hope he didn't get 3rd degree burns from removing a BD heatsink!
(since we know he's ok that's ok, right?)
Anand was in the ER yesterday
The 460 used quite a bit less power than the 470, and when the 460 was overclocked it could match the performance of the 470 while still using less power. The idle consumption on the 460 was very good as well. It wasn't the most power efficient overall but brought a lot to the table.
And from a sales standpoint the 460 was a huge hit. It's #2 on the Steam survey under DX11 GPU's.
http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/videocard/
I would call the multi-threaded results pretty bad, because an 8-core Bulldozer FX-8150 loses to a quad-core Intel Core i7 2600K when all cores are active, either in synthetic benchmarks (like Dhrystone) or real-world (like Cinebench). At best (POVray) it has a slight 3% lead. Again, this is a CPU with twice the core count, so it should at least be able to win handily in multi-threaded applications that leverage its strengths, which it can't.For a complete departure in their design philosophy I'm happy for them. This is a pretty good first impression for a brand new arch. For a little improvement, or even a slight step backward in singlethreaded apps, there is a decent enough improvement in multithreaded apps. I think it could've been a lot worse for them and these results come as a relief. I like how resentful the gamers are that BD doesn't cater specifically to them, though. I look forward to the 4S Interlagos benches.
I would call the multi-threaded results pretty bad, because an 8-core Bulldozer FX-8150 loses to a quad-core Intel Core i7 2600K when all cores are active, either in synthetic benchmarks (like Dhrystone) or real-world (like Cinebench). At best (POVray) it has a slight 3% lead. Again, this is a CPU with twice the core count, so it should at least be able to win handily in multi-threaded applications that leverage its strengths, which it can't.
The i5-2500K was on sale for $150 at MicroCenter last week.not terribly surprised - all the pre-release info was right.
Sucks that I have another two years in between upgrades though... unless intel is kind and releases a cheap quad core worth the upgrade somehow - though i don't see any reason for them to do so. . .
this sucks
All I have to say is this...
If you want AMD to pull through and (hopefully) build better processors and compete with Intel, then you have to support them and purchase their CPUs even if they are are not the cat's meow next to Intel. AMD needs CASH MONEY to get BETTER Engineers for better R&D. Period.
The i5-2500K was $150 at MicroCenter last week.
All I have to say is this...
If you want AMD to pull through and (hopefully) build better processors and compete with Intel....
Phenom II vs. Bulldozer Clock-for-Clock Comparison
Bulldozer is on average 22% slower per core than Phenom II is.
All I have to say is this...
If you want AMD to pull through and (hopefully) build better processors and compete with Intel, then you have to support them and purchase their CPUs even if they are are not the cat's meow next to Intel. AMD needs CASH MONEY to get BETTER Engineers for better R&D. Period. If everyone runs to Intel because they can't get the same faps per second or gigglehurts than they can with AMD, then Intel will continue to dominate, charge high prices, and only release competitive products when they have to. Does anyone remember the first company to 1GHz? Intel was incrementally upgrading their CPUs by 33MHz if I remember. With new chipsets. And RAM. Because they could. We all have AMD to thank right now for being as competitive as they are. Lets see, AMD market cap 5 billion, Intel 150 Billion. Who has more money for engineers? At least AMD is trying to stay relevant, and on a shoestring budget. Most engineers are probably like baseball players are go to where the bling is. So, if anything, buy AMD for charity to give them some cash so they can keep Intel on their toes and prices down.
All I have to say is this...
If you want AMD to pull through and (hopefully) build better processors and compete with Intel, then you have to support them and purchase their CPUs even if they are are not the cat's meow next to Intel. AMD needs CASH MONEY to get BETTER Engineers for better R&D. Period. If everyone runs to Intel because they can't get the same faps per second or gigglehurts than they can with AMD, then Intel will continue to dominate, charge high prices, and only release competitive products when they have to. Does anyone remember the first company to 1GHz? Intel was incrementally upgrading their CPUs by 33MHz if I remember. With new chipsets. And RAM. Because they could. We all have AMD to thank right now for being as competitive as they are. Lets see, AMD market cap 5 billion, Intel 150 Billion. Who has more money for engineers? At least AMD is trying to stay relevant, and on a shoestring budget. Most engineers are probably like baseball players are go to where the bling is. So, if anything, buy AMD for charity to give them some cash so they can keep Intel on their toes and prices down.
The i5-2500K was on sale for $150 at MicroCenter last week.
All I have to say is this...
If you want AMD to pull through and (hopefully) build better processors and compete with Intel, then you have to support them and purchase their CPUs even if they are are not the cat's meow next to Intel. AMD needs CASH MONEY to get BETTER Engineers for better R&D. Period. If everyone runs to Intel because they can't get the same faps per second or gigglehurts than they can with AMD, then Intel will continue to dominate, charge high prices, and only release competitive products when they have to. Does anyone remember the first company to 1GHz? Intel was incrementally upgrading their CPUs by 33MHz if I remember. With new chipsets. And RAM. Because they could. We all have AMD to thank right now for being as competitive as they are. Lets see, AMD market cap 5 billion, Intel 150 Billion. Who has more money for engineers? At least AMD is trying to stay relevant, and on a shoestring budget. Most engineers are probably like baseball players are go to where the bling is. So, if anything, buy AMD for charity to give them some cash so they can keep Intel on their toes and prices down.
Hope you're into WinRAR.
Aten-Ra: What IPC improvements will we see against Deneb or Thuban in single Thread and Multi thread applications?
AMD : Bulldozer is a new and radically different core architecture making it impossible to draw IPC parallels to any previous design. With the design of the AMD FX, we focused on offering the highest possible instructions per watt. AMD FX is designed with current and future workloads in mind. At the same time, we have added the new instruction sets and as improvements are realized in applications and operating systems (like the Windows 8 scheduler improvements), we believe performance will increase.
Note: In older apps, either compiled with an older compiler, or those using older instructions will see FX at a disadvantage. Again this was a design decision. Design for today’s apps and the future was the engineering mantra.
Phenom II vs. Bulldozer Clock-for-Clock Comparison
Bulldozer is on average 22% slower per core than Phenom II is.
They had to bring 10-20 new apps along the FX launch to show the performance of the new ISA's, now they look stupid with the older software every online site used in their reviews.