Why blame AMD for being ripped-off?
I paid $239 for my FX-8150 3 weeks after launch at Amazon , Newegg had higher pricing with no availabilty so I went the Amazon route. I feel quite satisfied with my purchase and now I got good value. You overpaid and are not happy that i,s not AMD's fault it is yours for not shopping around. I am not a shootemup gamer, I dont like fascist, imperialist games. I only play strategy games and do real work on my computer. The FX is great for people who are not idiot gamers on roid rage and use the cpu for work intensive chores. That is where talented and skilled programmers thread their apps properly unlike the brain dead gaming programmers who have never heard of multithreading something that was in vogue in os/2 applicaftions
databases,games like Galactic Civilization which started as a multithreaded app on OS/2 Warp more than 16 years ago. It is obvious to me windoze programmers as a group play to the lowest common denominator and never up the the architecture of their apps to anywhere near where their potential lies. I really care less about those anti-working class fascist games and even less of the patriotic ass-kissers who play them.
I paid $239QUOTE=xenocide;2731807]L3 Cache will definitely boost performance, but not by much. We're talking at best 5%. I was basing it off the sources you yourself cited. As for "reworked algorithm"s all I know is they claimed there was in issue with the latency of the L3 Cache, and that it had been addressed. The bottom line is the PD-based Trinity APU performed 15% better clock for clock than a BD-based CPU (which had L3 Cache), but still was 33% slower than an Intel CPU at a lower clock speed. There is absolutely no way the addition of L3 Cache will cover that gap.
I'm not spreading disinformation, I'm basing my statements off numbers. Notice all of my statements are cited, and have actual numbers attached to them--yours are largely vague things you had heard or been told by AMD's marketting team (which anyone here can tell you is pretty loose with the facts). I'm not an Intel or AMD Fan Boy, I want the best bang for my buck, and paying $280 for a CPU (FX-8150--although the cheaper 8120 was a much better buy) that barely edged out its predecessor (Phenom II X4/6) in anything but very heavily threaded tasks was not a great investment. I want Piledriver to be great, but realistically it probably won't be as massive an improvement as people want--just like Bulldozer wasn't the massive improvement over Phenom II people wanted.[/QUOTE]