New AMD Trinity overclocked to 7.3GHz

Wow, next build might have to be an AMD, Once was a time when they couldn't be beat for bang for your buck.

woah! that is sick

Thats overclocked it still doesnt match Intels i5 or i7. (Sadly).

Originally posted by omendata:

---

Thats overclocked it still doesnt match Intels i5 or i7. (Sadly).

---

That little A10-5800k will outperform an Intel Processor in the same price range and that is all that matters and the integrated graphics will kill any integrated intel solution hands down. AMD still offers the better value for one's performance dollar but by all means drop more money on the Intel or go all out and spend a gool grand on the Intel Extreme just to have the bragging rights on saving a few seconds here and there and getting a couple more FPS on an already high frame rate. Most sites put the A10-5800K up against an i5 that costs $80 more and the A10 wins especially in the graphics side. And if you can overclock it to 5GHz or so on the stock cooler it makes it one bad ass $120 processor

Not according to this or my own tests.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6347/amd-...esktop-part-2/2

I own a computer shop and have already tested and been thoroughly disappointed. I have never been a fan of Intel and all my own previous machines have been Amd but it seems they still have some catching up to do.

Not only that but these new processors have a helluva power draw.

Price/performance as you say is correct and it is worthwhile if you dont want the latest all singing and dancing cpu.

Personally for me its still the i5-2500 - it can overclock really well and doesnt draw too much power when a customer asks for a new system to be built. I have had a lot of people bring in their overheated fm1 systems for repair - not a single intel.

Multithreading has always been an issue - when all apps are multithread then maybe we will see some use for the new processors. Until then we have to wait.

Quote:

---

I own a computer shop and have already tested and been thoroughly disappointed

---

Do you how lame is this?
Nobody care about this... If is not working, repair your self, cant?buy it new. I do repairs my self, most case my repair cost is half of a new PC. If you are here you definitely know how to test or repair ur systems, no xtra point 4 u =(

Originally posted by omendata:

---

I have had a lot of people bring in their overheated fm1 systems for repair - not a single intel.

---

Well if they were built by you then I blame the builder. I have built about 20 FM1 Ax-Series machines over the past year for family and friends looking for a decent performing system on a budget and have not heard any complaints. Maybe it is the builder and we all know OEMs build on the cheap side.

I am not saying Intel is bad or anything because they make fine processors but comparing performance and price of the processor and all the other components AMD always offers the better value. They may not be the performance king and rate on the synthetic benchmarks as high but when it comes to everyday computing they offer good bang for the buck.

Listen nob-end I never said they were built by me.
I have been building systems for over 20 years , i am cisco and microsoft , a+ qualified and i dont build cheap so dont badmouth me. 20 sytems - aye in yer dreams. lol

Why is it nob-ends like you take offence at anyone daring to contradict them.

You are wrong - Intel processors far outpace Amd as you can see.
If you want even more proof then go to toms hardware one of the better sites on the internet for comparison.

Did I not say precisely what your last paragraph says - or can you not read.

ffs

Originally posted by i1der:

---

Quote:

---

I own a computer shop and have already tested and been thoroughly disappointed

---

Do you how lame is this?
Nobody care about this... If is not working, repair your self, cant?buy it new. I do repairs my self, most case my repair cost is half of a new PC. If you are here you definitely know how to test or repair ur systems, no xtra point 4 u =(

---

Whats your problem - learn to speak english when you want to reply first.

What language are you speeking meester?
twat

Originally posted by omendata:

---

Listen nob-end I never said they were built by me.
I have been building systems for over 20 years , i am cisco and microsoft , a+ qualified and i dont build cheap so dont badmouth me. 20 sytems - aye in yer dreams. lol

Why is it nob-ends like you take offence at anyone daring to contradict them.

You are wrong - Intel processors far outpace Amd as you can see.
If you want even more proof then go to toms hardware one of the better sites on the internet for comparison.

Did I not say precisely what your last paragraph says - or can you not read.

ffs

---

You own a computer shop and I manage an enterprise network so what? In the thousands of computers and servers I manage today and of the past I still think AMD offers the better value. You are entitled to your opinion based on your experiences but you are the one getting defensive probably due to your own insecurities which is why you have to throw out your alleged certifications. I am not here to argue with you so I will just bid you good day sir.

Originally posted by omendata:

---

Originally posted by i1der:

---

Quote:

---

I own a computer shop and have already tested and been thoroughly disappointed

---

Do you how lame is this?
Nobody care about this... If is not working, repair your self, cant?buy it new. I do repairs my self, most case my repair cost is half of a new PC. If you are here you definitely know how to test or repair ur systems, no xtra point 4 u =(

---

Whats your problem - learn to speak english when you want to reply first.

What language are you speeking meester?
twat

---

It is English I am from America I understand it :-) But do not tell anyone.

Originally posted by bobiroc:

---

Originally posted by omendata:

---

Listen nob-end I never said they were built by me.
I have been building systems for over 20 years , i am cisco and microsoft , a+ qualified and i dont build cheap so dont badmouth me. 20 sytems - aye in yer dreams. lol

Why is it nob-ends like you take offence at anyone daring to contradict them.

You are wrong - Intel processors far outpace Amd as you can see.
If you want even more proof then go to toms hardware one of the better sites on the internet for comparison.

Did I not say precisely what your last paragraph says - or can you not read.

ffs

---

You own a computer shop and I manage an enterprise network so what? In the thousands of computers and servers I manage today and of the past I still think AMD offers the better value. You are entitled to your opinion based on your experiences but you are the one getting defensive probably due to your own insecurities which is why you have to throw out your alleged certifications. I am not here to argue with you so I will just bid you good day sir.

---

You manage a network , I build and repair pc's and networks every day so that I think qualifies my opinion on pc builds. No insecurity just annoyed when someone calls me a bum engineer. Never disagreed with the fact Amd offers better value - always has since K6 - I bid you good day.

AMD have a long way to go to touch top tier Intel CPUs on performance, and I hope they can reach it one day once again. This would keep a flame light under each others asses to get the best out of there products keeping competition high and prices low. AMD offer great value, and you wouldn't be able to know for day to day tasks and gaming if it's a AMD or an Intel CPU. Games do not need more then a dual core, and not many programs take advantage of all cores. For day to day tasks, and even heavy gaming a dual core from either Intel or AMD is more then enough.

Back to facts mentioned in this article, what kind of "extreme cooling" they used?
Liquid nitrogen or simple high-flow watercooling?

Originally posted by electronist619:

---

Back to facts mentioned in this article, what kind of "extreme cooling" they used?
Liquid nitrogen or simple high-flow watercooling?

---

I think extreme cooling would mean liquid nitrogen. I have never heard anyone call water cooled cpus "extreme cooling".

Despite the previous arguments touting everyone's resume or inability to dangle a participle, facts remain that these current findings placed upon the current AMD architecture implies that the next step toward faster desktop processors may be on the way. I.e., the speed bottleneck 'may' have been broken.

If we take this information & treat it as fact, my theory (held by those within the AMD engineering community & vendors trying to court them in accordance) that software engineers are (in a manner of speaking) choking down the code in favor of showing Intel systems to perform in a brighter light, might actually have to start bearing more scrutiny & start coding with painfully less bias; as it should be.

Granted, no quantifiable evidence has turned up as of recent, thus it's still quite circumstantial that this kind of programming infringement is 'that' apparent to AMD's seemingly slower performance. But given what would seem to be a sizable overheating issue (one that's detrimental to the longevity of your product) one would think you'd keep from designing this back into future production models.

Other than that, it's still a 'real world' working state in which we all find ourselves vying for the best bang for the buck & my money still goes down on the AMD processor. I still can't merit paying the equivalent for the likes of one processor that could have in turn virtually paid for an entirely new system (hand built, not AIO - proprietary POS).

And that I'll most certainly argue...

Makes you wonder how much nitrogen they had to use to cool the damn chip in the first place to reach that fast of speed...Sick indeed...

Originally posted by LordRuss:

---

Despite the previous arguments touting everyone's resume or inability to dangle a participle, facts remain that these current findings placed upon the current AMD architecture implies that the next step toward faster desktop processors may be on the way. I.e., the speed bottleneck 'may' have been broken.

If we take this information & treat it as fact, my theory (held by those within the AMD engineering community & vendors trying to court them in accordance) that software engineers are (in a manner of speaking) choking down the code in favor of showing Intel systems to perform in a brighter light, might actually have to start bearing more scrutiny & start coding with painfully less bias; as it should be.

Granted, no quantifiable evidence has turned up as of recent, thus it's still quite circumstantial that this kind of programming infringement is 'that' apparent to AMD's seemingly slower performance. But given what would seem to be a sizable overheating issue (one that's detrimental to the longevity of your product) one would think you'd keep from designing this back into future production models.

Other than that, it's still a 'real world' working state in which we all find ourselves vying for the best bang for the buck & my money still goes down on the AMD processor. I still can't merit paying the equivalent for the likes of one processor that could have in turn virtually paid for an entirely new system (hand built, not AIO - proprietary POS).

And that I'll most certainly argue...

---

Lets be honest , programmers arent what they used to be I dont know any Jeff Minter's or Matt Newmans , David Brabam (all genius programmers imho)- back in my day programmers were well known.

When 2gl languages ventured forth and people started using Cobol , Basic and migrated away from machine code , fortran etc and particularly with html programmers have gotten lazy not to mention the vast amount of memory they use - Elite was written in under 20k on the BBC Micro - compare that to the 16gb programmers have to write lazy code with. Recursion and binary trees are a forgotten art.

Couldnt agree more with most of what you say (except the bit about dangling a participle - i can sometimes let it hang .;-)) but its hyperthreading that needs taken advantage of programmers are just starting to program to harness the power of multi-core systems but its not easy - non of our programmers at the last company i worked for were working to take advantage of it and according to most of them , its not easy to program.

Originally posted by omendata:

---

Lets be honest , programmers arent what they used to be I dont know any Jeff Minter's or Matt Newmans , David Brabam (all genius programmers imho)- back in my day programmers were well known.

When 2gl languages ventured forth and people started using Cobol , Basic and migrated away from machine code , fortran etc and particularly with html programmers have gotten lazy not to mention the vast amount of memory they use - Elite was written in under 20k on the BBC Micro - compare that to the 16gb programmers have to write lazy code with. Recursion and binary trees are a forgotten art.

Couldnt agree more with most of what you say (except the bit about dangling a participle - i can sometimes let it hang .;-)) but its hyperthreading that needs taken advantage of programmers are just starting to program to harness the power of multi-core systems but its not easy - non of our programmers at the last company i worked for were working to take advantage of it and according to most of them , its not easy to program.

---

And there we have it... You pretty much hit the nail on the head, so to speak. Programmers are lazy or are being pushed to ridiculous release schedules that I'm surprised the code even loads on 45% of most machines these days.

Your statement of "...of programmers are just starting to program to harness the power of multi-core systems but its not easy..." rings so true, but is so over used; it kinda makes a guy want to wring somebodies neck.

Meaning, I think our boys "can" do it with a modicum of dexterity. I just believe they're having their hands tied by corporate mucky-mucks. I mean, like the programmers of yore, they are artists in their own medium - are they not?

So let them immerse themselves in their medium & get it right. Some artists don't go for that forced creativity shit at all.

"Lazy programmers" first glaringly pushed themselves into my world way back in C=64 and IBM PC (the original) days.

Back then there was a game called "Lode Runner" (quite good, BTW, even now). There were 100 levels, plus you could edit any/all of the levels yourself and save them.

The C=64 version loaded from floppy once. You could literally turn off the floppy drive afterwards. In other words, it used no more than 64K of RAM (the max available in a C=64, assuming you switched off all the ROMs). The PC version used ~174K, had worse graphics and sound, and furthermore, often had to re-access the floppy (or HD) it was run from.

So WTF? x86 machine code has far more opcodes than 6510 machine code, and damn well should be more efficient, at least in program size. The answer? Lazy programmers.

We probably never again will see programmers making systems do what they should *not* be able to do, such as making a c=64 display 64 sprites at once, when 8 was the designed limit. Oh well...

Lode runner was a classic but Elite was written in less than 15k and if you know anything about wireframe graphics and hidden line removal it was a mammoth mathematical problem and to program it in 6502 with limited screen memory and program memory was remarkeable. I worked on many C64 conversions as it was basically the same cpu as the Bbc micro - BBC V C64 was always the rivalry back then!!!

I think back then when we had limited resources it forced programmers to be more creative and inventive. I remember the first parallax scrolling game on the C64, it was amazing what a few lines of machine code , a 6522 via timer and a direct poke on the 6845crtc controller could do to transfer all that screen space 1 pixel at a time on 3 different planes. Now with unlimited memory and hard disk space...well... Just look at the Behemoth that is Windows...Says it all really!

Games will always push the envelope and the need to have ever faster processors and graphics cards will force the developers to harness multi-threaded games engines that will run on a variety of cpu's - its a shame because the Amd chips are pretty good with multi thread capable programs.