AMD FX processors released

killadoob said:
No bulldozer failed if they failed to make it work with windows. Why should microsoft develop an OS for bulldozer? They should take the OS and work from there.
Click to expand...

Then we'd all be stuck with Win32 still :rolleyes:
You make hardware that can surpass software, to do otherwise is silly.
Even though I doubt the validity of the source, I dont think you comprehend the article, else you wouldn't be blaming AMD
 
hereticangel said:
http://quinetiam.com/?p=2356

bulldozer never failed,windows failed...
Click to expand...

hahahahahaahhhaaaaaa, it is quite clear the guy is a raging lunatic :

Unprecedented forum censorship on this article and objective AMD Bulldozer performance test. These sites are thrashing the Bulldozer and shutting down objective analysis.

Overclock.net
Hardforum.com
Techpowerup.com
xstremesystems.org
Guru3D.com
tomshardware.com
andantech.com
Click to expand...

Good grief, this is like the biggest conspiracy in computer hardware ever !!1` The following camps have now all ganged up on AMD in an extremely ev0l plot :
- All reputable hardware review sites/communities
- All software developers
- AMD's rival processor manufacturing rival

The whole intarnets is bent on destroying AMD oh noezz!
 
Archer said:
Then we'd all be stuck with Win32 still :rolleyes:
You make hardware that can surpass software, to do otherwise is silly.
Even though I doubt the validity of the source, I dont think you comprehend the article, else you wouldn't be blaming AMD
Click to expand...

I was responding to heretic claim that windows is at fault, not sure why you are talking about the article when i am only responding to that claim, perhaps you didn't comprehend that?

As much as you can develop future technology your product still needs to be able to operate on current systems and compete with other products surely? Imagine amd release a cpu that is slow now but in two years it will be the best thing ever. Sounds a bit on the stupid side to me.

Buy our cpu's because in two years they will be better than intel's two year old technology. Sales plummet company goes bust and they sit there wondering WTF just happened.

/Rolls eyes
 
Last edited:
meh il buy it, because you can actaully have fun memory tweaking etc, may delay my purchase because of my ssd died :(
 
hereticangel said:
meh il buy it, because you can actaully have fun memory tweaking etc, may delay my purchase because of my ssd died :(
Click to expand...

Dude you don't need to justify buying amd, the product is fine for mid end stuff and who knows in a year or two when windows 8 releases it may be the best cpu on the market provided intel don't come out with something again for a year or two.

It's the faithful people who keep amd in business so maybe your loyalty will pay off one day and they will pwn intel's ass again. When they do i will happily buy amd again.
 
killadoob said:
I was responding to heretic claim that windows is at fault, not sure why you are talking about the article when i am only responding to that claim, perhaps you didn't comprehend that?
Click to expand...

While this particular article/blog thingy is stark raving mad, perhaps you havent seen the 5-15% improvements on Zambezi when you manually set core affinity for the programs in use? Hence, clearly, W7 is partly at fault, just like the foundry is also partly at fault, just like AMD themself is partly at fault.
 
Archer said:
While this particular article/blog thingy is stark raving mad, perhaps you havent seen the 5-15% improvements on Zambezi when you manually set core affinity for the programs in use? Hence, clearly, W7 is partly at fault, just like the foundry is also partly at fault, just like AMD themselves is partly at fault.
Click to expand...

Ok so windows 7 is at fault, now what? Didn't amd have computers with windows 7 when they developed the cpu? Couldn't they see the issue and work around it or find a solution before releasing? Perhaps they should put warning stickers on their cpu's.

Doesn't work well with the most used OS on the planet. Sorry.

Windows 7 is available all over the show, surely amd test their cpu's on all OS's before releasing them into the wild?

So right now we are playing the blame game and not the solution game

/rolls eyes
 
Lets be honest, the architecture of BD is a paradigm shift. It doesn't perform well in a conventional sense, ergo maybe the convention is in itself to blame.

Luckily, Redmond/Windows 7 can easily adjust its scheduling scheme to optimize for this new pair-processor affinity requirement.
 
Yeah I also find it strange that AMD would release a CPU knowing it will not perform well with most OS's out there.
 
Sigh...
Do you remember when hyper threading first came out? Guess what!?!? That wasnt supported by the most popular OS at time and performance took a hit...
Or power management features on the CPU... also not supported...

hmmmm, a pattern is emerging... hardware features precede the OS being able to handle it...
:rolleyes:
 
killadoob said:
So right now we are playing the blame game and not the solution game

/rolls eyes
Click to expand...

I think we're playing a 'what the hell is the real story on these chips' game... ie if there is a possibility of tweaking registry/bios to gain 2600k-comparable performance, or if the whole architecture is just buggered. And btw the only ones to blame are AMD - even if Asus, Windows7 and every other software vendor failed to optimize for bulldozer, AMD were the ones responsible for quality control.
 
cerebus said:
I think we're playing a 'what the hell is the real story on these chips' game... ie if there is a possibility of tweaking registry/bios to gain 2600k-comparable performance, or if the whole architecture is just buggered. And btw the only ones to blame are AMD - even if Asus, Windows7 and every other software vendor failed to optimize for bulldozer, AMD were the ones responsible for quality control.
Click to expand...

I don't know who is too blame but surely amd need to ensure they tell everyone what the solution or what the problem could be. They have created and tested these cpu's they must have knwn well before releasing the product there were issues or maybe i am wrong and they never even tested them on different OS's :D.

The architecture is not buggered, archer points out it will work fine in a year or two but not now. So it's perhaps buggered now but not in two years. You have to plan for the future and release stuff even if it only works in two years obviously :p

There must be a solution and amd should be working very closely with microsoft, asus and so on to get their cpu's on track surely? No point saying well this and that is not optimized, will it help with sales? The only thing they can do is try and fix it as fast as possible.
 
cerebus said:
I think we're playing a 'what the hell is the real story on these chips' game... ie if there is a possibility of tweaking registry/bios to gain 2600k-comparable performance, or if the whole architecture is just buggered. And btw the only ones to blame are AMD - even if Asus, Windows7 and every other software vendor failed to optimize for bulldozer, AMD were the ones responsible for quality control.
Click to expand...

+1

AMD knew what they were releasing, and what testing/results were gonna occur. why didnt they just release a press statement with the CPU saying

"this is what you gonna get, dont be alarmed, this is what you REALLY getting when you look at it from a different angle etc etc"
 
Last edited:
Archer said:
Sigh...
Do you remember when hyper threading first came out? Guess what!?!? That wasnt supported by the most popular OS at time and performance took a hit...
Or power management features on the CPU... also not supported...

hmmmm, a pattern is emerging... hardware features precede the OS being able to handle it...
:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Here we have your very own words bud with some rolling eyes.

You are putting words in your own mouth and then saying i am doing it :eek:, come on now.

It's fine to have future features but it shouldn't be your main selling point should it? Basically you are saying amd released these cpu's for the future or am i mistaken?

Cere dude my belief is amd Fked this up, they can test and they know what their cpu's are capable of before releasing them. If it was based on future technology then release them when they work well in current times. I don't know anyone willing to buy slower hardware that will work better in 12-18 months.

Who here would buy amd cpu's that won't work well now but they will in 12-18 months?
 
Last edited:
cerebus said:
Well..... there is also a chance that AMD just screwed up the whole thing. Internal reports coming out are also not pretty.
Click to expand...

Yes I've heard that one too. Hopefully, the new CEO will let the engineers do what they want again (old one resigned or was fired, cant remember, a month or two ago). Alas, that means another year at best before reasonable performance gains are seen with new chips. More likely, it'll only be 2013/4 that we see something great from AMD again.
 
Archer said:
Go pick a fight somewhere else, I'm not in the mood to argue with someone who is only out to bash a company
Click to expand...

The only person fighting is you, your comments and responses have been nothing but aggressive since this discussion started, if you cannot handle other people's opinions perhaps you should not engage them :D. I have tried to point it out to you like 3 times in the last few days but still it doesn't sink in and sadly people won't always agree with you and no matter how you act it won't change their feelings.

I don't think discussing why a product has failed is bashing a company.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X