Quote:
Originally Posted by
youreallbaddies 
The article was talking about video encoding without quicksync in which case the i5-2500K at 5.0 ghz was around 800 points better than the FX-8150 at 4.8 ghz.
I'd like to see any benchmarks showing the FX beating an i7 at video encoding.
You do realise video encoding is generally measured in FPS? As for their score...I have no idea what they did, but
every other review site disagrees with that conclusion. Bulldozer is damn good at x264 HD encoding, as it heavily uses integer cores and takes advantage of the 256bit FPU easily. I was even considering getting one, as every review I've seen showing a difference in gaming between CPUs has had results way different to mine (eg. A HD7970 being slower than a GTX 470) and I only game and video encode overall.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
youreallbaddies 
2159 vs 2141, that's less than 0.01% difference.
So according to your own source the FX-8150 at the very best ties the i7-2600K before overclocking....
When you overclock both CPUs the i7 smokes the FX in everything.
I don't know if I can be any clearer, maybe you're the one that needs to befriend some comprehension.
There really is no comparison.
It's been deleted, but there was a thread on OCN showing that they stay with each other. Bulldozers IPC is as good as Sandy's on x264 encoding. Video encoding is just something BD is extremely good at, not that Sandy Bridge owners can admit BD is better/as good as their chips at anything.