Originally Posted by -iceblade^
how about giving performance for the apps that matter in the present instead of looking at 5, 10 years into the future?
he says nothing about the terrible single thread performance, and that bit about BF3 - it's just about the only game that worked well.
Who said anything about 5-10 years into the future? Do you realize that it was ten years ago that the pentium III still reigned? Sub 1000mhz single cores with the most basic feature set, those of which are shamed by todays portable phones?
Based on that logic, in ten years cell phones will ship with 8 thread 3.4Ghz processors, yet you say that AMD or anyone else claims that this new processor will be relevent and only show it's true colors up till then?
And then you mention single threaded performance which is irrellevent to the maximum extent because any application that relies on single thread performance is already so old that it essentially runs in the blink of an eye.
Then, to top it all off, you mention the most processor demanding game in existance and portray it as a scapegoat example...
is anyone else missing the logic here?
Anyway, my stance is that currently this is a pointless processor, but pointless reasons are also....... pointless.
2600k at stock=>50% CPU load in BF3 beta at ultra. so....... no need for improvement in any current application, unless you mention workbench apps and use them as a "only matters in..." situation, in which case you really only support the argument for them.
R: i'm drunk but checked in, saw this, ranted against ill-though out troll post.