Added: 4 months ago
From: schteudfan
Views: 34,290
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (303)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • In Soviet Russia, a bulldozer is you.

  • lol lol lol lol lol

  • lmao funny ass shit i have a amd fx 6100 work better then i5

  • lol

  • Is it new FX 6100 ?

  • @Goodgame788 fx 6100 is better then the i5 and some of the i 7 and benchmark

  • LMAO

  • that´s awsome :)

  • ha ha ha, are u serious lol :)

  • Comment removed

  • AMD fanatics! Get over it....i7-2600k will ALWAYS perform better in heavy threaded apps and ALWAYS much better in games that are very CPU dependant. All this, while consuming way less power. AMD it´s a no go!

  • That was funny, yet I will not give up to phenom x6 :))))

  • I would like to see a head ot head comparison in REAL WORLD benchmark's. between sandy bridge and the new FX 8 core. Not just the synthetic crap. I'm betting bulldozer may garner a bit more respect.

  • @lamiac2411 I would like to see a head to head comparison in REAL WORLD benchmark's. between a Porsche 911 and the new Reliant Robin. Not just the synthetic crap. I'm betting the Reliant Robin may garner a bit more respect

  • slow but works xD

  • hardocp/article/2011/11/03/amd­­­­_fx8150_multigpu_gameplay_p­e­r­f­ormance_review/1

    This review accurately reveals the limitations of Bulldozer...I suggest you give it a read (if you're literate).

  • Comment removed

  • in soviet russia... ah whatever.

  • This vid perfectly pictures this...There's a new "2 Billion transistors" and it's struggling with older "1 Billion transistor". "2Billion Transistors" does win a bit over "1B transistor" in few benchmarks but while "1B transistor" is $70 cheaper and requires half of electrity... why should I go with 2B transistors??? the bigger question is why should i choose "netburst" again???

    BTW... AMD still made the coolest GPU on market!

  • "no description available"

    good point

  • Feeding trolls is so fun.

  • Comment removed

  • i7 at truth Benchmarks

  • rather intel Atom vs. Tagra 2

  • Ha ha! Nice! =)

  • xbitlabs/articles/cpu/display/­core-i7-975-950_7.html#sect0

  • @TsuruugiRevamped Oh, my fault...I misinterpreted. Thanks for your honesty regarding AMD. Hopefully they'll pull a rabbit out of a hat and turn things around (if not, Intel has little reason to release Ivy Bridge on schedule [not that those of us using Sandy really need to upgrade for any reason for the next couple years...I'm perfectly content with 2500k until I start dropping below 60fps]).

  • i'm actually planing to buy AMD PII soon

    :]

  • @TheKootas ...if your purchase is primarily for gaming and other tasks that use less than four threads, I'd strongly think twice about that purchase. Even a lowest-end Sandy Bridge dual-core is superior to most PII quads...

  • @unwittingnemesis

    i'll def think about it

    thx

  • @TheKootas I recommend the two processors below (depending on whether you're looking at dual or quad [you don't need six cores for anything, unless you primarily use your PC for video editing...IPC is king, period, for PC users]):

    anandtech/bench/Product/406?vs­=203 ($65 Sandy Bridge G620 vs. 1100t...note the gaming benchmarks)

    anandtech/bench/Product/289?vs­=203 (i3 2100 vs. 1100t...superior gaming performance, much less money)

  • @TheKootas ...those two are actually both dual-core (and cheap), but I believe that the latter has hyperthreading. Honestly, I really recommend just ponying up and splurging on the 2500k [$210-$220]...you'll unlikely need to upgrade for five or more years (as opposed to buying a cheaper dual-core), and it's hands-down the best gaming CPU on the market (even better than 2600k, since hyperthreading interferes with games that use four threads or less [99% of games on the market]).

  • anandtech/bench/Product/288?vs­=203

  • Comment removed

  • "but Windows 8 will make a *huge* difference, idiot" no...it won't. It's been predicted that Windows 8 will increase 8150's performance by 4-8%, according to the many published articles thath I've read. If that's inaccurate, find a published source that, on record, states that the chip will *definitively* (make sure a detailed explanation is included, and make sure that it's not Hardware Heaven, as they're partial [biased] to AMD) make a bigger difference (you need +50% IPC to = 2500k...).

  • "but we're talking about the future"...no, this chip was released in "the present." It wasn't released in three years (when it will be a full 100% behind Intel in performance [notably IPC]). Even when running octal-threaded tasks, it barely surpasses 2500k. Even in "the future," it will continue to fail to come anywhere near 2500k when running quad-threaded or lower tasks (again, virtually everything that any PC user utlizes, including 99% of all games, current and near-term future).

  • Comment removed

  • ...allow me to predict the "retort:" "umadbro?" :)

  • "...but it's "the future" that AMD had been planning on, and that's when this chip will shine"... :) No; with any luck, AMD will match the 2500k in three years with a different chip (that actually performs as planned). Face reality.

  • ...and let's try to avoid "but we're talking about octal-threaded programs, here...who cares about tasks that use four or less threads concurrently"... :)

  • Comment removed

  • Here...hope this helps you to further understand what *actually* caused the lackluster performance (add ".com").

    extremetech/computing/100583-a­nalyzing-bulldozers-scaling-si­ngle-thread-performance

  • Comment removed

  • Anyway, guys...I simply wanted to make a point here. If you've lost, just get out of the game (or join the winning team). Don't sit around and bullshit. :)

  • Well, until I see published benchmarks that show me a difference between before and after performance, I guess I'll have to consider this "debate" concluded. Back to the video (sorry, its creator)...hilarious!

  • Let this be a lesson...don't make statements you can't back up with evidence. Don't do it...or you'll end up looking like this dude (desperate, deceptive, dismissive, and just all around "done"). Someone...anyone. Find me a published article, written by any major hardward reviewer, that plainly provides before and after benchmarks showing us that a BIOS update resolved this chip's multiple woes, and, in fact, finally allowed it to compete with 2500k. Anyone? Again..."published."

  • LOL:) open this page and I loled at the video and the 2 people arguing with each other....

  • @Fran0neal no, there's no argument...there's a fanboy making baseless claims (which he can't verify with evidence). Again...not much of an argument. Hurt fanboy, basless claims, no evidence...the usual, I guess.

  • @Fran0neal ...and I am here solely in the interest of consumers (anti-fanboys; alternatively, we could label fanboys as "anti-consumers," since advocating the use of inferior products simply out of devotion to its developer is "anti-consumer"). I suggest you read back through the comments...it was rather hilarious (I asked for his source at least twenty times...but alas, didn't get one...).

  • Comment removed

  • @Fran0neal ...I mean, since everyone online is publishing articles about how much of a failure Bulldozer is, wouldn't you think that something like solving the problem with a simple BIOS update would be something that someone other than this dude would be discussing professionally? Perhaps our friend here is unaware of the fact that AMD's shareholders are dropping off en masse (as we speak), which they *might* not be doing had AMD resolved the issue with something as trivial as a BIOS update.

  • ...ultimately, though, I simply despise and cannot respect fanboys of any type ("fanboy" being someone who rallies ardently [almost always employing dishonesty, baseless comments, etc.] for something in spite of all evidence pointing to the contrary). I wanted AMD to be competitive again (as did we all), because a lack of competition in the high-end chip market is bad for everyone (this is a fairly simple concept, one would think...guess this dude can't grasp it...).

  • @unwittingnemesis agree with you on the compeition thingy..., it's important to keep the cpu manufacturers in developing an even better and more efficient technology. I'm no fanboy of intel / amd. I always buy what I think is the best.

  • @Fran0neal yes, absolutely. Because AMD fucked up so badly, we're all going to suffer...not just AMD's fanboys. Perfectly stated: "I always buy what I think is the best." I buy what is the best "value." HAD AMD priced this chip significantly below 2500k, they wouldn't have added insult to injury. $150 for this chip? Possibly worth the money (but probably not, since it's still below an 1100t with 99% of tasks that PCs run). $100-125, and you've got a solid value proposition.

  • @unwittingnemesis Hmm.., I see your other comments in the other video on how hardwareheaven made their error in benchmarking the FX 8150. I did read somewhere that CPU benchmark should be done in a low resolution to give more stress to the CPU cuz' on low resolution the CPU tends to work more than the GPU...,

    Correct me if I'm mistaken... ^_^

  • @Fran0neal yup...I challenged the other guy (Hitler video) to e-mail HH and ask them for graphs of the CPU usage during their "CPU gaming benchmarks;" I wonder if he tried, and whether or not he got a response :). As I said there, if you plan on running your games at the limits of your (crappy) GPU, then yes, both chips will provide the same fps so long as the CPU isn't hitting 100%. The problem here is that gamers that are buying high-end CPUs are typically using more than one mid-end GPU...

  • Adios, amigos...I shall return.

  • your published source, please (with benchmarks, preferably)

  • @unwittingnemesis So you haven't searched at all?

    Oh, and:

    hardwareheaven . com/reviews/1285/pg12/amd-fx-8­150-black-edition-8-core-proce­ssor-vs-core-i7-2600k-review-t­otal-war-shogun-2 . html

    pclab . pl/art47038 . html

    Compare the two.

    Oh, and remember the second one is the one with the CrossHair V.

  • @IAmSomeoneOrOther ...so, apparently, you're such an avid, experienced gamer that you failed to recognize that Hardware Heaven (apparently intentionally) GPU-limited the games while testing, so as to avoid pushing any CPU in the test to their limits (thus, the benchmarks mean nothing, except to show us what a single 6950 can do...thanks, HH!). Also, I don't see where this link shows me that a BIOS update drastically improved this chip's performance. Could you help me find that section?

  • @unwittingnemesis Apparently you forgot that the motherboards were different, which means a different BIOS, which got better performance.

    Oh, and even with GPU limited games the FX-8150 was apparently less of a Bottleneck to the 6950 than the i7 2600k.

  • @IAmSomeoneOrOther no...I didn't forget. I realized that your comment was bullshit and asked you to prove it by providing us with a published document. Why don't you just go ahead and do that, and end the suspense.

  • @IAmSomeoneOrOther if you honestly couldn't realize that their benchmarks were entirely GPU-limited, then you simply aren't experienced enough a gamer to even be talking about "BIOS updates fixing CPUs" (which is actually just a story that was made up to appease Bulldozer).

  • @unwittingnemesis *facepalm*

    NOTHING is entirely GPU limited.

    NOTHING.

    ZIP.

    ZERO.

    If you couldn't realize that then you simply aren't experienced enough (or smart enough) with computers to be talking about "Bulldozer sucks" and "BIOS updates fix CPUs" (which was never said, what was said however was that a prototype BIOS can make a processor not perform like it should).

  • @IAmSomeoneOrOther hmmm...still not seeing any published source stating that a BIOS update fixed your CPU. Oh, nothing can be entirely GPU-limited. Interesting, but ridiculous. I can GPU-limit anything I want with one 6950 (unless it was published five years ago). Your published BIOS source, please.

  • @unwittingnemesis If you still aren't smart enough to look at early benchmarks and compare then to current ones, then this conversation is over.

    Oh, and the OS still has to process some of your bullshit "GPU limited program" on the processor.

  • @IAmSomeoneOrOther ...there was never a conversation, here. There was a desperate fanboy attempting to create stories to cover the fact that his chip can't compete with Intel. You failed to provide a source showing us all benchmarks showing that your chip was significantly improved by a BIOS update, and it's sort of funny that no one else online (nor AMD's shareholders) are interested in discussing it...only AMD fanboys. Why is that? :) Audios, friendo...

  • @unwittingnemesis I really hate people like you who don't like to give thought to things.

    Oh, and if the chip can't compete with Intel, how did it do so with the Hardware Heaven benchmarks?

    Oh wait, I'm dragging on the conversation with a retarded Intel stockholder who is too god damn arrogant to actually look at the links I'm providing and hides behind his hidden channel.

  • @IAmSomeoneOrOther Nope, people are fleering cos bulldozer can`t compete with it`s predecessors. And amd fanboys are peeing hot for that reason.

  • @faakz If Bulldozer can't compete with its predecessors, then Intel can't compete with Bulldozer's predecessors.

  • @faakz I wouldn't bother...this guy is either delusional or simply unable to cope with the reality of the situation. Let him find out over time during his gaming misadventures (frequently dropping below 60fps). :)

  • @unwittingnemesis Thats it.

    You must be a flat out retard, since you think that any AMD processor (which, since you said that games are GPU limited in general, contradicts that thought) can't get over 60 FPS in games.

  • @unwittingnemesis and this is another thing I'm having a hard time understanding who gives a damn, if your below 60fps unless your retarded and your brain is slow your not going to care and even at that point shouldn't care. Unless your dropping below 30fps then you need to start caring.

  • @Inthepastxx Oh, OK; thanks for clearing that up.

  • @Inthepastxx "After 30 fps you have more frames than you need to fool the brain; however, while people can't see the individual frames past 24-30 fps, if you keep increasing the frame rate, people report that the motion appears more fluid and lifelike. This effect has been found up to about 60 fps, where people will report totally fluid motion. "

  • @unwittingnemesis I strongly have to disagree with your statement. AMD's new processors are rocking hard.

    They perform better in almost all cases compared to intel. As well render things a hell of a lot better which amd has always done. On top of maxing games our and reaching a great fps level without dropping off now.

    I'll have to say intel needs to start worrying.

  • @Inthepastxx Oh, OK; thanks for clearing that up (same response replies to your other comment).

  • @unwittingnemesis Oh, and what about USB 3.0, SATA, and PCIe benchmarking is entirely GPU limited?

    Or are you just that stupid?

  • @IAmSomeoneOrOther ..well, since you can't prove your BIOS update comment, and have failed miserably to defend whatever point it was that you were trying to make, let me leave you with this...it obviously sucks to be you, and good luck maintaining 60fps... :) Until another day, my friend...I'll come back in a few weeks and see if you've found that published article (have people that know something about PC hardware [and aren't simply bullshitting around] to talk to).

  • @unwittingnemesis So you don't find it odd Bulldozer got a performance boost recently with a BIOS update to the CrossHair V, and before the BIOS update it performed better on other board?

    Oh, and the point I was trying to make was that Bulldozer performs better on 75% of different boards.

    Which it did.

    So, I was able to prove my point.

    While your point of "Bulldozer sucks" hasn't been proven.

    Pro-tip: Saying a processor sucks has to apply to all platforms, while saying it is good doesn't.

  • @IAmSomeoneOrOther ...I find it odd that your delusions continue (as you can't seem to provide evidence of your claims, we'll have to simply assume that they're delusions). Frankly, I'm beginning to suspect that something is very wrong with your brain...so I'm just going to step out of your delusion and let you believe whatever you want, unencumbered by the evidence I've provided that clearly proves that you're, well, out of luck. Good luck with your chip, mi amigo...

  • @unwittingnemesis What evidence?

    You didn't provide links that prove your right, while I did.

    Oh, and I didn't buy a Bulldozer processor.

    Nice assumption though (not).

  • article, artucle...whatever you like

  • Tell us why there are no articles, anwhere online, telling us that AMD fixed the problem with a BIOS update. We're waiting.

  • ...does anyone else here get the impression that "IMakeFalseClaims" doesn't have evidence with which to prove his argument? Hard to take him seriously, then, isn't it...

  • @unwittingnemesis "IMakeFalseClaims"?

    Well done indeed.

    Since you can't seem to do research yourself.

  • Guys, let me sum this up for you: this chip is worse than the previous generation, and fanboys are losers. Does that help at all? Be a fanboy of consumers (and PC users [especially gamers])...not companies that can't deliver on their promises. Man up, and own the reality of the situation.

  • @unwittingnemesis Uh.

    No.

    Look for Benchmarks with different motherboards.

    As I said before.

    And stop hiding behind your wall if ignorance.

  • @IAmSomeoneOrOther "ignorance" is making a claim with nothing to assert it (which I don't do). Your source ("BIOS fix resolves AMD's apparent failure"), please.

  • HAHHAHAHAHAHHAA

  • пхаха:DD

  • By the way I showed this Vid to a friend of mines he loves AMD and he was steamed!! He was on his bike I drove by with my car and said "Is that bike powered by AMD? I yelled Intel inside!" and drove off LMAO!

  • oh, pardon...-"speed," + "processing ability."  There...perfect.

  • p.s. according to anand, your Dirt 3 comment is complete nonsense (no surprise there). There are no games on the market...again, no games...that run better on the SUX-8150 than on a 2500k (at any speed stock and up). If I'm wrong, tell me which game, and provide your source (your personal guarantee doesn't work for me). :)

  • Well, I was going to provide you with a direct link to anand's comparison between the 2500k and your SUX-8150, but unfortunately, youtube thinks that I shouldn't be allowed to ("error, try again")...and for good reason!

  • lol

  • "...but future games will use eight cores, and then Bulldozer will rule!" No. It's not a true eight-core processor, and your fps are still going to be well below a 2500k, even if Windows suddenly recognizes Bulldozer as an "eight core" CPU. Trust me (I wish it weren't true; we need competition in the industry).

  • ...oh, let me respond for you. "Windows 8"...nope. That's not going to help. "Well, why does fps matter when you're over 100 anyway?" Sure...as you put it, "the future" (forgetting the fact that I know that Bulldozer can't run many current [and even older] games at 60fps steadily [Anand's benchmarks spell it out]). A game that runs at 60fps on a 2500k will run at 40fps on your Bulldozer. A mock "eight core" design isn't going to change this fact...period.

  • awww...go liddle brudder!

  • hes making it go faster with the arm. GENIUS!

    

  • aww, how cute, look at him pushing himself with his little arm.

  • lol

  • AMD A failed , Intel The Best

  • In soviet russia, your live sucked, lets be honest here.

  • How quickly we forget that Intel has had its failures as well. Ignorant fanboys are ignorant....on both sides.

  • stupid video and stupid uploader

  • I lol even now. LOL

  • FX 8150 = 0815

    AMD = Every Year Shit

  • joke or not, i hope you all know how does bulldozer look like, definately not like this, lol

  • shit video. bulldozer rulez

  • Epic lmao

  • In Soviet Russia, - fuck this.

  • hahaha I rofl'd

  • gotta love it

  • LOL, what happens if he goes down hill?

  • @WiriamuN he probably still has brakes

  • It's performance benchmark:D

  • in soviet russia, we don't use engine

  • @nickkeim90 technically, not. the arm is moving because the engine is on.

  • tons of power slow in performance.

  • hahaha....this is f-ing priceless. What the f--- is that dude doing?

    p.s. Bulldozer (AMD) is garbage. :)

  • ahusasssssuashuahusahushuahush­uas

  • hahaha XD!!!

    

  • Intels anti AMD provisions kill intel itself.

  • the guy who drove that is probably so stoned..

  • Hehe,funny... But the new bulldozer is still awesome.Here is the true performance /watch?v=8rDwXuAINJk&feature=p­layer_embedded#!

    Thats AMD's new Bulldozer!

  • is turbo on???

  • Intel = 6 Tigers

    Amd = 8 Little Cats

  • Sad.. but true :(

  • lol this video is so true, AMD=FAIL

  • Lmao so true but still a fan boi to amd nothing changed intel still to rich for my blood

  • Its not a Bulldozer, its a Backhoe, but the joke is still funny.

  • fail (unless they can produce that processor for 200 dollars)

  • faildozer

  • AMD = Slow but Strong.

    Intel = Fast but Weak.

  • @zokCraft and when do you exactly need that SLOW but STRONG CPU? And what "STRONG" in CPU world even means? Intel still do more IPC, so how is that weak? Please tell us more!

  • ha ha ha amd CATERPILAR ..... haha..

  • hahhahaah xD

  • AMD had too many things going on at one time. New CPU architecture, graphic card development, and then there's the whole APU thing. They need to recover and fast.

  • @warsmith40k Whatever fanboy they fucks us over

  • @21boxhead First, I've built systems with processors from both companies so I'm not a "fanboy". Second, they didn't fuck "us" over they fucked themselves over by bringing that piece of shit to market. Third, if you pulled your dick out of your mouth once in a while maybe you could think with the right head.

  • @warsmith40k they fucked us over overrated piece of shit FX lol what a fucking joke and yes also fucked themselves over as well and last fuck you eat dick.

  • @21boxhead Repeating an insult back with far less eloquence...go troll someone in your own league.

  • @warsmith40k yeah OK whatever faggot fuck you eat dick

  • @21boxhead Keep going, prove how stupid you are.

    

  • DIDNT LIVE UP TO THE HYPE

  • Yeah. We will see how funny this is when we start getting $500 Intel ATOM CPUs. Because they can. The consumers have no choice.

  • There's nothing to be happy about with the failure of BD. This just means that Intel corners the market, and can drive prices wherever they want. AMD failing = bad for everyone. I'm still really interested in seeing how the quads perform.

  • LOL, that´s still faster than a sandy bridge x)

  • Fail... Find a BD, then put it in a video.

  • I guess INTEL can relax and celebrate now.

  • Comment removed

  • AMD is too much ahead of the software. The software is absolutely not optimized for multi-threading, let alone module architecture, and in the future GPGPU.

    The FX is the CPU for tommorows software, the Intel procs for todays software.

  • @bartjebeltegoed that comment is full of brain farting shit.

  • hàhàhàhàhà my tourtle runs more faster than this bulldozer LOL

  • yes...its like AMD

  • LOL, that was great! I'm getting one if they ever get more stock. But, that's one hillarious video... lighten-up people

  • best AMD Metaphor ive seen

  • @21boxhead Agreed

  • AMD FAILDOZER

  • H@H@H@H@H@

  • hahaha

  • :o ohh they meant that kind of bulldozer

  • LMAO

  • its bad enough to not show the cpu but to make matters worse thats not even a damn bulldozer! -_________-