bit-tech.net

What's the Best AMD Bulldozer Motherboard?

Comments 1 to 25 of 43

Reply
feathers 22nd November 2011, 09:12 Quote
Does anyone care what the best bulldozer motherboard is? I mean it's not like we are gonna rush out and buy a processor that performs so badly are we?
V3ctor 22nd November 2011, 09:34 Quote
If the FX-8150 comes to he 150eur mark (cheaper than 2500k), then I have no problem recomending this cpu to people.

But first they have to "disapear" with the Phenom II stock. :D
I would buy a Phenom II anytime over the new bulldozers
feathers 22nd November 2011, 09:40 Quote
It's currently 220 pound. Good luck with that one :)
tonyd223 22nd November 2011, 10:19 Quote
Think @V3ctor has a point - would rather buy a Phenom II than an FX, especially when you consider the price to performance thing.

I wonder if AMD's next processor will require a different slot as well, so you'd not even be buying AM3+ for future proofing. I see that FM1, which looks like a good idea, will be replaced by FM2 - so bang goes the upgrade path...
greigaitken 22nd November 2011, 10:37 Quote
what else were they gonna do with all the mb reviews in anticipation for bulldozer?
might as well press the publish key than the delete key
feathers 22nd November 2011, 10:39 Quote
I would rather not buy an antiquated phenom II when I can buy an i5 2500k. Makes no sense to me but I guess there are always people who will buy the crap stuff. I would rather save some extra cash and buy a significantly faster CPU especially when the intel overclocks so well.
Bede 22nd November 2011, 11:00 Quote
It's difficult for people who were sold the Bulldozer myth, and thus stuck with AMD past the point where loyalty becomes stupidity. There's no reason (as greigaitken points out) that bit-tech shouldn't cover AMD stuff just because it's rubbish atm.
feathers 22nd November 2011, 11:07 Quote
For me it's not difficult. When AMD was king I was just about to buy one and then Intel came out with the core duo. All of my AMD friends then dumped AMD for Intel. I go with whatever performs best and I also like overclocking (AMD has generally been quite weak on that compared to intel).

I guess there is the novelty value of having an 8 core cpu. I personally don't want 8 weak cores any more than I'd pay 500 pounds for a 32nm 6 core sandybridge. Until my mobo died 2 months ago I was using i7 860. When I buy a replacement mobo it will be z68 and i5 2500k. I'm no longer willing to pay 220+ for cpu and i5 k gives lot of overclock headroom at reasonable cost. AMD doesn't even merit a look. :)
Somer_Himpson 22nd November 2011, 11:09 Quote
Seriously...why bother?
I started reading through all the blurb regarding this in Custom PC this month and the decided to not bother wasting my life.
How stupid are AMD?
Involve the community, run some benchmarks, test things more before release...no-one is going to buy this shite.
Hustler 22nd November 2011, 11:19 Quote
Lol...Derpdozer Motherboards.

Seriously, who cares, might as well run an article on which is the best and quickest method of throwing money down the drain, as it equates to the same thing.
tonyd223 22nd November 2011, 11:44 Quote
I still use a 720BE, so a Phenom II x6 or a 980BE x4 makes upgrade sense... but yes, if starting from scratch, AMD makes no sense now...
Claave 22nd November 2011, 12:12 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonyd223
I wonder if AMD's next processor will require a different slot as well, so you'd not even be buying AM3+ for future proofing. I see that FM1, which looks like a good idea, will be replaced by FM2 - so bang goes the upgrade path...

As far as we know, the follow-up to Bulldozer (called Piledriver) will have an integrated graphics unit and thus will require a new socket. We're not sure what this will be at the moment. Perhaps the Llano follow-up and Piledriver will use the same new socket or maybe we'll be in the same situation as Intel, with LGA1155 and LGA2011 concurrently.
casper410 22nd November 2011, 12:51 Quote
Clearly we can see the performance improvement from 890 to 990 chipset. Well done Bit-tech.

Some of you forget when Phenom architecture was in its early stages the performance was basic. I really hope AMD can do the same with Bulldozer architecture, and i believe they will, i think we are in for some amazing future improvements on Bulldozer.
FM1 socket is a great build for most peoples needs, and at a very good price, well done AMD. Now release your 7 series GPU`s and help fund your processor design.
Unless you all happy with Intel`s new £800 chips and £200 botherboards, and panicking about AMD changing their sockets, so you can future proof your little gaming and internet pc, then stop complaining about Intels competition.
grritsshawn 22nd November 2011, 13:15 Quote
none
Hustler 22nd November 2011, 13:23 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonyd223
I still use a 720BE, so a Phenom II x6 or a 980BE x4 makes upgrade sense... but yes, if starting from scratch, AMD makes no sense now...

Upgrading to a 6 core makes sense...but to a 4 core from 3 really doesn't, 3 cores will give you 80-90% of the performance of a full blown 4 core, especially in games, admittedly, an extra core might be worth it if your into 3d rendering or heavy photo manipulation...
longweight 22nd November 2011, 13:50 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by casper410
Unless you all happy with Intel`s new £800 chips and £200 botherboards, and panicking about AMD changing their sockets, so you can future proof your little gaming and internet pc, then stop complaining about Intels competition.

???

Everyone is happy with the £160 Intel i5 2500K chip which is cheaper and better than the latest AMD Bulldozer stuff so I am not sure what point you are making here?

And in what way are people complaining about Intel's competition? All I can see is people recommending the Intel over any current AMD chip for most applications.
Quote:
Originally Posted by casper410
Some of you forget when Phenom architecture was in its early stages the performance was basic. I really hope AMD can do the same with Bulldozer architecture, and i believe they will, i think we are in for some amazing future improvements on Bulldozer.


Proof please.
Panos 22nd November 2011, 14:15 Quote
I bought a Gigabyte 990FX more than 7 months ago. I am pretty happy with it.
Awesome board, supports SLI (2 GTX570s on it atm) and the T1090 is working perfectly @ 4.3 Ghz.

The only game that stressed my system was Anno 1404, on huge maps with quite a lot going on!!!!!!!!
(My system chew and spit out Skyrim, BF3 and huge maps on CIV5).
Action_Parsnip 22nd November 2011, 14:17 Quote
NO gigabyte board??

And Asus wins again, <3 asus
Woodspoon 22nd November 2011, 14:25 Quote
Poor old AMD, as much as I want to see them succeed they really have punched themselves violently in the face this time, even if their next chip is super mega ultra hyper omg wtf turbo speed good, who's going to believe them after this mess?
tonyd223 22nd November 2011, 15:47 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hustler
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonyd223
I still use a 720BE, so a Phenom II x6 or a 980BE x4 makes upgrade sense... but yes, if starting from scratch, AMD makes no sense now...

Upgrading to a 6 core makes sense...but to a 4 core from 3 really doesn't, 3 cores will give you 80-90% of the performance of a full blown 4 core, especially in games, admittedly, an extra core might be worth it if your into 3d rendering or heavy photo manipulation...

Yeah, you're probably right - will probably go intel next year. Never bought intel for home before, so feel a little bit... er fan-boy-ish?
feathers 22nd November 2011, 16:39 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by casper410
Clearly we can see the performance improvement from 890 to 990 chipset. Well done Bit-tech.

Some of you forget when Phenom architecture was in its early stages the performance was basic. I really hope AMD can do the same with Bulldozer architecture, and i believe they will, i think we are in for some amazing future improvements on Bulldozer.
FM1 socket is a great build for most peoples needs, and at a very good price, well done AMD. Now release your 7 series GPU`s and help fund your processor design.
Unless you all happy with Intel`s new £800 chips and £200 botherboards, and panicking about AMD changing their sockets, so you can future proof your little gaming and internet pc, then stop complaining about Intels competition.

LOL. Give it enough time and the AMD kids start posting their love comments for what amounts to a very poor choice in computer hardware.

It's funny to me how people form emotional attachments to computer companies. I agree that competition is good for driving down prices and pushing forward development, I would not choose a processor because of any emotional attachment to AMD or Intel. My choice is based on cost and performance. If AMD took the lead by a significant margin I would drop intel. There is no place for emotional attachment with computer hardware. Performance is the deciding factor and in no way can you argue in favour of either the old phenom architecture or the new 8 slow core bull dozer. Even if I currently had an AMD system and was looking to upgrade, I would ditch the AMD parts and go with intel purely on performance. i5 2500k is the best value+performance processor at the moment.
chrismarkham1982 22nd November 2011, 20:11 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by casper410

Unless you all happy with Intel`s new £800 chips and £200 botherboards


We're not happy with 800 quid chips and 100 quid mobo's...we happy with Bulldozer bashing 150 quid Sandybridge chips and 100 quid mobos :)
Rustypouch 22nd November 2011, 21:03 Quote
I see a bit of patronizing going on here in some of these posts...not cool. Live and let be.

I have glanced through this article, I am not really interested in Bulldozer in its current state. I was another one who pinned his hopes on it being a good bang-for-buck processor and was planning on using it in my next, from scratch, build. It isn't just the CPU either, the Intel motherboards and chipset's have more variety to choose from and better features. If I bought into Bulldozer, I'd only be kicking myself later on down the line, knowing I could of had more performance, for less, from Intel. I think a lot of people will end up at the same conclusion.
Jipa 22nd November 2011, 23:55 Quote
Thanks for the roundup! Good to see the Crosshair V at the top, as that's the board I'm going to slap to my new setup as soon as I can be arsed to build it.

And please keep the bashing-bullshit to your self. It's hardly constructive, we've seen it a thousand times and it's getting so old it's just flaming at this stage. If you don't care about AMD/Bulldozer then why on earth do you have to pop into the article comments just to bash it once more? Sigh.

(now I'll just sit back and wait for someone to really make my point by calling me a fanboy)
feathers 23rd November 2011, 00:26 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jipa
Thanks for the roundup! Good to see the Crosshair V at the top, as that's the board I'm going to slap to my new setup as soon as I can be arsed to build it.

And please keep the bashing-bullshit to your self. It's hardly constructive, we've seen it a thousand times and it's getting so old it's just flaming at this stage. If you don't care about AMD/Bulldozer then why on earth do you have to pop into the article comments just to bash it once more? Sigh.

(now I'll just sit back and wait for someone to really make my point by calling me a fanboy)

I refuse to play in to your hands.

Fangirl.
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums