AMD CPU and Platform Discussion: Ryzen Might Be...Good? *knocks on wood*

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Serious Hardware/Software Crap > AMD CPU and Platform Discussion: Ryzen Might Be...Good? *knocks on wood*

BlackMK4: Aug 23, 2006; wat.; Megamarm

Edit: redacted

# ¿ May 20, 2011 23:12

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 29, 2024 08:16

BlackMK4: Aug 23, 2006; wat.; Megamarm

Corvettefisher posted:

Rumors have it the first bulldozers will be coming out on the 12th

Rumors have had release dates for years.

# ¿ Oct 3, 2011 19:13

BlackMK4: Aug 23, 2006; wat.; Megamarm

I can barely believe they released this thing.

# ¿ Oct 12, 2011 06:39

BlackMK4: Aug 23, 2006; wat.; Megamarm

Probably because everyone knows Linux already has compatibility issues with a lot of hardware. :v:

# ¿ Oct 16, 2011 06:36

BlackMK4: Aug 23, 2006; wat.; Megamarm

FISHMANPET posted:

Holy poo poo.

Question: Why should I buy BD when Phenom chips for $100 less show better in bechmarks?
Answer: FUTURE!

Seriously, there are no words.

quote:

7. Why would I buy a $275 Bulldozer cpu when the $170 1090t seems to equal its performance or actually do better at every benchmark and game we've seen?

Adam Kozak, Product Marketing Manager, AMD - We understand our customers make purchase decisions based on how they use their PCs, and in many cases our AMD Phenom� II processors are a great (purchase).

For those ready for a more modern architecture, who want a desktop for high resolution gaming and to tackle time intensive tasks with newer multi-threaded applications, the AMD FX processor is a great upgrade.

WHAT?

# ¿ Nov 29, 2011 19:30

BlackMK4: Aug 23, 2006; wat.; Megamarm

Thinking about it now, what did you expect? AMD has nothing to gain by admitting a flop and everything to lose by doing so. It gives people words from their own mouth to hang them with, it'll get more media attention, etc.

# ¿ Nov 29, 2011 19:49

BlackMK4: Aug 23, 2006; wat.; Megamarm

Faceless Clock posted:

That's just with Llano. Sandy Bridge doesn't see much benefit from faster RAM. So it is precisely marketing bullshit, albeit bullshit that does have a performance impact when you have a specific choice of components.

And really, who goes Llano without discrete graphics for gaming, then buys faster memory for the performance impact? Don't everyone raise your hands at once, now...

Laptops.

# ¿ Dec 1, 2011 00:29

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 29, 2024 08:16

BlackMK4: Aug 23, 2006; wat.; Megamarm

Faceless Clock posted:

These benchmarks are not for laptops.

But even if we go out on a limb and assume the impact is the same, having to buy new RAM to extract the most out of your brand new laptop is not exactly appealing.

Edit: And as pointed out a lot of laptops don't even support faster RAM, so...

A fair amount do, example being (Intel side) the Lenovo X220 which officially only supports up to 1333, however:

quote:

The performance numbers from upgrading the memory was insane. We saw performance gains from 6% to 86% depending on the benchmarks with the largest performance gains coming from graphics intensive games. Who would have thought that the area that gained the most was the frame rate in games? If you want to get better performance out of the Intel HD Graphics 3000 GPU on your Sandy Bridge laptop this is more than likely the best way to go about it. You can literally feel and see the difference in everything that you do on the system, so this is an ideal upgrade for those that want 8GB of memory and better performance.

http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1599/10/
Kinda blows the ' Sandy Bridge doesn't see much benefit from faster RAM.' thing too.

BlackMK4 fucked around with this message at 10:38 on Dec 1, 2011

# ¿ Dec 1, 2011 10:36

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Serious Hardware/Software Crap > AMD CPU and Platform Discussion: Ryzen Might Be...Good? *knocks on wood*