|
BangersInMyKnickers posted:Until Autodesk actually gets off their rear end and writes their software to utilize the hardware that has been in every computer for the last 6 years, per-core performance is still going to matter tremendously. loving Autodesk. Even their newest installers suggest you disable UAC.
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2011 23:56
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 21:27 |
|
|
Yeah. Seriously, swathes of "professional" applications are basically warmed over each year and put out for a high cost, without the re-development work required to multi-thread them, or otherwise improve performance properly.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2011 13:55
|
|
|
greasyhands posted:The only time they've ever been "real strong" was due to intel's colossal misstep with the pentium4. Their 386s ran at higher clocks than Intel's... They extended the life of the Socket 7 platform at a low cost which was very popular at the time... They also introduced the first 1GHz consumer CPU.. They were strongest notably when they came up x86-64 instructions, and Intel then licenced them from AMD, and yeah, Pentium 4 was a bit of a clusterfuck with a dead end.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2011 11:45
|
|
|
Nostrum posted:More directly to the 1.13 GHz Coppermine P3s, which were absolute poo poo and severely damaged Intel's reputation. Not to mention that is was only supported on one Intel platform that used RDRAM (another of Intel's disasterous mistakes). Wait a minute, the way I remember it RDRAM was used in the early P4 platforms, which was then tossed to one side in favour of PC133, and later DDR. But the P3s were still PC133.. I did have a 1GHz P3, or was it a 1GHz P3 Celeron, either way, it used PC133, and it was absolutely awesome. I overclocked it to 1.45GHz and it was stable all day long. Infact, the only reason I replaced it was because the MSI board had.. bad caps! yay! a real shame, because the board had better loving fan control than my current board, and I'd probably use it to this day as a file server if it was still working. HalloKitty fucked around with this message at 18:51 on Mar 11, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2011 18:48
|
|
|
I stand corrected, that time when RDRAM was on P3 before the early P4s was something I forgot about..
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2011 21:57
|
|
|
Space Gopher posted:Most of the stuff people do that actually leans hard on the CPU will take advantage of more cores. MAME. Ah, I guess that's a dick move, though. Per core performance is still a huge deal.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2011 11:57
|
|
|
Bob Morales posted:Has AMD ever had a compelling laptop chipset? (Except for the current Zacate setups) Possibly only around the time Intel was pushing Pentium 4-M, because everyone knows Netburst in a laptop was a great idea
|
|
#
¿
May 18, 2011 19:00
|
|
|
If this reaches IPC similar to even Nehalem, then drat
HalloKitty fucked around with this message at 10:19 on May 25, 2011 |
|
#
¿
May 25, 2011 10:15
|
|
|
We can speculate, but personally I want to see the chips out and benchmarked by someone reliable before I write off AMD
|
|
#
¿
May 30, 2011 19:16
|
|
|
Alereon posted:One thing we don't have yet are gaming battery life benchmarks, which is one area we can expect Llano to excel. Anandtech posted:Rounding out the battery life discussion, we also tested battery life while looping 3DMark06 at native resolution (1366x768). This represents a reasonable 3D gaming scenario, and Llano still managed a reasonable 161 minutes. Considering graphics performance is a healthy step up from what Intel’s HD 3000 offers and that AMD manages double the battery life under gaming situations compared to the K53E, mobile gaming is clearly a win. 58Wh battery.. Of course, what retail machines will do will no doubt vary
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2011 20:53
|
|
|
Let's be honest though, the BAPCo thing probably is because their CPUs aren't performing all that well, and they think the suite didn't emphasise GPU performance enough..
|
|
#
¿
Jun 24, 2011 18:54
|
|
|
Bob Morales posted:..1090T.. ..it's going to be faster at.. Bob Morales posted:compression Bob Morales posted:encryption HalloKitty fucked around with this message at 13:44 on Jul 13, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2011 13:38
|
|
|
JnnyThndrs posted:Wasn't the RROD issue due to leadfree solder hassles(similar to those lovely HP DV-series laptops), rather than poor design? Or were there multiple causes? Here's a fantastic series of articles on The Inquirer about the NVIDIA issue: http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1004378/why-nvidia-chips-defective As far as I understand it, the Xbox 360 issue was mainly one of heat. At least part of that must be down to the cooling shroud, it's poorly designed - the path to the GPU is extremely high resistance compared to the CPU, so most of the air just goes over the CPU, leaving the GPU to stew ridiculously.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2011 10:17
|
|
|
karoshi posted:Bulldozer This isn't good. A CPU that is - lest we forget - closing in on 2 years old, as the comparison for AMD's not yet released, high end processor? Sandy Bridge ALREADY gives you this kind of performance for the prices AMD are claiming. Sandy Bridge IS the lower priced competition for the 980x/990x. Sad, so very sad
|
|
#
¿
Sep 25, 2011 14:54
|
|
marketing
|
Even a little before that, a lot of people I knew where getting Athlon XP Bartons and clocking them up. Seemed a solid bet at the time, for the price.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2011 09:49
|
|
|
unpronounceable posted:Bulldozer: the Nah, that award has to go to HOLOGRAPHIC DISCS. Yeah, loving industry. We were supposed to have 3TB discs that were as cheap and as throwaway as CDs by now.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 3, 2011 22:31
|
|
|
We knew that, but still, they either need to go back to the drawing board and re-market it as core = module as opposed to module = 2 cores, otherwise this is just a flat out embarrassment..
|
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2011 14:34
|
|
|
Oh dear. I still want proper reviews, but nothing we've seen is good. Edit: Just skimmed through and looked at all the images in that preview. Dear god. Worse than the 2600k all round, whilst using more power. Advertised as 8 core, yet is crapped on by a 4 core with HT. (Yes, I understand why they call it 8, and why it isn't in truth). I don't know what AMD can do now. This architecture is a dead end. drat. Bulldozer? More like a plastic toy shovel.. HalloKitty fucked around with this message at 13:10 on Oct 10, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Oct 9, 2011 17:18
|
|
|
Ragingsheep posted:If Bulldozer matches an 2500k in terms of performance and price, is that enough? Not really, because by current numbers, it's using a LOT more power to do less. Unless the price is significantly less, you'd have to an AMD fanboy to buy AMD chips for mass desktops (power concerns) or your gaming desktop (limits your GPU performance, as well as sucking down more power, meaning the thing will be a drat space heater combined with the GPU). I think Brazos is the only thing AMD has going right now, which isn't saying a huge amount. Having a chip that's marginally better than Atom in all ways is a low-end space to play in. HalloKitty fucked around with this message at 07:55 on Oct 11, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Oct 11, 2011 07:51
|
|
|
If the 2700k is just a 2600k with a slight clock bump, you'd be an idiot to buy a 2700k. 2600k becomes the new 2500k recommendation, as you said. Where does AMD fit into this? It doesn't 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 11, 2011 21:16
|
|
|
movax posted:I wouldn't have an issue tossing a chip like this into a system for a non-gaming, non-techie family member if the price for the mobo and CPU was right. I would, because it will suck down power and be hotter and noisier than just giving them an i3 or i5. Llano, on the other hand is a potentially good chip to recommend for a home PC, if half decent graphics are required. However, I couldn't in all conscience recommend Bulldozer to anybody. I guess you can tell who's really loyal to AMD after this, if they end up with one of their high end chips and want to overclock it. That's just a punishing amount of power use and heat to get rid of, just to play catch up. HalloKitty fucked around with this message at 09:16 on Oct 12, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2011 09:02
|
|
|
Here's a wild card: Hardware Heaven's review http://www.hardwareheaven.com/revie...revolution.html Seems completely off to me, can anyone spot the problems with it? I'm more inclined to believe AnandTech, but it's interesting.. HalloKitty fucked around with this message at 14:51 on Oct 12, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2011 14:49
|
|
|
Even given a tie with the 2600k (mainly in gaming) in that review, which is by far the most positive review I've seen; it is still not amazing, given the power consumption. AMD also shouldn't have tried marketing it as "8-core". I knew when I first read about Bulldozer modules that they might try that poo poo - and it wouldn't work. Well, they tried and it didn't. HalloKitty fucked around with this message at 15:45 on Oct 12, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2011 15:04
|
|
|
Bob Morales posted:Any chance that it Bulldozer works a little better with AMD GPU's instead of NVIDIA? Anand used a 5870.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2011 15:40
|
|
|
WhyteRyce posted:Just in case you were still interested in Bulldozer No worry of that. Can barely believe anyone bothered.. That's just tragic. A BSOD shouldn't normally be triggerable by a game any more, especially since it'll be running without admin rights. It must have something to do with the CPU itself, or the way the kernel is assigning threads to the CPU. Delayed, power hungry and therefore hot, uncompetitive even for the price, over-marketed (8-core!) and now buggy.  indeed
HalloKitty fucked around with this message at 20:50 on Oct 19, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2011 20:48
|
|
|
Setzer Gabbiani posted:Given all the bad press, I'm surprised the 8120 and 8150 are both sold out on Newegg It must be AMD fanboys. Regular uninformed people aren't going to be chomping at the bit to buy the latest CPUs anyway. Choice quotes from newegg, please note, these rated the CPU 5/5: newegg guy posted:Cons: Portal 2 is currently broken with this CPU. It BSOD's before the menu loads up another newegg guy posted:Cons: Hasn't put Intel out of business yet yet another guy on newegg posted:Cons: I own zero stock in AMD. You can see the trend. I don't like Intel's anti-competitive business practices either, especially back in the P4 days. So many machines were built with Pentium 4, when Athlon 64 was clearly superior at the time, but when it comes down to it, you have to recommend the best CPU for the money, and Intel is winning by every metric other than use as a space heater. HalloKitty fucked around with this message at 21:03 on Oct 19, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2011 20:57
|
|
|
ClosedBSD posted:What the gently caress would cause a problem like this? Did AMD leave out whole x86_64 instruction sets or something? Seeing as they invented AMD64, I can't see how. Probably related to the fault mentioned on the previous page. quote:The CLOCK_WATCHDOG_TIMEOUT bug check has a value of 0×00000101. This indicates that an expected clock interrupt on a secondary processor, in a multi-processor system, was not received within the allocated interval.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2011 15:47
|
|
|
Bob Morales posted:http://www.tomshardware.com/news/ivy-bridge-processor-release-22nm-3d-transistor,13753.html pow! right in the kisser A liver-destroying evening ahead for AMD employees (apart from the ATI ones). Everyone else, awesome new CPUs coming! HalloKitty fucked around with this message at 22:19 on Oct 20, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2011 22:17
|
|
|
A 22nm Ivy Bridge in the hands of the consumer this year is so far beyond what we could have expected, that Intel will just be miles out of reach of AMD, and they are already comfortably in the lead. Leap Ahead™, indeed. HalloKitty fucked around with this message at 22:51 on Oct 20, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2011 22:47
|
|
|
Surely one of the biggest problems with IE6 is not that it sucked in one way or another, but that it helped proliferate a million proprietary piece of poo poo ActiveX controls, which probably locks many a person into using old poo poo today. Also a great vector for spyware! ActiveX is older than that, I guess, but I'm still going with blaming IE6's continued support of this and other IE only controls as being a barrier to alternative browsers in many situations for so long. HalloKitty fucked around with this message at 23:44 on Oct 20, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2011 23:42
|
|
|
At this point, I guess IE6 is probably slightly less disappointing
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2011 23:54
|
|
|
Juriko posted:IE6 is so reviled because millions of business machines where all trapped on windows2000 with nothing but IE6 available Of course, I forgot about it that. I can't see any reason why Microsoft left it like that. I guess they just shrugged and said Windows 2000 is unsupported. Are there really frameworks in XP that make IE7/8 possible that couldn't have been ported to Windows 2000? We have the same situation now with XP and IE8, so there's a small chance we'll run into exactly the same problem down the line. That said, it seems Windows 7 has a relatively decent adoption rate now. Although I'm sure there enough business that won't ever budge. Edit: hold on a minute, this derail is going too far. Bulldozer. They're working on a new stepping. Then again, it's fairly obvious that they'll be trying to improve it as they go along. They've got a lot of improving to do.. HalloKitty fucked around with this message at 12:20 on Oct 21, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2011 12:15
|
|
|
AES-NI is a nice point, I'll grant you... but Sandy Bridge and Westmere already have AES-NI. Still, there might be a certain price point at which Bulldozer makes sense for an encrypted file server on a budget, or something.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 24, 2011 11:11
|
|
|
Those benchmarks are interesting, because they show it being competitive a fair few times. It seems like if your application is threaded enough, and can abuse some of the new features, Bulldozer is pretty reasonable (although as you said, hot/power hungry). Back in the world of desktops and gaming, lightly threaded scenarios, as most of us will notice - Bulldozer's design was a bad bet.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 25, 2011 08:52
|
|
|
This site shows them as being pretty similar in performance. You'd probably want to leave it enabled, because it will have dedicated RAM instead of using your system RAM. That, and the drivers are probably better for games. Additionally, here's a nice comparison from AnandTech, comparing 5470m and Intel 3000 HD. The CPUs are a little different (the Macbook there having an advantage), but the 5470m is completely comparable to the 6370m. But yes, at this level, discrete graphics stop being such a great bullet point. HalloKitty fucked around with this message at 09:05 on Oct 27, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2011 08:45
|
|
|
Far from universally. In the world of MMOs, World of Warcraft creaks in at using 2 threads, I believe, one for the game, one for the audio. Crysis didn't scale meaningfully past two cores, if I recall correctly. The first game I recall that abused many cores was Supreme Commander. I've seen GTA IV dole out abuse to at least 3 cores. You'll see a bit more of that as time goes by, because the Xbox 360 has 3 CPU cores.. If it was a stronger chip, we would have good 6-way scaling by now, since each 360 core is HT capable. Still, the key seems to be performance per core if you're looking at gaming. Which AMD fails at, even though they're trying to target gamers. HalloKitty fucked around with this message at 13:56 on Oct 27, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2011 13:53
|
|
|
Alereon posted:HardOCP has an article up comparing overclocked gaming performance between Bulldozer and an i5 2500K. Unsurprisingly, Bulldozer loses, badly. This should shut up those few fanboys who rave about how great it overclocks. Worse, Bulldozer looks almost unplayable in most of the graphs. It spikes up and down like mad.. that would be a horrible experience. In one of the tests, the 2500k has a minimum of about 15fps - not great, but not unplayable, where Bulldozer hits <5fps, which would be horrendous.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2011 23:13
|
|
|
Alereon posted:AMD is actually working pretty closely with ARM. While I don't think they'll make ARM CPUs, there's been talk that they'll produce a licensable GPU block for ARM CPUs, much like PowerVR. Such as Imageon, which was sold to Qualcomm and became Adreno?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 6, 2011 01:54
|
|
|
Abandon x86? What happened to AMD's "x86 everywhere"? I think this is a mess, and there's no doubt that Bulldozer in its current state not at all competitive, but they're not a million miles away.. They need to hang on and squirt out a competitive CPU. This is kind of sad. I hope they don't drag ATI down with them, because there's no doubt ATI has been producing quality cards at an excellent price point. ATI must make money, they have a wide spread of market share - look at the Xbox 360 and the Wii, ATI GPUs..
|
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2011 16:14
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 21:27 |
|
|
WhyteRyce posted:I love tech analysts Yeah, I thought that was comical. Intel would be free to dominate at any price. x86 isn't going anywhere anytime soon.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2011 16:34
|
|