Overclock.net › Forums › AMD › AMD CPUs › 6 core CPUs?!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

6 core CPUs?! - Page 6

post #51 of 57
We have no idea if BD will perform as well as SB and the fact AMD hasn't released any samples or benchmarks implies it won't.

Buying a Phenom II now and a BD later will inevitably cost more than SB and may even be worse than LGA1156 and LGA1366 in terms of price/performance ratio.

To repeat myself, get SB now or wait for BD to come out before purchasing anything.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-760 @ 3.91 1.4v/1.3v BIOSTAR T5 XE CFX-SLI GTX 460 SLi 850/1900 1.1v 8gb DDR3 @ 1860 
OSMonitorCase
Windows 7 Pro 1920x1080 HAF 912 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-760 @ 3.91 1.4v/1.3v BIOSTAR T5 XE CFX-SLI GTX 460 SLi 850/1900 1.1v 8gb DDR3 @ 1860 
OSMonitorCase
Windows 7 Pro 1920x1080 HAF 912 
  hide details  
Reply
post #52 of 57
The OP has asked a question about going 6 core and you responded by recommending SB or BD or IB or whatever. I'm fine with that, but ensuing into useless arguments between different current & future processor architectures, just to please yourself, and not helping the user in need... sorry everyone, but at this point, I'm going to have to close this thread down until further notice.
Edited by xd_1771 - 8/19/11 at 2:09pm
post #53 of 57
Not as bad as I thought. Opened. Please stay on topic with your suggestions to the user.

To answer specifically to this user's questions,
In 1-2 months (which is, as you stated, when you will be buying these items) it is most likely that the FX series CPU will be out. As a result I think basing your choices on the opinions of today would be a bad idea. There is an off chance that a lower priced FX series processor will provide better price-performance than the i5 or i3 CPU - again, I state CHANCE. At this point, we really don't know. AMD has stated they refuse to give out details until about launch time and that is that. The last word from the company itself was 60-90 days from the first of June. We are within this time frame. Any other date estimations have come from potentially unreliable sources. Either way, the FX will be likely out by then and you will have a better perspective on what to choose. My point: if you can't decide now, don't decide. Or it is likely you will get pointed in the wrong direction.
Edited by xd_1771 - 8/19/11 at 2:13pm
post #54 of 57
Cheers XD_1771, As I'm trying to say, There's no point in going to SB, when theres the new FX CPU's coming out sometime in September that should hopefully outperform SB with the same pricetag.

If you know where your getting me at.
The Ancient
(14 items)
 
FZ-G1
(8 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Phenom X6 1055T 3.9GHz NB 3.0GHz ASUS Crosshair V  GTX 770 8GB G.Skill TridentX 1652MHz CL7-7-8-20-22 1T 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
OCZ 60GB Vertex 2E - 3x HDD's Samsung Blu-Ray Drive Custom W/C Loop Windows 7 64bit 
PowerCase
Superflower Leadex 650W Coolermaster Storm Scout Mod 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Core i5-3437U Intel HD4000 8GB 256GB SSD 
OSMonitorKeyboardCase
Windows 8 Pro 10.1 WUXGA Touchscreen Worlds Durable Tablet 
  hide details  
Reply
The Ancient
(14 items)
 
FZ-G1
(8 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Phenom X6 1055T 3.9GHz NB 3.0GHz ASUS Crosshair V  GTX 770 8GB G.Skill TridentX 1652MHz CL7-7-8-20-22 1T 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
OCZ 60GB Vertex 2E - 3x HDD's Samsung Blu-Ray Drive Custom W/C Loop Windows 7 64bit 
PowerCase
Superflower Leadex 650W Coolermaster Storm Scout Mod 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Core i5-3437U Intel HD4000 8GB 256GB SSD 
OSMonitorKeyboardCase
Windows 8 Pro 10.1 WUXGA Touchscreen Worlds Durable Tablet 
  hide details  
Reply
post #55 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by ALUCARDVPR;14643333 
AMD will always have a better price to performance ratio. If you are looking for a CPU that will be more than enough in any game and also allow you to multitask better, plus save you money on the entire build - CPU, Mobo, ect then go with AMD. Even Bulldozer brand new will still be cheaper than most of Intel's offerings right now.

So you "cleaned" this thread up but you left this obvious fallacy in. Cool....

Looks like someone has a soft spot for AMD.

I guess I'll have to state it again, going with a Phenom II over SB for gaming is a total failure. The slowest SB i-core series processor, the i3-2100, is faster than anything AMD has to offer at the moment for gaming.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atomfix;14644449 
Cheers XD_1771, As I'm trying to say, There's no point in going to SB, when theres the new FX CPU's coming out sometime in September that should hopefully outperform SB with the same pricetag.

If you know where your getting me at.
Because "should hopefully" is so convincing.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-760 @ 3.91 1.4v/1.3v BIOSTAR T5 XE CFX-SLI GTX 460 SLi 850/1900 1.1v 8gb DDR3 @ 1860 
OSMonitorCase
Windows 7 Pro 1920x1080 HAF 912 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-760 @ 3.91 1.4v/1.3v BIOSTAR T5 XE CFX-SLI GTX 460 SLi 850/1900 1.1v 8gb DDR3 @ 1860 
OSMonitorCase
Windows 7 Pro 1920x1080 HAF 912 
  hide details  
Reply
post #56 of 57
^ I think we get the point, but OCN staff cannot punish users for misinformation unless trouble is caused out of it on a large scale.

ALUCARDVPR is not necessarily misinforming anybody either. I wouldn't call K10 a total failure just yet; in the midrange price/performance sector it will keep up with the needs of users and gamers alike for quite awhile. Obviously, a new architecture will be better than an older one, but I do often have the feeling sometimes that people overact to the difference. Certainly there will be a difference vs the i3 2100, but in real life scenario I don't really feel it is worth arguing about at all - and as the staff member who always has to clean up after everyone when everything goes wrong, it sort of disappoints me that these arguments go on all the time. Quick comparison: in real world scenarios, the difference is very few frames per second - and since the framerates are already approaching 60hz - the frequency limit for monitors used by the majority of the world's population - the difference doesn't really matter anymore. With the 965 at 4Ghz and with the CPU-NB overclocked, the distance between the two comes to a close. The i3 does, however, win in power consumption by a fair margin - in case this matters to the user in question, I would like to point out.
post #57 of 57
Quote:
Originally Posted by xd_1771;14648792 
^ I think we get the point, but OCN staff cannot punish users for misinformation unless trouble is caused out of it on a large scale.

ALUCARDVPR is not necessarily misinforming anybody either. I wouldn't call K10 a total failure just yet; in the midrange price/performance sector it will keep up with the needs of users and gamers alike for quite awhile. Obviously, a new architecture will be better than an older one, but I do often have the feeling sometimes that people overact to the difference. Certainly there will be a difference vs the i3 2100, but in real life scenario I don't really feel it is worth arguing about at all - and as the staff member who always has to clean up after everyone when everything goes wrong, it sort of disappoints me that these arguments go on all the time. Quick comparison: in real world scenarios, the difference is very few frames per second - and since the framerates are already approaching 60hz - the frequency limit for monitors used by the majority of the world's population - the difference doesn't really matter anymore. With the 965 at 4Ghz and with the CPU-NB overclocked, the distance between the two comes to a close. The i3 does, however, win in power consumption by a fair margin - in case this matters to the user in question, I would like to point out.
It should be noted the i3-2100 performance out of the box is excellent while you really need to overclock Phenom IIs to get similar performance.

Many people neglect to mention the cost of an aftermarket cooler, the additional power required for overclocking (and the heat that comes with it), and the time you have to spend on overclocking.

I think these are valid points in addition to the performance difference and uncertainty of the BD upgrade path.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-760 @ 3.91 1.4v/1.3v BIOSTAR T5 XE CFX-SLI GTX 460 SLi 850/1900 1.1v 8gb DDR3 @ 1860 
OSMonitorCase
Windows 7 Pro 1920x1080 HAF 912 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5-760 @ 3.91 1.4v/1.3v BIOSTAR T5 XE CFX-SLI GTX 460 SLi 850/1900 1.1v 8gb DDR3 @ 1860 
OSMonitorCase
Windows 7 Pro 1920x1080 HAF 912 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: AMD CPUs
Overclock.net › Forums › AMD › AMD CPUs › 6 core CPUs?!