Page 6 of 9 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 90

Thread: First Linux Benchmarks Of AMD FX-8150 Bulldozer

  1. #51
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,587

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by misiu_mp View Post
    AMD won 64bit extension battle because they had a very strong product, at least as good as Intels and they were selling it at a very competitive price thus quickly gaining market share. There were simply too many amd cpus out there for intel to ignore that.
    The reason AMD won the 64-bit extension war was that Microsoft backed it. MS and intel (at least back then) didn't exactly have a loving relationship. MS didn't like all the compromises that intel was insisting being put into windows and intel certainly didn't like the fact that MS at the time were going to be using a AMD chip in the first gen XBoX. Going AMD64 instead of IA64 didn't require a compromise be made with regards to their existing line where as IA64 required some major changes and legacy apps would have to run under emulation.

  2. #52
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    174

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by deanjo View Post
    The reason AMD won the 64-bit extension war was that Microsoft backed it.
    It may have been so, but the only reason they had that backing was the strength of their products. Today its clear who leads the x86 cpu development. Not AMD.

  3. #53
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,587

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by misiu_mp View Post
    Today its clear who leads the x86 cpu development. Not AMD.
    Ya but I don't think that VIA can maintain that lead for long. :P

  4. #54

    Default

    The Gentoo FX-8150 user posted new results from GCC 4.6.1 - http://openbenchmarking.org/result/1...GR-8150PBULL57

  5. #55
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    845

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by deanjo View Post
    The reason AMD won the 64-bit extension war was that Microsoft backed it.
    Which in turn was a technical decision.

    Anyway, I was thinking of going with AMD's Bulldozer next time I ugrade but given what I've seen sofar it's been quite underwhelming. Still, I reckon I have atleast 1-2 years before I feel I've outgrown my core i7 and i5 and it will be interesting to see what the Bulldozer architecture offers at that time compared to Intel.

  6. #56
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,587

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by XorEaxEax View Post
    Still, I reckon I have atleast 1-2 years before I feel I've outgrown my core i7 and i5 and it will be interesting to see what the Bulldozer architecture offers at that time compared to Intel.
    Let's hope AMD is still around by then, they bet pretty heavy on BD and with their recent stock slide I can't see the release of BD doing much for their next few quarterly reports.

  7. #57

  8. #58
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    6,679

    Default

    @deanjo

    Are you dreaming? Xbox 1 had a 733 MHz INTEL chip!

  9. #59
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    5,411

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael View Post
    maybe they read here in the forum?

  10. #60
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,587

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kano View Post
    @deanjo

    Are you dreaming? Xbox 1 had a 733 MHz INTEL chip!
    No I am not dreaming Kano. XBoX 1 was originally supposed to have an AMD cpu (and early prototypes did) and what later became the nForce chipset. However intel came along and did their classic FUD campain at the time and convinced MS that the AMD cpu wouldn't be up to the task (thermal wise).
    Last edited by deanjo; 10-17-2011 at 12:21 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •