- Joined
- Jan 10, 2012
I can only hope it's a 64 core compute/ 64 core ipg processor.
-
Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!
AMD CORE is back
- Thread starter Johan45
- Start date
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2013
- Location
- USA
I do like the os. It's like the best parts of Linux and Windows in one.
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2013
- Location
- Holed up in Branford, CT
I love my Macs. Irony is they run windows better than any OEM PC! I love OS X. But I love to tinker with hardware and overclock. So that is a minus. I have built a couple hackintosh.
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2012
firesoul you need to look around, desktop is dead, mobile is where it's at, tv, radio, games, internet all in the palm of your hand!!! you can even game or watch shows on your big screen all through your phone!!!!
my guys are not even using the issued lap tops other than to store the data and deliver it to me, they gather all the data through the phone, it's just amazing!!!
my guys are not even using the issued lap tops other than to store the data and deliver it to me, they gather all the data through the phone, it's just amazing!!!
What you posted above (though true, the wattage) is not productive to this thread in the least and could be construed as flame baiting (particularly the first line)...I would like to stop this before anything starts.
Thanks.
Greens off and to put things in perspective, your CPU's are 2.6GHz. Put them to 4.7Ghz and see where their power is. Perhaps not 220W, but it will likely be 150W+. Not to mention you paid an arm and a leg more for that setup compared to the AMD (both new).
Now, let it go Cul.
Thanks.
Greens off and to put things in perspective, your CPU's are 2.6GHz. Put them to 4.7Ghz and see where their power is. Perhaps not 220W, but it will likely be 150W+. Not to mention you paid an arm and a leg more for that setup compared to the AMD (both new).
Now, let it go Cul.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2012
Rampant inefficiency? The 9590 smears your 5650s in single threaded.
And, honestly, who will actually utilize 12C/12T daily?
To further this point, let's see how much power your "oh so efficient" 5650s pull at 4.7GHz.
If you can even get in the ballpark of that speed.
Also, you paid an arm and a leg for your setup. The 9590 is easily under $500 for CPU and motherboard together.
Edit: Wow, EarthDog literally typed what I did in his edit
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2012
Huh? I have nothing against AMD processors, if they fix some of their issues and beat Intel I would glady jump on board, considering AMD CPUs are cheaper.
Those Opterons with their ridiculous number of cores are already tempting.
But yeah, this looks like another new APU, which handily beat Intel's craptacular integrated graphics at low to mid end price ranges.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2004
- Location
- Santa Barbara, CA
Perhaps just as long as we had to wait for Duke Nukem Forever.
But, I must say that the A64 was the most fun I've ever had overclocking. Those were the days, BH5 and TCCD.
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2013
- Location
- USA
Ya unfortunately that seems to be the future. ARM has come a long way though. Buy hey there's a reason I became an android developer lol.
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2013
- Location
- Holed up in Branford, CT
Intel was once handed the keys to the kingdom by IBM. Now they let ARM get a foothold. It's only a matter if time till Apple releases a MacBook running on ARM. You know it will sell like hot cakes and the ARM floodgates will open. Especially now with Apple having a 64 bit processor.
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2005
- Location
- Ormond Beach, FL.
Honestly, IMHO. if Intel would lower their price point to AMD's, they WOULD drive AMD out of business, but then they, and Nvidia, would have the SEC on them for having a monopoly. I buy what is best. First it was Intel and then AMD and then for years up to now, Intel. I've had AMD. The last was the 4400+. After that has been all Intel. I have never preferred ATI over Nvidia. My first love was 3DFX and then Nvidia.
The one MAJOR problem with Macs is you have to buy specific hardware designed for them, which costs twice or more as much as the same PC component. I've seen video cards at outlandish prices for Macs.
The one MAJOR problem with Macs is you have to buy specific hardware designed for them, which costs twice or more as much as the same PC component. I've seen video cards at outlandish prices for Macs.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2013
Not true. Lower price point = less money for R&D, which is what is keeping Intel ahead.
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2005
- Location
- Ormond Beach, FL.
That is a true statement.
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2013
- Location
- Holed up in Branford, CT
To be fair Macs themselves. The hardware Apple makes. They are a cut above. The motherboards are workstation grade. The power supplies are awesome. Macs have a long useful life. OS X is very, very good. That being said a pro model Mac USED to be affordable. Not any longer. Now you can't buy an expandable Mac unless you are very well off. You are stuck with an iMac or a Mac Mini. Neither floats my boat. I don't want or need a laptop. 90% of all computers over $1,000 sold are Macs. Professionals and college students gobble them. up.
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2013
- Location
- Holed up in Branford, CT
They spend an incredible amount of money on R&D. Maybe the most in tech.
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2013
Yes. Huge overhead, but it's what's keeping them on top. That's why you pay a little more. AMD can't afford to do that. They don't have near the bankroll that Intel does. That's why they market in the areas that they do.
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2005
- Location
- Ormond Beach, FL.
Apple does not make all of their hardware. C'mon, the processors now are Intel. I've seen Nvidia cards for a PC that cost 300 go for 600 for a Mac.
BTW, Microsoft has what a 95% of the market share in OS's and they are laying off 15,000 people. They got in over their heads with phones, audio players, and the Surface. They can't compete with Apple in any of them.
At one time, Apple had more available money than the US government had.
BTW, Microsoft has what a 95% of the market share in OS's and they are laying off 15,000 people. They got in over their heads with phones, audio players, and the Surface. They can't compete with Apple in any of them.
At one time, Apple had more available money than the US government had.
