-Fran-
Glorious
- May 3, 2007
- 9,256
- 2,634
- 44,640
[citation][nom]tpi2007[/nom]2. AMD is in deep trouble. I have a Q9550 at stock (and these E0 overclock very well, to Core i5 750 levels on stock voltage), and it was a bit embarrassing to see their flagship 970 at 3.5 Ghz be the next in line in the graphs. This just proves that the current Quad Core line from AMD is really only competing on price, because architecturally they are on par with the Core 2 Quads @ 45nm. Intel just stopped producing any faster variants and moved on, while AMD is still there, two years late, producing higher clocked versions. If I overclock my Q9550 to 3.5 Ghz I will probably have equal or better performance. As I said, it's embarrassing even to me, let alone for AMD, to see it laid out bare in the graphs. At current prices, AMD's best quad-core line is essentially dead. I hope they come up with something soon though. Only people already on an AMD board will consider these if the price doesn't change soon.[/citation]
I beg to differ, my friend. AMD might not have a clock per clock win, but their P/P ratio IS good. A Phenom II X4 955 c3 stepping can run @4Ghz with no sweat, and there is when it triumphs over Core i5 on this gen. I have a 965 c3 (cause there were no 955 c3) running @3.9Ghz on a 890FX MoBo (wasn't lucky to get stable @4Ghz). I can tell you it beats any C2D (have a friend running one @3.8Ghz and I beat him on benchies and gaming, thanks to the IMC and bigger PCIe bandwith is my guess). Even more, if you would like to play "risky", you could get a Phenom II X2 555 and unlock it to get a free 955, so I really think AMD ain't lost at ALL in the P/P battle. Maybe clock for clock and efficiency, but not pure P/P; they still game on that area (they must or they'd really be dead =/ ). Even more when you add MoBo's into the mix and all the goodies you get for your buck.
[citation][nom]tpi2007[/nom]3. For the price, I predict the i5-2500k is going to be a best-seller. Only 11$ more expensive than the non-k version and excellent performance with unlocked multiplier; another best-seller for those who want 4 cores, the best performance and save the maximum amount of cash is the i5-2400. 300Mhz base clock faster than the 2300 for only seven bucks more, when the difference upwards is only 200Mhz and 100Mhz and with bigger price differences. Overall, it's a very welcome nice step up, and I do understand their strategy for overclocking, it might upset those super-value seekers, but hey, unlocked processors just got a lot cheaper, right ? I think the disadvantages are clearly outnumbered by the advantages, and still more platforms to come which allow more overclocking. My only gripe is with QuickSync for the reasons I stated above, I hope it's just a software problem, otherwise it is useless to many, many people.[/citation]
I have a little objection there. It's not "unlocked" (from what I undertand), it's only a little feature they give you so they can charge you more instead of getting it from factory and/or tweaking it yourself. They could charge you full price for that little headroom without having to do much more than not using the lock; a gimmick if you like to get a cheap shot at your wallet. I just hope ASUS and friends get some sort of cheap unlock/bypass like in the P4 Presshots era. And, you can't have both of the best worlds; I need more info on this one, but MoBos equipped with the H67 won't be aimed for the upper-mid segment, right? So bye bye real value; graphics switching on the Desktop should be considered too... With all the energy going to discrete graphics these days, a little save here and there could make a difference IMO.
Still, I can't ignore mere performance; they ARE fast. Hellish fast. Intel did a great job on that department. Hope AMD takes note on the bad things from SB and make a better product. Don't care if it's perf' king, just make it go fast and make it P/P king. Let me keep my rig over 60FPS with v-sync on and make more devs use APP/CUDA. I don't want to lose another "3DNow" thanks to "Evil" wrong doings.
Cheers!
I beg to differ, my friend. AMD might not have a clock per clock win, but their P/P ratio IS good. A Phenom II X4 955 c3 stepping can run @4Ghz with no sweat, and there is when it triumphs over Core i5 on this gen. I have a 965 c3 (cause there were no 955 c3) running @3.9Ghz on a 890FX MoBo (wasn't lucky to get stable @4Ghz). I can tell you it beats any C2D (have a friend running one @3.8Ghz and I beat him on benchies and gaming, thanks to the IMC and bigger PCIe bandwith is my guess). Even more, if you would like to play "risky", you could get a Phenom II X2 555 and unlock it to get a free 955, so I really think AMD ain't lost at ALL in the P/P battle. Maybe clock for clock and efficiency, but not pure P/P; they still game on that area (they must or they'd really be dead =/ ). Even more when you add MoBo's into the mix and all the goodies you get for your buck.
[citation][nom]tpi2007[/nom]3. For the price, I predict the i5-2500k is going to be a best-seller. Only 11$ more expensive than the non-k version and excellent performance with unlocked multiplier; another best-seller for those who want 4 cores, the best performance and save the maximum amount of cash is the i5-2400. 300Mhz base clock faster than the 2300 for only seven bucks more, when the difference upwards is only 200Mhz and 100Mhz and with bigger price differences. Overall, it's a very welcome nice step up, and I do understand their strategy for overclocking, it might upset those super-value seekers, but hey, unlocked processors just got a lot cheaper, right ? I think the disadvantages are clearly outnumbered by the advantages, and still more platforms to come which allow more overclocking. My only gripe is with QuickSync for the reasons I stated above, I hope it's just a software problem, otherwise it is useless to many, many people.[/citation]
I have a little objection there. It's not "unlocked" (from what I undertand), it's only a little feature they give you so they can charge you more instead of getting it from factory and/or tweaking it yourself. They could charge you full price for that little headroom without having to do much more than not using the lock; a gimmick if you like to get a cheap shot at your wallet. I just hope ASUS and friends get some sort of cheap unlock/bypass like in the P4 Presshots era. And, you can't have both of the best worlds; I need more info on this one, but MoBos equipped with the H67 won't be aimed for the upper-mid segment, right? So bye bye real value; graphics switching on the Desktop should be considered too... With all the energy going to discrete graphics these days, a little save here and there could make a difference IMO.
Still, I can't ignore mere performance; they ARE fast. Hellish fast. Intel did a great job on that department. Hope AMD takes note on the bad things from SB and make a better product. Don't care if it's perf' king, just make it go fast and make it P/P king. Let me keep my rig over 60FPS with v-sync on and make more devs use APP/CUDA. I don't want to lose another "3DNow" thanks to "Evil" wrong doings.
Cheers!
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram