Overclock.net › Forums › AMD › AMD CPUs › Is Bulldozer going to fail vs Sandy Bridge?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Is Bulldozer going to fail vs Sandy Bridge? - Page 13  

Poll Results: Is Bulldozer going to fail vs Sandy Bridge?

 
  • 32% (289)
    Yes, it will.-
  • 67% (606)
    No, I don't think so...
895 Total Votes  
post #121 of 616
Yeah thats my point, before chrsitmas it was all BUZZ , HIP , HAPPENING, ITS COMMING... GET READY>....

Now nothing... tumbleweeed....
Old Timer
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Phennom 2 X4 965 @ 4070Mhz Gigabyte GA-790XTA-UD4 2 x Sapphire 6950 (Flashed to 6970) 4096 MB DDR3 Dual Channel Corsair Dominator 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
2 x Patriot Zephyer SSD (raid 0) 6 x 2TB (storage) DVD RW Windows 7 X64 50" LG plasma + 2 x 20" LG Lcd's 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Microsoft Entertainment Desktop 7000 Antec True Power Quattro 1000w Silverstone Raven 02E Miscrosoft Entertainment Desktop 7000 
Mouse Pad
Razor 
  hide details  
Old Timer
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Phennom 2 X4 965 @ 4070Mhz Gigabyte GA-790XTA-UD4 2 x Sapphire 6950 (Flashed to 6970) 4096 MB DDR3 Dual Channel Corsair Dominator 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
2 x Patriot Zephyer SSD (raid 0) 6 x 2TB (storage) DVD RW Windows 7 X64 50" LG plasma + 2 x 20" LG Lcd's 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Microsoft Entertainment Desktop 7000 Antec True Power Quattro 1000w Silverstone Raven 02E Miscrosoft Entertainment Desktop 7000 
Mouse Pad
Razor 
  hide details  
post #122 of 616
Quote:
Originally Posted by scyy View Post
You do realize sites have tested the "advantage" of intel by changing the cpuid to intel from amd and it came out with an average of 10% where there was an advantage and went up to 20% in one or two benchs and many programs didn't show any real advantage either way. And even if it was 10% in everything there is still the extra 30% clock for clock that sandy bridge is faster than the phenom II's. Intel as of now very much is superior when it comes to performance and anyone who is arguing against that is delusional. I am not denying amd has its place in the market at this time but when it comes to who is the fastest it is no contest. And I'm sure I'm going to get labeled a fanboy again for pointing out these facts that every single benchmark and review out there backs up. And where have I insulted anyone who is using AMD chips? I insulted the fanboy wuttz but aside from that I haven't been hostile in the least.

I agree the advantage intel puts in is shady but even without it sandy bridge is still way ahead clock for clock and overclockability.
and here we go again.. it´s total wrong compare SB with K10 - total mega wrong.

fair compare list :
Nehalem-K10
BDr1 - SB
BDr1.5 - IB
BDr2.0 - Haswell
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Opteron 6386SE G34r1 H8SGL Radeon R9 380X 32GB ECC_DDR3 1333 4ch 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Seagate 600 Pro Enterprise SSD WD Green+Black some water Win8.1_64 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
K120 TX850 Tai-chi M560 
AudioAudio
Xmos_u8_DAC; (diy Pluto 2A3/SE estat amp) STAX cookies 3pcs 
  hide details  
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Opteron 6386SE G34r1 H8SGL Radeon R9 380X 32GB ECC_DDR3 1333 4ch 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Seagate 600 Pro Enterprise SSD WD Green+Black some water Win8.1_64 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
K120 TX850 Tai-chi M560 
AudioAudio
Xmos_u8_DAC; (diy Pluto 2A3/SE estat amp) STAX cookies 3pcs 
  hide details  
post #123 of 616
See if i was the Cyottee from Loony Tunes, i would strap a rocket to AMD's ASS and get this rolling.... its been in development since 2005..... (so i hear)....
Old Timer
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Phennom 2 X4 965 @ 4070Mhz Gigabyte GA-790XTA-UD4 2 x Sapphire 6950 (Flashed to 6970) 4096 MB DDR3 Dual Channel Corsair Dominator 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
2 x Patriot Zephyer SSD (raid 0) 6 x 2TB (storage) DVD RW Windows 7 X64 50" LG plasma + 2 x 20" LG Lcd's 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Microsoft Entertainment Desktop 7000 Antec True Power Quattro 1000w Silverstone Raven 02E Miscrosoft Entertainment Desktop 7000 
Mouse Pad
Razor 
  hide details  
Old Timer
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Phennom 2 X4 965 @ 4070Mhz Gigabyte GA-790XTA-UD4 2 x Sapphire 6950 (Flashed to 6970) 4096 MB DDR3 Dual Channel Corsair Dominator 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
2 x Patriot Zephyer SSD (raid 0) 6 x 2TB (storage) DVD RW Windows 7 X64 50" LG plasma + 2 x 20" LG Lcd's 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Microsoft Entertainment Desktop 7000 Antec True Power Quattro 1000w Silverstone Raven 02E Miscrosoft Entertainment Desktop 7000 
Mouse Pad
Razor 
  hide details  
post #124 of 616
I was just about to post how this convo was becoming more civilized, and then bam...

Quote:
Originally Posted by BallaTheFeared View Post
The i7's are over-priced and not worth the money imo.

But I've been flamed harder than anyone here has flamed me for that thought process.

Just ask 2010rig, they were calling me out for trolling the 1366 users bad, I was even going after the 980x users
This is true, we've gone back and forth a lot on this issue, just like we went back and forth a LOT on AMD vs Intel prior to SB released.

The thing is, when these 980x users put their rigs together, it was 6+ months ago ( that's just a ballpark ) Sandy Bridge wasn't an option then, and those guys wanted the best processor and had the cash to pay for it. I myself could've gotten one too, but to ME, I didn't see the point in spending an extra $700, when the 930 was $300 and I could overclock it to 4.2 and for my needs, it's more then plenty.

Considering at the time I was coming from an AMD Dual Core rig, the performance increase was astronomical it seems. 20 hour encodes vs 25 minutes encodes now, booyah!

So, just because other people did see the point in spending the extra cash in a 980x, why should anyone troll them NOW that Sandy Bridge is out, and make them feel bad about their purchase?

If those 980x users NOW bought that processor considering the 2600k is out, well, that is a waste of an extra $700 in a lot of our eyes. But at the end of the day, it's their money and it's their choice how they spend it.

That goes for people with AMD rigs too, there's been many examples posted here that AMD fit their budget nicely and who are we to judge?

This whole debate can go on and on, price / performance AMD is doing well for themselves, if you want the top performance and aren't afraid to pay for it, you go with Intel, that's the sad and honest truth right now.

The 2500k is priced quite nicely for gaming rigs, and Intel has raised the bar. Heck, I still laugh at how Balla is now using Intel as he was beyond pro AMD just a couple months ago, but he's a good example of someone who has used both platforms ( 1090T & 2500k ) and is simply voicing his opinion of his experience. For HIS needs the 2500k made more sense, since he wasn't taking advantage of multi-threaded apps where the 1090T would shine.

For all our sake, I sure hope BD delivers even if it's for the mere fact for Intel to price their products better, and for some of us to have new gear to play with.

Intel hasn't had any real competition in a few years, so they can freely charge what they want.

You all remember when AMD held the top performance crown and freely charged $1000 for Dual Core processors, don't you? Or when they held the top performance crown for graphics cards?

Remember when the 5870 & 5970 were King of the hill for 6 months, prior to Fermi's release? The 5870 was priced between $400 - $500, and you couldn't get a 5970 for under $700, if AMD cared about you so much, they could've easily priced their cards for what they're going for now couldn't they? But that's not how things work, hardware is always priced based on their performance, and based on what the competition has to offer. This is reflected clearly in the processor and graphics industry.

The 6970 came out priced near $500 upon launch in a lot of retailers like Amazon, NewEgg got the memo right away. Their performance was expected to match or slightly exceed the 480, but Nvidia crushed that hope with the release of the 5xx series, and thus the 6970 pricing was adjusted according to its performance, AMD had to send $100 rebates to their partners to lower the price, since they were now being asked to sell the cards for near what they paid wholesale.

When either company is at the top, they will milk it for as much as they can, both companies are in it to make money period. Doesn't make it right, no one is forcing anyone to buy from either company, we all made that choice.

What a lot of people fail to understand is that most people are NOT loyal to either company, they just happen to be in a certain price range that makes them choose one over the other, for their specific needs, and we should all respect that. ( Many of US forget this simple fact )
Edited by 2010rig - 2/15/11 at 4:46pm
2010rig
(14 items)
 
Galaxy S3
(8 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
X5660 @ 4.5  ASUS P6X58D-E 980TI? 12GB OCZ Platinum - 7-7-7-21 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
1 80GB SSD x25m - 3TB F3 + F4 NH-D14 Windows 7 Ultimate LG 47LH55 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Natural Wireless Keyboard Corsair 750HX CM 690 II Advanced MX 518 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Snapdragon S4 Dual core 1500mhz Adreno 225 Samsung 2GB 16GB Onboard Flash 
OSMonitorPowerCase
Android 4.4.2 - CM11 4.8" AMOLED 1280x720 2100 mAh battery Otterbox Defender 
  hide details  
2010rig
(14 items)
 
Galaxy S3
(8 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
X5660 @ 4.5  ASUS P6X58D-E 980TI? 12GB OCZ Platinum - 7-7-7-21 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
1 80GB SSD x25m - 3TB F3 + F4 NH-D14 Windows 7 Ultimate LG 47LH55 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Natural Wireless Keyboard Corsair 750HX CM 690 II Advanced MX 518 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Snapdragon S4 Dual core 1500mhz Adreno 225 Samsung 2GB 16GB Onboard Flash 
OSMonitorPowerCase
Android 4.4.2 - CM11 4.8" AMOLED 1280x720 2100 mAh battery Otterbox Defender 
  hide details  
post #125 of 616
Quote:
Originally Posted by pietro sk View Post
and here we go again.. it´s total wrong compare SB with K10 - total mega wrong.

fair compare list :
Nehalem-K10
BDr1 - SB
BDr1.5 - IB
BDr2.0 - Haswell
How is it wrong? I realize it is a generation off but at the moment those are the two products that are going against eachother. Once bulldozer is out and we see official benchmarks then you will be right and it is a bad comparison but as of now it is the only comparison we have between amd and intel. You're pretty much saying, "I know its faster but give us a timeout for a few months and ignore the obvious performance gap till bulldozer is out."
Edited by scyy - 2/15/11 at 4:25pm
3930k
(20 items)
 
  
3930k
(20 items)
 
  
post #126 of 616
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kia Kore View Post
See if i was the Cyottee from Loony Tunes, i would strap a rocket to AMD's ASS and get this rolling.... its been in development since 2005..... (so i hear)....
whats the point ?



"future is fusion" has been presented iirc from the time when amd bought ati (2006)...
finally this year fusion is ready. i believe it was possible launch fusion year or two earlier ,
but i´m confident if fusion was done on old tech - it would quickly turn to disappointment.

its exact same at intel, example: nehalem wouldn´t succeed if it was done on 130nm tech..


good ideas needs to be done at the right moment
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Opteron 6386SE G34r1 H8SGL Radeon R9 380X 32GB ECC_DDR3 1333 4ch 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Seagate 600 Pro Enterprise SSD WD Green+Black some water Win8.1_64 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
K120 TX850 Tai-chi M560 
AudioAudio
Xmos_u8_DAC; (diy Pluto 2A3/SE estat amp) STAX cookies 3pcs 
  hide details  
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Opteron 6386SE G34r1 H8SGL Radeon R9 380X 32GB ECC_DDR3 1333 4ch 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Seagate 600 Pro Enterprise SSD WD Green+Black some water Win8.1_64 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
K120 TX850 Tai-chi M560 
AudioAudio
Xmos_u8_DAC; (diy Pluto 2A3/SE estat amp) STAX cookies 3pcs 
  hide details  
post #127 of 616
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2010rig View Post
I was just about to post how this convo was becoming more civilized, and then bam...



This is true, we've gone back and forth a lot on this issue, just like we went back and forth a LOT on AMD vs Intel prior to SB released.

The thing is, when these 980x users put their rigs together, it was 6+ months ago ( that's just a ballpark ) Sandy Bridge wasn't an option then, and those guys wanted the best processor and had the cash to pay for it. I myself could've gotten one too, but to ME, I didn't see the point in spending an extra $700, when the 930 was $300 and I could overclock it to 4.2 and for my needs, it's more then plenty.

Considering at the time I was coming from an AMD Dual Core rig, the performance increase was astronomical it seems. 20 hour encodes vs 25 minutes encodes now, booyah!

So, just because other people did see the point in spending the extra cash in a 980x, why should anyone troll them NOW that Sandy Bridge is out, and make them feel bad about their purchase?

If those 980x users NOW bought that processor considering the 2600k is out, well, that is a waste of an extra $700 in a lot of our eyes. But at the end of the day, it's their money and it's their choice how they spend it.

That goes for people with AMD rigs too, there's been many examples posted here that AMD fit their budget nicely and who are we to judge?

This whole debate can go on and on, price / performance AMD is doing well for themselves, if you want the top performance and aren't afraid to pay for it, you go with Intel, that's the sad and honest truth right now.

The 2500k is priced quite nicely for gaming rigs, and Intel has raised the bar. Heck, I still laugh at how Balla is now using Intel as he was beyond pro AMD just a couple months ago, but he's a good example of someone who has used both platforms ( 1090T & 2500k ) and is simply voicing his opinion of his experience. For HIS needs the 2500k made more sense, since he wasn't taking advantage of multi-threaded apps where the 1090T would shine.

For all our sake, I sure hope BD delivers even if it's for the mere fact for Intel to price their products better, and for some of us to have new gear to play with.

Intel hasn't had any real competition in a few years, so they can freely charge what they want.

You all remember when AMD held the top performance crown and freely charged $1000 for Dual Core processors, don't you? Or when they held the top performance crown for graphics cards?

Remember when the 5870 & 5970 were King of the hill for 6 months, prior to Fermi's release? The 5870 was priced between $400 - $500, and you couldn't get a 5970 for under $700, if AMD cared about you so much, they could've easily priced their cards for what they're going for now couldn't they? But that's not how things work, hardware is always priced based on their performance, and based on what the competition has to offer. This is reflected clearly in the processor and graphics industry.

The 6970 came out priced near $500 upon launch in a lot of retailers like Amazon, NewEgg got the memo right away. Their performance was expected to match or slightly exceed the 480, but Nvidia crushed that hope with the release of the 5xx series, and thus the 6970 pricing was adjusted according to its performance.

When either company is at the top, they will milk it for as much as they can, they are in it to make money period. Doesn't make it right, no one is forcing anyone to buy from either company, we all made that choice.

What a lot of people fail to understand is that most people are NOT loyal to either company, they just happen to be in a certain price range that makes them choose one over the other, for their specific needs, and we should all respect that. ( Many of US forget this simple fact )
/signed

I buy what is in my price range at the time. Chances are I won't upgrade CPU until I see what BD and Ivy have to offer in terms of Performance per dollar. That said lets hope AMD closes the gap a bit so that prices get more competitive and they both battle for enthusiast interest. It'd certainly be awesome for those of us on a budget!

Anyways any bickering prior to people having this chip in their rig is null & void no matter what side of the argument you're on.
Need More Power
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Phenom II X4 B50 @ 3.8GHZ(Stable-3 Cores) MSI 790GX-G65 Galaxy GTX460 768MB x's 2 4GB OCZ(7-7-7-16-1T) 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Western Digital 1.5TB Optiarc DVD Drive Windows 7 Ultimate 64 27" Samsung SyncMaster P2770 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G15 Corsair GS800 HAF 932 Logitech G5 
  hide details  
Need More Power
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Phenom II X4 B50 @ 3.8GHZ(Stable-3 Cores) MSI 790GX-G65 Galaxy GTX460 768MB x's 2 4GB OCZ(7-7-7-16-1T) 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Western Digital 1.5TB Optiarc DVD Drive Windows 7 Ultimate 64 27" Samsung SyncMaster P2770 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G15 Corsair GS800 HAF 932 Logitech G5 
  hide details  
post #128 of 616
Quote:
Originally Posted by scyy View Post
How is it wrong? I realize it is a generation off but at the moment those are the two products that are going against eachother. Once bulldozer is out and we see official benchmarks then you will be right and it is a bad comparison but as of now it is the only comparison we have between amd and intel. You're pretty much saying, "I know its faster but give us a timeout for a few months and ignore the obvious performance gap till bulldozer is out."
if you remember (not that long ago) journalysts compared K10 against Nehalem/westmere..

And today we should again compare the old, same K10 versus total new SB ???
Now, how does it sounds ? weird, huh?

btw - nehalem + k10 represents "older" tech, for example nothing like avx is present in these old chips
BD has more instruct. sets common with SB, than K10 with SB

k10 served well, but it needs go to retirement, really. amd users deserve brand new shiny µ-architecture also
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Opteron 6386SE G34r1 H8SGL Radeon R9 380X 32GB ECC_DDR3 1333 4ch 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Seagate 600 Pro Enterprise SSD WD Green+Black some water Win8.1_64 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
K120 TX850 Tai-chi M560 
AudioAudio
Xmos_u8_DAC; (diy Pluto 2A3/SE estat amp) STAX cookies 3pcs 
  hide details  
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Opteron 6386SE G34r1 H8SGL Radeon R9 380X 32GB ECC_DDR3 1333 4ch 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Seagate 600 Pro Enterprise SSD WD Green+Black some water Win8.1_64 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
K120 TX850 Tai-chi M560 
AudioAudio
Xmos_u8_DAC; (diy Pluto 2A3/SE estat amp) STAX cookies 3pcs 
  hide details  
post #129 of 616
Quote:
Originally Posted by pietro sk View Post
if you remember (not that long ago) journalysts compared K10 against Nehalem/westmere..

And today we should again compare the old, same K10 versus total new SB ???
Now, how does it sounds ? weird, huh?

btw - nehalem + k10 represents "older" tech, for example nothing like avx is present in these old chips
BD has more instruct. sets common with SB, than K10 with SB

k10 served well, but it needs go to retirement, really. amd users deserve brand new shiny µ-architecture also
I'm not denying that k10 isn't the true competitor of SB and nowhere have I said otherwise. However until BD is released the only comparisons that can be made are between the phenom II's and sandy bridge. Not fair? Maybe, but considering those are the two products that people have to choose from at this point they are going to make the comparison.
3930k
(20 items)
 
  
3930k
(20 items)
 
  
post #130 of 616
ha! my RELEVANT posts got deleted along with my iTunes, videos & e-cards!
awesome slanting this thread! ftw!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: AMD CPUs
This thread is locked  
Overclock.net › Forums › AMD › AMD CPUs › Is Bulldozer going to fail vs Sandy Bridge?