Printable View
The long-awaited Bulldozer is finally here. How does it stack up against its biggest competitors? Does it live up to our expectations? Keep reading to find out!http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/Revi...?d=yIl2AUoC8zA http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/Revi...8w:V_sGLiPBpWU http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/Revi...?d=qj6IDK7rITs http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/Revi...8w:gIN9vFwOqvQ
http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/Revie...~4/fu2FSHRw_Rs
More...
What do you guys think. Was this your expectation from Bulldozer?
One word comes to mind: disappointed.
I wonder if this was why the previous CEO stepped down because he knew that BD wasn't gonna turn heads.
I was hoping for more of a game changer but still seems like a decent CPU for a good pricepoint but still falls behind Intel
This is what I'm thinking.... Intel drops their prices on the Sandy Bridge lineup, and AMD will be in a bad situation. Though I'm still pretty sure lots of people will buy Bulldozer.
With all the hype around it, one would think to see a more competitive product released. tsk tsk.
If i held out on getting a 2600k's for bulldozer I would have been pissed.
Whats up AMD how can you not put out a desktop CPU to compete with Intel?
Sandy Bridge-E is out soon and you just have no chance! Why AMD why?
This is exactly what I expected from this chip actually.Quote:
Originally Posted by peti1212
Makes me happier with the Phenom II X6 1090T I recently bought. Definitely disappointing, especially after the wait. Also makes me less excited about Trinity, which I had hoped would be some really nice APU's.
OK if you prefer to have your GPU do most of the work.
Shame its such a poor chip, A win for intel all the way
Yep...that's what they're planning come 2012...its kind of sad for the CPU division of AMD. What's really going to hurt their marketing campaign though is that Bulldozer can be outperformed by the Phenom II line...that's just something you don't expect from a new architecture.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pablo 54
I fully expected it. This is pretty much down to the T how I saw this coming down. Actual desktop chips were not ready so they just renamed server chips and released them. With lackluster performance they are now blaming the OS.....wat.Quote:
Originally Posted by ca_adi
Yeah Bulldozer is looking more like bull crap, a bull dozing,...pick your colloquialism.
I too was skeptical when first hearing of it's lofty claims of replacing physical cores with heavy use of floating point modules. Seems they've further hyped it with this high clock talk. In the end it just means it's all the less efficient.
It's been said that "The light that burns twice as bright, burns half as long." I guess with AMD it's "The CPU that is clocked higher runs slower." Who knows, maybe they'll run half as long too. LOL
Strange that no one tested -bigadv folding on this chip to see how good or bad it does.