[citation][nom]djdarko321[/nom]hmmmm another 2 core vs 4 core and 4 core vs 6 core test LMAO cmon people! and Sandy Bridge is the answer for bulldozer sorry Bulldozer will finally catch AMD up to the i7's but not sandy bridge ..... AMD need 4 cores to beat 2 and 6 to beat out ALL core 2 quads and fight the i7 930/940need more originality people to make these chips come out faster and cheaper which would in turn, help us advance and evolve more with technology[/citation]
Bulldozer's core setup is literally two cores as one. This in itself will be significantly more powerful, in principle, than Nehalem and its Hyper-Threading which only duplicates certain parts in order to aid in multi-threading.
AMD have been developing the STARS successor for years now. They're not bringing out another derivative.
Let's wait and see. For all we know, Bulldozer will be far more capable than STARS and a little more capable than the Nehalem architecture clock-for-clock even without HT, and as we've seen from Intel recently, you don't always get what you expect - Larrabee was touted as something incredibly powerful, then enthusiasm dipped when it became apparent that was not the case, and then it got killed in its present form. Until we get benchmarks on both camps, there's really no sense in predicting Bulldozer will fail.
Back to Thuban, disable Cool 'n' Quiet - the processor has independently clocked cores which switch faster than the original Phenom's implementation, but we saw how much Phenom's performance was crippled under Vista. And we've never really had a proper test to show how much of an improvement Windows 7 offers over Vista's poor scheduling system. If you don't want to disable CnQ, practice what you preach - use K10Stat and mess with the p-states and voltages. If the lowest P-State is 800MHz as with the other Phenom IIs... change it to 1.6GHz! At least reduce the opportunity for the processor to be trying to work at 800MHz.