bulldozer isnt nearly as bad as it was marketed. marketing it as a modern "fx" was a mistake from the beginning. honestly i dont know what the boys over at amd were thinking. no wonder theyre letting their marketing department go.
bulldozer is NOT an 8 core cpu and never should have been marketed as such. yes, it technically has 8 cores but this cpu is unlike anything before. its sharing resources between 2 cores, and calling it a module. i practical terms, a "8 core" is a 4 core. a 4 core is a 2 core. had they just marketed it for what it is, a core with an extra physical core, to help compete with hyperthreading. really, they "doubled" their cores while only adding 10-20 percent to the die space. its not a magic trick. you dont get 100 percent more for 20 percent
amd has a vision. the vision is true multithreading. able to work on any amount of cores. crossfire set ups that work, with 100 percent gain. just being able to dump more cpu cores and gpu cores into a computer and have the benefit be there 100 percent. in all actuality, we all want this. software always using as many cores as possible with maximum efficiency. the limits and constraints of building a modern super computer desktop would become practical. if this were to happen, amd would not only compete with intel, but be something to be feared. this is the vision. bulldozer is a step in that direction.
all i can say is its a vision i share, but dont go discontinuing that phenom line anytime soon. single/dual/tri threaded apps are very *now*
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram