Overclock.net › Forums › AMD › AMD CPUs › Bulldozer STILL selling out of stock
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Bulldozer STILL selling out of stock - Page 21  

post #201 of 495
Quote:
Originally Posted by radaja View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clairvoyant129 View Post

That comment wasn't pointed at you generally but the guy who keeps using the 990X argument. It is ridiculous. Both companies are guilty of having $1000 consumer CPUs that have horrible price/performance ratio.

yea i see that now,and yep the whole 1000 intel vs amd 250 is ridiculous,since the AMD 250 isn't even on par with the 1000 intel.
i mean if the FX8150 smoked the 990x it would make perfect sense,we would all be running 8150's

This is exactly what I was trying to get at the 8150 is on par with the i7 940 as proven by benchmarks, I have no idea why he is comparing it to a 980x that is miles ahead of a 8150.
post #202 of 495
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clairvoyant129 View Post

Funny. When AMD was in the lead, every fanboy on the planet touted their performance but now it's just good enough? So next time AMD has the performance crown and Intel lower their price dramatically what are you going to say?
Why do you keep using the 990X? Why not 2500K? How about in the past with AMD's FX-62 compared to Intel's E6600? Did you care back then?

2500K/2600K are in a league of their own, My argument is that Bulldozer really competes with Gulftown

Easy choice, I would have bought the e6600. I go by price/performance. ALWAYS

Quote:
Originally Posted by XAslanX View Post

This is exactly what I was trying to get at the 8150 is on par with the i7 940 as proven by benchmarks, I have no idea why he is comparing it to a 980x that is miles ahead of a 8150.

That anatech site is just for getting a general idea. The run their processors at stock and they use the 1024 test to show cpu superiority, which the 990x has, but not at the price/performance.

I need 8150 vs 990x, both at 4.5 GHZ, both at 1920, benchmarked against games people play like Battlefield 3, MW3, Skyrim. Who comes out on top for price/performance?

its a viable test and argument until the 990x is either taken off the market completely by all retailers or it is no longer sold at the 1,000 pricepoint.
Edited by dlee7283 - 12/10/11 at 9:57pm
Um Stock....
(8 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 6700 MSI B150 Mortar Artic Zotac GTX 1060 3GB Crucial 8 GB DDR4-2400 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
256 Mushkin Triactor Pioneer BR-RW Windows 10 LTSB x64 Seiki 4K 60HZ 42 inch 
  hide details  
Um Stock....
(8 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 6700 MSI B150 Mortar Artic Zotac GTX 1060 3GB Crucial 8 GB DDR4-2400 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
256 Mushkin Triactor Pioneer BR-RW Windows 10 LTSB x64 Seiki 4K 60HZ 42 inch 
  hide details  
post #203 of 495
Quote:
Originally Posted by dlee7283 View Post

2500K/2600K are in a league of their own, My argument is that Bulldozer really competes with Gulftown
Easy choice, I would have bough the e6600
That anatech site is just for getting a general idea.
I need 8150 vs 990x, both at 4.5 GHZ, both at 1920, benchmarked against games people play like Battlefield 3, MW3, Skyrim. Who comes out on top for price/performance?

Actually Gulftown destroys BD in both single threaded and heavily multi-threaded scenarios. Check Anandtech's benchmarks, they include Photoshop CS4, Cinebench, Sony Vegas, Blender, Excel and games at higher resolutions (all real world scenarios) and guess who wins? Even cheapest Gulftown the i7 980(non X version)/i7 970 completely dominates FX-8150.

But then again if you bench at 1920, it is GPU limited so benchmarks will normalize.
Edited by Clairvoyant129 - 12/10/11 at 10:00pm
 
Surface Pro 3
(7 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 3720QM @ 2.6GHz/3.6GHz Turbo  HM77 Geforce GT650M 1GB GDDR5 @ 900MHz 16GB @ 1600MHz  
Hard DriveOSMonitor
256GB Samsung PM830 SSD OSX 10.8 Mountain Lion 2880x1800 Retina Display 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Core i5-4300U @1.9GHz/2.5GHz Turbo Intel HD4400 8GB @ 1600MHz 256GB SSD 
OSMonitorKeyboard
Windows 8.1 Pro 2160x1440 ClearType HD  Surface Pro Type Cover 3 
  hide details  
 
Surface Pro 3
(7 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 3720QM @ 2.6GHz/3.6GHz Turbo  HM77 Geforce GT650M 1GB GDDR5 @ 900MHz 16GB @ 1600MHz  
Hard DriveOSMonitor
256GB Samsung PM830 SSD OSX 10.8 Mountain Lion 2880x1800 Retina Display 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Core i5-4300U @1.9GHz/2.5GHz Turbo Intel HD4400 8GB @ 1600MHz 256GB SSD 
OSMonitorKeyboard
Windows 8.1 Pro 2160x1440 ClearType HD  Surface Pro Type Cover 3 
  hide details  
post #204 of 495
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clairvoyant129 View Post

Actually Gulftown destroys BD in both single threaded and heavily multi-threaded scenarios. Check Anandtech's benchmarks, they include Photoshop CS4, Cinebench, Sony Vegas, Blender, Excel and games at higher resolutions (all real world scenarios) and guess who wins? Even cheapest Gulftown the i7 980(non X version)/i7 970 completely dominates FX-8150.
But then again if you bench at 1920, it is GPU limited so GPU factors in more heavily the benchmarks will normalize.

3d rendering is a different story

also how is a 2.5 sec difference in CS4 "dominating"
Um Stock....
(8 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 6700 MSI B150 Mortar Artic Zotac GTX 1060 3GB Crucial 8 GB DDR4-2400 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
256 Mushkin Triactor Pioneer BR-RW Windows 10 LTSB x64 Seiki 4K 60HZ 42 inch 
  hide details  
Um Stock....
(8 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 6700 MSI B150 Mortar Artic Zotac GTX 1060 3GB Crucial 8 GB DDR4-2400 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
256 Mushkin Triactor Pioneer BR-RW Windows 10 LTSB x64 Seiki 4K 60HZ 42 inch 
  hide details  
post #205 of 495
Quote:
Originally Posted by dlee7283 View Post


I need 8150 vs 990x, both at 4.5 GHZ, both at 1920, benchmarked against games people play like Battlefield 3, MW3, Skyrim. Who comes out on top for price/performance?

its a viable test and argument until the 990x is either taken off the market completely by all retailers or it is no longer sold at the 1,000 pricepoint.


You could easily say that about any chip on the market regardless of manufacture, the 990x is at the top for a reason.
post #206 of 495
Quote:
Originally Posted by dlee7283 View Post

3d rendering is a different story
also how is a 2.5 sec difference in CS4 "dominating"

Because if you actually use photoshop for a living say you have over 1000 photos, it will save you 42+mins.
 
Surface Pro 3
(7 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 3720QM @ 2.6GHz/3.6GHz Turbo  HM77 Geforce GT650M 1GB GDDR5 @ 900MHz 16GB @ 1600MHz  
Hard DriveOSMonitor
256GB Samsung PM830 SSD OSX 10.8 Mountain Lion 2880x1800 Retina Display 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Core i5-4300U @1.9GHz/2.5GHz Turbo Intel HD4400 8GB @ 1600MHz 256GB SSD 
OSMonitorKeyboard
Windows 8.1 Pro 2160x1440 ClearType HD  Surface Pro Type Cover 3 
  hide details  
 
Surface Pro 3
(7 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 3720QM @ 2.6GHz/3.6GHz Turbo  HM77 Geforce GT650M 1GB GDDR5 @ 900MHz 16GB @ 1600MHz  
Hard DriveOSMonitor
256GB Samsung PM830 SSD OSX 10.8 Mountain Lion 2880x1800 Retina Display 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Core i5-4300U @1.9GHz/2.5GHz Turbo Intel HD4400 8GB @ 1600MHz 256GB SSD 
OSMonitorKeyboard
Windows 8.1 Pro 2160x1440 ClearType HD  Surface Pro Type Cover 3 
  hide details  
post #207 of 495
Quote:
Originally Posted by dlee7283 View Post

2500K/2600K are in a league of their own, My argument is that Bulldozer really competes with Gulftown
Easy choice, I would have bought the e6600. I go by price/performance. ALWAYS
That anatech site is just for getting a general idea. The run their processors at stock and they use the 1024 test to show cpu superiority, which the 990x has, but not at the price/performance.
I need 8150 vs 990x, both at 4.5 GHZ, both at 1920, benchmarked against games people play like Battlefield 3, MW3, Skyrim. Who comes out on top for price/performance?
its a viable test and argument until the 990x is either taken off the market completely by all retailers or it is no longer sold at the 1,000 pricepoint.

Seriously? The 990x is not a gaming processor, besides in that testing its is over 100 mhz slower than the bulldozer. Clocking them the same will just worsen the gap. Besides this is intels current offering note how it is 300 mhx slower http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/434?vs=443

They do not adjust price because they do not expect anyone to buy them in bulk anymore.
My System
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
I7 2600k @ 4.5 ghz 1.4v GIGABYTE GA-Z68XP-UD3P MSI 970 GTX 4G (2x4gb) Corsair XMS3 @ 1866mhz 9-10-9-27 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Samsung 830 64 gb 500 gb 7200 Rpm DVD-RW Nh-d14 /w 6 Noctua p12/14's 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 64 bit 23in LG Ducky OCN w/ mx cherry browns 850 watt corsair tx 
CaseMouseAudio
Cooler master storm trooper Logitech g5 Asus xonar dg/ w ath-m50 
  hide details  
My System
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
I7 2600k @ 4.5 ghz 1.4v GIGABYTE GA-Z68XP-UD3P MSI 970 GTX 4G (2x4gb) Corsair XMS3 @ 1866mhz 9-10-9-27 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Samsung 830 64 gb 500 gb 7200 Rpm DVD-RW Nh-d14 /w 6 Noctua p12/14's 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 64 bit 23in LG Ducky OCN w/ mx cherry browns 850 watt corsair tx 
CaseMouseAudio
Cooler master storm trooper Logitech g5 Asus xonar dg/ w ath-m50 
  hide details  
post #208 of 495
Quote:
Originally Posted by XAslanX View Post

You could easily say that about any chip on the market regardless of manufacture, the 990x is at the top for a reason.

u would rather spend a thousand on a 990x over 250 on a 8150?

and you honestly don't think AMD couldn't release a AMD FX Extreme for $500 that couldn't smoke the 990X at $1,000?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fatalrip View Post

Seriously? The 990x is not a gaming processor, besides in that testing its is over 100 mhz slower than the bulldozer. Clocking them the same will just worsen the gap. Besides this is intels current offering note how it is 300 mhx slower http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/434?vs=443
They do not adjust price because they do not expect anyone to buy them in bulk anymore.

I am talking about price vs performance $250 vs $1,000. I can use that $750 dollars to improve the computer across the board by a significant amount.

and I would never put the 8150 against SB-E like you just did.
Um Stock....
(8 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 6700 MSI B150 Mortar Artic Zotac GTX 1060 3GB Crucial 8 GB DDR4-2400 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
256 Mushkin Triactor Pioneer BR-RW Windows 10 LTSB x64 Seiki 4K 60HZ 42 inch 
  hide details  
Um Stock....
(8 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 6700 MSI B150 Mortar Artic Zotac GTX 1060 3GB Crucial 8 GB DDR4-2400 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
256 Mushkin Triactor Pioneer BR-RW Windows 10 LTSB x64 Seiki 4K 60HZ 42 inch 
  hide details  
post #209 of 495
Quote:
Originally Posted by Devilmaypoop View Post

They really don't. In many cases there is up to 50% or more difference in games and programs.
Quote:
because they provide good performance at a very nice price.
Yeah.
Not. For the same price you could get a i5 2500K rig that would overclock the same/better and perform just as fast in multithreaded applications and upto more than 50% faster in single threaded applications.

I woudl like to see this proof cause I have seen my own proof that proves this incorrect. Please send me proof of this alond with setting of each cpu and which tests were done. This is very hard to believe when comparing to tests that I have done with i5 and 8120. Hope you get back to us soon.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blizlake View Post

AMD buying their own chips to fake huge sales? headscratch.gif

This is the dumbest thing I have heard all day.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mhill2029 View Post

It's actually rare to see an AMD owner have sensible logic, props to you sir thumb.gif
I cannot stand people that sit in these forums talking nonsense and defend AMD BullDozer and come up with daft ways to excuse it's performance or justify price against Intel's 3year old 990x (i mean seriously). Wish people would just grasp the facts, BD is behind in performance and does get trounced by a 2500k/2600k, which is it's true competitor at this point in time. Why is it hard to understand the facts? I'm not a fanboy, i'm a bit more mature than that, i've been in this industry for 20years or so. And i tell it how it is, not what you want to hear so you can sleep better at night.
Truth is i'm looking forward to PileDriver and do hope it turns things around, but it's a big ask as IvyBridge has it in it's firing line. Time will tell.

The BD is right where AMD said it would be. The i5 does not destroy the BD. The BD destroys 2500K in multithreading and is hardly off that much with single core performance. Me and my friend did comparison like stated above. Both cpus overclocked to 5GHz. Once BD hits 4.8Ghz+ its scales very well. Overall BD is a better processor than 2500K if overclocked over 4.8GHz. I dont understand how people can sit there and talk trash on a cpu that they probably have never seen let alone experienced. I think you guys just like to hear yourselves talk. Me and my budy did many comparisons with the two processors and there is nowhere that the 2500K just destroys the BD. Also, BD is running on scheduler that is not optimized.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clairvoyant129 View Post

Funny. When AMD was in the lead, every fanboy on the planet touted their performance but now it's just good enough? So next time AMD has the performance crown and Intel lower their price dramatically what are you going to say?
Why do you keep using the 990X? Why not 2500K? How about in the past with AMD's FX-62 compared to Intel's E6600? Did you care back then?

Just so you guys know that 8150 was to be released at $240 not 270 or whatever theyre selling it at. The BD defintely compares with 2500K no problem and will probably outperform it once W7 patch comes. When I first got my 8120 at release I was disappointed a little but then ASUS provided bios updates which increased performance a little and increased stability a lot. I am running at 5GHz stable no problems and it runs like a dream. I work with 2500 at work as well and I defintely prefer 8120 at home for what I use it for. Like mentioned earlier, 2500K cannot handle multitasking like BD can. Thats just the way it is. I like to do many things at one time and I used to have to keep the opened programs down to a minimum with intel but with BD i dont. I can be running ten programs at once and not have to worry about performance decrease as I do with i5. Until you guys experience BD you shouldn't talk about it like you designed the damn thing. The way you guys talk sound like you work at both intel and amd testing centers. Sound like a bunch of kids who wish they knew what they are talking about. Arguing back and forth about something that comes down to opinion only. Its like trying to tell a Christian there's no GOD. Rediculous.

Another thing too is that BD is a brand new architecture that amd has had no experience with. This is the biggest change for amd in a long time. Along with other new architectures that weren't so great when first released were optimized and turned out to be great processors. (Ex: Phenom, Pentium). BD is a good processor and once the optimizations are made and revisions come out along with optimized scheduler it will turn out to be a great processor and things will only get better from there. AMD is headed in the right direction and they will be in a great position by the end of next year. I would put money on it. You guys can talk all you want about how much you think I am wrong but I can atleast admit that it is my opinion and that really anything can happen. Unlike you were you will sit there and say that you and everything you say is right and thats the way it going to be. For those of you that think you are right all the time and that everything you say is fact, you probably whine when you dont get your way to your parents until they give you what you want. Spoiled little brats and you will be **** out of luck when your on your own and have to take care of yourself. I feel sorry for you but then again I really dont. Guess you'll just have to learn the hard way.

Back to the point of the thread. I am not sure why BD is selling out so well but I do know that its not because it has "8-cores" stamped on it or "guiness record". I can assure you that the average joe is not buying up all the BD's. Like stated before the most people dont know about the BD. Average joe buys there pc 's from best buy or walmart and they dont even sell prebuilt desktops with BD. The informed are the ones that buy the BD out. Maybe you should take a step back and think maybe Bulldozer isn't as bad as "I" think it is. BD is not a bad processor. BD is not the best processor. Intel has the best processor. No doubt about it. I hear a lot of people talking about why 8 cores most apps dont use 2 or 4 cores. But then you see phones coming out with dual core processors. Multithreaded apps are soon to be especially with intel hyperthreading and amd bd. Apps will start to become very multithreaded. Those who think otherwise are just lost. The BD is far from a failure and will soon turn out to be a great cpu for amd. Especially when win7 patch or win8 and bd revisions and bios' fine tuned and Piledriver eventually will be a beast. Yeah intel has some amazing processors and will probably be on top for a while but amd is headed in the right direction. The only reason there has been word going around about BD is grabage is because people like "you" listen to other people like "you". If you want to know what I am talking about then go to Bulldozer owner forum and ask some of them yourself. I know plenty of people who used to own high end intel processor that bought BD and is very happy with its performance. Until you experience BD for yourself then what you say means nothing and you should just stop talking because you are just making yourself look like a fool. BD defintely compares to 2500K when overclocked over 4.8Ghz+. No doubt about it. It gets old hearing the same crap being spit out about BD just because they heard it from someone else that knows nothing about the BD either. Its actually kind of funny seeing how gullible some of you really are. Stop acting like a bunch of kids. Its like listening to two little kids arguing, "my bike is better than yours, neener neener neener, hahaha." If all you do is waste your time arguing on forums of how you think your stuff is better than someone else's, you might was well have a 500Mhz single core processor. Whats the point of having a nice i5 or i7 just to sit on OCN and talk about how much better yours is. Stop playing with yourselves and do something with your lives.

Anyway, I am very happy with the performance of my BD and if you are thinking about picking one up for youself then dont listen to these guys who just talk trash about it. Go get your info from BD owners and ask them what they think of it and how well it performs for them and what they use it for. The next cpu I will buy will be the 2nd revision PileDriver. If PileDriver is even just 5% better than BD I will be very happy. By then win8 will be out and the optimizations for the new architecture will be done and bios will be fine tuned and stable and I think PileDriver then will be twice as sweet as BD is right now.

I use my BD for 3D Design, AutoCAD, BF3, MW3, COD Black Ops, Video Editing, Video Converting, Movies, SimCity4, AOE III and many other things and my 8120 works better than most other cpu I have used overall. (i5 2500 i7 950, i5 650, i3 550, E6500, Phenom II, Athlon II, ) I did not say that BD is better than all these cpus but overall it performed better than most for what I use it for. It all comes down to personal preference and opinion. Stop trying to convince everone one that what they want it what you want because its not. Everyone has their own needs and wants. Most of the time it is completely opposite of you or me. Let people make their own decision. It's fine that you have your own thought and beliefs but when you try to convince everyone that they are fact, then you are just making yourself not look smart.

Like I said before, talk to the BD owners about their experience to come up with your own opinion of the BD. Dont just take someone else word for it who hasn't experienced one and probably is just repeating what he/she heard from someone else.

Also, most of what I said above is opinion so dont try to come back with your opinion and tell me I am wrong. I never said anyone was wrong, I am simply stating my opinion. I can care less if you believe it.

Dont waste your time trying to argue with me. If you do, dually noted.

Hope I could help. Thanks
FUSION
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardRAMHard Drive
AMD Llano A8-3870k ASUS F1A75-M Pro FM1 uATX Corsair Vengeance Corsair Force 3 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Hitachi ASUS DVD Burner Cooler Master Hyper TX3 Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
ASUS VE247H 24" 1080p Razer Lycosa Corsair CX500 Fractal Define Design R3 ATX 
Mouse
Razer DeathAdder 
  hide details  
FUSION
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardRAMHard Drive
AMD Llano A8-3870k ASUS F1A75-M Pro FM1 uATX Corsair Vengeance Corsair Force 3 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Hitachi ASUS DVD Burner Cooler Master Hyper TX3 Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
ASUS VE247H 24" 1080p Razer Lycosa Corsair CX500 Fractal Define Design R3 ATX 
Mouse
Razer DeathAdder 
  hide details  
post #210 of 495
Quote:
Originally Posted by dlee7283 View Post

u would rather spend a thousand on a 990x over 250 on a 8150?
and you honestly don't think AMD couldn't release a AMD FX Extreme for $500 that couldn't smoke the 990X at $1,000?
I am talking about price vs performance $250 vs $1,000. I can use that $750 dollars to improve the computer across the board by a significant amount.

and I would never put the 8150 against SB-E like you just did.

Because it gets trashed by the $1000 offering. For 210 you can get a 2500k that has better price to performance than the bulldozer

/End your fanboy clouded dribble please. I does not matter Intel released sandy bridge months and months ago. And in just a few more ivy bridge comes out. What are you gonna do still say we can't compare it to sandy bridge then even though it will be only one generation behind? Come on man AMD dropped the ball they are not horrible processors but they are nothing special ether, perhaps they will rectify it with piledriver we can only hope.


@the person above me, how much power does your cpu pull at 5 ghz =o?
Edited by Fatalrip - 12/10/11 at 10:27pm
My System
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
I7 2600k @ 4.5 ghz 1.4v GIGABYTE GA-Z68XP-UD3P MSI 970 GTX 4G (2x4gb) Corsair XMS3 @ 1866mhz 9-10-9-27 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Samsung 830 64 gb 500 gb 7200 Rpm DVD-RW Nh-d14 /w 6 Noctua p12/14's 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 64 bit 23in LG Ducky OCN w/ mx cherry browns 850 watt corsair tx 
CaseMouseAudio
Cooler master storm trooper Logitech g5 Asus xonar dg/ w ath-m50 
  hide details  
My System
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
I7 2600k @ 4.5 ghz 1.4v GIGABYTE GA-Z68XP-UD3P MSI 970 GTX 4G (2x4gb) Corsair XMS3 @ 1866mhz 9-10-9-27 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Samsung 830 64 gb 500 gb 7200 Rpm DVD-RW Nh-d14 /w 6 Noctua p12/14's 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 64 bit 23in LG Ducky OCN w/ mx cherry browns 850 watt corsair tx 
CaseMouseAudio
Cooler master storm trooper Logitech g5 Asus xonar dg/ w ath-m50 
  hide details  
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: AMD CPUs
This thread is locked  
Overclock.net › Forums › AMD › AMD CPUs › Bulldozer STILL selling out of stock