You need to Read the rules and Join the forums before you can post.

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
AMD Bulldozer FX Revealed
04-03-2011, 10:00 PM,
#11
RE: AMD Bulldozer FX Revealed
(04-03-2011, 09:55 PM)starbreaker Wrote: Also, if you admit to yourself as a pc enthusiast and gamer, even the lower end amd and intel chips are overkill for the games we are offered by the gaming industry today, if anything the extreme games are more GPU heavy dependent.

1- Let's not start an AMD/Intel war here. Both companies offer great chips and it's the existence of both that allows for healthy competition and good prices.

2- The low-end AMD and Intel chips are not overkill for today's games. Many modern games rely intensively on the CPU, such as SC2 and WoW, just to name two of them.

Even with with GPU-heavy games, a faster CPU will improve performance, by being less of a bottleneck for the GPU.
Laptop: MSI GS30 Shadow-045 Dimensions: 12.6" x 8.9" x 0.8" 2.65lbs CPU: Intel Core i7-4870HQ Quad-Core + Hyper-Threading OC 2.5-3.9GHz RAM: 16GB DDR3 1600MHz Video Card: Intel Iris Pro 5200 Storage: 2x128GB SDD RAID0 Audio: ASUS Xonar U3 USB Sound Card + Audio-Technica ATH-M50 headphones Screen: 13.3" - 1920 x 1080 IPS + 27" Dell P2715Q IPS 3840 x 2160 Keyboard: Filco Majestouch MX Cherry Blue Mouse: Logitech MX518
Reply
04-03-2011, 10:14 PM, (This post was last modified: 04-03-2011, 10:27 PM by starbreaker.)
#12
RE: AMD Bulldozer FX Revealed
Wiki and the links wiki provides. The 12 core claim is from blogs I've read, designs based on the already existing 12 and 16 core server Opteron chips. I should of just stated up to 10 being that's what AMD itself has claimed the max would be in 2011 for user chips.


OK, I'll use the word sufficient then. All I'm saying is the pc hardware is far ahead of gaming software. I don't know if this has always been the case but it's true today.

Wow, a reply from thee Mathieu. I had just hoped this would of been under different circumstances.
Reply
04-03-2011, 11:09 PM,
#13
RE: AMD Bulldozer FX Revealed
(04-03-2011, 10:00 PM)MathieuB Wrote:
(04-03-2011, 09:55 PM)starbreaker Wrote: Also, if you admit to yourself as a pc enthusiast and gamer, even the lower end amd and intel chips are overkill for the games we are offered by the gaming industry today, if anything the extreme games are more GPU heavy dependent.

1- Let's not start an AMD/Intel war here. Both companies offer great chips and it's the existence of both that allows for healthy competition and good prices.

2- The low-end AMD and Intel chips are not overkill for today's games. Many modern games rely intensively on the CPU, such as SC2 and WoW, just to name two of them.

Even with with GPU-heavy games, a faster CPU will improve performance, by being less of a bottleneck for the GPU.

+1 Fanboys of either brand are only hurting themselves by limiting their options.
Desktop: CPU: Intel Core i5 2500 3.30GHz RAM: G.Skill 8GB MOBO: ASRock P67 Extreme4 Gen3 Video Card: SLI MSI Nvidia GeForce GTX 460 768 SSD: Corsair Force 3 60GB HDD: Samsung F3 1TB Sound: Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi Titanium Mouse: Storm Sentinal Z3RO-G Keyboard: Das Keyboard Silent/Filco Majestouch 2 Speakers: Behringer MS-16 Headphones: Alessandro MS-1/Shure SRH440 modded Router: D-Link Xtreme DIR-655 Monitor: Dell Ultrasharp U2312HM De-anti-glared Laptop: Lenovo Thinkpad X120e/Thinkpad T430
Reply
04-04-2011, 10:28 AM,
#14
RE: AMD Bulldozer FX Revealed
(04-03-2011, 10:14 PM)starbreaker Wrote: All I'm saying is the pc hardware is far ahead of gaming software. I don't know if this has always been the case but it's true today.

Wow, a reply from thee Mathieu. I had just hoped this would of been under different circumstances.

Yeah, PC hardware is slowly getting ahead of game requirements, for example, you no longer need the fastest video card to play the majority of games at 1920 x 1080.

This is most likely due to old console hardware though, meaning that game developers have to hold back, so that games run on the PS3/Xbox360.

thee Mathieu, really lol? I'm just a man, trying to do my best to help others build their PC, not some kind of demi-god Tongue
Laptop: MSI GS30 Shadow-045 Dimensions: 12.6" x 8.9" x 0.8" 2.65lbs CPU: Intel Core i7-4870HQ Quad-Core + Hyper-Threading OC 2.5-3.9GHz RAM: 16GB DDR3 1600MHz Video Card: Intel Iris Pro 5200 Storage: 2x128GB SDD RAID0 Audio: ASUS Xonar U3 USB Sound Card + Audio-Technica ATH-M50 headphones Screen: 13.3" - 1920 x 1080 IPS + 27" Dell P2715Q IPS 3840 x 2160 Keyboard: Filco Majestouch MX Cherry Blue Mouse: Logitech MX518
Reply
04-04-2011, 02:04 PM,
#15
RE: AMD Bulldozer FX Revealed
(04-04-2011, 10:28 AM)MathieuB Wrote: Yeah, PC hardware is slowly getting ahead of game requirements, for example, you no longer need the fastest video card to play the majority of games at 1920 x 1080.

This is most likely due to old console hardware though, meaning that game developers have to hold back, so that games run on the PS3/Xbox360.

The fact that so many PC games are simply console ports is awfully disappointing. I understand the business reasonings for it, but its just frustrating as a gamer and not likely to change.
Reply
04-04-2011, 02:36 PM,
#16
RE: AMD Bulldozer FX Revealed
(04-04-2011, 02:04 PM)Bigpapa42 Wrote:
(04-04-2011, 10:28 AM)MathieuB Wrote: Yeah, PC hardware is slowly getting ahead of game requirements, for example, you no longer need the fastest video card to play the majority of games at 1920 x 1080.

This is most likely due to old console hardware though, meaning that game developers have to hold back, so that games run on the PS3/Xbox360.

The fact that so many PC games are simply console ports is awfully disappointing. I understand the business reasonings for it, but its just frustrating as a gamer and not likely to change.

It is frustrating. A lot of pc gamers were looking forward to Crysis 2. However, Crysis 2 did not feel like a pc game at all. I played it at my buddy's house and it was very linear, small rooms and areas to fight in. Also I heard it didn't come with an editor. I still got my eyes on Skyrim and Diablo 3 hoping neither of those are simple console ports.
Desktop: CPU: Intel Core i5 2500 3.30GHz RAM: G.Skill 8GB MOBO: ASRock P67 Extreme4 Gen3 Video Card: SLI MSI Nvidia GeForce GTX 460 768 SSD: Corsair Force 3 60GB HDD: Samsung F3 1TB Sound: Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi Titanium Mouse: Storm Sentinal Z3RO-G Keyboard: Das Keyboard Silent/Filco Majestouch 2 Speakers: Behringer MS-16 Headphones: Alessandro MS-1/Shure SRH440 modded Router: D-Link Xtreme DIR-655 Monitor: Dell Ultrasharp U2312HM De-anti-glared Laptop: Lenovo Thinkpad X120e/Thinkpad T430
Reply
04-04-2011, 05:09 PM, (This post was last modified: 04-04-2011, 05:10 PM by windez.)
#17
RE: AMD Bulldozer FX Revealed
(04-04-2011, 02:36 PM)ichigeki Wrote: It is frustrating. A lot of pc gamers were looking forward to Crysis 2. However, Crysis 2 did not feel like a pc game at all. I played it at my buddy's house and it was very linear, small rooms and areas to fight in. Also I heard it didn't come with an editor. I still got my eyes on Skyrim and Diablo 3 hoping neither of those are simple console ports.

So Crysis 2 is out already!!??? Please tell me it had decent graphics!
Sad to hear its linear, sandbox gameplay and visuals were what made the origional crysis great. I mean it certainly wasnt the plot.
Dragon Age 2 was disappointing, to say the least. Don't get me wrong it was a great game, but I clocked over 80 hours on the first one, and in the 2nd I clocked 15. I might have clocked more had I not been working full time, and had a two week rental deadline from blockbuster.

It's sad really, for example I'm looking forward to LA noire, but that wont even come out on the pc, going to have to get it for my 360 or ps3. I swear the graphics on console are ugly, ugg!

Still you can't blame developers entirely, if they put any sort of drm on a pc game, they get crucified by fanbois, if they dont put any protection everyone pirates, so they just say "screw it we'll stick to consoles!"

Oh yeah--

THEE MATHIEU, THEE!!!!!
Reply
04-04-2011, 05:32 PM, (This post was last modified: 04-04-2011, 05:35 PM by ichigeki.)
#18
RE: AMD Bulldozer FX Revealed
(04-04-2011, 05:09 PM)windez Wrote:
(04-04-2011, 02:36 PM)ichigeki Wrote: It is frustrating. A lot of pc gamers were looking forward to Crysis 2. However, Crysis 2 did not feel like a pc game at all. I played it at my buddy's house and it was very linear, small rooms and areas to fight in. Also I heard it didn't come with an editor. I still got my eyes on Skyrim and Diablo 3 hoping neither of those are simple console ports.

So Crysis 2 is out already!!??? Please tell me it had decent graphics!
Sad to hear its linear, sandbox gameplay and visuals were what made the origional crysis great. I mean it certainly wasnt the plot.
Dragon Age 2 was disappointing, to say the least. Don't get me wrong it was a great game, but I clocked over 80 hours on the first one, and in the 2nd I clocked 15. I might have clocked more had I not been working full time, and had a two week rental deadline from blockbuster.

It's sad really, for example I'm looking forward to LA noire, but that wont even come out on the pc, going to have to get it for my 360 or ps3. I swear the graphics on console are ugly, ugg!

Still you can't blame developers entirely, if they put any sort of drm on a pc game, they get crucified by fanbois, if they dont put any protection everyone pirates, so they just say "screw it we'll stick to consoles!"

Oh yeah--

THEE MATHIEU, THEE!!!!!

This is getting off topic but...

Technically, I think Crysis 1 had better graphics. However Crysis 2 does "look" better. It is currently only dx9 and rumors say that they will release a patch to update it to dx11. What I liked about Crysis 2 is that it is very optimized. My buddy has a gtx 460 768mb and we were getting 40-50 fps on max graphics.

Back to Topic:

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/mainboards/...ssors.html

According to this topic, AM3+ will "only" support eight cores. I say only because it is rumored that a line up of 10-12 cores were supposed to come out. Will the 10-12 core use AM4 then?

Good News! Bulldozer motherboards will support SLI. We are seeing a harmony between these companies!
SLI on Bulldozer motherboards
Desktop: CPU: Intel Core i5 2500 3.30GHz RAM: G.Skill 8GB MOBO: ASRock P67 Extreme4 Gen3 Video Card: SLI MSI Nvidia GeForce GTX 460 768 SSD: Corsair Force 3 60GB HDD: Samsung F3 1TB Sound: Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi Titanium Mouse: Storm Sentinal Z3RO-G Keyboard: Das Keyboard Silent/Filco Majestouch 2 Speakers: Behringer MS-16 Headphones: Alessandro MS-1/Shure SRH440 modded Router: D-Link Xtreme DIR-655 Monitor: Dell Ultrasharp U2312HM De-anti-glared Laptop: Lenovo Thinkpad X120e/Thinkpad T430
Reply
04-04-2011, 05:39 PM,
#19
RE: AMD Bulldozer FX Revealed
Getting a 404 on that link

I'm thinking that AM3+ consumer motherboards will support "only" 8 core, with AMD releasing another, larger socket for server motherboards, with support for more cores.

Of course Nvidia will allow SLI support on AM3+, otherwise they would lose too many profitable video card sales to AMD.
Laptop: MSI GS30 Shadow-045 Dimensions: 12.6" x 8.9" x 0.8" 2.65lbs CPU: Intel Core i7-4870HQ Quad-Core + Hyper-Threading OC 2.5-3.9GHz RAM: 16GB DDR3 1600MHz Video Card: Intel Iris Pro 5200 Storage: 2x128GB SDD RAID0 Audio: ASUS Xonar U3 USB Sound Card + Audio-Technica ATH-M50 headphones Screen: 13.3" - 1920 x 1080 IPS + 27" Dell P2715Q IPS 3840 x 2160 Keyboard: Filco Majestouch MX Cherry Blue Mouse: Logitech MX518
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)