guys you know what is the problem with amd? they could not develop and make a new socket and motherboard chipset ( north bridge).. since the am2 days,example am2 they restructured to become am+ and the same with am3 and am3+, what happen is the speed is boost only a litle bit.. .. i think what amd needs to do is develop and make a new socket(or chipset for the motherboard)
you morons..... sandy bridge-e(ivy bridge) will be out any day. it is a 22nm process and have as many cores as babydozer and kittycat. WITH HYPERTHREADING. you guys are morons.
The reason for delaying the launch of Bulldozer is that it is so good it already could beat intel sandy slut bridge ! Now they are just tweaking it to even more to just kick intel in the nuts.
AMD chips are bullshit. AMD is the ford of the tech world. always playing catch up. Their cheap as fuck and break down just has fast under stressful environment. That's why no one other then the gaming industry uses AMD. They run hot like hell and the second they start to over heat they'll burn themselves out. What's the use of having the best O.C numbers if the fucking thing crashes more then a blind asian woman. lol
@johannes19969 really? because every chip that i have bench marked vs the compatible intel chip, they ran 8 to 13 degrees higher doing the same work load. I have even dropped some clock speeds of AMDs to match intels and FSBs and they still run hotter. I have O.Cd a few intel chips to the point that they hit 140F at 95% peak, and saw a few AMDs that had lower wattage pass that at 80% peaks.
@Randomkaoz pls write that with °C because im german.... My amd phenom II dont came over 40°C at 3.5ghz with aircooling with the same cooler some intel come over 55°C so? Who runs hotter amd or intel?
@johannes19969 well yeah i know that much about intel cooler i never use the one that comes with the intel. I mean i understand intel saying there is no need since they run cool but that doesn't mean you shouldn't put a better fan. If you take the cooling solutions that AMD use and put it on an intel you'll see results at the same clock speed. But remember not to compare for example a phenom II 8X series to a Intel i7 980. That doesn't make sense. i see that a lot.
@Randomkaoz Not really , I've had the same CPU for the last 4 years. A 1 core @ 2.4 ghz. I use it for gaming only and it still works like a charm. It's a piece of crap but it lasted.
@yoiitzmo 1 core is that from the late 90s early 2000?? because around those days AMD was owning the cpu benchmarks. I dont know what the fuck happen after the Core 2 family came out. but like i said in my post man it's only used in the gaming industry. Watch what happens when the games it more complex your gonna see more AMDs getting hot and fucking up. Because it's been all about the GPU but now games like crysis two are CPU heavy then ever.
2011 AMD Cores Bulldozer plus new chipset on motherboard AMD move fast Asus and other are ready for new technology 8 core and 16 core soon in computers 32GB ram for games
@SuckerBullet They beat them a few times over the years but intel pulls ahead often because of there larger size they can do research and continue to make the same amount of chips and AMD could not with the amount of machines they had but that is changing they have another company build the cpus so they can continue to come up with new ideas. If you notice they even changed the names that they have used all this time the new stuff is no longer based off the old sempron or athlon.
@cjellwood not really, its like eg 16 cores, 2 cores joined to gether ie if there was 16cores but 2 will work together to get wot you would call a real x2 perfomance (eg if ea core was 3ghz it would be 6ghz perfomance as a single threaded application.) inother words better scalability with multithreads to get that upper perfomance.
@cjellwood no bulldozer uses modules which is 2 cores put together. the 2 cores shares some resorses whish will decrease the performance -20% when the cpu is fully loaded, but the resourses that isn´t shared only uses 12.5% more space.
so you get 60% better performance with 12.5% more silicon area when the cpu is fully loaded.
@adolf512 This is incorrect. Official numbers from AMD are that their 2-core Module will perform only 6-8% less than a native dual-core chip. Your 20% is incredibly wrong please don't mislead people, that would equate to an 8core performing only a well as a 7core native, and this is wrong. Also you don't mention the resources they share are "doubled", therefor not reducing performance, but still removing old redunancies.
Can't wait to upgrade to next year, I've had it with intels processor bullshit. "Multithreading, dude, that's the stuff.", what a load of shit, none of my programs uses the threading. Amd FTW !
@Ryuuken24 i know wtf...intel keeps saying more cores more programs can run seemlessly at once...but that sure isn't the case in my i5 750...total bull crap by intel.
@fthis12345 what do you mean? im buying a new pc now, do you mean that 4 cores don't actually act separately when you use multiple programs?
and btw i would really like to see a software that can use like 90% of 3-4 cores, not 90% 70% 10% 0%
i mean how long is since the first dual core came out? 5 years , and most of the software still effectively uses 2 cores and a bit of a third. And now amd is making 16 core proc ? lol
@ThePhysics1234 AFAIK the fact that the cores are on a single die is invicible to the OS, thus it is completely possible for each of the cores to run a program different from the others
do Bulldozer=Bullshits???
heh613 2 months ago
hahahha Failldozer in a coocie box
MrAlways420time 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
guys you know what is the problem with amd? they could not develop and make a new socket and motherboard chipset ( north bridge).. since the am2 days,example am2 they restructured to become am+ and the same with am3 and am3+, what happen is the speed is boost only a litle bit.. .. i think what amd needs to do is develop and make a new socket(or chipset for the motherboard)
markalious 4 months ago
Intel = for navie suckers
StevensiTX 5 months ago
you morons..... sandy bridge-e(ivy bridge) will be out any day. it is a 22nm process and have as many cores as babydozer and kittycat. WITH HYPERTHREADING. you guys are morons.
Lobomaster22 5 months ago
@Lobomaster22
Yes -.- GPU SPE/SPU Cores...
StevensiTX 5 months ago
@StevensiTX are you agreeing with me...?
Lobomaster22 5 months ago
@Lobomaster22
Fast GPU has always the better performance than CPUs.
StevensiTX 5 months ago
Bill gates hate this video!
pepearcano 6 months ago
The reason for delaying the launch of Bulldozer is that it is so good it already could beat intel sandy slut bridge ! Now they are just tweaking it to even more to just kick intel in the nuts.
Jonkopoppers 6 months ago
1 dislike Intel fanboy :D
androidakram14 6 months ago 7
@androidakram14 Shut the fuck up Intel is way better than AMD obviously
AwesomeFace50 3 months ago
Ivy bridge will kill bullsht
missthemissles 6 months ago
@missthemissles You're the only bullshit. See you when I'm six-feet under!
TheScriptr 6 months ago
@missthemissles
Will kill Smart peoples
StevensiTX 5 months ago
AMD chips are bullshit. AMD is the ford of the tech world. always playing catch up. Their cheap as fuck and break down just has fast under stressful environment. That's why no one other then the gaming industry uses AMD. They run hot like hell and the second they start to over heat they'll burn themselves out. What's the use of having the best O.C numbers if the fucking thing crashes more then a blind asian woman. lol
Randomkaoz 7 months ago
@Randomkaoz they dont run hot like hell....
johannes19969 7 months ago
@johannes19969 really? because every chip that i have bench marked vs the compatible intel chip, they ran 8 to 13 degrees higher doing the same work load. I have even dropped some clock speeds of AMDs to match intels and FSBs and they still run hotter. I have O.Cd a few intel chips to the point that they hit 140F at 95% peak, and saw a few AMDs that had lower wattage pass that at 80% peaks.
Randomkaoz 7 months ago
@Randomkaoz pls write that with °C because im german.... My amd phenom II dont came over 40°C at 3.5ghz with aircooling with the same cooler some intel come over 55°C so? Who runs hotter amd or intel?
johannes19969 7 months ago
@johannes19969 well yeah i know that much about intel cooler i never use the one that comes with the intel. I mean i understand intel saying there is no need since they run cool but that doesn't mean you shouldn't put a better fan. If you take the cooling solutions that AMD use and put it on an intel you'll see results at the same clock speed. But remember not to compare for example a phenom II 8X series to a Intel i7 980. That doesn't make sense. i see that a lot.
Randomkaoz 7 months ago
@Randomkaoz Not really , I've had the same CPU for the last 4 years. A 1 core @ 2.4 ghz. I use it for gaming only and it still works like a charm. It's a piece of crap but it lasted.
yoiitzmo 7 months ago
@yoiitzmo 1 core is that from the late 90s early 2000?? because around those days AMD was owning the cpu benchmarks. I dont know what the fuck happen after the Core 2 family came out. but like i said in my post man it's only used in the gaming industry. Watch what happens when the games it more complex your gonna see more AMDs getting hot and fucking up. Because it's been all about the GPU but now games like crysis two are CPU heavy then ever.
Randomkaoz 7 months ago
@Randomkaoz It's a 2006 card. Athlon 1620.
yoiitzmo 7 months ago
psshhhhhh, 8 cores? no on has optimized 8 cores yet :P
missthemissles 7 months ago
@missthemissles Their demo computer at E3 tells it all. AMD is going to kick Intel in their Sandy nuts.
motorcycler11 6 months ago
@motorcycler11 and then bulldozer gen.2 is gonna kick Ivy brigde's nuts :D
Nuskad 6 months ago
this will kill all sandy bridge cpus....
johannes19969 8 months ago 2
@johannes19969 ya,ya who knows ?Intel alwasy be faster but more expensive ..
HeadouCompany 8 months ago
@HeadouCompany thahs right^^
johannes19969 8 months ago
@johannes19969 yeah for the next month lol.
Randomkaoz 7 months ago
Who wants a "Sandy bridge" not me i want a Bulldozer
TheBrainlessGuy 8 months ago 14
@TheBrainlessGuy same here dude!!
dragonmastershow 4 months ago
@TheBrainlessGuy You still do?
Xaeleep 4 months ago
2011 AMD Cores Bulldozer plus new chipset on motherboard AMD move fast Asus and other are ready for new technology 8 core and 16 core soon in computers 32GB ram for games
VOYTASNY 9 months ago 2
seriously doubt this will be able to defeat intel.
shermanlee85856 9 months ago
@shermanlee85856 AMD probably never will be more powerful than Intel. AMD's are a hell lot cheaper though.
SuckerBullet 9 months ago
@SuckerBullet They beat them a few times over the years but intel pulls ahead often because of there larger size they can do research and continue to make the same amount of chips and AMD could not with the amount of machines they had but that is changing they have another company build the cpus so they can continue to come up with new ideas. If you notice they even changed the names that they have used all this time the new stuff is no longer based off the old sempron or athlon.
STRIKER520 9 months ago
bulldozer its for games?? bobcat its for games?? or for server?
MrAben1995 10 months ago
Soooo , all this shows it can beat an standard i7 with ht on , if its cheaper i will go for it .
torentmonkey 10 months ago 3
bobycat and bullydozer
stigyo92 1 year ago
Am I correct in thinking that the Bulldozer is multi core but acts as a single core?
cjellwood 1 year ago
@cjellwood not really, its like eg 16 cores, 2 cores joined to gether ie if there was 16cores but 2 will work together to get wot you would call a real x2 perfomance (eg if ea core was 3ghz it would be 6ghz perfomance as a single threaded application.) inother words better scalability with multithreads to get that upper perfomance.
helloshayan 1 year ago
@cjellwood no bulldozer uses modules which is 2 cores put together. the 2 cores shares some resorses whish will decrease the performance -20% when the cpu is fully loaded, but the resourses that isn´t shared only uses 12.5% more space.
so you get 60% better performance with 12.5% more silicon area when the cpu is fully loaded.
adolf512 1 year ago
@adolf512 This is incorrect. Official numbers from AMD are that their 2-core Module will perform only 6-8% less than a native dual-core chip. Your 20% is incredibly wrong please don't mislead people, that would equate to an 8core performing only a well as a 7core native, and this is wrong. Also you don't mention the resources they share are "doubled", therefor not reducing performance, but still removing old redunancies.
The rest is good and accurate according to AMD :)
Peace
HypnoticSuggestion 1 year ago
@HypnoticSuggestion i already know the -20% number is wrong.
that number came from the biggest digital cumputermagazine in sweden.
the currect one is +80% by the dublicated resources.
adolf512 1 year ago
i want a bulldozer when it comes out
if they make a 16 ore 24 core then that'd be awesoezz!
kabobularproductions 1 year ago
Can't wait to upgrade to next year, I've had it with intels processor bullshit. "Multithreading, dude, that's the stuff.", what a load of shit, none of my programs uses the threading. Amd FTW !
Ryuuken24 1 year ago
@Ryuuken24 i know wtf...intel keeps saying more cores more programs can run seemlessly at once...but that sure isn't the case in my i5 750...total bull crap by intel.
fthis12345 1 year ago
@fthis12345 what do you mean? im buying a new pc now, do you mean that 4 cores don't actually act separately when you use multiple programs?
and btw i would really like to see a software that can use like 90% of 3-4 cores, not 90% 70% 10% 0%
i mean how long is since the first dual core came out? 5 years , and most of the software still effectively uses 2 cores and a bit of a third. And now amd is making 16 core proc ? lol
ThePhysics1234 1 year ago
@ThePhysics1234 i want 30 cores so i can play on twelve warcraft accounts and farm for golds! :p
drmurda 1 year ago
@ThePhysics1234 AFAIK the fact that the cores are on a single die is invicible to the OS, thus it is completely possible for each of the cores to run a program different from the others
sundhaug92 11 months ago
Comment removed
ZXRaziel 1 year ago