New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by polyzp

I would bet that an 8150 at 5 Ghz (32 nm) from 2011 is a better gaming CPU than the i5-4670k at 4.5 Ghz (22 nm) from 2013 in modern games that take advantage of all 8 cores.
The jump from the 1100t to the FX 8150 was more significant than you think! At ~5 Ghz the 8150 is no joke of a chip.
wccftech stole my post! no credit given hah! I am the real AMDFX
Oh .... it WILL exist After Steamroller is introduced with Kaveri, it will show through that an FX is inevitable. Core count is the only thing AMD is still figuring out, and until it is settled Steamroller FX "doesn't exist". This core count issue was also noticed in older leaked info with regards to a 6 core steamroller Kaveri APU. My guess is both 8 core and 10/12 Core Variants will be announced by Q4 2014 for release in Q1 2015, aswell as 6 core variants for Kaveri by...
Im just saying , its wrong to state AMD's Richland iGPU is more powerful than any intel iGPU.
Yes normally I support AMD, but this statement is wrong. Intel's Iris 5200 does in fact trounce AMD's most powerful richland GPU even overclocked. look at the anandtech review, iris is closer to a GT 640 then a GT 630 amd typically compared richland too. In fact AMD only pit the 8670D against the HD 4600, not Iris which is double the cores! Kaveri's jump will be enough to trounce iris however!
Just Look at the difference from Bulldozer to Piledriver to now Steamroller! :O Over a 30% increase in IPC from Piledriver in this specific cosmology benchmark! " Thats over 1100% the jump we saw from Bulldozer to Piledriver! " Big Thanks to Seronx for the Link! Source
different core count, cant flash the 290 to the 290x. 4770k + 290 is too expensive!! so its 4770k + 280x or 5 ghz FX + 290x..
The AMD board i was thinking about getting was : you think this board is capable of 4.7-5.0 Ghz overclocks?
R9 290 + 4770k vs R9 290X + 5 Ghz FX 8320 even still, for modern games the AMD rig will pull ahead
New Posts  All Forums: