Added: 6 months ago
From: camwilmot
Views: 95,301
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (401)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • 1. Grab it

    2. Run fast as shit

    3. ???

    4. Profit!

  • amd is for budget, Bulldozer is also not designed to run for games. It is designed for a server. but i agree that the extreme series from intel is way to expansive my persenal preference is a i5 2500k it runs better for games than a I7 2600k

  • i dont understand why these bulldozers perform so badly nevermind the sandy bridge cores these 8-core bulldozers sometimes even underperform the 4-core phenom-2's

  • @hazik619jericho because most desktop applications are not multithreaded to 8 threads, if they used say 2 threads than phenom would win because of windows' outdated thread scheduleing; bulldozers have 8 bulldozer cores which equal 4 modules that are not 2 complete cores

  • @dli7319 ok so you mean that the 8 core bulldozer are actually 4 core(or eight pseudo cores) ,8 threaded.

    Waiting for the performance desktop versions of the fusion apu's hope they make a good mark.

  • @hazik619jericho think of it like 4 true cores and 4 partial cores, unlike hyperthreading , apu are slow

  • 2500k beats out or ties the comparable amd bulldoser processors in a games and apps that arent dependent on crazy high threaded processors period intel makes better processors and thats why amd isnt competing with them anymore

  • 3600 MHz 8 cores , for €240 wtf? why the fuck less cheap than all the intel proccesors?

  • @007pieke and it is better :P

  • 2600K

  • Apparently AMD cheated with the cores, these are fake. X4 version has really 2 cores and 4 logic, X6 has 3 cores and 6 logic, X8 has 4 cores and 8 logic cores. Which makes it that AMD makes a 4 core processor from Bulldozer which is sold as a 8 core processor and it has the performance of intel core i5 2500K so AMD is equal to intel but then it looks as it is more expensive. I have an AMD and I will stay with it. The job they do is good enough!

  • @megadog103 I will stay with amd as they are better bang for the buck and i game so i save on processor because i want powerful graphic cards. The only thing i didn't liked on the bulldozer is that they brough up the fx just to sell even not being as good as the fx name used to be back in the day it ate intel's for breakfast, that was a desperate move, really disappointing. Also the FX has really 8 cores but they have to share stuff in 4 modules otherwise TDP would be off the scale

  • @megadog103 Wrong. It has as many core as AMD state but 2 cores have shared front end fetch, decode and L2 Cache.

    Normally the front end and L2 Cache isn't shared per core but in this case it is thus making it slower VS 2 cores that don't share.

  • Stock cpu fan = amd fail

  • @THEREVERify

    Intel stock cpu fans are also rubbish...

  • I'm not trolling or bashing. In fact I am getting an AMD FX chip (because its in my price range and better then the i3 4core I currently got). But just wondering. Why is it basically on par with the i5? And not doing a lot of the things it says it was going to do?

  • @JasonFthecaptain Wow where did you acquire this magical 4 core i3? Surely you don't mean 4 physical cores, perhaps 4 logical ones?

  • @pk4490 It came with my dell inspron 580. I'm not sure if physical or not I never mess with the processors unless I have to (which I never had to with this PC). but that what it says on my hardware settings.

  • @JasonFthecaptain Well what model of i3 is it? As far as I know there isn't an i3 with 4 cores but who knows, sometimes OEMs like dell get uniquely branded stuff

  • @pk4490 says 3.2GHz if that's what your ashing. I don't know any thing else I threw out the box and the info is coming right from my hardware settings.

  • @JasonFthecaptain In computer > system properties what does it say?

  • @pk4490 Intel(R) Core(TM) i3 CPU 550 @3.2GHz and there is 4 in the Processor tab of device manager.

  • @JasonFthecaptain Yeah device manager will show 4 cores whether they are physical or logical. You don't have 4 cores, you have 2 that do hyper-threading so it shows up as 4

  • HEY FANBOY IDIOTS, Grow a brain, stop playing games, get your ass to school, get off moms basement, get a JOB, buy your own house and a real car. Then you can get a REAL girl inside a REAL car instead of watching porn and driving a fake one. Then, AMD vs INTEL wont matter anymore. Gaming rigs? LOL! I'm waaaay too old for reading this shit. FACT: Pros use AMD64/Linux. Fanboys use Wintel trying to play crappy games faster. How much $ have you made with your rig? Exactly. ZERO. So, grow up morons!

  • @crazywaterz

    you damn right

  • As long as AMD can handle any game to date and future games to come, it honestly does not matter. When it comes to games, it's primarily the GPU. Bulldozer is more for future proofing for Win8 and of course resource heavy applications.

    Also, the only people who honestly care about benchmark winning are Gurus. A Gamer like myself will always look at "Bang for the Buck" and Longevity of my CPU. Take my current CPU, it's been around for 5-6 years and still runs games today, flawlessly.

  • Nowdays the "BULDOZER" was calling "FAILDOZER" :) People exepted too mutch from it, and it diesnt shows that HIGH performe that they where excepting from it.(i know its in the Guinis, but still its a bit fail)

  • @hope00hope i have heard it called dilldozer

  • 4 core unused ...... its not for game lol , go Phenom II X4

  • @luffyzoko it only uses 4 cores cuz the software only uses 4 cores. You need to make the software to run off all 8 then you get better performance.

  • @DarkCalmor

    yes its for Hyper-Threading but in video games its not necessary :D

  • Interesting game, the guy is moving in real time almost.

  • intel is in for a bumpy fall

  • what case is that

  • I'm a satisfied AMD user for years, and if there's one disavantage for their chips, it's the power consume (and temperature). Hope they can improve that someday.

  • Everyone knows intel is asways gonna pwn but amd for the price of a intel core i5 u can get Like this Or phenom x6 1090t Maybe better idk but FUCK INTEL

  • was reading on the net somewhere that there is a registry fix for the BD chip that gives it better performance.

  • The true potential of these CPU's will become apparent with Win8 which will take advantage of the double pipelining and FPU system that AMD has incorporated which Win7 does not recognize, so in tests it "sees" only 4 cores, and even then it doesn't take all the new infrastructure into account. By the time Win8 comes out of course new cpus will be out by both Intel and AMD, but this one will still hold it's own for a long time to come.

  • lol mortifersoldat prove that amd is faster... cause no benchmark show that amd is faster then intel.....

    Intel is always faster 4 cored intel versus 8cored amd Intel Wins.. by over 200%

    and why is intel expensive?

    because they got the performence. hold longer. and are better material then amd so AMD is not good but Intel is

  • @mypet33 ur funny seing as amd actualy lasts longer then intel also... what most people dont see is that the intel cpu's are only 4 cores, thus meaning that u will have to replace it in a few years the amd ones are 8 cores, therefor meaning u dont have to change it for like another 10 years... also it will perform better then cuz it takes advantage of te 8 cores duhhhhhhhhh!!!!

  • these are my people!

  • U guys argue too much. AMD is cheaper and faster than Intel - not to say intel sucks ass, but way overpriced when you get the same performance with 1/2 the price from AMD. I'm definitely digging the box they had set up there; anyone know what it is?

  • @mortifersoldat same performance? bro bulldozer was a bunch of bullshit. it bare barely hanged with intel's 2008 yes 2008 intel core i7...and you're saying amd is cheaper? lol the $220 i5 2500k beats the $300 8150!

  • hahahaha epic fail.... look at 1:29 it shows a graphic glitch.... 

  • and also dispite the fact I don't want to save up for like 3-6 months for an intel system which gaming wise you won't notice a difference than an amd platform I basicly don't have to save up for, leaving out the fact I'm poor at this point of time

  • and all in all intel would be more for office anyways I admit for rendering software its much better...

    Gaming wise you won't notice much of difference since the eye only catches about 25-30 fps and you only need 60 fps to bottle frame dips.. and it will take like 4 more years till we need better cpu's anyways that's how the market goes.. there are architechtures already which aren't on the market because it will drown the market forever

  • To say .. intel fan boys are deep in heart apple lovers..

    Fed by commerce and hype to blind to see it.. My AMD's never failed on me for the past 12 years so why should I switch... to get raped in the wallet because I want the most expensive..

    Yes I am mad at this fail, still I keep faith. really don't mind it intel fan boys are just douches which live on their parents sack and will die of loneliness

    and starvation because their extreme cpu was so expensive

  • Like saying AMD needs my money more than intel does.. Seeing intel gets more than enough from Macintosh... And really Apply saved intel's buisiness.. if mac stayed with motorola intel would've been cheaper than amd now anyways.. mac is feeding the technology of intel ..

    So who cares in just matter of time they will be competing again..

    And also IF I ONLY HAD 1400 to spend on intel I would.. till that time I remain amd fan boy and I don't care for this fail I really don't

  • As soon as intel gets affordable I will switch, but I rather live my life in a dungeon of a basement than being intel fan boy ever.. .I don't mind AMD failing this time... They actually invented the TRUE dual cores while intel was still glueing cores together.. they were the first ones to invent the true dual core.

    And all in all both of brands got enough awards... I just dispite the fact intel cares more about name rather than price.. sure 8150 fails but I'm still gonna buy it I don't mind

  • Comment removed

  • seriously, 850W power supply? is that for the bulldozer?-)

  • Faildozer

  • @phil2011100 it rapes your wallet too.

  • @ scyphe Just accept the fact that Orochi is completely irrelevant for desktops. It was designed for servers. That's why it isn't a fail at all. And even on desktops it has its strengths. The comparisons I have seen so far also show that Bulldozer is often faster than its predecessor. It can be even twice as fast with AVX/FMA support. Stop spreading such FUD. Being a fanboy doesn't make you credible either. Clock speed is also irrelevant. It simply depends on the architecture.

  • @avynian I'm actually not a fanboy like you. My fave CPU was my Opteron 165. Anyway, ICP is irrelevant, now Clock speed is also irrelevant. What is relevant? Brandname recognition? And why do you go on and on about how Orochi is irrelevant? For whom? Then why did AMD bother releasing the FX-series? And this youtube clip was ALL about gaming/desktop performance on the new Bulldozer-based FX-8150. You're in the wrong place. If you want do discuss server chips, go somewhere else. FX-8150 is FAIL!

  • @avynian lol rabid AMD fanboy still trying to worm his way out of the fact that this new architecture completley sucks. Server, desktop.. who cares.. it SUCKS, period. I understand you think IPC and ClockSpeed are not important anymore, and this probably explains why you are alone in thinking that this CPU is good LOL. Keep living in denial son, meanwhile the rest of us will enjoy computing in the real world.

  • @ChristFallen You are pathetic. Still spamming and trying to claim BS. I'm asking who is the fanboy. It's not me. ;) Bulldozer definitely doesn't suck. That are just excuses of ignorant Intel fanboys. Accept the truth, BD is a completely new core architecture that scales much better than the competition. That's the basic point. Period. The rest is just about tweaking you will see in future silicon and software support.

  • @avynian haha your superchip has now turned into a budgetchip just like i predicted 6 months ago. You can pick up the top model bulldozer for 140 pounds now in UK LOL.

  • @ChristFallen You still have no clue. The top Bulldozer model is listed for over $1000. The top FX costs here over €200. That's in the price range of i5 2500 / i7 2600. I don't see what's wrong with that. Obviously you don't know what a budget chip is like. They normally are listed for less than $100. However, from an economic point of view, Zambezi is just irrelevant because Orochi is a server design. But thanks again for another cheap troll attempt.

  • @ scyphe Yes, the rest of the world moves on. But not the way you think. BIOS improvements, software optimizations, OS Support, etc. You should never interpret too much into launch reviews. Bulldozer is faster than its predecessor and can even outperform the competition in several scenarios. Stop spreading FUD! Orochi was not designed to be a processor for gamers. A little advice, if you want to play games, buy a fast GPU. ;)

  • @avynian Do you HONESTLY believe BIOS improvements, software optimizations and OS Support will make the FX-8150 outperform the 1090T/1100T at the same clocks? I mean, Windows 8 (which will supposedly be patched for the Bulldozer) isn't coming until the end of 2012 at which point it will be obsolete. You are so delusional it's just silly. And please explain to me what Orochi was designed for (since it's described as a performance desktop part).

  • @avynian Just accept the fact that AMD failed miserably with Bulldozer as far as desktop performance/enthusiast CPU's are concerned. In 9/10 tests by AMD fans a lower clocked 1090T outperforms a higher clocked FX-8150. You can twist the facts any way you want, being a fanboy wont' make the FX-8150 or it's siblings any better.

  • i hope try it

  • I would never buy anything lower than an opertron or xeon

  • any processor over 4 cores its useless

  • lol only 3-4 core is actually being used..

  • FX sucks

  • Anyone noticed the artifacts at 1:29?

  • @FlowsterLive ,that is normal in dirt 3!!if the car hits a barricade artifacts will show up!has got nothing to do with CPU or GPu performance!!!!

  • why do you hate it soo much

  • *AMD sorry - fucking android

  • Why does everyone hate on AND so much? Granted they're not as prestigious as intel but they serve a function on the market as an inexpensive alternative. Your equipment is what u make of it even if you don't have the money to spend on an advanced build.

  • @rbahena82 intel is to apple as apple is to windows. expensive!

  • AMD: Another Major Dissapointment

  • @ avynian: further - On October 12, 2011 AMD released the first three FX Series Processors of the Bulldozer line and lifted their NDA on official reviews.

    The first Bulldozer CPUs were met with a mixed response. It was discovered that the FX-8150 performed poorly in benchmarks that were not highly-threaded, falling behind the second-generation Intel Core i series processors and matching or even being outperformed by AMD's own Phenom II X6, which were clocked lower.

  • Sorry avynian, you're just spreading FUD. You have some very splintered facts, mixing them up and then building arguments based on the best way you can foul your debate opponents. Meanwhile the rest of the world have moved on and found that the Bulldozer architecture is severely lacking, esp. on the client side. "Bulldozer is the codename Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) has given to one of the next-generation CPU cores". Zambezi is the codename for the desktop variants that we're talking about.

  • faildozer

  • What case is that? It's gorgeous!!!

  • One question , anyone of you saw the 990x from Intel , i saw and  i was hoping a lot more, In games I7 2600 beats 990x , And on road map of intel says the 990x its the EXTREME cpu. Inst a fail too ,when the EXTREME loses by PREMIUM ?

  • The Intel bias really pisses people off though...

    Intel loves to give the impression they are professional office workers and AMD likes to give the impression they are gamers...

  • i want that case...

  • Comment removed

  • Big faill

  • This is just sad bulldozer cant beat in i5 but only in appilations by 5% and cant even get close to i7 what till benchmarks come out people just wait....

  • Sad it's effectively only using three cores can't wait till it use the other 5 to the max then it will be AWESOME!

  • little do most know, that there is a chip that has been clock at 500 ghz. google is a wonderful thing.

  • That World OC Record at 8.462 GHz it's just for competition, not for xyz-fps on Battlefield 3...

  • what graphics card is in it?

  • Glad i got my 2500k, LONG LIVE INTEL.

  • It needs a 4.8Ghz overclock to compete with a stock 2500K and the 2600K pulls away with 8 threaded performance. Bulldozer's 8 true cores should of toppled the 2600K but that really isn't the case.

    Maybe called it Bulldozer because it's as fast as one.

  • Baaahahahaaaaa, Bulldozer tops this years list of dissapointments.

    It's a bigger letdown than DNF!

  • Comment removed

  • 2500k all the way. And I'm an AMD fanboy

  • @FriendlyDagger Well, it's out and it sucks.

  • @TortillaGaming it dosen't suck ,there just isn't any software that can take advantage of the 8 cores!

  • @iownudie108 There are many programs that do support 8 or more cores.

  • @TortillaGaming and you say you have tested the performance of the bulldozer on these programs?

  • @iownudie108 No, but i've seen benchmarks.

  • @iownudie108 by the time software comes to take advantage of all 8 cores, the software will also take advantage of all 8 threads on the Core i7 systems... and let's not forget the 12 thread i7s...

    also note that all of the Intel chips COST LESS TO MANUFACTURE as well.

    if you want another comparison, compare the 2 module, 4 core version of Zambezi against the dual core i3s... the i3s wipe the floor still...

    Give it time, if anything it's a matter of cache latency and fine tuning bulldozer....

  • @xelink if intel chips cost less to manufacture then why are they so much more expensive? Intel fanboy?

  • @SlaughteredInside intel is more expensive because your paying for the Name and not whats inside.

  • @SlaughteredInside intel pushes mutch more money in science and publicity. intel is a mutch bigger concern than amd. thats it i think, i´m a a md boy but these days... since the phenom intel is on the winner road.

  • @SlaughteredInside

    AMD 8 core Bulldozer has a transistor count of 1.2billion

    Intel 2600k has a transistor count of 0.99billion

    AMD has a larger die size

    Intel has a smaller die size

    Bigger die + more transistors = cost more to produce

    Intel do not cost any more than an AMD cpu when it comes to performance. It has been proved many times that Bulldozer sucks ass thus AMD have to lower prices to compete with lower end Intel CPUs.

    Good day sir.

  • @lolwut1337n355 This comparison is completely pointless. Orochi (FX8) == server design, SB (i7 2600) == client design. Client designs are more compact because you can omit a lot of sever specific stuff. Just compare SB and SB-E. You will see that SB-E is also suboptimal for desktop systems. Because it's a server design, just like Orochi. Btw, SB also sucks ass when it comes to graphics power. Llano runs circles around it. You see, this foolish game works also for Intel. ;)

  • @avynian I use a discrete graphic card (unlocked Radeon 6950). If I were only interested in checking e-mails and playing farmville I'd probably be happy with the crappy fusion/sb integrated GPU-core. But pulling that as an argument under a video demonstration in regards to performance and enthusiast level computing is just so sad and silly. You stick with your Fusion tech and play farmville, meanwhile I'll stick with my 2500k + unlocked 6950, SSD, fast 8GB DDR3.

  • @scyphe I don't know what you are talking about. Bulldozer is not Fusion yet. Trinity will be the first Fusion chip based on Bulldozer. But thanks for another example that you don't know anything about Bulldozer. And yes, iGPUs are crappy. But only if you know Intel. ;) Trinity's iGPU won't be far away from my HD 5750. The industry is quite sure, iGPUs are the future. Discrete graphics will disappear. But live on in your little niche world, where everyone needs high-end graphics for games.

  • @lolwut1337n355 I just got a fx8120 and Asus sabertooth 990fx the other day for $300 @ Microcenter. Sabertooth x79 alone would cost you $330 in intel flavor, another $320 for i7-3820. If you want to pay over twice as much for slightly better performance and think you got a great deal then more power to you.

  • @jandjsdaddy The 2500k outperforms AMDs best bulldozer and it's cheaper.

    Fail some more.

  • @lolwut1337n355 Nah same shit HD on all games. Intel is like alienware you're just paying for the name.

  • @Kevin323gaw Benchmarks say otherwise.

  • @lolwut1337n355 The money in my wallet vice versa.

  • @Kevin323gaw 2500k outperforms AMDs best bulldozer chip. 2500k is cheaper.

    Fail some more.

  • @lolwut1337n355 Not in my computer playboy, everything is 2 times faster. All music/files opens almost instantaneously. All my games at ultra high deff 8 cores super fast and only for a cheap $200.00 and if id like i can OC to 4.5 but what for? Don't need too. Stocks runs like a beast. " Fail some more" That can only mean one thing your a mini playboy :)

  • @Kevin323gaw You do know bulldozer doesn't have 8 "full" cores right? Thats why it fails so much compared to the old Phenoms x6 or Intel i5s

    CPU has no real impact on how fast you can open files. That's all down to how fast your HDD or SSD is.

  • @SlaughteredInside You pay for performance =D

  • @xelink loool... cost less to manufacture... feels like i7 extreme edition should be like 400 bucks instead of 1400 if you say it like that... moron...

  • @iownudie108

    why not ?? some 3D softwares and video editing softwares supports 8 cores !!

  • @iownudie108 Who bullshited you to believe this? It was tested on Gentoo Linux (where every software is recompiled) and tested under various conditions. It could not pull intels nehalem performance, was on par with 25k sandybridge (in single thread it failed), but overally it lost. And its integer performance is weak, only 2 per clock, cause they thought sse is vital for gaming. But gaming engines nearly all are either crazy singlethreaded, or use some lock to sync the threads.Its bad CPU design

  • @iownudie108 Not only the 8 core but especially of the FMA4 and XOP instructions, which no Intel processor has yet.

  • @iownudie108 you mean the 4 modules which consist of pretty much 2 half cores each. its not a real 8 core because the architecture doesn't allow it to be a real 8 core. I am an AMD fan but this is a real shame and AMD have made a huge mistake which they need to fix soon before Intel take even more advantage of the current market.

  • @iownudie108 AMD = Another Major Disappointment. Software that can't stress 8 cores? What dogshit, it doesn't benchmark shit and barely keeps up with the quad core i5 2500K. I can't believe these idiots actually would thumbs up your comment and support this dogshit architecture. youtube.com/watch?v=0x4MHUgMlO­I

  • @iownudie108 3D Studio Max, Maya 3D Realflow BOOOYAH

  • @iownudie108 yea true if you look at what the buldozwers were designed for, they were designed for server/workstations and they work very well at that i have a 6 core one in my Full HD video editing pc and its very good for the price due to the fact that preier pro cs5.5 which is what i use, uses all 6 cores, it wasnt designed for gameing !!

  • @iownudie108 wrong, there many programs that use 8 cores

  • @iownudie108 Not only the 8 cores, but the infrastructure within, Win7 cannot recognize more then half the instructions, in tests in Win8 beta, these CPU's scored way higher already, and Win7 beta is ridiculously early in development.

  • @iownudie108 Exactly the hardware develop is going other way than the software develop.

  • @iownudie108 Not true, Cinebench can utilize up to 16 cores and the i7 2600k still beats it by a fair margin. Not to mention that there isn't really 8 cores, there are four units that each have 2 effective cores, but it's not full on 8 cores. But if a 4 core i7 that's barely more expensive and consumes less power, generates less heat, and has way more overclocking headroom can beat a top of the line bulldozer in an 8 core benchmark. AMD really screwed up...

  • @ATLMember not true I have found that Intels are less stable to overclock and run hotter than my amd cpu's which run at a max of 40c with stock cooling. not to mention I can overclock my cpu with out going into my bios and have a stable overclock while still in windows.

  • @DarkCalmor Well Bulldozer runs really cool to begin with, but temperatures increase by a ton if you start OCing. Also intel chips are more stabile at high temps. I'm not trying to be an intel fanboy here, but why would anyone buy this chip. It's their new architecture but there best chip can't come close to even a 2600k. These guys are fucked when intel releases Ivy Bridge.

  • @TortillaGaming Not what I heard 

  • @CyberMcRock They lied to you.

  • 32nm architecture is currently what intel's i7's are running on for around $1000. AMD's highest end cpu the FX-8170 is less than 1/3 the price and it runs much cooler, has 8 cores so it can multitask, and has been overclocked to over 5ghz ON AIR... So saying that intel's cpus are the best is true in some ways. also, AMD's CPUs are easier to OC....

  • @andy52709 so are you saying my i7 2600K isnt a 32NM and costs around 1000$ ???

    how retarded are you? or are you just another stupid fuckup of a fanboi?

    the fx 8xxx series are kinda like phenom 1 was , hot, uses too much power, and performs like shit compared to what its been hyped to be

  • @fihthedon He probably meant 990x. 990x is $1000

  • @andy52709 You have to DISABLE AT LEAST 3 MODULES TO GO BEYOND 4.8 GHZ please do a little research before you post FX 8150 is extremely hot on air cooling go look at overclock3d net video review of bulldozer

    This and the I5 2500K is performing at the SAME level except I5 better at single threaded performance FX 8150 better on multi threaded performance BUT when you overclock both parts on AIR I5 2500K smokes this garbage cpu

    I5 2500K cheaper & more power efficient too

  • @kaaoslove I don't have ANYTHING against the 2500k, I in fact like it. Yes you were right about disabling cores to OC higher and I know that, but if I could go with ANY cpu, it would either be an i7 2600k or AMD FX-8120

  • Too bad AMD failed again and made another piece of shit CPU...

  • LMAO @ avynian. In some ways I'm impressed with your obstinate dream world where Zambezi doesn't suck. Dream on. ;)

  • amd is desperatly tryin to stay in race with intel but they compete only with mid range intel i5 processors when the top dogs of intel are way advanced for amd to catch up. But hey we like cheap stuf of amd that perform well. But amd better come up with some new technology cuz keep adding cores and increasing cpu frekfency is not gonna cut it. I mean what are they gonna do for next one 10 cores and 5.5 frekfency overclock? yea right.....

  • Comment removed

  • The new AMD 8 core is getting schooled by the 2500k even in applications that can take advantage of all 8 cores. This is before either processor is overclocked. (sandybridge overclocks WAY better on air and water)

    Sigh.

    AMD, I am disappoint...

  • my game runs like that with my atlone x3 rana 450 witha 6850 i want new cpu but for the time it has to do so im happish but damn whant one of those cpus

  • Running without 12v 4pin connector @0:54?

  • @johnbravz the 8 pin is connected so it doesnt matter

  • @johnbravz you have a 8pin connector at the left top of the board and you have a 4pin extra for like heavy overclocking, can be handy

  • @desertfox1792 its not about the number of cores. If you NEED the level of performance that the X58 platform offers, there is nothing from AMD that will deliver.

    @xeridian and that has no relevance for any of us. It was running 2 cores (1 module) and on HELIUM not nitrogen. Sad thing is even at 8GHz it would probably be outdone by a 5GHz 2600K.

  • AMD Bulldozer... like GSP said, i'm not impress by your performance! =D

  • The company that has the more popular products will always charge more, no matter how close it is it its competitors, if it is more popular, it will cost more.

    Hopefully the bulldozer will give AMD the edge pushing them to the front in both price and performance, forcing Intel to lower its prices.

  • I hate to break this to you, but I just read the first review...it's not looking pretty for AMD. The 1100T still beats the FX-8150p in a lot of benchmarks, and it's still not even close to even 2500k performance = ( this was at guru3D.

  • i am glad that bulldozer is coming out so i can get older cpus for cheap. hopefully the am3 6 cores goes under 100 bucks. maybe the i5 2500k will be 100 bucks too.

  • remark that the bulldozer works better under X86 system.

  • @monsterrun What do you mean by that?

  • @qpstrafe I watched a AMD explanation video about the engenering behind the bulldozer.

    And the engeiners said they found a way to make a cpu that runs better then any other known processors in the market, only if it runs on a X86 system. (32 bits).

    64 bits system seems to not have the same effect and the cpu seems to lose around 5/8 of its performance power. According to the engeiners.

  • @qpstrafe "AMD Cores Bulldozer and Bobcat introduction to design"

    on youtube.

  • @monsterrun ok thanks

    

  • i got the case in the fucking Glasstower :D

  • @z4z5z6 thats a Corsair Special Edition White Graphite Series 600T right

  • @jimmybigcockyou Yeah its just an awesome Case, i had to decide between the Obsidian 800D and this one.

    The 600T is much cheaper, has good Cable Management, A Good Airflow and a replaceable side Panel which can be a Grill or a Window on the Side, on the Grill you can add 4x120mm Fans. Its very silent too and it has a Fan Speed Control Tool ! (Even the Corsair H100 can be placed in it!)

  • 8.462 on helium. stable 7 on nitro

  • I have an i7 950 and I don't think I have ever used more than 2 cores! I can wait to have 8!

  • Won't see a diffrence between intel 8 core(22nm) or amd's 8 core (32nm) in gaming so Amd it will be :)

  • lab501.ro/procesoare-chipsetu.­..ozer-preview/7.Google this site, Bulldozer=FAIL!