Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [Official] AMD Bulldozer Reviews Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[Official] AMD Bulldozer Reviews Thread - Page 223

post #2221 of 2308
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wishmaker View Post
Windows 8 is not even at the beta stage
And there would be no reason to benchmark anything under the current developer's preview because you know the Beta will perform better when it comes.
post #2222 of 2308
So, without reading 75 pages of posts, what is a good general consensus on Bulldozer as it stands?
     
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-3770k @ 4.2GHz ASRock Z68 Extreme3 Gen3 EVGA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti FTW3 ELITE GAMING 32 GB G.Skill Sniper LVS XMP 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
OCZ Agility 3 120GB WD Caviar Black 1 TB Memorex External DVD/DL-RW Stock Intel Fan 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Titan cooler on 770 Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit 3x ASUS MX279H Mionix Zibal 60 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
XFX Pro 850W Fractal Design Define XL R2 Mionix Naos 8200 Mionix Propus 380 
AudioAudioAudio
Asus Xonar Essence STX Onkyo HT-R590 Pioneer HDJ-2000 
CPUMotherboardRAMHard Drive
i7 6700k 4.7 GHz Asus Maximus VIII Gene G.Skill Ripjaws 32 GB Samsung 950 Pro M.2 256 GB 
Hard DriveCoolingOSPower
4 TB WD Red Corsair H110i GTX Windows 10 EVGA SuperNova 550W Modular 
Case
Fractal Design Node 804 
  hide details  
Reply
     
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-3770k @ 4.2GHz ASRock Z68 Extreme3 Gen3 EVGA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti FTW3 ELITE GAMING 32 GB G.Skill Sniper LVS XMP 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
OCZ Agility 3 120GB WD Caviar Black 1 TB Memorex External DVD/DL-RW Stock Intel Fan 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
Titan cooler on 770 Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit 3x ASUS MX279H Mionix Zibal 60 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
XFX Pro 850W Fractal Design Define XL R2 Mionix Naos 8200 Mionix Propus 380 
AudioAudioAudio
Asus Xonar Essence STX Onkyo HT-R590 Pioneer HDJ-2000 
CPUMotherboardRAMHard Drive
i7 6700k 4.7 GHz Asus Maximus VIII Gene G.Skill Ripjaws 32 GB Samsung 950 Pro M.2 256 GB 
Hard DriveCoolingOSPower
4 TB WD Red Corsair H110i GTX Windows 10 EVGA SuperNova 550W Modular 
Case
Fractal Design Node 804 
  hide details  
Reply
post #2223 of 2308
^^^ Yeah all this Windows 8 talk - What if it turns out to be Vista all over again? Will BD users switch to it because it's %4 faster? Will the Intel chips be %5 faster? Enough of putting carrots in front of people AMD - what are you doing for us now?
post #2224 of 2308
Quote:
Originally Posted by lem_ View Post
There is most definitely a Windows 7 AMD FX – software patch in the works. By most estimates the AMD Bulldozer FX is underperforming by 40-70% in most Windows 7 benchmarks. By forcing Windows 7 to recognize 8 cpu cores a huge performance hit has happened. The Bulldozer FX-8xxx design… really isn’t 8 cores, it’s a 4 core CPU with an extra integer pipeline on each core. If the FX-8xxx series scale according to the 4 and 6 core Bulldozer design than there is a serious bug in Windows 7 that is crippling the FX-8150 performance.

The one thing that is for-sure here is that every hardware review website rushed to be the first to publish an AMD FX-8150 review, they all used the same generic benchmarks and NONE did any real world computing. The game is fixed, the big-dog spreads around the most ad-dollars.

Source

has this been posted already?
Trying to blame Microsoft for poor AMD core management is ludicrous. The onus is on AMD to make sure their products are completely compatible with widely used OS platforms. If there was an incompatibility, it should have been handled between MS and AMD engineers a long time ago.

The game is hardly fixed. AMD brought forth an EXTREMELY underwhelming product after multiple delays. It is slower most of the time than its competitor and uses more power than its competitor. This is not big dog under dog crap. This is AMD releasing a product that provides no justification for it be purchased over it's competitor's product.
Biggie Smalls
(22 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i5-2500K Asus P8Z77-M EVGA Titan X Corsair Vengeance DDR3 16GB 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Samsung 830 Pro Samsung 850 Pro Western Digital Black Caviar 64MB Cache Western Digital Black Caviar 64MB Cache 
Optical DriveCoolingOSMonitor
LG Bluray Combo Drive Corsair H50 Windows 7 Professional x64 Dell UltraSharp U3415W 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Ducky Shine 4 Blue/Red Corsair AX860 Corsair Obsidian 350D Razer Deathadder Chroma 
Mouse PadAudioAudioAudio
fUnc Mouse Mat Grace m9xx DAC/AMP ELAC B6 Schiit Lyr 2 
AudioAudio
Fostex TH-X00 (ebony cups with detachable cable... Sennheiser HD650 
  hide details  
Reply
Biggie Smalls
(22 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i5-2500K Asus P8Z77-M EVGA Titan X Corsair Vengeance DDR3 16GB 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Samsung 830 Pro Samsung 850 Pro Western Digital Black Caviar 64MB Cache Western Digital Black Caviar 64MB Cache 
Optical DriveCoolingOSMonitor
LG Bluray Combo Drive Corsair H50 Windows 7 Professional x64 Dell UltraSharp U3415W 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Ducky Shine 4 Blue/Red Corsair AX860 Corsair Obsidian 350D Razer Deathadder Chroma 
Mouse PadAudioAudioAudio
fUnc Mouse Mat Grace m9xx DAC/AMP ELAC B6 Schiit Lyr 2 
AudioAudio
Fostex TH-X00 (ebony cups with detachable cable... Sennheiser HD650 
  hide details  
Reply
post #2225 of 2308
Quote:
Originally Posted by Siigari View Post
So, without reading 75 pages of posts, what is a good general consensus on Bulldozer as it stands?
Don't buy it. If you have Phenom II X4/X6, continue to stick with that. If you are looking to upgrade to a new build, go Intel. BD is simply not worth investing a new build into, nor does it justify an upgrade unless you are possibly upgrading from an Athlon II dual core.
Biggie Smalls
(22 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i5-2500K Asus P8Z77-M EVGA Titan X Corsair Vengeance DDR3 16GB 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Samsung 830 Pro Samsung 850 Pro Western Digital Black Caviar 64MB Cache Western Digital Black Caviar 64MB Cache 
Optical DriveCoolingOSMonitor
LG Bluray Combo Drive Corsair H50 Windows 7 Professional x64 Dell UltraSharp U3415W 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Ducky Shine 4 Blue/Red Corsair AX860 Corsair Obsidian 350D Razer Deathadder Chroma 
Mouse PadAudioAudioAudio
fUnc Mouse Mat Grace m9xx DAC/AMP ELAC B6 Schiit Lyr 2 
AudioAudio
Fostex TH-X00 (ebony cups with detachable cable... Sennheiser HD650 
  hide details  
Reply
Biggie Smalls
(22 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i5-2500K Asus P8Z77-M EVGA Titan X Corsair Vengeance DDR3 16GB 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Samsung 830 Pro Samsung 850 Pro Western Digital Black Caviar 64MB Cache Western Digital Black Caviar 64MB Cache 
Optical DriveCoolingOSMonitor
LG Bluray Combo Drive Corsair H50 Windows 7 Professional x64 Dell UltraSharp U3415W 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Ducky Shine 4 Blue/Red Corsair AX860 Corsair Obsidian 350D Razer Deathadder Chroma 
Mouse PadAudioAudioAudio
fUnc Mouse Mat Grace m9xx DAC/AMP ELAC B6 Schiit Lyr 2 
AudioAudio
Fostex TH-X00 (ebony cups with detachable cable... Sennheiser HD650 
  hide details  
Reply
post #2226 of 2308
Quote:
Originally Posted by Siigari View Post
So, without reading 75 pages of posts, what is a good general consensus on Bulldozer as it stands?
The easiest answer is, "It depends what review you're reading". However, a few things are consistent:
1. IPC is very poor, as is performance with any application using <4 cores.
2. Overclocked power consumption is absurdly high - somewhere around 450W vs 250-300 for SB.
3. Gaming performance:
3a. Low resolutions and detail (1024x768, low settings) = poor performance.
3b. 1080P and high quality = competitive.
3c. MultiGPU performance appears to be bugged; several reviews show no increase in FPS with the addition of GPUs.
post #2227 of 2308
I was gonna quote a whole bunch of people and such... but did any1 read the rage3d review?

Both 8150 and 2600K OC'd to 4.5GHZ as well...

Power Draw:
Don't know what people are freaking out about... 479w load stock and 545w load on their OC2... an i7 920 uses about the same power... I don't remember everyone running for the hills and bringing it up over and over for the 920... it was a solid chip. and at most, its about 100 watts above a 2600K... total system power by the way, and 8 "cores" that are closer to real cores than SMT... so it makes sense. Plus... 100W ain't gonna kill anyone... people buy 500-700w PSU's for rigs that only need 300-400 max all the time... Most users almost always have a decent overhead...

Temps:
About the same temps as a 2600K stock and OC'd... not bad considering it uses more power... Must be a "cool" design...

Performance: Synthetic:
SiSoft Sandra Arth test: 2600K clearly wins, but not by anything astronomical, though very noticeable.

SiSoft Sandra Multimedia test: BD blows away Intel with Integer work, but gets hammered in Float and Dbl...

SiSoft Memory Bandwidth: At stock and the 2st OC attempt BD is behind... but after a better OC it jumps substantially and beats the 2600K handily (by more than the 2600K beat the stock and 1st OC BD)

Aida64 Julia Test: BD beats the 920 but gets stomped by the 2600K.

Aida64 Mandel: Ouch for BD this time as well, even ousted by the 1100T.

Truecrypt: BD loses stock vs stock but quickly gets the upper hand in OC's.

SiSoft Sandra AES256: BD is behind stock vs stock and even after the 1st OT, but after the OC2 it shows its teeth and pulls ahead by a decent margin.

SiSoft Sandra Sha256: Ouch for BD... very bad showing here.

Aida64 AES: BD 40K behind at stock vs stock and OC vs OC1 but the OC2 pulls ahead by about 40K. Big jump.

Aida Hashing: BD stomps 2600K

Performance: Application and Gaming:
3DMark11: keeps up with 2600K

Cinebench: Stock BD isn't great, but after OC it competes easily.

7-zip: BD wins

Winrar: Tie with 2600K

x256 AVX/XOP HD bench: Slightly behind...

BF:BC2 (1920x1080 - High - 8xMSAA): BD has better min fps but loses in max. Though when above 120 isn't as noticeable as say the 52fps min for 2600K vs 63 for BD. And the OC2 brings its to 2600K speeds.

Civ 5 (1080 - 8xMSAA): stock and first OC BD has a very low min fps... but after the OC2 it vastly improves, enough to tie 2600K min and be within 2fps max... (of 2600K OC'ed)

Crysis 2 (1080, Ultra, EdgeAA, DX11): behind 2600K but OC closes the gap, even against 2600K's OC.

DiRT 3 - 1920x1080 4xMSAA Ultra Preset: BD competes at stock and pulls away when OC'd.

Medal of Honor (SP) - 1920x1080 high settings with AA: BD has better min at stock again but loses max, OC fixes things.

So what I garner from such a review is that OC'ing methodology can play a large role in results as well... Rage3D had a 1st OC that performed similar to most reviews, but then OC'd BD with some different settings and look what happens... competing with a 2600K in most scenarios, even games.

I think BD has a few more surprises left for us once the kinks are worked out, nothing magical but a little better, and when comparing OC vs OC, BD can outshine 2600K considering 2600K is often ahead at stock yet when both are OC'd the BD competes and sometimes wins. Considering BD was further behind than the 2600K at stock, it had to make up the deficit and then go further to catch or beat a 2600K.

It has potential. I still think they should have die shrunk a Phenom II to make a Phenom II to work out fab kinks with 32nm and THEN do BD.... maybe more applications will be more highly threaded by that point in time as well, making BD an even better choice.

So while the 8150 at stock isn't the best choice, its by no means a fail. I think people had it in their heads that it had to beat Intel or nothing. When you have that mentality you will consider the BD launch a total fail for gamers. But when you read into it objectively and start seeing the OC results, things change, and BD looks promising. Prices are still above MSRP which is confusing at best, considering the tone of many reviews...

Wow this is getting long. Oh and I'm not trying to say BD is great or anything, just simply that its better than most would admit.
M06
(20 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX6300 Gigabyte 990FXA-UD5 XFX 7950 - 3GB G.Skill Sniper 8GB (2x4GB) DDR3 2133 CL9 @ 1733... 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
WD Blue 500GB WD Black 1.5TB Crucial M4 128GB (OS) LG ODD 
CoolingOSMonitorMonitor
Deepcool Lucifer v2 Win7 Ultimate 64 bit Acer X223w (1050) LG 22EN33 (1080) 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Sharkoon Tactix OCZ ModXstream Pro 700w Modular Corsair 300R CM Storm Xornet 
Mouse PadAudioAudioAudio
Steelseries Qck+ DOTA2 Edition Edifier e1100+  Sennheiser HD215 Plantronics Gamecom 307 
  hide details  
Reply
M06
(20 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX6300 Gigabyte 990FXA-UD5 XFX 7950 - 3GB G.Skill Sniper 8GB (2x4GB) DDR3 2133 CL9 @ 1733... 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
WD Blue 500GB WD Black 1.5TB Crucial M4 128GB (OS) LG ODD 
CoolingOSMonitorMonitor
Deepcool Lucifer v2 Win7 Ultimate 64 bit Acer X223w (1050) LG 22EN33 (1080) 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Sharkoon Tactix OCZ ModXstream Pro 700w Modular Corsair 300R CM Storm Xornet 
Mouse PadAudioAudioAudio
Steelseries Qck+ DOTA2 Edition Edifier e1100+  Sennheiser HD215 Plantronics Gamecom 307 
  hide details  
Reply
post #2228 of 2308
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuell View Post
I was gonna quote a whole bunch of people and such... but did any1 read the rage3d review?

Both 8150 and 2600K OC'd to 4.5GHZ as well...

Power Draw:
Don't know what people are freaking out about... 479w load stock and 545w load on their OC2... an i7 920 uses about the same power... I don't remember everyone running for the hills and bringing it up over and over for the 920... it was a solid chip. and at most, its about 100 watts above a 2600K... total system power by the way, and 8 "cores" that are closer to real cores than SMT... so it makes sense. Plus... 100W ain't gonna kill anyone... people buy 500-700w PSU's for rigs that only need 300-400 max all the time... Most users almost always have a decent overhead...

In relation to the performance and price of the BD 8-core, the higher power consumption is simply not justified. It does not sound like a lot, until you realize that an OC'ed BD would be consistently drawing more power and that really does add up over time.

Temps:
About the same temps as a 2600K stock and OC'd... not bad considering it uses more power... Must be a "cool" design...

Like I mentioned in a post further up, that means that we may possibly expect good things in the future about the BD design, but the future does not help consumers NOW and any BD purchase is for NOW. Until they work out the power consumption levels though, this is not going to do well IMHO.

Performance: Synthetic:
SiSoft Sandra Arth test: 2600K clearly wins, but not by anything astronomical, though very noticeable.

SiSoft Sandra Multimedia test: BD blows away Intel with Integer work, but gets hammered in Float and Dbl...

SiSoft Memory Bandwidth: At stock and the 2st OC attempt BD is behind... but after a better OC it jumps substantially and beats the 2600K handily (by more than the 2600K beat the stock and 1st OC BD)

Aida64 Julia Test: BD beats the 920 but gets stomped by the 2600K.

Aida64 Mandel: Ouch for BD this time as well, even ousted by the 1100T.

Truecrypt: BD loses stock vs stock but quickly gets the upper hand in OC's.

SiSoft Sandra AES256: BD is behind stock vs stock and even after the 1st OT, but after the OC2 it shows its teeth and pulls ahead by a decent margin.

SiSoft Sandra Sha256: Ouch for BD... very bad showing here.

Aida64 AES: BD 40K behind at stock vs stock and OC vs OC1 but the OC2 pulls ahead by about 40K. Big jump.

Aida Hashing: BD stomps 2600K

Performance: Application and Gaming:
3DMark11: keeps up with 2600K

Cinebench: Stock BD isn't great, but after OC it competes easily.

7-zip: BD wins

Winrar: Tie with 2600K

x256 AVX/XOP HD bench: Slightly behind...

BF:BC2 (1920x1080 - High - 8xMSAA): BD has better min fps but loses in max. Though when above 120 isn't as noticeable as say the 52fps min for 2600K vs 63 for BD. And the OC2 brings its to 2600K speeds.

Civ 5 (1080 - 8xMSAA): stock and first OC BD has a very low min fps... but after the OC2 it vastly improves, enough to tie 2600K min and be within 2fps max... (of 2600K OC'ed)

Crysis 2 (1080, Ultra, EdgeAA, DX11): behind 2600K but OC closes the gap, even against 2600K's OC.

DiRT 3 - 1920x1080 4xMSAA Ultra Preset: BD competes at stock and pulls away when OC'd.

Medal of Honor (SP) - 1920x1080 high settings with AA: BD has better min at stock again but loses max, OC fixes things.

So what I garner from such a review is that OC'ing methodology can play a large role in results as well... Rage3D had a 1st OC that performed similar to most reviews, but then OC'd BD with some different settings and look what happens... competing with a 2600K in most scenarios, even games.

I think BD has a few more surprises left for us once the kinks are worked out, nothing magical but a little better, and when comparing OC vs OC, BD can outshine 2600K considering 2600K is often ahead at stock yet when both are OC'd the BD competes and sometimes wins. Considering BD was further behind than the 2600K at stock, it had to make up the deficit and then go further to catch or beat a 2600K.

It has potential. I still think they should have die shrunk a Phenom II to make a Phenom II to work out fab kinks with 32nm and THEN do BD.... maybe more applications will be more highly threaded by that point in time as well, making BD an even better choice.

By the time we have enough programs taking advantage of multi-core programming, we will be looking at AMD and Intel's next offering. BD architecture shows promise, but is definitely not release worthy right now.

So while the 8150 at stock isn't the best choice, its by no means a fail. I think people had it in their heads that it had to beat Intel or nothing. When you have that mentality you will consider the BD launch a total fail for gamers. But when you read into it objectively and start seeing the OC results, things change, and BD looks promising. Prices are still above MSRP which is confusing at best, considering the tone of many reviews...

BD is not a bad processor by any means. It is more than year late and unable to justify being an upgrade for anyone really. It is simply not worth upgrading to a BD at this point in time.

Wow this is getting long. Oh and I'm not trying to say BD is great or anything, just simply that its better than most would admit.
Addressed some points.
Biggie Smalls
(22 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i5-2500K Asus P8Z77-M EVGA Titan X Corsair Vengeance DDR3 16GB 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Samsung 830 Pro Samsung 850 Pro Western Digital Black Caviar 64MB Cache Western Digital Black Caviar 64MB Cache 
Optical DriveCoolingOSMonitor
LG Bluray Combo Drive Corsair H50 Windows 7 Professional x64 Dell UltraSharp U3415W 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Ducky Shine 4 Blue/Red Corsair AX860 Corsair Obsidian 350D Razer Deathadder Chroma 
Mouse PadAudioAudioAudio
fUnc Mouse Mat Grace m9xx DAC/AMP ELAC B6 Schiit Lyr 2 
AudioAudio
Fostex TH-X00 (ebony cups with detachable cable... Sennheiser HD650 
  hide details  
Reply
Biggie Smalls
(22 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i5-2500K Asus P8Z77-M EVGA Titan X Corsair Vengeance DDR3 16GB 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Samsung 830 Pro Samsung 850 Pro Western Digital Black Caviar 64MB Cache Western Digital Black Caviar 64MB Cache 
Optical DriveCoolingOSMonitor
LG Bluray Combo Drive Corsair H50 Windows 7 Professional x64 Dell UltraSharp U3415W 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Ducky Shine 4 Blue/Red Corsair AX860 Corsair Obsidian 350D Razer Deathadder Chroma 
Mouse PadAudioAudioAudio
fUnc Mouse Mat Grace m9xx DAC/AMP ELAC B6 Schiit Lyr 2 
AudioAudio
Fostex TH-X00 (ebony cups with detachable cable... Sennheiser HD650 
  hide details  
Reply
post #2229 of 2308
Power Consumption Calculations:
8150
Idle: 128*8760(1 year)/1K = 1121.28
Load: 260*8760/1K = 2277.6

2600K
Idle: 124*8760/1K = 1086.24
Load: 202*8760/1K = 1769.52

Cost to me is 0.12 per kwh... So that means.......

8150 Cost per year:
Idle: $134.55
Load: $273.31

2600K Cost per year:
Idle: $130.35
Load: $212.34

Now I may be making this up... but most computers aren't running under full load 24/7/365. So the MAX savings if you get is $60.97. I'd say with realistic usage scenarios and such, the real world difference would be less than $10.

So yea, I do find it hard people keep harping on this... Sure it drinks more juice to get the job done... but its extremely insignificant... Considering how the GPU market is with power consumption, this kind of variation is almost not worth pointing out for real world cost...
M06
(20 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX6300 Gigabyte 990FXA-UD5 XFX 7950 - 3GB G.Skill Sniper 8GB (2x4GB) DDR3 2133 CL9 @ 1733... 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
WD Blue 500GB WD Black 1.5TB Crucial M4 128GB (OS) LG ODD 
CoolingOSMonitorMonitor
Deepcool Lucifer v2 Win7 Ultimate 64 bit Acer X223w (1050) LG 22EN33 (1080) 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Sharkoon Tactix OCZ ModXstream Pro 700w Modular Corsair 300R CM Storm Xornet 
Mouse PadAudioAudioAudio
Steelseries Qck+ DOTA2 Edition Edifier e1100+  Sennheiser HD215 Plantronics Gamecom 307 
  hide details  
Reply
M06
(20 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX6300 Gigabyte 990FXA-UD5 XFX 7950 - 3GB G.Skill Sniper 8GB (2x4GB) DDR3 2133 CL9 @ 1733... 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
WD Blue 500GB WD Black 1.5TB Crucial M4 128GB (OS) LG ODD 
CoolingOSMonitorMonitor
Deepcool Lucifer v2 Win7 Ultimate 64 bit Acer X223w (1050) LG 22EN33 (1080) 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Sharkoon Tactix OCZ ModXstream Pro 700w Modular Corsair 300R CM Storm Xornet 
Mouse PadAudioAudioAudio
Steelseries Qck+ DOTA2 Edition Edifier e1100+  Sennheiser HD215 Plantronics Gamecom 307 
  hide details  
Reply
post #2230 of 2308
Well, My friend is getting his bulldozer parts today. I am going to drop by to help him put it together and I WILL run benchmarks on it..and keep the results to myself..cause I have already annoyed him enough of why he bought it over intel lol
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Hardware News
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [Official] AMD Bulldozer Reviews Thread