Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by CardJoe, 29 Jan 2010.
Might be time to upgrade soon! Need moah powaaahhhh for my rendering!
confusis if anything this makes it better for amd users to upgrade think about it first you get a budget am3 proccesor then in a couple years upgrade to better proccesor
if you think about it they are trying to make it a standerd conection for there proccesors like usb for example i know they are fundementally diferent but in essence its the same where as intel keep releasing different chipsets amd keep the same and improve on it
While the layout of that board isn't particularly bad, I have one BIG gripe with "Value" OEMs. I wish they would spend a little bit extra and purchase a jMicron chip for eSATA, rather than diverting one of the onboard ones. Yes, while it's pretty rad to be able to boot from an external drive, some of us actually need 6 SATA inside a machine
a media mobo with SATA 6gbps?????? What an unnecessary feature Mr. Swinburne....
"you're talking 2008, and P45. The two are entirely non-comparable."
Yes the recent past is non-comparable to the present.... Especially when it's only a one generation change (p45....p55... .... ..)and they use the exact* same chipsets for devices like usb and sata...... but totally non-comparable....
I use all ten of my sata ports on my 790fx-ud5.
but anyway, it seems like the wait for 32nm with AMD is going to be a while. i am starting to think i would have been better off spending a bit (well, it would have been a good £200) more on a i7 920.
What's the odds on Intal already being at 22nm (or whatever size is next) before AMD get down to their current 32nm.
whats the point of 6gbps sata? most/all HDDs cant even hit the 400MB/s that 3gbps delivers on traditional sata..
for SSD drives.
it seems AMD has everything together (in terms of global foundries business) but they need to scrap 45nm stuff and K10.5. Then just start with a blank slate and 32nm (or less) and make a new CPU.
@l3v1ck - very likely unless AMD decides to skip 32nm all together. Which would be good as long as it can really compete with Sandy Bridge.
Im wondering if their integration of GPU and CPU will be their strength over intel. While I can't see it out powering a seperate GPU, their on board stuff should really be better than what intel has due to their experience.
When you think about it, they only got half decent 45nm parts once intel changed archeticture. They're now a month behind intel on 32nm and counting.
I was able to run Crysis very well with a HD 3300 (before I filled up my PCI-e slots)
I expect a significant increase in performance from the Hd 4290 not only that but this chipset is a very attractive, capable, and cost effective way to enter PC gaming.
the more the better! 6 cores will make multitasking in a x64 OS even more enjoyable. More complex real time rendering and better AI.
We all know Intel is the poster boy for performance. 2 or 3 frames faster in games. With other "Real World" applications blink your eye twice and you may miss Intel beat AMD.
I'll take the second place trophy and spend my savings on other upgrades.
Definitely interesting news. And bear in mind that if the price is right, this will make a lot of sense to a lot of people. Could be just the shot in the arm AMD need. Bindi's right, Intel won't even come close on price and as they don't appear to be in a rush to offer hexcore on 1156, this will be "mid-range" platform money sewn up. I look forward to hearing more....
If they can make some improvements, they might be able to oust the P55, but as for now, it's quite a daunting task seeing as the P55 seems like the better deal performance wise.
Of course when it comes to multi-threads...that's going to be different.
After a bad run in with ECS motherboards years ago I have avoided them ever since.
On the AMD front, a 6 core CPU has a nice ring to it, though I would have hoped that what would appear to be their top end Phenom II X6 part would have been clocked higher, as I am still using a dual core AMD cpu on the older AM2 socket running at a nice 3GHz.
With the motherboard only supporting DirectX 10.1 rather than DirectX11 and not natively supporting USB 3.0 and uncertain about dual display support, this is most definitely a miss for me.
I am hoping that we have some much better hardware come out during the course of this year with decent specs that makes it worth the effort of upgrading.
You mean, just as the similar wattage 955s and 965s can't overclock?
On the first sentence, thank-you Captain Obvious. On the second, in the same way Intel's Core 2 was just a tweaked, die shrunk Pentium M (Banias) from 2003?
So AMD should do this instead of going ahead with their current plan of replacing 45nm and K10.5, and starting with a blank slate on 32nm with a new CPU (Bulldozer)? Dirk Meyer, someone's after your job!
Or did you mean do it now? But what would AMD sell until 32nm and Bulldozer arrives?
And completely re-do their upcoming design just as they are testing early Bulldozer samples on 32nm? And piss away all the money and time AMD has already spent on the current design? And the hundreds on millions GloFo has already spent on 32nm research, redesign and retooling? Which, by the way, is almost finished. Piss it all away for a process (22nm) that they have only just completed early SRAM test wafers and won't be ready until 2012 at the earliest?
Wow, I just re-read that and I sound like a sarcastic tw@t. Thankfully, I feel like a sarcastic tw@t tonight so no need to go back and rewrite.
So what's the point of this?
Most games can't utilize 4 cores, so what good is 6?
Sure, maybe graphics gurus and folding farms...
But I don't think that'll bring them the money they need/want.
faulk wulf the idea of six cores is to make it do you can do more demanding things easier
anyway i thought games now adays more graphics intensive than cpu intensive and i would get one of these becasue i do a lot of video encoding/transcoding and this would let me do many files at once at full speed and speed up the total time
6 core proccesors are probably geared more towards media centre pc's than gaming pc's
Heck I know I'm getting a 6 core AMD. I passed on the 4 core generation because of low utilization but now that Cpu's can make better efficient use of their cores without much help from the programmer I have faith that all games being made will program specifically for this benefit.
6 core CPU's and Ultra powerful Gpgpu's are turning PC's into SILICON MONSTERS
The difference being that Intel aren't going to be selling that for the next year or two. Plus there is a reasonable difference Between the Pentium M and Core 2.
Well, I can't claim to be an expert regarding parallel processing and coding software to run on multiple cores, but surely they have given those applications and the OS itself the ability to simply scale to multiple cores whether it's 2, 4, 6 or more?
Separate names with a comma.