When first bulldozer reviews arrived i have decided to quick check Anandtech review and was not impressed - thought that i will wait when later processors will arrive, since i was not interested in FX 8150 anyway... I bought a Gigabyte 990X motherboard this year in order to have SLI, hi quality sound and perhaps a future upgrade for a FX 6 core CPU. From time to time i do heavy video editing, and my UltraISO program also works alot with all the extraction and conversion stuff, so i definitely needed a 6 core CPU, not only for games.
I thought about upgrading my Phenom II 1075T to FX 6100 - in other words an older 6 core 3 - 3,5 GHz CPU to 3,3 - 3,6 GHz CPU. If there had been at least 10 % performance increase clock per clock, i would have been satisfied. So yesterday i have decided to read a through-out review about FX 6100 HERE and was horshacked.
Are you kidding me? FX 6100 being totally trashed by Phenom II 1100T by an average 33 % in almost all the tests! Only FX 8150 is roughly equal to 1100T?
Adding salt to the flesh i tested my Phenom 2 X6 at 3600 MHz VS Core 2 Duo E8400 at 3600 MHz in Crysis and Avatar and E8400 was 10 to 15 % faster.
Seeing tests that Core 2 Duo E8400 is roughly equal or slightly slower than Nehalem Core i3 540, which is, of course, considerably behind a Sandy Bridge Core i3 equivalent CPU, i am thinking how all the reviewers even dare to compare the AMD FX CPU with the Sandy Bridge CPU. The Phenom II processors never have beaten Nehalem Core i7 in the first place, and seeing how FX processors are even weaker than Phenom II, it is disgusting that FX processors are even mentioned in the same line with Sandy Bridge.
I don't feel like i need to upgrade my Pheom II, but if it will come to it, the only way i see is selling it with my 990X mobo and getting a 1155 system.
Please take my thoughts cool, i did not mean to offend any AMD fans, just stating my experience and observations..
Edited by Marshock - 4/30/12 at 2:24am
I thought about upgrading my Phenom II 1075T to FX 6100 - in other words an older 6 core 3 - 3,5 GHz CPU to 3,3 - 3,6 GHz CPU. If there had been at least 10 % performance increase clock per clock, i would have been satisfied. So yesterday i have decided to read a through-out review about FX 6100 HERE and was horshacked.
Are you kidding me? FX 6100 being totally trashed by Phenom II 1100T by an average 33 % in almost all the tests! Only FX 8150 is roughly equal to 1100T?
Adding salt to the flesh i tested my Phenom 2 X6 at 3600 MHz VS Core 2 Duo E8400 at 3600 MHz in Crysis and Avatar and E8400 was 10 to 15 % faster.
Seeing tests that Core 2 Duo E8400 is roughly equal or slightly slower than Nehalem Core i3 540, which is, of course, considerably behind a Sandy Bridge Core i3 equivalent CPU, i am thinking how all the reviewers even dare to compare the AMD FX CPU with the Sandy Bridge CPU. The Phenom II processors never have beaten Nehalem Core i7 in the first place, and seeing how FX processors are even weaker than Phenom II, it is disgusting that FX processors are even mentioned in the same line with Sandy Bridge.
I don't feel like i need to upgrade my Pheom II, but if it will come to it, the only way i see is selling it with my 990X mobo and getting a 1155 system.
Please take my thoughts cool, i did not mean to offend any AMD fans, just stating my experience and observations..
Edited by Marshock - 4/30/12 at 2:24am
My System
(15 items) |
|
My System
(15 items) |
.
:
