BRIGHT SIDE OF NEWS About | Advertise | Contact BSN USER Login
| Register 		SUBSCRIBE Newsletter | RSS Feeds
Thursday, May 23, 2013
Email this to a friend.
Your friend's e-mail:
Your Name:
Your e-mail:
Message subject:
Comments
by: Anonymous on 2/11/2010
"For Fusion to make sense, AMD must enabled GPGPU."

Except AMD sucks at it. Look at Folding@Home and Stream compared to what nVIDIA is doing.
Idiots... by: Anonymous on 2/11/2010
"Nope the Core i7 is not faster in games. When the 965BE is clocked above 3GHz its better in some games then the Core i7. My guess is that the Core i7 works better on stock speed because of turbo boost. Most games only use 1 or 2 cores, so the other 2 idle. Then the 2 cores that are used are overclocked automatically by turbo boost and that's why it offers better performance then the 965BE at stock speed."

Core 2 Quad (Not even the Core i7) CRUSHES the Phenom II clock for clock. Go look at Tom's for the test @ all 3 chips running at 2.8GHz. And most games don't only use 1 to 2 cores. If you think that you are insane. Look again at Tom's for the processor core scaling from 1 to 4 cores. Trust me, you DO NOT want to be gaming on a single core. The next biggest jump is from dual to triple core. 4 cores is a smaller jump, but still impressive.
You all don't get it by: Anonymous on 2/10/2010
It seems that nobody here get what is AMD intention with Liano. But then the article isn't explain it either.

Fusion is more than only glueing GPU and CPU together. If the GPU is only intended to do normal GPU stuffs then there are no reasons for fusion to exist.

For Fusion to make sense, AMD must enabled GPGPU. By using GPU for General Purpose Computing, there are certain tasks that can be speeded up to hundreds time faster than CPU computing. Now we only has 4 cores in single CPU chip contrast that with hundreds of cores in single GPU chip.

Granted as of now the leader in GPGPU is not AMD, it's NVIDIA. It's not the question of hardware, it's the software, the compiler, the programming language that has to be available first to take advantage of the GPU power.
by: Anonymous on 2/10/2010
"Really, what is the difference between your 200fps and my 100fps? I tell you I can not see the difference. Maybe it is my eyes that need the upgrade!"

You can't see the difference for 2 reasons:

1. If you run it on a LCD with 60Hz refresh rate, then you only have 60FPS on the screen. You can't have more FPS then the refresh rate of the monitor (the FPS that FRAPS tells you is the FPS output of the graphic card, not the actual FPS of the screen, since that is always equal to the refresh rate).

2. Your eyes can't see see more then about 25 pictures per second. So anything that runs between 30-60FPS without dropping below 30 should seem to run smoothly to your eyes.
by: Anonymous on 2/9/2010
This chip, clocled at around 3.0ghz and at 100$ will rock for mainstream and budget systems. Overclocked it will kick serious ass in budget gaming systems, totally negating a discreet card and bringing the costs down. Well done AMD!
by: Anonymous on 2/9/2010
Really, what is the difference between your 200fps and my 100fps? I tell you I can not see the difference. Maybe it is my eyes that need the upgrade!

I can't wait untill Llano is out. It will go nicely into a small ITX MB.
by: Anonymous on 2/9/2010
Really, what is the difference between your 200fps and my 100fps? I tell you I can not see the difference. Maybe it is my eyes that need the upgrade!

I can't wait untill Llano is out. It will go nicely into a small ITX MB.
by: Frantz on 2/9/2010
Core I7 is way faster in games!!!

Does that mean that If I use a Core i7 CPU I will complete my games faster? To put the question another way, at which point is the additional speed meaningless?
by: Anonymous on 2/9/2010
Nope the Core i7 is not faster in games. When the 965BE is clocked above 3GHz its better in some games then the Core i7. My guess is that the Core i7 works better on stock speed because of turbo boost. Most games only use 1 or 2 cores, so the other 2 idle. Then the 2 cores that are used are overclocked automatically by turbo boost and that's why it offers better performance then the 965BE at stock speed.

http://www.legionhardware.com/document.php?id=869&p=0
by: Anonymous on 2/9/2010
---------------------------------------------
AMD competes just fine with Intel. Stop picking a few benchmarks. Overall, even i7 is maybe 10-12%. Some cases AMD has the lead - especially in High-Res gaming and Cryptography - you know stuff people actually use. Both more important than Cinebench, Fritz chess or Super Pi.
---------------------------------------------

Core i7 is way faster in games
Yeah right by: Anonymous on 2/9/2010
AMD competes just fine with Intel. Stop picking a few benchmarks. Overall, even i7 is maybe 10-12%. Some cases AMD has the lead - especially in High-Res gaming and Cryptography - you know stuff people actually use. Both more important than Cinebench, Fritz chess or Super Pi.
by: Anonymous on 2/9/2010
"Given that AMD traditionally needs (at least) five years to deliver a new CPU architecture, that move."

What does that sentence mean?!
© 2009 - 2011 Bright Side Of News*, All rights reserved.
© 2009 - 2013 Bright Side Of News*, All rights reserved.