We can only hope... This lack-luster release not only hurts AMD but also hurts us consumers. Now Intel can justify throwing a $600 price tag on their chips...

AWESOME! I could not stop laughing!!!!!


I prey that this guy will not make a new version of the COD video... :D


Pity, what Hitler said reminded me of the days my AMD 386DX40MHz was the fastest thing in the market (runing Falcon 4.0) :(

~S~

Very painful when a FX-8150 OC'd to 4.8Ghz performs ~25% worse in ARMA II (CPU dependant game) then a i5 2500k at stock speeds, and about 50% worse then a OC'd 2500k...
Doesn't look like they'll do that well in the servermarket either with their high powerusage and mediocre performance.

Pity really as it would be nice to see Intel pressured so Sandy Bridge and Sandy-E/Ivy Bridge CPU's would get pricecuts.

Cant fault you on that for hopeful optimism, but by that time Intel will be light years ahead again, Ivy Bridge is out 1st quarter 2012 and this time next year they will be optimized even more ... I'm really sorry to see AMD get left behind like this.

I've been building my own PC's since 1990 now and and have swung back and forth between Intel and AMD as the performance or even the price per performance (bang for buck) dictated, but Bulldozer working worse than current gen AMD high end processors is nothing but a complete embarrassment, it wouldn't be so bad if they hadnt been shouting from the rooftoops how this CPU release was going to topple Intel I7's the past year or so.

Lets face it, the multicore CPU market is hard to sell to, and AMD have messed this up royally.

Will be interesting to see some FSX benchmarks though, after FSX SP2 that sim can sort of use up to 24 CPU cores, but its the raw speed of each Bulldozer core that is the major disappointment here, its all very well having long pipe lines (as Bulldozer seems to have done) but SB shorter pipelines gets more work done per clock cycle ... its all about efficiency and in this area it looks pretty certain this Bulldozer release ... optimizing or not is a Lemon.

Sorry mate, one of my best friends is a die hard AMD guy and he sounded in shock when I spoke to him on the phone just now.


Bottom line is, we all hoped Bulldozer was gonna be the killer they claimed it would be, its been delayed enough without waiting years more for optimisations, AMD need to start from scratch IMHO ... this really does mean no price drops for Intel Sandy Bridge parts and they can charge what they like for the forthcoming SB-E and Ivy Bridge.

No competition is bad news for us consumers :mad:

I cracked up when he said, all those who bought Sandy Bridge please get out :)

When Falcon 4.0 came out I remember having a Pentium II @ 400 Mhz so I guess you mean Falcon 3.0 ;) I remember having a 386DX 33 back when 3.0 was released but upgraded to a 486DX 50 after it was released...

Ahh, chip nostalgia...

To not end up as a complete Intel FB I did run AMD:s from the 1.33 T-bird to the Athlon 64 3000. I was the Core 2 Duo that made walk the broad path again :)

I think that AMD have been too ambitious with Bulldozer, especially when there's not much in the way of software that is "truly" multi-threaded. I think the Bulldozer generation chips will go the way of the PhysX card … it’s a really good design in terms of thinking ahead, but there’s very little software out there to take full advantage it now and the current Intel line of CPUs can do more.

My first foray into flight sim was actually an Amiga 500 with half a meg of ram, it came with a basic Flight sim called Bob Dimmermans (I think) FA-18 Interceptor ... wow, all of a sudden I was defending the US and making carrier landings and shooting down Migs, I only wanted the Amiga to sort of do a data base for all my CD's an vinyl records.

This was unheard of.

After that I bought a PC from a guy in Aberdeen, Intel 33MHz with 2 MB (yes 2MB of ram) and a hard drive so small it would not hold a modern days OS swap file, but that got me into Falcon 3.0, Fleet Defender and lots of others.

Have been building my own ever since.

Quite possible, could be that AMD took a gamble with multi threading taking off, but it hasn't, (hence the firing of a CEO of theirs recently?) not even in our flight sim gaming world, right now 4 cores are more than enough and it will take years for software developers (especially Flight Sim) to catch up.

I still feel sort of sick inside for all those that put their faith in AMD's outrageous claims for Bulldozer, including the guy in this thread who had "waiting for Bulldozer 8150 in his sig" AMD has really let not just them down but all of us ... they were the only competition and now they have played their ace, we now know they have been bluffing for a long time.

He he, we are getting old ;) Started on the Spectrum myself with "Fighter Pilot". I have actually saved a little list of all my computers to not forget them. Home built since the P75 :)

Year CPU Memory GPU
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1982 ZX Spectrum 48kb ???
1985 286-12 512kb ???
1989 386Dx-33 1Mb 1Mb SVGA
1992 486Dx-50 2Mb Trio64 LB
1994 Pentium 75 4Mb Matrox Millenium I
1995 Pentium 120 8Mb Matrox Millenium I
1996 Pentium 166MMX 16Mb Matrox Millenium I / 3dfx Voodoo
1999 Pentium 2 400Mhz 64Mb ATI Rage Pro / 2x Voodoo 2
2001 AMD Athlon Thunderbird 1.33Ghz 512Mb Geforce 3
2003 AMD Athlon XP 2000+ 1,6 Ghz 1Gb Radeon 9800 Pro
2004 AMD Athlon XP 3000+ 2,166 Ghz 2Gb ATI X800 Pro
2006 Intel Core 2 Duo E6700 2.66 Ghz 4Gb Geforce 8800 GTX
2008 Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 3.33 Ghz 6Gb Geforce 275GTX
2011 Intel Core i7 2600k 3,4 Ghz 8Gb Geforce 580GTX

Some day I will get back to AMD I hope - but not on the first gen Bulldozer at least :)