Waco Posted September 18, 2009 Posted September 18, 2009 Oh believe me a low end quad vs a high end quad is a big difference I hate waiting lol Impatience is bad. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bosco Posted September 18, 2009 Posted September 18, 2009 Yes it is Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ocre Posted September 18, 2009 Posted September 18, 2009 Oh believe me a low end quad vs a high end quad is a big difference I hate waiting lol haha! but come on, you are comparing inches on the scale of miles. I really wouldnt have anything to do this CPU, but the OEM non system builders (lets hope thats all who get one) wont really have too terrible of a cpu. What i think is funny is the fact it wasnt put up against the original phenom in the 9650 range. I think it will fall in that area as far as performance goes. And if thats true (which it looks to be) then I dont see at all any reason to get excited over this CPU. As a matter of fact I might even suggest getting the 9650 over this cpu, which show you how bad this cpu is. Like in what scenario could any one suggest getting the 9650? Well thats the only place the cpu fits, in a toss up between bad and bad. Its not horrible, no. And its only bad compared to the CPUs of today (and some of yesterday, like even 2yrs ago, lol)... It really seems to me that this may be the very bottom of the rejected barrel in the AMD recycling/ renaming brands. I dont think they are building very many cpus from the ground up with no L3, I would say the majority are phenom2s that had defective L3. I remember a while back reading some interesting info on the athlon 2 way before they came out. Here is something like it: http://www.legitreviews.com/news/6491/ except I doubt there will be many that don't have L3 thats disabled. It just is a pitty the OC isnt good on these chips. That is another thing that makes be believe this is the bottom of the worst bins of the phenom 2 runs. Anyway, those are my thoughts. Sum it up: I would say there are many original phenoms floating around that could be had for extremely cheap these days, which also would be a better buy. I see this chip is on par with the older phenom 9650, and it cost about the same as well. To be excited about this quad then one should also see the older phenom 9650 as a great buy as well. but nobody will ever say that. Hype is an interesting thing Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krieg1337 Posted September 18, 2009 Posted September 18, 2009 Fine, dark if you are not trolling be more specific when you say something. You said the 620 "can" beat the I5 then ccokeman replies to what you said with proof at how your statement was wrong but then you just tell him you were talking about games. cmon... I have been saying that CPU's CAN beat high ends in games since a while in other threads...But I guess I need to make sure EVERYONE knows now, that when I say a CPU is good, I mean it from the GAMERS VIEW. Sorry if you misunderstood me, but now you know, so its all good right? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ocre Posted September 18, 2009 Posted September 18, 2009 I have been saying that CPU's CAN beat high ends in games since a while in other threads...But I guess I need to make sure EVERYONE knows now, that when I say a CPU is good, I mean it from the GAMERS VIEW. Sorry if you misunderstood me, but now you know, so its all good right? Geez, I got what you meant from the beginning. I dont see why everyone went so anal bout it. How could someone not understand it. Everyone knows that the i5 eats this CPU form lunch. Its not even competing with it. What is wrong with your statement saying it CAN beat the i5 in some cases, well in some games. I think it was well worth mentioning that much. What is getting wrong with peeps these days. Always ready to jump on people. Using the "T" word at any chance give the poor guy a break. I was actually surprised to see this crappy CPU keep up in gaming at all. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krieg1337 Posted September 18, 2009 Posted September 18, 2009 People have issues with my thoughts because I don't "go with the flow"(In this case, I don't go, omfg Intel = <3) Look at the review, then read my post, then come back. You will see I have evidence behind my thought, but we can all just read a post, not look a the review and then attack me for posting that a CPU has the ability to beat an i5 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bosco Posted September 18, 2009 Posted September 18, 2009 People have issues with my thoughts because I don't "go with the flow"(In this case, I don't go, omfg Intel = Look at the review, then read my post, then come back. You will see I have evidence behind my thought, but we can all just read a post, not look a the review and then attack me for posting that a CPU has the ability to beat an i5 If you look at the numbers its between 1 or 2 frames. If you look at margin of error its the same numbers. The lower the resolution the more of a jump you will see. If we had listed 800 or 1024 it would have been a blood bath and to be honest who cares about that. Its pretty even when you look at the gaming scores and the higher you go CPU doesn't matter. So when it comes down to it you buy based on what you want to use it for. If gaming is all you need this is a cheap as you can get saving you a few bucks for sure. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krieg1337 Posted September 18, 2009 Posted September 18, 2009 If you look at the numbers its between 1 or 2 frames. If you look at margin of error its the same numbers. The lower the resolution the more of a jump you will see. If we had listed 800 or 1024 it would have been a blood bath and to be honest who cares about that. Its pretty even when you look at the gaming scores and the higher you go CPU doesn't matter. So when it comes down to it you buy based on what you want to use it for. If gaming is all you need this is a cheap as you can get saving you a few bucks for sure. Exactly, which is why I don't understand why people have issues when I say that. They say i5 all the way, but is it necessary for games? No. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
redtigerdragon Posted September 18, 2009 Posted September 18, 2009 Why buy a quad when you are just interested in gaming? Just get a cheap dual core. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bosco Posted September 18, 2009 Posted September 18, 2009 I think it was just the way it was worded is all. It sounded like the I5 got smoked when in facts its pretty much the samething when you break it down. Like said before if you do stuff like rendering and such an I5 is a no brainer over this cpu if you want faster performance and have the money. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ccokeman Posted September 18, 2009 Posted September 18, 2009 Bah! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IVIYTH0S Posted September 18, 2009 Posted September 18, 2009 Why buy a quad when you are just interested in gaming? Just get a cheap dual core. aka a good processor this chip bites the big one, low price or not. x2 550 FTW Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts