap as they are listing (ill save the prices and release quarter for your reading pleasure!)

[Thor.]

I am going to wait a year or so until the price comes down like the 6x did, it was close to that when it came out.

 

2 more cores at 3.3ghz, i am waiting for the 16x bulldozer cpus coming soon hopefully.

 

 

hopefully they will come out with a consumer version.

 

 

just came across this.

 

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2096655/leaked-amd-roadmap-core-piledriver-chip-tip-2012

Edited September 14, 2011 by Thor.

[Illiad86]

Dang, that's cheap! Good old AMD ^_^

 

This is what I hate the most about computers though...minute you build a new one with new stuff, more new stuff comes out 6 months later lol. But, most people are satisfied with what they have and don't upgrade all the time, like me. I'll probably wind up getting one of those in 2-3 years time :P

 

Did you see that they broke the overclocking record with that chip? 8.4 or 8.5GHz (cant' remember now, was crazy though) :blink:, with liquid helium and liquid nitrogen...but still.

Edited September 14, 2011 by Illiad86

[hoofhearted4]

ill get the "expensive" one. 8 cores, overclocked will be fine for me for a LONG time to come. im only an average PC gamer, and dont do anything that even requires 4+ cores nvm 8. so that 8 core Bulldozer will hold me over for many many years. lol the PC im building is WAY more then i need....and i love it lol

[Nysba]

It's STILL not all about the cores :facepalm:

[samadchaz]

first we saw bandwidth never matter (P4 Extreme)now the number of cores nor cache, I say its only matters the Architecture :rolleyes:

[Jeux]

"and these prices, which are all well below any of Intel’s comparable i7 (and even some i5) Sandy Bridge chips, suggest that the FX Series chips are priced to sell rather than compete.

 

AMD probably never intended to compete with Intel in terms of raw processing power."

 

This. Intel fanboys will argue performance, AMD fanboys will argue price. As usual. Nothing changes. I use the term "fanboys" loosely.

[Thor.]

In reality i am looking fro a consumer version of this cpu, man whatever happened to the 1000 core cpus.

 

Amd and intel are way behind the times.

 

 

http://www.pcworld.c..._for_lunch.html

Edited September 15, 2011 by Thor.

[Blu02]

It's really too bad that modern games wont make use of all those cores yet, so it's quite the waste of money if you're not using them for some application. But the overclocking-capabilities of Bulldozer is interesting. We're yet to see the actual gain in performance of it though. That record they set last week was only with 2 cores activated (1 module).

 

It however turned out that Sandy Bridge-E wont be as powerful as expected. There's practically no difference in performance in most games compared to the current Sandy Bridge generation. And it wont have PCIE 3.0 support for some reason.

 

I'm left quite doubtful here to upgrade my over 2 years old i7 920 that still performs as a high-end CPU by todays standards :blink: I'm starting to turn my eyes towards Ivybridge instead.

 

Damn progress is slow nowadays!

Edited September 15, 2011 by Mr. Bravo

[cancausecancer]

http://www.extremetech.com/computing/95633-amd-bulldozer-fx-pricing-revealed-a-lot-cheaper-than-sandy-bridge

 

 

Damn I love AMD now. I use Intel but I like AMD as an entity much more than Intel.