AMD Bulldozer

[Embattle]

It appears it even struggles against the AMD Phenom II let alone any of the Intel processors.

AnandTech - The Bulldozer Review: AMD FX-8150 Tested
HARDOCP - AMD Bulldozer / FX-8150 Desktop Performance
AMD FX-8150 Review | bit-tech.net
AMD FX-8150 review | AMD Bulldozer review | Processors | Reviews | PC Pro
AMD FX 8150 processor review
AMD FX-8150 Black Edition 8-Core Processor vs Core i7-2600K Review - Introduction

 

[ECA]

Yeah, major fail.

 

[crispy]

Well, lets see how it does when it runs apps not optimized by intels compiler. Looking forward for linux benchmarks where they might be more on par...

 

[Yaka]

heh are amd fan bois still banging that drum after all these years?

 

[old.Osy]

It was never about AMD, but about technology enthusiasts milking performance out of cheaper alternatives. You know the type, us geeks.

 

[MYstIC G]

Not seen a good alternative to Intel since back in the Cyrix days unfortunately. Everything AMD I've tried has always been horrible by comparison.

 

[Tuthmes]

AMD Athlon 64 was a lot better then the prescott/northwood Intels. HyperTransport is another thing we owe to AMD. Infact come to think of it AMD was first in getting 64bit to the public.

Nevertheless I've always hade Intel CPU's.

 

[Embattle]

If I remember correctly AMD copied it from DEC Alpha.

Since the DUOs where Intel simplified the processor AMD has been lagging.

 

[Tuthmes]

Yes, yes hence I said beeing first in getting 64bit to the public. The x86-64 instruction set has it's pro in not having to compile or having performance penalty's when it comes to the x86-32 instruction set.

Intel was betting on another horse at the time, the Itanium.

 

[Embattle]

Which technically didn't need it at the time.

 

[Embattle]

Intel just had to totally change the way it was going with netburst, along came Core 2 and since they AMD hasn't caught up. The problem AMD have is it seems their reinvention involves sticking more cores on the processor, by doing so their reinvention requires the work of others.

 

[Tuthmes]

Which technically didn't need it at the time.

Well technically we still don't!

Intel just had to totally change the way it was going with netburst, along came Core 2 and since they AMD hasn't caught up. The problem AMD have is it seems their reinvention involves sticking more cores on the processor, by doing so their reinvention requires the work of others.

Well that's where the fanboy's would say if it werent for AMD Intel would still have a netburst CPU. Core 2 and the Pentium M was and is full of awesomeness though.