Quote Originally Posted by leeenux View Post
Wow, what a sweeping generalization... and a very misleading one at that.

How about something like:

"Unless you're building a PC to run the Cinnebench single threaded benchmark, you're better off with a Core2 Duo."

Bulldozer did have some regressions, mostly in single threaded benchmarks. However, it's also faster than the Phenom II X6 in many single threaded benchmarks, and almost universally faster in well threaded benchmarks.

I'm posting from an FX8120, and it feels faster than any Sandy Bridge, Nehalem or Phenom II I've ever used. I have the following windows open:

A Virtualbox VM running an Apache/PHP/Postgresql test server
A Virtualbox VM running a SVN server
Several terminals
...and a few more random windows

, and not ever a hint of lag, despite running 2 craptastic Java-based IDEs at the same time. I can even do something CPU intensive like creating a Truecrypt volume or compiling the Linux kernel, and still no slowdown whatsoever. I hate to break it to you, but a quad core Sandy Bridge cannot do all of those things and still be perfectly responsive, especially if you're using it's IGP.
you just point out the effect of running a benchmark and the reality.
yes in the reality all cores are floated with any kind of stuff all the time.
in an benchmark only 1 program make a load.
i also think that the bulldozer beat the intel cpu if you run all stuff in the same time.

i for example i do not open up 1 browser windows i do have 60+ browser windows.
you can beat any cpu only with the browser just open up 200 of them and do some stuff.

the "singlecore" performance really only care in benchmarks.