1329 replies to this topic

[As8s]

I'm renting a suite for the first month of the game and playing it on this. The jumbotron in the Cowboys stadium is 180 feet wide, 71 feet tall, and made up of millions of LED's.

Edited by As8s, 17 June 2012 - 09:20 AM.

[SJ SCP Wolf]

And some dude played gears of war on it.

http://www.engadget....-360-during-do/

Edited by SJ SCP Wolf, 17 June 2012 - 09:59 AM.

[Servocicero]

what about this?

http://www.gamebaz.c...om/?a=i&i=23695



I still have one sitting around, and it worked great for Ace Combat a few years ago.

[sumdumfu]

Vulpesveritas, on 17 June 2012 - 07:14 AM, said:

One reason is A: Do they have an AM3 processor already perhaps? b : They are at the $125 price point and are looking for something faster than an FX-4100? C: A or B and are looking to upgrade to Vishera or Steamroller when they come out?




And if anyone actually bothers to look at my thread, Intel gets performance wins for stock speed advantages at most price points. However, with no Intel e-retailer listings for unlocked CPUs sub-$200, AMD has an advantage for anyone willing to overclock. Then that $150-175 sweet spot has AMD rather nicely, with the FX-6200 being quite a decent gaming chip just about on par with an i3 at stock in low threaded games, doing a bit better in multithreaded games, with multitasking capabilities on par with an Ivy i5, and then the FX-8120 which is a great value chip for multitasking and hard number crunching.

www.pricewatch.com my friend. 2500ks for $165.

[Vulpesveritas]

sumdumfu, on 17 June 2012 - 03:04 PM, said:

www.pricewatch.com my friend. 2500ks for $165.

Few things.
1. From only one website is it available from.
2. It's an OEM CPU, not a retail box. Note how all the CPUs I listed are CPU box items? Had I gone for OEM shipping, they would have been different. Like this for $100 for example; http://www.newegg.co...N82E16819103994
Or this over the 965; http://www.newegg.co...N82E16819103893
etc.
3. Starmicro, the actual seller at $165 for that OEM CPU, has mixed to poor reviews for the most part, and is not one of the larger trusted internet retailers. (like Newegg, Tiger Direct, Amazon, etc.) So it may be more risky buying from them. Also customer service is questionable.

[Odins Fist]

"ARS TECHNICA" "Bulldozer shows a significant reduction in single-threaded performance relative to the Phenom II. So great is the drop that even when run in multithreaded mode, the eight concurrent threads on Bulldozer can't keep up with the Phenom II's six threads, or even an Intel chip's four depending on the model they are designed to compete with (almost all)." "These are bad results for AMD. The FX-8150 is more expensive than the Phenom II X6 1100T (was) "good luck finding an 1100 Thuban", yet in typical desktop workloads its performance is no better, and sometimes even worse".
.
Don't take my word for it, I didn't write it.
When the results were in and all the fanboys were crying about Windows 7 being the cause of Bulldozer's poor showing, that's all I had to know when considering a so called upgrade to Bulldozer, I decided to wait for Piledriver, and will wait to see how it stacks up. I did the same with the original Phenom, I passed, and was glad I did, went straight from Athlon 64 x2 6000/6400+ to a Phenom II x3 720 Heka, clocked 3.8 Ghz and unlocked to x4, for $99.00, then sold them to customers in brand new builds when they were $79.00, when AMD has a winner, they have a winner, when they have a mediocre chip, they have a mediocre chip... I'm still waiting to see just how Piledriver stacks up, and it will determine what I buy for personal use in the future (GAMING)... B.T.W., have seen a 2011 socket 3820 4.8Ghz 24/7, seen em run at 5.0Ghz as well... A little warm, and pricey.
.
"IF" the day comes that AMD doesn't make any money for me, then that's the day they get dropped, I don't see it happening for building non gaming internet surfers, but if they keep putting out mediocre chips as a new release, then it's time to jump ship for gaming, regardless of brand "loyalty", and the last time I check neither "INTEL" or "AMD" was loyal to me, they are simply both non feeling corporations, who's only purpose is to make money.... Ethics debate aside, i'm going to go with what works, and what puts food on the table.
.
I hope by some miracle that Piledriver or Steamroller will be priced low and perform like a boss, it would be good for business.
On a side note, AMD is all I have used for gaming since 2008, so i'm not an intel fanboy.
.
The only advice should be... "BUY" what works for you, don't buy what "DOESN'T"...

[Argon3]

Sweet review and a shameless bump

[Vulpesveritas]

Odins Fist, on 17 June 2012 - 05:04 PM, said:

"ARS TECHNICA" "Bulldozer shows a significant reduction in single-threaded performance relative to the Phenom II. So great is the drop that even when run in multithreaded mode, the eight concurrent threads on Bulldozer can't keep up with the Phenom II's six threads, or even an Intel chip's four depending on the model they are designed to compete with (almost all)." "These are bad results for AMD. The FX-8150 is more expensive than the Phenom II X6 1100T (was) "good luck finding an 1100 Thuban", yet in typical desktop workloads its performance is no better, and sometimes even worse".
.
Don't take my word for it, I didn't write it.
When the results were in and all the fanboys were crying about Windows 7 being the cause of Bulldozer's poor showing, that's all I had to know when considering a so called upgrade to Bulldozer, I decided to wait for Piledriver, and will wait to see how it stacks up. I did the same with the original Phenom, I passed, and was glad I did, went straight from Athlon 64 x2 6000/6400+ to a Phenom II x3 720 Heka, clocked 3.8 Ghz and unlocked to x4, for $99.00, then sold them to customers in brand new builds when they were $79.00, when AMD has a winner, they have a winner, when they have a mediocre chip, they have a mediocre chip... I'm still waiting to see just how Piledriver stacks up, and it will determine what I buy for personal use in the future (GAMING)... B.T.W., have seen a 2011 socket 3820 4.8Ghz 24/7, seen em run at 5.0Ghz as well... A little warm, and pricey.
.
"IF" the day comes that AMD doesn't make any money for me, then that's the day they get dropped, I don't see it happening for building non gaming internet surfers, but if they keep putting out mediocre chips as a new release, then it's time to jump ship for gaming, regardless of brand "loyalty", and the last time I check neither "INTEL" or "AMD" was loyal to me, they are simply both non feeling corporations, who's only purpose is to make money.... Ethics debate aside, i'm going to go with what works, and what puts food on the table.
.
I hope by some miracle that Piledriver or Steamroller will be priced low and perform like a boss, it would be good for business.
On a side note, AMD is all I have used for gaming since 2008, so i'm not an intel fanboy.
.
The only advice should be... "BUY" what works for you, don't buy what "DOESN'T"...

Pretty much. Though real life tests show the FX processors to be nowhere nearly that bad. A number of quite viable benchmarks disagree for multithreaded applications. IPC fell no where near as far as Ars Technica was implying in that. On average, bulldozer is 5-15% slower clock-for-clock core-for-core versus Phenom II based on all the reviews and benchmarks I have read.
Such as Passmark:
http://www.cpubenchm...8150+Eight-Core (scroll down till you find that 1100t)
Guru 3D: http://www.guru3d.co...essor-review/20
HardOCP: http://www.hardocp.c...rmance_review/2
http://www.hardocp.c...rmance_review/5
Anandtech also disagrees, although it seems that their site is down at the time of this reply...

Anyhow. Piledriver (in Trinigy) has already been proven to be faster then Llano IPC by 5%, while being more power efficient. And with Llano more power efficient and having higher IPC than Phenom II, that is a decently good thing. Not to mention desktop Vishera likely getting architecture tweaks and getting L3 cache. And coming at 4ghz+ at stock, it's looking at least... competitive if chips come out at the current bulldozer prices.

Edited by Vulpesveritas, 17 June 2012 - 06:51 PM.

[As8s]

yea I had seen that.

[Vulpesveritas]

Updated to $150. May go higher tonight depending on mood.

[CynicalCyanide]

Check out http://www.hardwares....com/page/power

They're easily the best one stop site for PSU reviews. (Since they actually test the PSUs instead of reading the box specs like half of 'reviewers' do. See: http://www.hardwares...com/article/410 "Why 99% of Power Supply Reviews Are Wrong").

And to anyone thinking of skimping on their PSUs, here's a reason not to:

"the “reviewer” gave the product a “Gold Award” to a 750 W power supply that burns if you try to pull more than 450 W from it."

Don't burn the rest of your hard earned money along with it.

[cipher]

LOL, why do you have a Rosewill (Newegg's house brand) listed? They pull from a variety of manufacturers, so you never truly know what you're getting. Sometimes it's a solid manufacturer, sometimes not.

[Catamount]

That's no longer true, Cipher. Rosewill units today are basically always Super Flower units, and almost always highly rated.

Rosewill Green, Hive and Capstone units represent some of the best value on the market.


Don't take my word on Vuples' PSU recommendation though; here's a review of it's slightly larger cousin (bold mine):

http://www.jonnyguru...Story5&reid=266

Quote

With the Capstone 750W unit, Rosewill has become a brand name to take notice of. Gone are the days when the words "house brand" meant something like Deer or Powmax. This unit is efficient, powerful, and extremely well performing. It is as good as almost anything else out there I could name. I do wish it were at least semi-modular, and was a bit cheaper, but that's just about all it has going against it.

You'll find similarly glowing reviews for basically all of Rosewill's PSUs. At worst, they're decent units at ultralow prices, and at best, they're very good units and very good prices.

Edited by Catamount, 18 June 2012 - 05:33 AM.

[cipher]

Catamount, on 18 June 2012 - 05:32 AM, said:

That's no longer true, Cipher. Rosewill units today are basically always Super Flower units, and almost always highly rated.

Ah, thanks. I didn't know they switched to only Super Flower (Golden King), which is a decent manufacturer.

[cipher]

Catamount, on 18 June 2012 - 05:32 AM, said:

That's no longer true, Cipher. Rosewill units today are basically always Super Flower units, and almost always highly rated.

cipher, on 18 June 2012 - 05:39 AM, said:

Ah, thanks. I didn't know they switched to only Super Flower (Golden King), which is a decent manufacturer.

I did some updated research on Rosewill and it's only the Capstone line of their power supplies that's almost guaranteed to be made by Super Flower as per http://www.anandtech...w-80plus-gold/6

The other series of their power supplies still vary. An example is the Hive series from Rosewill which is made by Sirtec (High Power) as per http://www.anandtech...ill-hive-550w/4

So I'm not wrong. It's a good thing we can find out the *real* manufacturers behind each Rosewill model from in-depth review sites. So this hasn't changed since the Rosewill brand was launched. They seem to stick with the same manufacturers for each series, so the Capstone line Vulpe linked is fine, but other lines shouldn't be high on the recommendation list.

Also, Vulpes, you might want to add info about the 80 Plus certification for those who don't know: http://www.plugloads...erSupplies.aspx

Edited by cipher, 18 June 2012 - 07:15 AM.

[Vulpesveritas]

Believe it or not, I do actually search for OEMs... and reviews on PSU lines and such.
The only one that I don't know the quality of really is that CWT OEM of that Corsair 420w PSU to be quite honest... and I wish I knew it.
Beyond that, updated with the chart.

Edited by Vulpesveritas, 18 June 2012 - 11:33 AM.

[cipher]

Chart looks great.

[Vulpesveritas]

updated with OEMs.
Edit: Updated to $175
Edit 2: Updated to $200
Edit 3: Added three new lower power use options, updated where I noticed things I forgot.
Edit 4: Added in my recommended percentages.
Edit 5: Linked CPU and GPU Guides

Edited by Vulpesveritas, 18 June 2012 - 10:07 AM.

[Homeles]

Please do the world a favor and don't use Passmark.

Anyways, an i5 3570K can be had for $229 or less, making the i5 2500K obsolete.

Edited by Homeles, 18 June 2012 - 10:18 AM.

[Vulpesveritas]

Homeles, on 18 June 2012 - 10:18 AM, said:

Please do the world a favor and don't use Passmark.

Anyways, an i5 3570K can be had for $229 or less, making the i5 2500K obsolete.

The 2500k still overclocks higher, and is faster at said high overclocks, given Ivy is only 5-10% faster.

And why not use passmark? It shows the overall multithread capabilities of a processor.

Which in turns shows closer to the real life performance of a processor than some random single threaded processor.

And it has a convenient chart which I can show all the processors on at once.