Discussion in 'Building a new PC' started by theonejrs, Nov 18, 2008.
well in other news,
windows 7 has taken over xp as the most used OS.
Worst bug yet!
What a shame the email doesn't give me some idea of what people are saying. I keep getting booted back to page 1. I haven't read one word on the new page...
New pages require 2-3 posts on the page before the page will actually display - else, the thread ends at the previous page, and email links to the new post just direct to page 1 of the thread. Has been going on for 12+ months. Affects any thread 80+ pages.
Used a different web browser. Eureka! No doubt something in the cookies was screwy. But, I deleted all afterdawn cookies, no luck. However, deleting ALL cookies fixed it for firefox
Sam, I probably won't buy this first generation Zambezi processor(HIGHLY unlikely). Piledriver may be a different story. Or some other revised chip.
I just want to be sure people understand certain factors about the tests used. I know this sounds childish, but the test really is unfair when you think about it. The architecture is the first in its class, and very cutting edge. One should not ignore, that software is not ready for it. I don't know AMD's reasons for releasing the processor prematurely, while no OS has full support. Perhaps the world has become their guinea pigs LOL! They are selling like hotcakes after all. Not that I'll be one of the buyers.
There's certainly no debating the power requirement. I'm not gonna tax my beautiful Corsair supply You make some very good points. I really don't want to melt my board :S
I'll be honest, it's not cutting edge. It isn't the first 32nm processor, it isn't the first 8-core processor, it doesn't use a new socket, it doesn't use much revolutionary new technology. It's just plain naff. Seeing relatively pricey AMD boards burn out just from running 140W TDP CPUs at stock - the thought of putting 450W through one? It scares me. The fact that the CPU comes with a waterblock for its stock cooling speaks volumes. I'm sorry but there's no two ways about it, Bulldozer is just plain bad, and has failed as a product.
Come on now. 450W? Surely you jest... Surely you're talking full system draw. If it were that bad, no way they'd market it. Every board would be smoking LOL!!!
Phenom I failed. Phenom II was/is good. Piledriver may just deserve praise and attention Here's hoping to the future
Nope - just the CPU. And don't call me surely.
Hmmm, that is scary. I updated.
Look very carefully at the i5 and i7's power usage in that chart (2500K/2600K) Remember that the i5 is only 3/4 the price of the FX-8150, and the i7 is very similar (10%) - then consider that the i5 is literally twice as fast for games, and that the i7 is faster than the FX in every single computational test you can think of.
Come on AD this is just getting stupid now. We've been waiting to see the new page for 2 days.
deleted duplicated posts.
Would love to read your post ddp but I can't see the page
FWIW Jeff, I can see this page perfectly fine.
i'm not having a problem at all & i'm using ie8 on xp pro sp2.
I found this interesting. I can't say I believe it 100%, but it does support my theory. The bulldozer is being tested unfairly. I do still acknowledge the heavy power hit though
AMD Bulldozer Registry Fix
Take it how you will. I still find it hilarious, how many people don't understand what's going on here. It's simple logic. I'm about as green as they come, and I can see perfectly, we're not seeing the bulldozer's full potential. Not with archaic coding! As you already know, MHZ means nothing! Intel has more performance typically per clock, than say phenom II. Bulldozer is likely a better performer, but because of immature coding, the average person can't see it. They simply assume AMD has failed epic-ly...
By the way, I'm not suggesting it's a better performer than even i5, I'm simply saying it's better than we're seeing it. I don't know if it's 5% or 50%. Time will tell
This, from someone who thinks PCI express is called PCI-X. For the time being, I'm going to consider that article 100% false unless proven otherwise.
To get an idea of your understanding, could you give me an estimate of what you think coding could do for the Bulldozer?
Minimal - I have already seen cutting-edge processing features like AES tested on the Bulldozer, and compared to the Intel chips that have them (Sandy Bridge and Gulftown only), it doesn't change anything. The only time Bulldozer will shine is when we see more applications that are fully multi-threaded. Even then, it'll still be slower (when overclocked) than a similarly overclocked i7 2600K.
Separate names with a comma.