As I recall..... they delayed BD for so many months for a reason; that being that it was not up to par with what AMD wanted it to be.
---------- Post added 2011-10-14 at 08:27 AM ----------
---------- Post added 2011-10-14 at 02:43 PM ----------
It's being blamed on the operating system now. The processor is capable of using instruction sets and variables that don't even exist in current operating systems, i.e. Windows 7 (and therefore all apps/games/benches on Win 7) is essentially bottlenecking the FX chips - atleast that's what I've read.
Designing a CPU that nothing can make use of yet, now that's futureproofing. Wait, how did they even do that? o_O
It's in AMD's best interests to work VERY closely with Microsoft to help resolve performance issues - who knows, maybe with a framework patch we could see a ginormous boost? Or maybe we'll have to wait for Win 8? Staying positive here >_< it's partially thanks to AMD's competition that Intel came up with the monster that is Sandy Bridge.
Not to mention, I'm sure some [email protected] farms would love to test out this chip with -bigadv. It may be a shoddy implementation of 8 "cores", but with how saturated an i7 would get, BD might show an advantage with 8 heavy threads over an i7 ramming two heavy threads down one pipe.
Power consumption really is only ludicrous when the chip is overclocked too, keep in mind. Llano is made on the same process, and those sip power more or less. Clock an FX down to Llano clock levels, give it folding work, and it should be alright for that. Note that this is my speculation, and entirely a niche application. Trying to justify it being out of stock so fast rather than it being good (it sort of isnt right now).
red panda red panda red panda!
The combined cost of re-licensing for Win 7, training staff/engineers, building up support and getting everything fully compatible etc is simply not worth it.
Also all the machines here are E8400's + 2gb RAM...Win 7 wouldn't exactly help performance.