AMD FX processors released

[techead]

good price for the entry level chip. you can bet your bottom dollar people will flock to that like seagulls to a chip

though the top-end is kinda pricey for the performance its offering (from what we have seen so far)

 

[techead]

AMD still wins at best value for money, gamer or not.

Fully agree with Archer. In fact it's humorous how "gamers" tend to froth at benchmarks and clock speed. Do they consider how much of that power gets put into gaming, compared to the graphics card?

I have a question on this...

Lets for argument sake, say we have a Intel C2D E8200 (stock 2.66ghz) with a ATI 5850 with game running @ 20 FPS

You overclock the Intel C2D E8200 to 3.4ghz and I see an increase from 20FPS to 30FPS. This would clearly indicate a CPU bottleneck (from my understanding anyway)

Does this mean that the CPU would be running 100% when it was at 2.66ghz??

Essentially what Im trying to determine, is that if your CPU is running at 100% during gaming, does it mean its a bottleneck?

hope that makes sense

 

[yeti]

If anything is being fully utilized it is a bottleneck.

 

[Libertas Computers]

I have a question on this...

Lets for argument sake, say we have a Intel C2D E8200 (stock 2.66ghz) with a ATI 5850 with game running @ 20 FPS

You overclock the Intel C2D E8200 to 3.4ghz and I see an increase from 20FPS to 30FPS. This would clearly indicate a CPU bottleneck (from my understanding anyway)

Does this mean that the CPU would be running 100% when it was at 2.66ghz??

Essentially what Im trying to determine, is that if your CPU is running at 100% during gaming, does it mean its a bottleneck?

hope that makes sense

It makes sense and in all likelyhood it does seem to look like a CPU bottleneck. After the OC, does it still run at 100%? Because there will always be a bottleneck, so say the CPU is now down to 80%, that will then mean that there is something else, the GPU, RAM, MB's lane speeds and all those things...

But in short, yes... There is a CPU bottleneck..

 

[Messugga]

I have a question on this...

Lets for argument sake, say we have a Intel C2D E8200 (stock 2.66ghz) with a ATI 5850 with game running @ 20 FPS

You overclock the Intel C2D E8200 to 3.4ghz and I see an increase from 20FPS to 30FPS. This would clearly indicate a CPU bottleneck (from my understanding anyway)

Does this mean that the CPU would be running 100% when it was at 2.66ghz??

Essentially what Im trying to determine, is that if your CPU is running at 100% during gaming, does it mean its a bottleneck?

hope that makes sense

Well, odds are that it won't constantly run at 100% and will rather spike to such levels, but yes, in short, if a component is being max'ed out while the other components are not running at capacity, that component is the bottleneck and upgrading it would probably provide you with a performance increase. That being said, if your GPU runs at 90% and your CPU at 100%, then it probably won't be worthwhile to upgrade.

 

[techead]

ok thanks for the replies. just confirmed that people need to stop saying that cpu's arent THAT important and should pump all your money into a GPU

 

[Ancalagon]

good price for the entry level chip. you can bet your bottom dollar people will flock to that like seagulls to a chip

though the top-end is kinda pricey for the performance its offering (from what we have seen so far)

Pity the old Athlon II is faster, cheaper and consumes less power. Lets not even mention Phenom II which blows the FX 4100 out the water.

Benchmarks here

 

[Messugga]

ok thanks for the replies. just confirmed that people need to stop saying that cpu's arent THAT important and should pump all your money into a GPU

Nobody said that. What they are saying is that if you have anything midrange and relatively current, your bottleneck for gaming will probably lay with your GPU. My Q6600 bottlenecks my 560ti in some games while in others, the GPU is the bottleneck. It really depends on how the software you are using was written.

 

[PostmanPot]

ok thanks for the replies. just confirmed that people need to stop saying that cpu's arent THAT important and should pump all your money into a GPU

/facepalm

 

[killadoob]

AMD still wins at best value for money, gamer or not.

Fully agree with Archer. In fact it's humorous how "gamers" tend to froth at benchmarks and clock speed. Do they consider how much of that power gets put into gaming, compared to the graphics card?

Well in the benchies they say you become cpu limited with the new amd's.

It would also depend on the game and setup i guess. Awesome pricing though, libertas how about the mobo's bud? I want that cheap 4 core and mobo possibly i must get cheap some mobo reviews.

When will they/you have stock? Although the phenom 2 is better.

Hmmm perhaps i should just get a dual core for the office pc though.

 

[techead]

Pity the old Athlon II is faster, cheaper and consumes less power. Lets not even mention Phenom II which blows the FX 4100 out the water.

Benchmarks here

if that IS the case... then AMD have a serious problem on their hands?

 

[techead]

/facepalm

i just want people to know fact, and not be disappointed when they install their system and they dont get the results they were expecting coz they "followed the general consensus" and overlooked the facts

everyone interprets things we say differently, and sometimes we arent all clear as we should be (even though we mean well.... myself included)

 

[Ancalagon]

AMD still wins at best value for money, gamer or not.

Fully agree with Archer. In fact it's humorous how "gamers" tend to froth at benchmarks and clock speed. Do they consider how much of that power gets put into gaming, compared to the graphics card?

Their motherboards are normally a lot cheaper, but with Sandy Bridge dual cores now costing as little as like R1200, its hard to recommend any AMD CPU. Maybe a Phenom II depending on workload, but I really cannot see a reason why your average gamer would want any BD, whether it be the 4 core or the 8 core.

 

[Archer]

Their motherboards are normally a lot cheaper, but with Sandy Bridge dual cores now costing as little as like R1200, its hard to recommend any AMD CPU. Maybe a Phenom II depending on workload, but I really cannot see a reason why your average gamer would want any BD, whether it be the 4 core or the 8 core.

Agreed. I'd say at the low end a Phenom X4 is better than a i3-2100, but anything above that its i5-2400/2500 territory

 

[Gtx Gaming]

/waits to confirm that 4 core can unlock to 8 cores.

http://rebeltech.co.za/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=251_257_297&products_id=9174

buy the 4 core for 1000 bux and unlock it to 8 core, 8 cores for 1k

 

[Ancalagon]

AMD has said its impossible this time.

 

[Gtx Gaming]

link?

http://emm.msi.com/display.php?List=33&N=1150

msi says there MB can unlock up to 8 cores.

"it also unlocks up to 8 CPU cores."

 

[scotty777]

AMD has said its impossible this time.

AMD says a lot of things... I wouldn't hold my breath . ha ha

Besides, people aren't stupid, were there's a will, there's a way

 

[Archer]

Besides, people aren't stupid, were there's a will, there's a way

If the extra cores are soldered/cut off then unless you have a micron telescope, and EPIC soldering skills, there will not be a way.

 

[RSkeens]

Looks like Prophecy have now listed these on their website. The pricing is quite a deal more than other quotes in this thread.