Originally Posted by Obakemono
WTH is wrong with a CPU clocking at 4.2 out of the box? It seems that the 4ghz barrier is such a brick wall like the sound barrier was to people. The fastest 4 core CPU from AMD is 3.7 on the older process, why can't BD be allowed to clock higher than that?
The problem people are seeing is that new chips are almost always priced to slightly
undercut their competition.
If this CPU costs ~350 dollars, it almost certainly means it's going to perform only modestly better than a 2600k. This is also the most expensive desktop BD.
This is not
good news for enthusiasts who have been looking to get one of these CPUs. Why is this not good news? It implies that 4.2-4.7GHz clock speed is what is needed to beat a 3.4-3.8GHz SB. It also implies that AMD cannot clock chips higher, because they don't have any more headroom.
This is why I am worried. I fear BD may have very little overclocking headroom, and that it won't have the IPC needed to even approach Intel's chips in lightly threaded apps. Oh, for much of what I do a 5GHz BD seems like it would match or beat a 4.8-5GHz SB, but this would be almost no improvement over what I've already got, and wouldn't stand a chance against Ivy Bridge.
If the information in this article is largely correct, BD is shaping up to be another Thuban, which while competitive in it's price range against Bloomfield, really could not stand up to SB.