View Single Post
  #20 (permalink)  
Old September 21, 2012, 05:38 PM
sswilson's Avatar
sswilson sswilson is offline
Moderator
F@H
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Moncton NB
Posts: 14,227

My System Specs

Default

If they want to call it a core cluster then fine, that works for me, just don't call each individual unit a core unless it has all the resources it needs to act independantly. The main problem (IMO) with BD's release was that what they were calling an 8 core unit could barely hold it's own against their own previous hexacores. I also don't see how intel's naming convention isn't honest about the number of cores... it's clearly stated that hyperthreading is not a full fledged core and listed as 4 cores / 8 threads.

Now, OTOH, if (and I don't see why they shouldn't be able to demonstrate this) AMD processors can perform more simultaneous "low/medium usage" threads without a performance penalty then quite frankly there's probably a strong market for that as most folks aren't like us enthusiasts and they aren't running their gear @ 100%. Maybe we need to rethink how we benchmark, or at the very least attempt to come up with a method of testing general "snappiness" under medium loads rather than only looking at max loads.
__________________
EVGA X58 3X SLI / i7 980X / 3X 4G Mushkin Blackline Frostbite / XFX Pro 1000W / EVGA GTX 680 SC+ 2GB / Intel DC S3700 200G / WD 6401AALS / TT Lvl 10 GT
Swiftech MCP655 WC Pump / EK XT 240 Rad / 2X Scythe Ultra Kaze / EK Supreme HF / Primochill Myriad Dual Bay Res / Dell UltraSharp U2412M

Gigabyte C1007UN-D / 2X4G Gskill PC3-10700 / Pico PSU / 2.5" 750G Toshiba HDD / Mini-Box M350 / 1X 19" BenQ / 1X 17" HP
Reply With Quote