Quad core..phht Amd has a new 8 core desktop cpu

[tuolumnejim]

I know you Intel guys will go "so", but I really like AMD granted I haven't use an Intel chip since they had the "new" 300mhz unit.

Just got this in my email from newegg.

CPU Link
Main ad link

[Merc1138]

Yeah we know. By the way, it's garbage. Go try reading some benchmarks compared to the previous generation of AMD CPUs, and Intel's current line.

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=487677

[Darklyte27]

Yup more isnt always better
Im running a sandy bridge 2600k with a ssd drive

[Us3rName]

I've been out of the loop

wasn't there some type of bottle neck in terms of processing capabilities compared to what the storage devices can do?

basically can we utilize the full potential of the processor?

[Merc1138]

I've been out of the loop

wasn't there some type of bottle neck in terms of processing capabilities compared to what the storage devices can do?

basically can we utilize the full potential of the processor?

Huh? I'm not sure what storage device speed has to do with the CPU, that would be application specific. Again, using the full potential of the processor depends on whether or not the applications are multi-threaded, even then they need to be optimized to use the total number of cores available(or the OS needs to be able to assign individual processes to each core, which modern OS's can do). So you need multi-threaded applications, or be multi-tasking to take advantage of the additional cores. Neither scenario is something that would really apply to a desktop PC(unless you're trying to play battlefield 3 and encode video at the same time or something).

Plus, individual SSD drives these days can easily do 300MB/s read 250MB/s write(and some cheating is involved with benchmark applications writing out just zeros with specific block sizes to hit the max of about 550MB/s read and 550MB/s write), that's not including PCI-e based SSD options or SSDs used in a RAID volume.

[Us3rName]

like I said.

out of the loop.

When 64bit OS were starting to roll in was when there were talks on hardware related bottle necking.

this was when 1gb of ram was $100+

I just bought 2gb for $60 last week!

[tuolumnejim]

Were some writers saying the same thing about quadcore cpu's being unuseable? Look where we are now, give these a little time to work the bugs out and these are going to be awesome.

[paul0660]

Competition is a very good thing.

If there were no Apple, we would still be typing c:/ to start the day.

If there were no MS, top of the line would be a 150mhz at $3000.

[choprzrul]

Question: Which company's processor will benchmark better, a $300 AMD or a $300 Intel? Assuming same bus speeds, memory speeds, etc.

.

[nmerced]

Question: Which company's processor will benchmark better, a $300 AMD or a $300 Intel? Assuming same bus speeds, memory speeds, etc.

.

Right now its Intel but just barely. I'm pretty sure Intel would be coming up with a new line in the near future. The pissing race is never ending.

[Merc1138]

Were some writers saying the same thing about quadcore cpu's being unuseable? Look where we are now, give these a little time to work the bugs out and these are going to be awesome.

Yes, but when the single core performance of the 6 core CPU(AMD) runs circles around the 8 core CPU(AMD), and the 8 core CPU(AMD) is just barely on par with Intel's middle-end 4 core CPU(sandy bridge) even with mutlithreaded applications, AMD screwed up. Then there is the matter of the power requirements for those additional slow cores. There are no "bugs to be worked out", AMD launched a bad product and is relying on it's marketing team to overcome the mediocre/bad reviews. Hence the garbage like the world record overclock that required 3/4 of the CPU to be disabled to even achieve with no stability or performance testing done.

Right now its Intel but just barely. I'm pretty sure Intel would be coming up with a new line in the near future. The pissing race is never ending.

Intel already scheduled their new line(Ivy bridge) to launch in March.

[choprzrul]

Question: Which company's processor will benchmark better, a $300 AMD or a $300 Intel? Assuming same bus speeds, memory speeds, etc.

.

It might be a forum faux pas, but I am answering my own question as it made me curious enough to go look.

Using Passmark's benchmark tool scores, I compared 2 identically priced processors. AMD prices didn't go to $300, so I used their highest priced processor from Newegg. I then looked up an Intel processor that matched the price and cross referenced both of them on Passmark's page.

For your review:

$189.99 Intel Core i5-2400: Passmark CPU = 6137

$189.99 AMD Phenom II X6 1100T: Passmark CPU = 6306

CPU Benchmarks

In a world where money is no object, Intel wins the speed wars. I don't live in such a world. So, if I have $189.99 to spend, and I want the fasted processor for that price, AMD wins.

If I have a pocket full of cast to blow, Intel wins.

.

[Merc1138]

It might be a forum faux pas, but I am answering my own question as it made me curious enough to go look.

Using Passmark's benchmark tool scores, I compared 2 identically priced processors. AMD prices didn't go to $300, so I used their highest priced processor from Newegg. I then looked up an Intel processor that matched the price and cross referenced both of them on Passmark's page.

For your review:

$189.99 Intel Core i5-2400: Passmark CPU = 6137

$189.99 AMD Phenom II X6 1100T: Passmark CPU = 6306

CPU Benchmarks

In a world where money is no object, Intel wins the speed wars. I don't live in such a world. So, if I have $189.99 to spend, and I want the fasted processor for that price, AMD wins.

If I have a pocket full of cast to blow, Intel wins.

.

Umm, from the site you linked:

AMD FX-8150 Eight-Core Score = 8628 $279.99 on newegg
Intel Core i7-2600 score = 8965 $299.99 on newegg
Intel Core i7-2600k score = 10020 $314.99 on newegg

I don't consider a product announced last year, and launched 10 months after Intel released the i7-2600(with half the cores)that can't beat it in performance(but costs a whole $20 less) to be worthwhile. When you're talking about a $20 price difference, it's hardly an issue of money being no object.

[choprzrul]

Umm, from the site you linked:

AMD FX-8150 Eight-Core Score = 8628 $279.99 on newegg
Intel Core i7-2600 score = 8965 $299.99 on newegg
Intel Core i7-2600k score = 10020 $314.99 on newegg

I don't consider a product announced last year, and launched 10 months after Intel released the i7-2600(with half the cores)that can't beat it in performance(but costs a whole $20 less) to be worthwhile. When you're talking about a $20 price difference, it's hardly an issue of money being no object.

I was just trying to use an exact apples to apples example based solely upon price. As the price difference increases, so does the benchmark values, as demonstrated in your example.

.

[natrab]

And FYI, Microcenter still has the 2600k for $279. That's where I got mine.