What's AMD up to? v2

[Seawolf]

It's good they still have solid products on the low-middle end because they have jack on the high end.

At any rate, desktop Trinity delayed with no date -

http://techreport.com/discussions.x/23093

[powerarmour]

AMD's Steamroller Detailed: 3rd Generation Bulldozer Core :-

http://www.anandtech.com/print/6201

[Tabajara]

It's good they still have solid products on the low-middle end because they have jack on the high end.

At any rate, desktop Trinity delayed with no date -

http://techreport.com/discussions.x/23093

And, as such, currently they aren't a good value for gaming:

http://techreport.com/articles.x/23246

[Seawolf]

And, as such, currently they aren't a good value for gaming:

http://techreport.com/articles.x/23246

That's Llano, and Llano isn't really for desktop gaming unless you were using the dual graphics.

[Tabajara]

And, as such, currently they aren't a good value for gaming:

http://techreport.com/articles.x/23246

That's Llano, and Llano isn't really for desktop gaming unless you were using the dual graphics.

They tested with the Phenom II X4 850, Phenom II X4 980, Phenom II X6 1100T, AMD FX-4170, AMD FX-6200 and AMD FX-8150. The Intel processors trounced them. An i5 3470 has a better cost relationship than all of them...

[Seawolf]

I'm trying to forget those exist.

[Seawolf]

Gotta say though, that doesn't take into account that AMD mobos are a hell of a lot cheaper for the good ones.

[Tabajara]

Gotta say though, that doesn't take into account that AMD mobos are a hell of a lot cheaper for the good ones.

The P8Z77-M PRO I got costs $149 and has everything most people will ever need

That TR comparison showed something I felt for a long time: Intel chipsets are "faster". Besides mere RAM and CPU speeds, Intel solutions seem to be lower latency. They just work, and are fast. I don't miss my Athlon times, making the computer behave was a lot more work.

[Seawolf]

We're talking Athlon, seriously?

Back then everything was a lot more work.

Meanwhile, AMD had native USB3 and SATA6 before Intel did iirc. They might not be better than their current solutions, but they're there.

And all you need are AMDs chipset drivers, just like Intel.

Hell, you don't even 'need' those, just like Intel, but they improve things at any rate (and add the USB3 support that win7 doesn't have of course)

Meanwhile, my cheap motherboard on the Llano has more SATA3 ports than a Z77, more USB3 ports than a Z77...

I find Intels cheap motherboards pathetic. If I buy a new high end system I'd have to get the Extreme stuff just because of that s***.

[Tabajara]

The mobo I'm using is proof that you don't need a high end mobo to have a good chipset.

What I meant is that, in spite of AMD mobos better/equal spec sheet, the practice of using a mobo with a intel chipset is just better. In my humble opinion, based on my limited experience, intel PCs from the Core generation just work better and feel faster. I can't recall an AMD rig I used, personal or not, without a few "surprises" from time to time, without feeling there was a bottleneck somewhere that prevented the CPU, GPU and video card to give all they could. Athlon, x86-64 and Hypertransport were wake up calls for intel, lessons were learned and now it has a platform that gives a superior experience in every aspect. Intel users have to thank AMD for that. The problem is that Hector Ruiz made a series of bad decisions that made that advantage go away, and the chances of it happening again are slim.