Guinness processor record at 8,429 GHz.

[Sylver]

It's amazing, although I don't see much liquid nitrogen in ordinary homes… It's true that they are hitting hard, and very expensive too xD Although there isn't much difference with the normal i7s... I was expecting something more exorbitant. Thanks for the contribution Kernel1.0, and to you for yours Tecnho Best regards

[Kernel1.0]

Is it expensive? Okay, the economy is very bad, but that price for a top-of-the-range, newly released model is cheap. An i7 top-of-the-range model is worth much more. Remember, they are dollars.

[Tecnho]

Speaking of money, it is cheap if we compare it to a Xtreme of 266 dollars to 1000 that is worth 980 or 990, now we will have to see the quality.

[Sylver]

If good, that's what I'm saying, that the price is not very exorbitant, although for some pockets it is still expensive...
But what do you say, a top-of-the-range i7 is close to 1000€, it's a pretty tolerable price, you have to consider it, especially if you have the capital.

Greetings

[CNCBCN]

from my point of view I don't skimp (and my economy leaves much to be desired, being unemployed …. ) anyway it has always been cheaper an AMD than an Intel

[Nemo]

The expensive-cheap is relative.
As Kernel 1.0 says, they are top-of-the-range processors, the question is how high that range is, because in the article that Tecnho linked to (waiting to see real tests and reviews) they talk about a comparison with the i7 2600k which are top-of-the-range, but with a "smaller" socket, that Intel still has the ace up its sleeve with the 2011 socket platform. which is supposed to be the "big brother" (and is expected to be closer to the 1000€ of its predecessors).

And my doubt is: Has AMD taken a step down compared to the competition, settling for taking over the middle market and forgetting about the Extreme range?

Best regards

[Sylver]

@Nemo:

And my doubt is: Has AMD stepped down a rung compared to the competition, settling for the mid-range market and forgetting about the Extreme range?

Best regards

I have my doubts that they have carried out such a strategy. As I also doubt that if AMD releases an extreme range later, they can be on par with Intel… but all are just ramblings.

Regards

[krampak]

Are there performance results for any site? because the figure of 4.8Ghz by air (without knowing if they are stable) does not impress me

[incrediboy]

well it doesn't really convince me, until I see the real performance of those processors…

[Raesan]

It will always be "useful" to assign 8 tasks to BOINC.

[Obione]

Or for working with video, audio and games, the virtual cores are not much use (I say the Bulldozer modules are more of the same) and most of us here are gamers.

I think they won't perform better than the 2500K in games. Let's hope some good micros come out

[CNCBCN]

we are with the same old story, what is the use of an 8 cores? what is the use of going up to 8.4 GHz with liquid nitrogen? what do I want an 8 cores at about 4 or 5 GHz by air for? to pass tests? what do you want an extreme range for if they are worth what they are worth and "they are only good for that":mudo: better a 386 of all time, right?

[Tecnho]

Why do you want a car if you can go by metro??, well, that's for anyone who wants to buy it and have the most powerful one, everyone decides where to spend their money and there is variety if they manufacture it is because there is demand, whether you think it's expensive or cheap, you have other options that will surely fit your budget, to me this seems perfect and that they come up with more nonsense and keep moving forward.

[CNCBCN]

@Tecnho:

Why do you want a car when you can take the metro??, well, for those who want to buy it and have the most powerful one, everyone decides where to spend their money and there is variety if they manufacture it is because there is demand, whether you think it's expensive or cheap, you have other options that will surely fit your budget, to me this seems perfect and that they come out with more nonsense and keep advancing.

Tecnho, don't you get the sarcasm?? there are always those who say that because there isn't an extreme range of AMD at a price that is prohibitive for almost all of us, but I see this new AMD as having balls, it's not too expensive, it's well priced (some tests are needed, like God commands, that is, saying it goes up X but not saying scores, well... that's it).

[incrediboy]

@CNCBCN:

we are with the same old story, what is the use of an 8 cores ¿? what is the use of going up to 8,4 GHz with liquid nitrogen ¿? what do I want an 8 cores at about 4 or 5 GHz by air ¿ for passing tests ¿what do you want an extrem range if they are worth what they are worth and "are only good for that":mudo: better a 386 of all time ¿no?

apart from white and black there is a scale of gray, did you know that? ;D

[Nemo]

The extreme range of processors must always exist, just like the competitions for cars since it is in that sector where the R&D of the companies is focused, or would we have Sandy Bridge at 200€ if it were not for the advances put into practice in the i7 980/990?

That's why I was wondering if AMD had left this market section, because I think it marks the line of future development.

I think that with these processors AMD has not done anything out of its line, processors more or less at the level of the rival but at a better price.

Best regards.