Are people really still trying to pretend that bulldozer was good?

Yes. I was telling some AMD fanboys that bulldozer was dogshit and they all REEEEE'd at me

Problem is even when fully multithreaded sandy still kicked bulldozer's ass up and down the street. Bulldozer's only chance was to slash prices down to the ankles and pretend like their top sku was actually a budget option so people wouldn't compare it to the 2600k

I guess people are so emotionally invested in the years of damage control thy did they just can't move on.

It's all a covert psyops by amd stock owners to make the many sandy bridge owners to upgrade to ryzen in order to make their and stock more valuable.

What? No it wasn't. It was extremely expensive and shitty at the same time, just like Ryzen.

And yet Ryzen is still better than Intel.

i'm still on 8350. it wasn't good but it was okay fir the price in my case back then. still, it aged like wine. more recent games are running better than older ones because they use more threads. for example, ac unity runs better than black flag. i will stick with it until socket am5 comes out. as long as current consoles exist with their crap cpu's, the fx will do just fine.

If price is that much more important than performance, did you know you can buy a box of 675 transistors on Amazon for

core for core? no, intel has way more potential you drone

Zen 2 is on par with Intel for single-threaded perf. It's also not vulnerable to the dozens of security vulnerabilities that come out every day on Intel, meaning Intel CPUs keep getting slower (at least on the server side) while AMD doesn't.

Bulldozer was great. Maybe if you spent all day running cinebench like a real power user you would understand.

>Zen
for wat?

Attached: UPGRADE2010.png (836x768, 17K)

>'things that never happened' for 2000

Fine wine.

It is better the sandy bridge, it aged better before security holes in Linux. It was a rough rude that smoothed out in the long run.

>675 transistors on Amazon for

>REEEEE'd at me
retarded people do,
smart people buys 8 cores for price of 2

It wasn't great but my 8350 is still serving me relatively well, might upgrade in the next couple years thought.

Great CPU's, they became so legendary,Intel would eventually pay tribute to them with clones of their own.

>at least it was cheap
isn't a $400 FX 9590 beaten by a, what, $120 2600?

>$400 FX

>$400 FX 9590 beaten by a, what, $120 2600?
FX 9590 still in price
intel 2600 cheap as shit
iCoocks is loosers

BUMP

>as long as current consoles exist with their crap cpu's, the fx will do just fine.
Yeah it's amazing how much console developers are able to pull out of those low power cores that are literally shittier than bulldozer. Their only advantage is not sharing so much shit between each other, but even with that they're just too barebones to compete with anything. Amd really won a lottery with console contracts.

>Zen 2 is on par with Intel for single-threaded perf. It's also not vulnerable to the dozens of security vulnerabilities that come out every day on Intel
This statement is fundamentally untrue because:
1. Intel vulnerabilities don't come out "every day" but it took literal decades for them to be found
2. While it's true Zen 2 (or Zen in general) is not vulnerable to intel's bugs, it's very likely it has its own set of security issues that will surface sooner or later (but probably sooner than the decades it took for intel, because nowadays much more people are on lookout for such things).

>Amd really won a lottery with console contracts.
IT WAS NOT LATTERY, BUT PREDICATBLE.
ONLY RETARDEDED iFUGS LOOSE

I still use this housefire of a cpu in my rig. Got it for cheap in black friday couple years ago and with semi decent gpu (gtx1050ti) I can play AAA games on pretty high setting and it wouldn't break a sweat

>unironically stuttered on pubg due to how inefficient the game is

Still using a piledriver to this day. Serves me well, single-threaded loads are okay, multi-threaded loads are comfortably quick. Due to sensible decisions (offloading a lot of compute to GPU in the case of terminals and compositing) my CPU load is usually negligible. The datasets I'm working with will probably get bigger soon though, so I'll have to upgrade or use a remote machine. Still, I'm not that impatient.

>The datasets I'm working with will probably get bigger soon though
3900X/3950X my fren

>70MB cache
Wow, things have changed. I wish I could afford that, but £500 is pretty steep (I'm a student). My supervisor has a 48-core machine with ample memory that I'll be able to ssh into as soon as it's fixed, so it's not like my old machine will cause issues or anything.

but the fx8320 was a very fine chip in terms of price to performance.

video games aside, it was kinda on the same price point as some i3 cpus, yet it performed much smoother when it came to multitasking.

Vishera had some good options at certain price points. The 6300, for example, was priced on the low end of Intel's i3 processors and offered significantly better multithreaded performance at the cost of slightly lower single threaded which could be offset through a modest overclock. The 8320, as well, could have been a good choice for the same reasons. Then a bunch of hardware vulnerabilities came to light which forced Intel to develop patches that reduced performance. At the time, though, this wasn't a concern which relegated most of the Vishera lineup to niche status.

Attached: images.jpg (207x244, 11K)

bulldozer was shit
vishera tho was good

*laughs in 220W*

AMD can take a shit and AMDrones will still buy it.

AMDrones are mentally deficient, they barely qualify as subhuman.

INTEL can take a shit and INTELrones will still buy it.

INTELrones are mentally deficient, they barely qualify as subhuman.

Can I be a CYRIXrone?

Shame you can't find a new 990FX board anymore. 4.5 is easily achievable on those and it kinda solves the single core problem.

Went from an 8350 to 3700x, I never once said bulldozer was good, it was at best adequate, nothing more.
But hey, at least it wasnt an intelaviv chip.

Attached: CPU-Zen2.jpg (401x400, 78K)

Cyrix was destroyed by Intel, guess who is next on Intel's chopping block.

They're in no position now sure but certainly not in the future.

It was a good low budget option.

Glad I avoided this disaster. Still holding onto my 2600k until there's a launch without issues.

Pretty sure mine was 200.

Also no psp/me

Just ignore them, they are just retards with buyer remorse trying to ride on AMD's current reputation.

>Amd really won a lottery with console contracts.
IT WAS NOT LOTTERY, BUT PREDICATBLE.
ONLY RETARDEDED iFUGS LOOSE

I had a FX-8120, and I wasn't THAT stupid to pretend that it was great!
It was good enough for the shit I did back then...
I'm an AMDfag, but I not that STUPID to defend what can't be defended!!!
The only faggot I know that defend a platform no matter what are intelfag and LUnixfags.

Stop doing drugs kid...

There you are wrong! Bulldozer = Itanium.
And BOTH SIDES tried to defend their respective SHIT!

Is this supposed to be a joke?
Bulldozer was awesome and only got better with time. It was a server chip and buying it is the equivalent of buying a xeon at affordable prices. Too bad people fell for Intel's marketing over sandy bridge.

How can it be a sever chip when nobody used it in servers?

They didn't win a lottery. IBM pulled out of that space after the PS3, Nvidia was a dogshit parter to Sony, Intel didn't seem to have interest and also didn't have the ability/desire to develop a GPU also, and AMD just did a good job and didn't ruin their business partnerships.

it hit 5ghz so that made it good