Your Opinion: Bulldozer vs. Sandy Bridge

[87dtna]

I doubt bulldozer will see 2010. I also still doubt it will be compatable AM3. If it is compatable with AM3, I predict a serious let down on the performance. Similar to that of the original gtx400 fermi's when first released which were suppose to ''crush'' the 5k series of ATI.
AMD needs a full revamp of architecture and a new socket, having compatability with old hardware I think keeps their new products from performing well. I heard awhile back that bulldozer really needs more than 938 pins. I mean look at intel, they have 1366 pins for a reason. So again, I think it's gonna be a huge performance let down compared to even nehalam let alone sandy bridge if it remains compatable with AM3.

 

[El Gappo]

Yeah.. They have clearly said 2011 numerous times but you can't help but dream

It's going to be AM3r2 whatever that is.. No missing pins maybe? Backwards compatibility with am3 cpu's on the new board but no bulls on the old boards I'm guessing.

 

[spynoodle]

Yeah.. They have clearly said 2011 numerous times but you can't help but dream

It's going to be AM3r2 whatever that is.. No missing pins maybe? Backwards compatibility with am3 cpu's on the new board but no bulls on the old boards I'm guessing.

Well, even 941 pins (that's the max, right? Is it 942?) isn't much better than 938.

 

[El Gappo]

God knows. Could not even be square

 

[StrangleHold]

All I know is, AMD is being shut mouthed about it ths time. Not runing their mouth like they did with the Phenom I, then turned out to be nothing but 4 brisbane cores on a monolith chip. So maybe its a good sign.

 

[87dtna]

God knows. Could not even be square

LOL, I'd love to see a round CPU.....or maybe an octagon would be cool

All I know is, AMD is being shut mouthed about it ths time. Not runing their mouth like they did with the Phenom I, then turned out to be nothing but 4 brisbane cores on a monolith chip. So maybe its a good sign.

Yeah maybe, but I doubt it. I've lost faith in AMD.

 

[spynoodle]

LOL, I'd love to see a round CPU.....or maybe an octagon would be cool

Well, with Magny Cours we've got rectangle down *checks off of list of odd shapes* I would personally love a triangle.

 

[FuryRosewood]

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardwa...mpaign=Feed:+bit-tech/all+(bit-tech.net+feed)

...ouch looks like OCing on sandy bridge will be pretty damn near impossible except for unlocked multi chips

 

[87dtna]

Yeah thats only for socket 1155 versions, first sentence on there.

 

[spynoodle]

Yeah thats only for socket 1155 versions, first sentence on there.

But do you know how much that still sucks? Socket 1155 = ALL CHEAP VERSIONS OF THE CHIP TILL MID 2011!!! I'm pissed now. Part of the whole reason a lot of us buy Intel is because of their superior overclockability! What's this crap all about????? If they hate overclocking this bad then apparently they hate profits too, because they're not going to get a lot pulling this kind of crap.

 

[87dtna]

True. We'll just have to stick with the I7's until prices come down on the good stuff. I don't see I7's being obsolete for several years yet.

The way I see it, having so many cores is like having 50mb/s internet service. Sure you have the possibility of downloading that fast, but you are limited by the server you are downloading from anyway. Same thing with cores. We have CPU's with 6 cores now, soon 8 soon 12.....but nothing except our CPU benching tests utilizes more than 4 cores right now anyway and for awhile yet as tons of things can't even utilize more than a dual core right now. An I7 is still fairly futureproof at this point.

 

[StrangleHold]

Almost hilarious

 

[Twist86]

Easy to fix this issue...don't buy the chips the limit and they will stop asap. Liter all the sites with this info to help idiot buyers to not buy them.

 

[spynoodle]

True. We'll just have to stick with the I7's until prices come down on the good stuff. I don't see I7's being obsolete for several years yet.

The way I see it, having so many cores is like having 50mb/s internet service. Sure you have the possibility of downloading that fast, but you are limited by the server you are downloading from anyway. Same thing with cores. We have CPU's with 6 cores now, soon 8 soon 12.....but nothing except our CPU benching tests utilizes more than 4 cores right now anyway and for awhile yet as tons of things can't even utilize more than a dual core right now. An I7 is still fairly futureproof at this point.

I'm still pissed, though. What would possess them to do this? They've kept market dominance for around half a decade and they think somehow disabling overclocking will help them? Who comes up with this &&*^*&^*&^!!!!!?????

 

[bomberboysk]

I'm still pissed, though. What would possess them to do this? They've kept market dominance for around half a decade and they think somehow disabling overclocking will help them? Who comes up with this &&*^*&^*&^!!!!!?????

The enthusiast market is only a small amount of their business. Intel is banking on having the better chip and being able to beat amd clock for clock, plus intel is a master at marketing, just look at netburst.

 

[Drenlin]

I'm going to laugh if Bulldozer somehow ends up wiping the floor with them. AMD's chipsets are currently much better for enthusiast builders(imo), so if overclocking is gone and Bulldozer is faster, they may very well lose that whole market. Not that it would hurt them much, but still...

 

[87dtna]

How exactly are AMD's chipsets better? And what are you smokin?

 

[FairDoos]

well I feel that amd is getting ahead of themselves here. I mean they had the 12 core magny cours but those are extremely expensive and not as efficient as could and should be. Intel has always dominated the market of cpus and Bulldozer wont change it. Intel is being smart. Get the new architecture down and then increase cores. AMD is going to flop. AMD has weaker architecture anyway. If they are worse at 40nm then Intel is at 45nm just wait. Intel has THE most features in their cpus and are really top notch. Intel forever

Lol fail fan boy you have no idea what your talking about no shoo..

 

[Twist86]

I'm still pissed, though. What would possess them to do this? They've kept market dominance for around half a decade and they think somehow disabling overclocking will help them? Who comes up with this &&*^*&^*&^!!!!!?????

Greed and the fact AMD can't touch them yet. The only solution is to make sure Sandy bombs on sales but sadly the overclocking market vs main stream is tiny in comparison. Its like the graphic vs gameplay...most of us that remember GREAT games want gamplay but the mainstream want graphics more then anything.


I plan to go AMD next upgrade...but that will be 2 years easily and I might overclock to 3.6ghz to stretch it longer if possible.

 

[FuryRosewood]

The enthusiast market is only a small amount of their business. Intel is banking on having the better chip and being able to beat amd clock for clock, plus intel is a master at marketing, just look at netburst.

their going for rock solid reliability, as usual, and to be totally honest, i think this is probably a good way to ensure data gets in and out of the machine intact...