maybe the CEO tot tat selling CPUs were like selling cupcakes.

So any positive notes about BD out of all this mess?

so a bad chip already getting near to beat 2600k over video transcoding. Sounds like a big plan and good stuff ish coming =D

omg , nvr expect this to happen
i tot no way amd gonna create something slower than its predecessor , i juz take those rumor as fake benchmark
cant believe amd did it
well done amd

If you were using Q6600, why not the i5-750 or i7-920 a year+ ago? That would have been sweet spot upgrade points. Both CPUs, OC or not, are still kicking butts and taking names today.

They(AMD) never even look into software developers side of story, no many of them(Software devs) will actually bothered scratch their head to rewrite the softwares to from few thread (1-4) to many threads lolz, same goes to their graphic department

the AMD itself should build the load-balancing mechanism in their chip

fully utilize the capability and available of the cpu power

they should have placed a smaller l3 cache and added two more agu + alu to each of their cores..

By reading the reviews online,
that reminds me what happened to ATI few years ago, when HD2000 <-> HD3000 era.

The technology used at HD3000 is totally different compare to HD2000, but the performance was poor compare to it's competitor. But after sometime, with the release of HD4000, the whole story start to change in VGA card market.

I start to think AMD uses the same tactic for it's processor now

The thing here is, it's not a blame game. It doesn't matter who to blame.

What matters is that the AMD processors that customers were waiting for for so long, initially people believed it will be better than Intel, then as good as Intel, then close to Intel, and when it finally came out, it's even struggling to beat the previous architecture.

Point is, customers are disappointed at the processors. It doesn't matter who fak up, customers are disappointed at the product itself.

And this goes both ways. AMD customers are disappointed because they can't get a good processor from AMD after such a long and tiring wait, and ALL computer customers will feel the impact from the lack of a strong AMD as an Intel competitor. Computer prices will be through the roof, customers will get less freedom and choice in buying processors, and Intel will be more arrogant.

At the end of the day, it doesn't matter who fak up what. Unless you're the company CEO and you will have to worry about that. As customers, all we can say is that we are disappointed at the product that has been just released.

This post has been edited by xcen: Oct 13 2011, 10:10 AM

the lesson for the story
buy the intel proc.

CPU ain't equal to GPU, CPU need to perform complex stuffs like simulation, emulation and Artificial Intelligence, GPUs just can't do that cuz they may be fast but they're stupid due to their lack of functions(opcodes in tech terms), dumb AMD

i'd say marketing department need to bear some responsibilities on this "huge" disappointment. they created d hype which made some ppl thought that BD would be Intel slayer. for those who closely follow AMD in recent years, they should know there's no way AMD can close the performance gap (let alone slayin Intel) with Bulldozer, which is something totally new if compared to previous gen. The marketing guys shouldn't labelled BD as FX series thou, coz FX still hold a special status in some AMD fans (or most), & when reality hits, it sure pains more.

undeniably BD is a let down, personally d power consumption (when overclocked) surprised me d most. but d things are here, so either i go blue camp or i just bare with it. no one is committed to use one brand of chip only, so it's always up to d users to choose what suit themselves d most. it amuses me to see some even go to d extent like having breakup with gf (those swearing they'll never buy AMD again) because they feel cheated. for me, i'll just stick around for a 'lil longer (since I've ledi got an 990FX board & doesn't want to go thru d hassle of changin board & chip). whether BD architecture could be foundation for better product lines in future is remain to be seen. fingers crossed & i'll keep reminding myself to stick my feet on d ground regardless what being "advertised" next time.

it's a promising architecture but the single thread performance is too bad to be competitive.
it does not improve much enough compare to phenom 2.
hope global foundry will sort out the quirks and ramp up the chip clock speed to remain competitive.

turbo core does seems to work nicely though.

yes I believe so as well.. thats why i suggested to the user who was asking what to do with his mobo to wait for enhanced BD. I think by then it will be refined and offers respectable performance..

it doesn't really matter if it was faster that the fastest fast CPU, just offers great performance to run everything available and good value.. then i'm buying

then again there's the optimization thing, on windows 8 with different sheduling (never spelled that word correct) the performance increase by what 10% ?!! thats huge it shows what optimised software can do...

just need to give it time to mature i'm sure amd will pull it off again just like in 2003

this bulldozer focus on games performance or multitasking job?
i thought multitasking should be great on FX

What do you expect from turbo core?
It should work because CPU runs in turbo mode is not something rocket science.

Multitask I guess, but 4 cores easily can handle most everyday multitask user, I tried like Hexalog(6-log) a MMORPG, Firefox, notepad and picture viewer with my 2500K and it work just fine

Better than Intel:

About same as Intel:


It is a heavily threaded integer monster. Goes floaty things turns out bad. Gamers shouldn't get it.

It is priced between 2600k & 2500k, so performance seems ok. But the power consumption for such new chip... is too high.

Well, at least I won't upgrade to another FX as I think my 'fake' FX can hold on its own