Just as an aside, "BE" stands for Black Edition.

The 8 gig overclock was done by disabling all but one module (only 2 "cores" were overclocked) though, not 8 "cores".

BTW: AMD doesn't like the "BE" much any more -- they like Intel's "K" moniker much better nowadays .... They like it well enough to "borrow" it for themselves.

Even as a much further aside, and a trip down the road ...
. . . What does the acronym "BFE" stand for in Serious Sam, BFE ?




Hint: it's Croteam

blast fiends everywhere

gstanford gstanford
i know what
he stands for
nvidia and intel
his other brands
don't work so well
next time
during show and tell
he'll bring his rig
it makes a smell







sickbeast > all brands

© 2011 SB pwnage

Not being on intels side here but have you been paying attention at all? How do you think that AMD is gonna fusion a GPU on CPUs that already run 125w? AMD is cherry picking in very low low yields their flagship cpus which looks to be sold for very cheap. The next cpu down the line, 8120 is also at a high 125 wattage. Most ppl forget fusion is limited by wattage, very limited. The trade off will always hold fusion CPUs back, at best they can be great for budget systems.

More interesting is how intel can manage very powerful cpus with their graphics which is great for a budget system. The performance of SB vs BD is gonna be insane once you consider intel has not only beat AMD terribly they did it while sacrificing CPU resources for a on die GPU. So while ppl will think its sad how bad BD vs SB looks, they are forgetting that intel has a gpu as well as a cpu. imagine what intel could do with a CPU at 125w today without the gpu. AMDs own ignorance has done this to them, had they not been touting fusion so much they wouldnt be in this mess. Their own bragging has made intel step up to the plate. There should be no doubt that intel igp is only gonna get better and better. They have bought a lot more patents and licenses from nvidia and you will see very interesting implementations of this technology that will impress even nvidia.

Whats truthfully sad is that AMD is still at this point and time totally incapable of fusion with any processor that has significant power. Their fusion CPU side is a joke, its technology 5+ yrs old. PPl think intels gpu is a joke but they now have a CPU, 2600 SB, that kills everything and is only 95w. There is sooo much room for improvement. Consider the fact that intel has started yrs after AMD on this technology and it should be scary to any amd fan. Intel has jumped vastly in their igp technology in just a few generations. One more jump as big as sandy in graphics and intel is ahead of amd in graphical power as well as having a cpu thats in the multitudes better.

Apoppin thinks intel is lost and behind but actually intel is a force that is dedicated now and has already bought billions of dollars worth of technology just for their graphics. This new technology hasnt had the time to be really implemented. SB is just the starting point.

I would say that AMD has completely fudged up. Their own mouths has brought the game to such high stakes. The only Fusion you will from them will be with cpus from waay back. Intel has taken their fusion very seriously, they are actually making something happen on a large scale. Amds BD needs soo much work its not gonna see a GPU for some time it ever does. You will see ph2s at 32nm with fusion before you see BD. They will most likely have the same graphical power as the chips today, and little more. I think intel is gonna be a very interesting company in the next few yrs. I am betting in some extremely genius technology coming out of them. Intel knows its got to step up and has already spent tremendously on gpu technology, well actual proven technology from nvidia....which is serious not laughabee. AMD is out of intels reach by far, intel knows the ARM threat and they are the sole fight to keep the x86 riches. Intel will impress, they will do this much. But will it save them?

Intel tried to make an x86 GPU and failed.

The thing is, these things are all software inverted. If you put 2 billion transistors on a chip, with the right software they will be powerful.

AMD is on the right track. Their current Fusion chips are simple, but they show a lot of potential and are fantastic for the laptop market.

The thing with CPUs right now is that we have reached the point where most things happen instantaneously. There is no need for more power for 90% of the things people use a computer for.

I think it will be interesting to have a supercomputer in a laptop. That's where AMD is headed. Intel can try to use their ideas and do their own thing, but the reality is, they don't have the level of GPU expertise that AMD has, period.

That said, they say that CPUs are a lot harder to design than GPUs. FWIW, AMD may have a tougher hill to climb than Intel has.

The pecking order right now for GPUs is:

1. nVidia
2. AMD
3. Intel

The pecking order for x86 CPUs is as follows:

1. Intel
2. AMD

You guys can refer to Bulldozer as a witch or a fairy or whatever else you choose. The fact of the matter remains that AMD has historically created monster CPUs during a generational leap such as what we're about to see.

Personal attacks SickBeast?
You are good at those, aren't you?

Why don't you talk about your beloved AMD instead of me? Not my fault nvidia and Intel are flogging the living sh!t out of them, they only have themselves to blame for that.

SickBeast, you better apologize to grstanford since he's taking it so personally!!! Tell him that it's only an "attack" at your own attempt to find humor in some certain things.

SickBeast, i dont want to be the one saying these things. I think its sad. I dont want to see AMD fail on BD or fusion but what i said above will pan out. AMD will never put a supercomputer in a laptop, where do you get that from? I do give you that BD is great for laptops, budget ones especially. That is not a bad implementation. But that is also not what amds fusion was touted, from the start it was pushed in a way that the last place you would expect fusion was budget laptops. As a matter of fact, most ppl were surprised to hear that BD isnt gonna be a fusion chip. there are still many who think it will be. It shouldve been, dont you see this? AMD the creator of fusion cannot accomplish this on this BD or the next. Intels igp is gonna get much much better. in 2yrs AMD wont have a fusion BD. Where do you think intels graphics will be by then? You probably dont see this, but it will be over 2x better on a chip that eats AMDs alive. This AMD chip wont even have a gpu on it! Can you see what i am saying?

Another thing your ignoring is that the console refresh is approaching fast. Overnight PC systems are gonna see games that are wayyyy more demanding. These amd laptop fusion systems wont be capable, they really arent today. Intel may not be capable either but they arent the one owning a gfx division that marked the future is fusion.

I guess my disappointment fuels my statements. AMD spent soo much time and money for ATI and fusion. It was a move that i am unsure of. Its looking bad from my perspective, i want it to pan out. I want it to, trust me.

I think your misinterpreting my position on this. The way i see it isnt the way i want. I am telling you that things look bad, especially that fusion isnt gonna happen for AMD CPUs that are significant any time in the near yrs. This is something you should take note of, it also should be unexpected to many AMD fans. If you think i am just promoting intel, i i am not. I would love to see BD stomp SB in the ground. I have the ability to keep my emotions out of my thoughts. I am only saying these things because its sad fact. Its not something you will hear from many, espeically one who wants fusion to work out for amd.