AMD Phenom II on 45nm was able to beat out Core 2 Quad, so at one point AMD's first 45nm product = Intel's first 45nm product. Both shrinks would have been considered "tocks".
AMD has a lot less of a foundry to work with. Intel has made great strides with transistor shape, optimizing their HKMG 32nm bulk process. GlobalFoundries, and even when AMD owned the fab in Dresden, has always struggled to keep up.
Bulldozer materialized as a horrible product. It is a horrible product that looks okay on paper. It is a combination though, of the product and the fab. I'm not going to blame either one here. When you realize that AMD is 25x smaller than intel, they run a pretty efficient operation.
By the way, how the fuck am I an AMD fanboy? I talk about how bad Bulldozer is on a daily basis.
You're pretty fucking retarded.
As far as this:
Well, I'm not a fanboy, like you are a fanboy, so I don't do those kind of things. I am an overclocker, and use both intel and AMD parts. My next CPU will be 3 2600K to bin for DICE/LN2 runs for points on HWBOT. I'm not a partial, biased waste of space like you unfortunately.
Really? You're gonna go tell me to cry to mommy? Hahahahaha
I'm sure you wish you were one of those "Top dog's" in life. I doubt many of us will ever be
You're absolutely right about Bulldozer being pathetic.
However I've already said it, I dunno, 10 times in this thread...quad core intel mobile part beats high end intel desktop part too. Just because the article said "AMD FX-8150" and not "AMD FX-8150, 2500K and 6% behind 2600K" you went on your little intel fanboy happy stint, making stupid, worthless, biased comments as far as the Cinebench score being our subject,
and it is our subject.
LOLDUHOMFG IVY HAS A TDP OF 77W? WOAH NO WEY ITS ON 22NM WITH INTELSENHANCEDFINFET3DGATEDESIGN ANDTHEYSPENT20xTHER&DMONEY!
Did I ever make Bulldozer out to be even a
good product in this thread here? I simply mentioned that it beat out a similarly priced Intel desktop product and you're all asshurt on the other side of your computer about imaginary "AMD fanboys" and how much they suck. I am not acting like a fanboy.
How mature am I? You resorted to telling me to "cry to my mommy" because I'm the big bad "fanboy" here despite being neutral.
You do make stupid comments. Lets look at what you've said in words so far this thread:
1
2
3
4
1. Intel will not let AMD die. Actually, government won't even let that happen. What will be created is a monopoly. Do you know what a monopoly is? There have already been several investigations about it already being that way, because
AMD is too incompetent to keep up.
In case you need a definition:
in·com·pe·tent/inˈkämpətənt/
Adjective:
Not having the necessary skills to do something successfully.
2. That really shows the extent of your knowledge.
3.That largely depends on what you're doing. If you're running an 33 year old instruction set designed for Intel 8087
or SSE, the only thing Pentium 4 could do right, but hardly existed at the time.
Are you running cinebench or superpi when "any intel quad beats anything AMD has"? Or encoding videos? Making archives?...nobody gives a shit how many cores you need to match the performance in a multithreaded program that allows for 32+ threads. In fact, you can be a lot more efficient when you make a thousand slow cores work in harmony. (Think "GPU")
4. Throwing SuperPi out of the equation is not "handpicking one benchmark". That does not make someone an AMD fanboy, oh loyal Intel fanboy overlord.
I'm sorry, I said you make stupid worthless comments. In fact, you neglected to note that Ivy Bridge mobile beats out Intel's $220 desktop part and almost matches their $320 part yet spend every moment you can making sure everyone knows it beats out AMD's $240 desktop part. Nice one, fanboy
Now, if you'd like to know my thoughts on Bulldozer, here are a collection of posts from XtremeSystems.org about what I think of AMD's current lineup.
Some of these are funny, so feel free to get a laugh out of them.
@ XS
