28 replies to this topic

[Bloodshed Romance]

For today on NEWEGG there is a daily sale on the AMD FX6100 (3.3ghz 6 core processor)

it is $119.99 today plus a free 1year extended warranty..

http://www.newegg.co...-962-_-Homepage

[Oderint dum Metuant]

Phenom II 965 is still $10 cheaper and better.

[Blackfire1]

uh..... that not a true six core mate. Its one of those bulldozer hybrid jobs. :\

[Catamount]

Saying it's not a "true" six core kind of side-steps the point of bulldozer. In bulldozer modules, most hardware is replicated, and the chip's capabilities reflect genuine multicore design. The fact that the cores share a small amount of hardware doesn't change that. That's why Bulldozer is a fantastic CPU line when extreme multithreading is needed, at least for the price (there are certainly things that cost vastly more that still best it, but good luck finding better performance/$ than the 8120 in multithreaded apps).

The problem with Bulldozer is simple that the architecture is a mess, and from what I hear, Piledriver doesn't do nearly enough to fix that (if much at all). Performance per clock is still just not nearly good enough. Looking at single-threaded performance really reveals this. Load up a single Bulldozer module, and it gets all the resources of a traditional core to itself, including the tiny shared bit, and yet it still performs abysmally. That is the core problem with Bulldozer (no pun intended ).

Edited by Catamount, 17 September 2012 - 03:45 AM.

[Bloodshed Romance]

I have the FX8150 upgraded from a Phenom II x4.... this is a major upgrade.. its faster, better, and handles heavy applications very well..

i've noticed that some games that only use 4 cores, this processor actually evens it out across all 8 of its cores..
wouldn't the 6 core version do basically the same?

its still a very good deal...W

[Oderint dum Metuant]

Bloodshed Romance, on 17 September 2012 - 12:01 PM, said:

I have the FX8150 upgraded from a Phenom II x4.... this is a major upgrade.. its faster, better, and handles heavy applications very well..

i've noticed that some games that only use 4 cores, this processor actually evens it out across all 8 of its cores..
wouldn't the 6 core version do basically the same?

its still a very good deal...W

It would be a good deal, if they had no stock of Phenom II 965's.

In your case, you could have stopped at the 8120 as there is little point in the 8150. In terms of clock speed the 8150 is 200mhz faster than the x4 965 thats not a great deal of extra speed, but the IPC of the bulldozer chip is abysmal, which is why some of the Phenom II chips at their current prices are better deals than the bulldozer ones.

When stocks of phenom II dry up however...

[bikerbass77]

AMD really need to up their game. It used to be that they had decent designs but ran 2 years behind Intel for the manufacturing process (usually a generation lower chip density) but these days, they are losing on the design front as well. The whole Bulldozer series has been a disaster. The Phenom series was bad enough but if they don't do a complete core re-design soon they will completely lose the desktop market and we really need someone to keep Intel honest.

[BustaHead]

got the 6 core at superbiiz for $110.00 shipped 3 weeks ago. you can get it for $105.00 with the $15.00 off code right now.

http://www.superbiiz.com/ "crunch15"

[Agent Mohsen]

Who still buys AMD chips?

I'm not rich by any means, but I would save up for an Intel chip in a heartbeat and wouldn't be caught dead with an AMD chip these days.

[Vulpesveritas]

Agent Mohsen, on 20 September 2012 - 04:20 PM, said:

Who still buys AMD chips?

I'm not rich by any means, but I would save up for an Intel chip in a heartbeat and wouldn't be caught dead with an AMD chip these days.

Umm people who play modern games but are on a sub-$1000 budget and put their money on the more important parts first (GPU), or those who are ethical buyers.

[Barbaric Soul]

Agent Mohsen, on 20 September 2012 - 04:20 PM, said:

Who still buys AMD chips?

I'm not rich by any means, but I would save up for an Intel chip in a heartbeat and wouldn't be caught dead with an AMD chip these days.

There's nothing majorly wrong with Bulldozer chips. They are more than adequate for a gaming computer. I've built a FX6200/HD6870 system for my nephew, and own both a I7 2600k/HD7970 system and I7 860/GTX560 system. Video card differences aside, I couldn't tell a difference between the Intel systems and the FX6200 system.

And about the sale, personally, I'd spend the extra $20 for the FX6200.

Edited by Barbaric Soul, 20 September 2012 - 06:08 PM.

[Az0r]

Barbaric Soul, on 20 September 2012 - 06:07 PM, said:

There's nothing majorly wrong with Bulldozer chips. They are more than adequate for a gaming computer. I've built a FX6200/HD6870 system for my nephew, and own both a I7 2600k/HD7970 system and I7 860/GTX560 system. Video card differences aside, I couldn't tell a difference between the Intel systems and the FX6200 system.

And about the sale, personally, I'd spend the extra $20 for the FX6200.

What? How could you possibly NOT tell the difference between an FX6200 paired with a 6870 and a I7 2600k paired with a 7970? It's like worlds apart. I went from an 965 phenom to an i5-3750k and my god it was night and day.

[zaku reaper]

i'm still waiting for piledriver and haswell chips to show up....interested in how the A10 chips will bench as well

actually surprised that modern games run decent enuf for the most part on my c2d e6850 with its horrid integrated gpu lol

Edited by zaku reaper, 20 September 2012 - 10:27 PM.

[Bloodshed Romance]

see stats below...
ITS AMAZING...
thanks..

[Barbaric Soul]

Az0r, on 20 September 2012 - 06:22 PM, said:

What? How could you possibly NOT tell the difference between an FX6200 paired with a 6870 and a I7 2600k paired with a 7970? It's like worlds apart. I went from an 965 phenom to an i5-3750k and my god it was night and day.

Like I said, aside from video card differences, I could not tell a difference between the Intels and the AMD FX. Sure, I got better gaming performance from the 7970 system, but the 6870 and the GTX 560 are so close performance wise, I couldn't tell a difference between the I7 860 and FX6200 systems. And when it came to normal everday non-gaming use, I couldn't tell a difference between the FX6200 and I7 2600K system. As for the performance difference you claim to have seen, I'm willing to bet that has a lot to do with other upgrades you made. For me, all three systems had/have high quality motherboards and RAM, and SSD, so all three system were on equal footing when comparing them.

Aside from benchmarking and taking into consideration the video card differences between all three systems, all three systems, including the AMD FX system, performed great.

Edited by Barbaric Soul, 21 September 2012 - 02:28 AM.

[Bloodshed Romance]

I haven't really had experiences with intel... mainly cause of the cost..
I came from the LGA775 socket with the dual core Intel Pentium D 3.0GHZ... with a Radeon 4350 (think it was XFX aswell)
when that ran outta date.. I upgraded to a HP OEM (AMD, Phenom ii X4 2.8GHZ) with 6GB RAM.. 7200 RPM drive (used today).. then shoved a XFX 6770 in it..
when that motherboard died cause it was the OEM crap.. I changed out motherboards to a Biostar 880G (AM3) with the Phenom ii x4..
then I upgraded to the 990FX biostar motherboard to get crossfire x16, x16 so I could use 2 6770s because when the HP mobo died I got a second 6770...
I then upgraded my CPU to the 8150 (was debating on 4100, 4170, 8120 and 8150.. I said screw it.. upgrade now instead of later..) because I had a friend that needed some parts to play games better...
my latest upgrade was a XFX 7970 and it is amazing...

I would have looked at an intel setup but I can't gather myself to spend $300 on a CPU when I paid $189 for my 8150.. my motherboard was like $130 which doesn't really change from AMD and Intel boards..

maybe someday i'll try out an Intel setup.. but for now.. i'm all AMD

[bikerbass77]

Barbaric Soul, on 21 September 2012 - 02:27 AM, said:

Like I said, aside from video card differences, I could not tell a difference between the Intels and the AMD FX. Sure, I got better gaming performance from the 7970 system, but the 6870 and the GTX 560 are so close performance wise, I couldn't tell a difference between the I7 860 and FX6200 systems. And when it came to normal everday non-gaming use, I couldn't tell a difference between the FX6200 and I7 2600K system. As for the performance difference you claim to have seen, I'm willing to bet that has a lot to do with other upgrades you made. For me, all three systems had/have high quality motherboards and RAM, and SSD, so all three system were on equal footing when comparing them.

Aside from benchmarking and taking into consideration the video card differences between all three systems, all three systems, including the AMD FX system, performed great.

To the doubters - one thing that really helps the AMD system is that when you pare the GPU in the AMD processor with a compatible graphics card (AMD of the same series GPU usually) the system runs them together a bit like crossfire which can add gaming performance.

On a side note the A10 APU's seem to be holding there own against Intel CPU's of the same price in multi-threading but losing out still for single core performance. There has been some suspicion that the driver or firmware that controls turbo mode that is supposed to clock up a single core as needed is not yet working and this may well change soon. It seems to be a decent upgrade for those with 2 or 3 core Phenom CPU's but if I were building a new system I would more likely go Intel. This will probably change early next month when the new APU's are brought to market (apparently APU's followed by hit is offensive).

Edited by Hans Davion, 22 September 2012 - 02:05 PM.

[Bloodshed Romance]

i'm looking forward to the A10 APUs..

[Sky Legacy]

Agent Mohsen, on 20 September 2012 - 04:20 PM, said:

Who still buys AMD chips?

I'm not rich by any means, but I would save up for an Intel chip in a heartbeat and wouldn't be caught dead with an AMD chip these days.

Um what? I play with only high end AMD chips and my comps are as fast or faster as any Intel comps. You sound ignorant, this isn't the 1990's.

[Habaneros]

Barbaric Soul, on 21 September 2012 - 02:27 AM, said:

Like I said, aside from video card differences, I could not tell a difference between the Intels and the AMD FX. Sure, I got better gaming performance from the 7970 system, but the 6870 and the GTX 560 are so close performance wise, I couldn't tell a difference between the I7 860 and FX6200 systems. And when it came to normal everday non-gaming use, I couldn't tell a difference between the FX6200 and I7 2600K system. As for the performance difference you claim to have seen, I'm willing to bet that has a lot to do with other upgrades you made. For me, all three systems had/have high quality motherboards and RAM, and SSD, so all three system were on equal footing when comparing them.

Aside from benchmarking and taking into consideration the video card differences between all three systems, all three systems, including the AMD FX system, performed great.

agree on that, since IMO people too concern in benchmark results
i agree intel hi end cpu win on very hi end system like 2x hi end gpu user, other than that, AMD still holds its value
sweet spot still need to research on each combination

and most of bulldozer problem is on Windows cannot work optimized in Zambezi architecture (since Zambezi try introduce server technology in PC world and windows is pc os in pc world LOL)
IMO when Android reach desktop OS, linux base can utilize more of bulldozer architecture than Windows
like Open CL @ Llano now?

the most intel win now is about efficiency thats why i suggest celeron or pentium for office desktop, or Llano but Llano more for home user since have HTPC advantage

1 more things AMD service user with room for upgrade for their chip that big factor for me, will give me options before dump the system
most intel user will remember 775, 1156 and 1155 saga or 1366 to 2011 if u play hi end system

but i read some where according to STEAM most user just 5670 so the market mostly not hi end system