Makes No Sense To Buy Bulldozer With Evidence - Page 4

^ This. The 2500K build OP linked would cost $377.83 USD. Here is the Bulldozer system I just built ...

ASRock 970 Extreme3 $74.99 USD + AMD FX-8120 $169.99 USD = $244.98.

Plus when I bought my rig there was a $15 off promo code for the 8120 bringing the total down to $229.98. That's a $133 difference in price. I would hardly say that is negligible. To say it doesn't make sense to buy a Bulldozer over an i3/i5 is kinda ridiculous. AMD may have slipped a little, but they are still offering a bigger bang for your buck here. Another thing about the Bulldozer: I won't be upgrading my mobo when Piledriver drops because it is compatible with AM3+. Do you think you can say the same for an IB or SB build?

Excellent. You still can't ignore the $130 difference that you see when you go with parts that make sense with an AMD budget build. I love Intel, and they are definitely the go to fo top level enthusiasts who are looking to max performance, but AMD still has a lock down on the niche market for budget builders.

1. The 8120 is inferior the the 2500k
2. A decent motherboard and 2500k should cost under $300, and promo codes do not prove that one processor in general is more cost effective than another.
3. When Haswell drops, I will be in the market for a new computer anyway.

in your op you make a list of thing you claim are posted by amd fanboys that are incorrect. I'm going to go down the list and compare you vs the fanboys in each one, as unbiased as I can.

1) your right here, and the fanboys are wrong. the 4100 matches an i3 in price, and the 8120 matches the i5.

2) here again the fanboys would be wrong, but you misrepresent it. the price is the same for the same overall performance. the 8120 and i5 balance each other- the fx whips the i5s ass in threaded, the i5 gives it the other way in single core. performance is in the same ballpark, so is price. both the i5 and the 8120 can be good buys depending on price and what you will use them for.

3) you would be right- if what your saying was true. no one, even the fanboys are claiming bulldozer is better at gaming then sb, except in bf3, were the 8120 will beat everything but an i7. in all other games, intel wins. they are right in saying however that the difference is unnoticeable- in most cases it is. exceptions would be sc2 and other games like it.

4) not really both are about the same. you win here, fanboys lose. the only difference might be $20 or $30 off the board.

5) neither you or the fanboys can be right here, simply because we have no idea how future games will be programmed. It could go how AMD thinks it will- bf3 way, where games being to use more and more cores. or, games continue along where they are now and use 3-4 threads max.

in the end you have to look at these at price points all a round, not just in gaming.


Heres my take.
i3 2100 VS FX-4100
here I would say the i3 is a more well rounded chip. they perform on par in threaded programs while the i3 wins at gaming and single threaded apps.
i5 2500K VS FX-81XO
this seems to be where bulldozer get the most sales. like in i3 vs 4100, the intel has half the cores, unlike i3 vs 4100 it has no ht. this gives the 8120 a huge threaded advantage in threaded software, while the i5 whips the fx in gaming . I tend to think of this as a draw, with the i5 being much better for gamers but the FX being much better for video editing.
Edited by jrl1357 - 7/4/12 at 3:42pm