newls1 Posted December 3, 2011 Author Report Share Posted December 3, 2011 looking at it in a different way. Im thinking of every end user. There are far more people who use their computer for email music and websurfing than gamers. The gamer base can't make them profitable alone. You have to look at it as sell 40000 400 dollar laptops or 200 2000 dollar rigs. Its all about money at this point and the market is shifting. This thread IS NOT ABOUT "THE EVERYDAY USER" N8, but rather us select few that want a PC to game on, and when I say "game" I mean ultra highend... Yes of course were a "small" part of the market, but still very important. PC gaming has been on a steady incline for years now, and this market segment is shifting in price range (thank god) What is "Crystal Clear" here is that AMD marketed this new chip (bulldozer) 100000)% toward the gamer who is looking for max performance/OC'ing potential/and again... max FPS, they only succeeded to accomplish partially 1 of those tasks. There whole marketing scheme proved to be a joke, and to put it nicely, there are a ton of pissed of people AND OEM's.. I love my staffie So anti FACEBOOK it isn't even funny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxim Posted December 3, 2011 Report Share Posted December 3, 2011 My first computer I built and my current desktop both use AMD processors, and though I havent delved into OCing at all since I built my first computer 6 years ago, I have always realized they are only competitive with intell in the mid level market. People see the 'top amd processor' and the price in comparison with intell and think OH OH OH LOOK AT THE DEAL IM GETTING! I remember a guy at work bought a bunch of shit for his 'Badass beast of a machine' so his brother could put it together. I asked about the processor and he said it was the best for his money, the AMD 6 cores. I laughed and asked why he didnt just get an i7 since even the i7s beat out the AMD 6 cores and his response was 'No thats only a 4 core, this is a 6 core'. (funny thing is the only game he plays is world of warcraft; a real graphic intensive game) Ignorance is bliss I guess. Honestly I dont think this will change much because AMD has been in Intells shadow for a long time and I havent thought it was going to change anytime soon. Maybe that shadow was so dark they miscounted the transistors...Yeah thats it. Only thing that WAS good with AMD was their graphic cards which at one point were top of the top. Now with the shitty 6xxx release cards thats also changed. My next build will for sure be intell and ive known that for a long time. P.S. Teach me teh overclock! First time I did it I fried my MOBO. Ugh I hate the "mine has more cores" bullshit. I work with guys at Best Buy who bought the i7-970 through an Intel deal a year or so ago. I've got the 2600K in my system. And they always have the nerve to tell me that theirs is better because it's got "12 cores". OMFG drives me up a wall. They run at stock clock speeds and don't know a thing about overclocking or the architecture, they just know that apparently 6 hyperthreaded cores = 12 cores. Customers come in and brag about their 6-core AMD rigs and I have to stop myself from smiling because they don't realize what they've got is more cors and less power than what they're using it for. Also, the 6xxx series cards weren't shitty. They added support for more tessellation in games and are much better performers when put in CrossFireX. If you're looking for a low- to mid-range GPU, the 5xxx series is more bang for the buck, but for top-end and heavy graphical needs the 69xx series is AMD's fastest cards. (5970 is in a different league due to being a dual-gpu card, it falls between the 6970 and 6990) EDIT: Also, World of Warcraft is way more CPU bound than GPU bound. Being an MMO where the largest issue is simply drawing so many players and handling all the raw calculation of spells, damage, etc. having a strong dual/quad-core CPU and a mid-to-high end GPU is the best combo for a good WoW experience. a 6-core is still overkill for processing, however. wtf is lolcats? I'd def get a fat hooker if i had to resort to that kinda thing. I feel like they'd be grateful and work harder. Also its more bang for my buck, more real estate for my dollar if you catch my drift. its like the Costco of streetwalkers. I was hoping for 150 . I was hoping she would let me put it in her butt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newls1 Posted December 3, 2011 Author Report Share Posted December 3, 2011 Here I go. I've been really into PC hardware since 2005, and that was when I was in 7th grade. To put that in perspective, that means I was 12 then and 19 now. I built my first system in '06, which was an AMD 3700+ 939, with an nForce4 SLI chipset and an amazing (at the time) Zalman cooler. 939 AMDs were the SHIT! They had a clear edge on the Pentium 4s of the time. On-die memory controllers, cooler operation, that kind of thing. I saw newls1 mentioned the FX 55/57/59 processors. Those were top-dog. Since the introduction of the Core and Core 2 processors, however, AMD has had a hell of a time keeping up. They made some poor decisions with their AM2/AM3 lines, and were outperformed by even some lower-market Intels. The problem with Bulldozer is that they designed the chip automatically with some software, whereas Intel has been doing their chips by hand. There are inherent issues with going the software route- while the software will put in everything you'd like it to, it doesn't necessarily make the most efficient design. It can't 'see' potential bottlenecks between internal components, and just does what it has to to get the job done. It's cheaper to go this route though, which is desirable to AMD...they don't have nearly the same R&D cash as Intel. It really is unfortunate that AMD has been unable to come up with competition. I've been wanting to run something from them for quite some time now, but haven't been able to find a chip to justify a purchase. Intel is running the roost for sure...the Sandy Bridge (and Sandy Bridge-E) chips are insanely fast, not to mention what's going to happen with Ivy Bridge. I'm not looking forward to paying $600 for my CPU though. Ivy Bridge is just a "tock" from the "tick" that was Sandy bridge. There have been plenty of articles about what Ivy brings to the table.. Die shrink (22nm) a slightly more optimized mem controller, and should have PCIe 3.0 hub internal. Nothing really ground breaking. Ocing should be further improved due to die shrink, but of course, us OC'ers have to keep voltage scaling in mind as 22nm MIGHT BE VERY PICKY with voltage!!! I love my staffie So anti FACEBOOK it isn't even funny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newls1 Posted December 3, 2011 Author Report Share Posted December 3, 2011 My first computer I built and my current desktop both use AMD processors, and though I havent delved into OCing at all since I built my first computer 6 years ago, I have always realized they are only competitive with intell in the mid level market. People see the 'top amd processor' and the price in comparison with intell and think OH OH OH LOOK AT THE DEAL IM GETTING! I remember a guy at work bought a bunch of shit for his 'Badass beast of a machine' so his brother could put it together. I asked about the processor and he said it was the best for his money, the AMD 6 cores. I laughed and asked why he didnt just get an i7 since even the i7s beat out the AMD 6 cores and his response was 'No thats only a 4 core, this is a 6 core'. (funny thing is the only game he plays is world of warcraft; a real graphic intensive game) Ignorance is bliss I guess. Honestly I dont think this will change much because AMD has been in Intells shadow for a long time and I havent thought it was going to change anytime soon. Maybe that shadow was so dark they miscounted the transistors...Yeah thats it. Only thing that WAS good with AMD was their graphic cards which at one point were top of the top. Now with the shitty 6xxx release cards thats also changed. My next build will for sure be intell and ive known that for a long time. P.S. Teach me teh overclock! First time I did it I fried my MOBO. Ugh I hate the "mine has more cores" bullshit. I work with guys at Best Buy who bought the i7-970 through an Intel deal a year or so ago. I've got the 2600K in my system. And they always have the nerve to tell me that theirs is better because it's got "12 cores". OMFG drives me up a wall. They run at stock clock speeds and don't know a thing about overclocking or the architecture, they just know that apparently 6 hyperthreaded cores = 12 cores. Customers come in and brag about their 6-core AMD rigs and I have to stop myself from smiling because they don't realize what they've got is more cors and less power than what they're using it for. Also, the 6xxx series cards weren't shitty. They added support for more tessellation in games and are much better performers when put in CrossFireX. If you're looking for a low- to mid-range GPU, the 5xxx series is more bang for the buck, but for top-end and heavy graphical needs the 69xx series is AMD's fastest cards. (5970 is in a different league due to being a dual-gpu card, it falls between the 6970 and 6990) EDIT: Also, World of Warcraft is way more CPU bound than GPU bound. Being an MMO where the largest issue is simply drawing so many players and handling all the raw calculation of spells, damage, etc. having a strong dual/quad-core CPU and a mid-to-high end GPU is the best combo for a good WoW experience. a 6-core is still overkill for processing, however. I agree completely..... TO ALL NOOBS OUT THERE, MORE CORES DONT MEAN SHIT UNLESS THE PROGRAMS U USE ACTUALLY TAKE AWARENESS TO THE EXTRA CORES... whoever said the 6 series GPU's suck.... go crawl back in your hole, and realize how far from the truth that is.... MAXIM... We need to meet up one day, you seem like you have your knowledge straight!!! I love my staffie So anti FACEBOOK it isn't even funny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxim Posted December 3, 2011 Report Share Posted December 3, 2011 Here I go. I've been really into PC hardware since 2005, and that was when I was in 7th grade. To put that in perspective, that means I was 12 then and 19 now. I built my first system in '06, which was an AMD 3700+ 939, with an nForce4 SLI chipset and an amazing (at the time) Zalman cooler. 939 AMDs were the SHIT! They had a clear edge on the Pentium 4s of the time. On-die memory controllers, cooler operation, that kind of thing. I saw newls1 mentioned the FX 55/57/59 processors. Those were top-dog. Since the introduction of the Core and Core 2 processors, however, AMD has had a hell of a time keeping up. They made some poor decisions with their AM2/AM3 lines, and were outperformed by even some lower-market Intels. The problem with Bulldozer is that they designed the chip automatically with some software, whereas Intel has been doing their chips by hand. There are inherent issues with going the software route- while the software will put in everything you'd like it to, it doesn't necessarily make the most efficient design. It can't 'see' potential bottlenecks between internal components, and just does what it has to to get the job done. It's cheaper to go this route though, which is desirable to AMD...they don't have nearly the same R&D cash as Intel. It really is unfortunate that AMD has been unable to come up with competition. I've been wanting to run something from them for quite some time now, but haven't been able to find a chip to justify a purchase. Intel is running the roost for sure...the Sandy Bridge (and Sandy Bridge-E) chips are insanely fast, not to mention what's going to happen with Ivy Bridge. I'm not looking forward to paying $600 for my CPU though. Ivy Bridge is just a "tock" from the "tick" that was Sandy bridge. There have been plenty of articles about what Ivy brings to the table.. Die shrink (22nm) a slightly more optimized mem controller, and should have PCIe 3.0 hub internal. Nothing really ground breaking. Ocing should be further improved due to die shrink, but of course, us OC'ers have to keep voltage scaling in mind as 22nm MIGHT BE VERY PICKY with voltage!!! Ivy Bridge is the "tick" to Sandy Bridge's "tock". Close though You've got it spot on though. Same archetecture. Much smaller transistors however, so more transistors on the same size chip could certainly lead to faster performance/higher clocks/more cores on the same size chip. Intel can also go the other way, using their newer, smaller, more efficient transistors to make smaller chips. Ivy Bridge, or at least the 22nm transistors, will likely mark their increased push into the tablet and mobile phone market. Also, I'll be interested to see what 22nm Atom processors can put out. Not so much for netbooks, their niche is nearly gone with tablets and Ultrabooks, but a 22nm Atom processor in a Windows 8 tablet would be something I'd like to see in action. wtf is lolcats? I'd def get a fat hooker if i had to resort to that kinda thing. I feel like they'd be grateful and work harder. Also its more bang for my buck, more real estate for my dollar if you catch my drift. its like the Costco of streetwalkers. I was hoping for 150 . I was hoping she would let me put it in her butt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newls1 Posted December 3, 2011 Author Report Share Posted December 3, 2011 Here I go. I've been really into PC hardware since 2005, and that was when I was in 7th grade. To put that in perspective, that means I was 12 then and 19 now. I built my first system in '06, which was an AMD 3700+ 939, with an nForce4 SLI chipset and an amazing (at the time) Zalman cooler. 939 AMDs were the SHIT! They had a clear edge on the Pentium 4s of the time. On-die memory controllers, cooler operation, that kind of thing. I saw newls1 mentioned the FX 55/57/59 processors. Those were top-dog. Since the introduction of the Core and Core 2 processors, however, AMD has had a hell of a time keeping up. They made some poor decisions with their AM2/AM3 lines, and were outperformed by even some lower-market Intels. The problem with Bulldozer is that they designed the chip automatically with some software, whereas Intel has been doing their chips by hand. There are inherent issues with going the software route- while the software will put in everything you'd like it to, it doesn't necessarily make the most efficient design. It can't 'see' potential bottlenecks between internal components, and just does what it has to to get the job done. It's cheaper to go this route though, which is desirable to AMD...they don't have nearly the same R&D cash as Intel. It really is unfortunate that AMD has been unable to come up with competition. I've been wanting to run something from them for quite some time now, but haven't been able to find a chip to justify a purchase. Intel is running the roost for sure...the Sandy Bridge (and Sandy Bridge-E) chips are insanely fast, not to mention what's going to happen with Ivy Bridge. I'm not looking forward to paying $600 for my CPU though. Ivy Bridge is just a "tock" from the "tick" that was Sandy bridge. There have been plenty of articles about what Ivy brings to the table.. Die shrink (22nm) a slightly more optimized mem controller, and should have PCIe 3.0 hub internal. Nothing really ground breaking. Ocing should be further improved due to die shrink, but of course, us OC'ers have to keep voltage scaling in mind as 22nm MIGHT BE VERY PICKY with voltage!!! Ivy Bridge is the "tick" to Sandy Bridge's "tock". Close though You've got it spot on though. Same archetecture. Much smaller transistors however, so more transistors on the same size chip could certainly lead to faster performance/higher clocks/more cores on the same size chip. Intel can also go the other way, using their newer, smaller, more efficient transistors to make smaller chips. Ivy Bridge, or at least the 22nm transistors, will likely mark their increased push into the tablet and mobile phone market. Also, I'll be interested to see what 22nm Atom processors can put out. Not so much for netbooks, their niche is nearly gone with tablets and Ultrabooks, but a 22nm Atom processor in a Windows 8 tablet would be something I'd like to see in action. Yup, thanks for having my back there, I for some reason reversed them I love my staffie So anti FACEBOOK it isn't even funny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
n8ball2013 Posted December 3, 2011 Report Share Posted December 3, 2011 I dont look at it from a gaming perspective seth. Gaming rigs don't make me money. As much as id like to throw together a beast build Im so burnt out by the time I get home that the last thing on my mind is building another one. You can help me with the 17 biulds I got on tap though lol THERE IS NO BUILD LOG! 1998 Chevy Silverado ext cab Alpine CDA-9887 4 Team Fi 15s 2 Ampere Audio TFE 8.0 2 Ampere Audio 150.4 3 Digital Designs CS6.5 component sets Dual Mechman 370XP Elite alternators inbound! 8 XS Power d3400 6 XS power d680 Second Skin Stinger Tsunami Wiring Sky High A Real Voltmeter not a piece of shit stinger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxim Posted December 3, 2011 Report Share Posted December 3, 2011 I dont look at it from a gaming perspective seth. Gaming rigs don't make me money. As much as id like to throw together a beast build Im so burnt out by the time I get home that the last thing on my mind is building another one. You can help me with the 17 biulds I got on tap though lol Excuses, excuses wtf is lolcats? I'd def get a fat hooker if i had to resort to that kinda thing. I feel like they'd be grateful and work harder. Also its more bang for my buck, more real estate for my dollar if you catch my drift. its like the Costco of streetwalkers. I was hoping for 150 . I was hoping she would let me put it in her butt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newls1 Posted December 3, 2011 Author Report Share Posted December 3, 2011 I dont look at it from a gaming perspective seth. Gaming rigs don't make me money. As much as id like to throw together a beast build Im so burnt out by the time I get home that the last thing on my mind is building another one. You can help me with the 17 biulds I got on tap though lol I'd help you at any time, you have my number, phone is on 24/7 MAXIM... im changing your member title I love my staffie So anti FACEBOOK it isn't even funny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxim Posted December 3, 2011 Report Share Posted December 3, 2011 I dont look at it from a gaming perspective seth. Gaming rigs don't make me money. As much as id like to throw together a beast build Im so burnt out by the time I get home that the last thing on my mind is building another one. You can help me with the 17 biulds I got on tap though lol I'd help you at any time, you have my number, phone is on 24/7 MAXIM... im changing your member title Aww. I just got to 150dB! Actually, kinda cool being Guru #2. I can dig it. wtf is lolcats? I'd def get a fat hooker if i had to resort to that kinda thing. I feel like they'd be grateful and work harder. Also its more bang for my buck, more real estate for my dollar if you catch my drift. its like the Costco of streetwalkers. I was hoping for 150 . I was hoping she would let me put it in her butt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.