Does AH only use one core of an AMD chip?

[Skuzzy]

One of the things you can do is to contact the support folks who support the applications you want to run and ask them what CPU will run that application the best.  Support people are only interested in what will result in the fewest number of calls and emails so they tend to be pretty upfront and honest about it.

[TequilaChaser]

my AutoCad MEP works extremely better on AMD than it does on Intel......  AutoCad has always worked better on AMD platforms for me personally.....  as well as some of my other auditing programs  & hvac programs.....

yet my Intel blows my AMD away when it comes to coding/decrypting/editing movies & videos....

just my personal experience

TC

[Skuzzy]

That makes sense TC.  AMD has a better FPU than Intel, and AutoCAD is all about FPU code.  While Intel does kick them in the transcoding/streaming department.

Like I said before, they both have their own strengths and weaknesses.

[Getback]

That makes sense TC.  AMD has a better FPU than Intel, and AutoCAD is all about FPU code.  While Intel does kick them in the transcoding/streaming department.

Like I said before, they both have their own strengths and weaknesses.

I'm going to wait for word from the man. However, it will be a while before I build again anyway.

[skribetm]

cranked up my laptop chip to 2.6GHz stable from 1.4GHz stock; using k10stat.
even gave much better FR's:
+45 ~ +50 ~ in hordes, +48 in heavy smokes.

all for $450 price tag from best buy. sweetest deal, yet.


btw, nice touch on the texas rangers logo in tanktown

[Getback]

my AutoCad MEP works extremely better on AMD than it does on Intel......  AutoCad has always worked better on AMD platforms for me personally.....  as well as some of my other auditing programs  & hvac programs.....

yet my Intel blows my AMD away when it comes to coding/decrypting/editing movies & videos....

just my personal experience

TC

Wouldn't have thought that TC. Good info.

[Kev367th]

Hi Skuzzy. (long time)

Downloaded the game and tried on a Phenom II X6 1100T.

Definately uses more than one core.

Would guess all Phenom II's would be the same.

[guncrasher]

cranked up my laptop chip to 2.6GHz stable from 1.4GHz stock; using k10stat.
even gave much better FR's:
+45 ~ +50 ~ in hordes, +48 in heavy smokes.

all for $450 price tag from best buy. sweetest deal, yet.


btw, nice touch on the texas rangers logo in tanktown

assuming you play ah with all the eye candy on. oh wait do you?

semp

[Skuzzy]

Hi Skuzzy. (long time)

Downloaded the game and tried on a Phenom II X6 1100T.

Definately uses more than one core.

Would guess all Phenom II's would be the same.

Phenom II's are a bit of a grab bag as that is where AMD started cutting in a fix into the silicon (this one is hard to nail down as AMD has a habit of not notifying the public when they make all their silicon fixes).  However, if you run another application which uses a high resolution timer, at the same time as the game is running, it will revert to using one core.

Good to see you again Kev.  It has been a while.  Hope everything is going well with you.

[icepac]

Regardless of the manufacturer, Aces High will more enjoy "per core" performance.

This means that the fastest core II processors will surely outperform a lower end I5 and possibly I7.

One thing that clouds the waters is that many benchmarks showing performance comparisons will show the summed performance of all the cores meaning a low end six core amd phenom will be outperformed by a phenomII X2 555 black edition in aces high.

[skribetm]

assuming you play ah with all the eye candy on. oh wait do you?

semp

yup, but at only 1366x768. hi-res pack installed in those screenies.
next step is 2560x1600p with amd fx. BF3 here i come! 


DSC04137 by ᵿ, on Flickr

[Skuzzy]

I'm going to wait for word from the man. However, it will be a while before I build again anyway.

I am a bit disappointed with Bulldozer.  The 8150 seems to scale better than the Intel 2500K, but the performance and power usage is worse when running low loads.  The power usage escalates pretty high, compared to Intel, when loading all the cores up.  It was a bit of a pain to overclock the 8150, compared to the 2500K Intel CPU.

Seems the best price/performance ratios are found in the Intel 2500K.

I expected more, from all the marketing AMD has been slinging around for the last few years about Bulldozer.  Maybe my expectations were too high from all that media blizting they did, but the real world performance levels are worse than a Phenom II, in single threaded cases.

I do not think you can go wrong with Bulldozer, but I see no compelling reason to not use the Intel 2500K over it.  In some cases the 2500K performs better, which I would not have expected.  If you average it all together, they are pretty much neck-in-neck.

Aces High, in a lightly loaded system, performs better on the Intel 2500K versus the AMD 8150, with stock clocks.

[Masherbrum]

I am a bit disappointed with Bulldozer.  The 8150 seems to scale better than the Intel 2500K, but the performance and power usage is worse when running low loads.  The power usage escalates pretty high, compared to Intel, when loading all the cores up.  It was a bit of a pain to overclock the 8150, compared to the 2500K Intel CPU.

Seems the best price/performance ratios are found in the Intel 2500K.

I expected more, from all the marketing AMD has been slinging around for the last few years about Bulldozer.  Maybe my expectations were too high from all that media blizting they did, but the real world performance levels are worse than a Phenom II, in single threaded cases.

I do not think you can go wrong with Bulldozer, but I see no compelling reason to not use the Intel 2500K over it.  In some cases the 2500K performs better, which I would not have expected.  If you average it all together, they are pretty much neck-in-neck.

Aces High, in a lightly loaded system, performs better on the Intel 2500K versus the AMD 8150, with stock clocks.

Latest issue of Maximum PC highlights the Bulldozer, AMD struck out with it.    The Intel scored higher on the majority of the scores/speeds/etc.

Agree with you completely Skuzzy.    The Intel's are solid.

[Getback]

I am a bit disappointed with Bulldozer.  The 8150 seems to scale better than the Intel 2500K, but the performance and power usage is worse when running low loads.  The power usage escalates pretty high, compared to Intel, when loading all the cores up.  It was a bit of a pain to overclock the 8150, compared to the 2500K Intel CPU.

Seems the best price/performance ratios are found in the Intel 2500K.

I expected more, from all the marketing AMD has been slinging around for the last few years about Bulldozer.  Maybe my expectations were too high from all that media blizting they did, but the real world performance levels are worse than a Phenom II, in single threaded cases.

I do not think you can go wrong with Bulldozer, but I see no compelling reason to not use the Intel 2500K over it.  In some cases the 2500K performs better, which I would not have expected.  If you average it all together, they are pretty much neck-in-neck.

Aces High, in a lightly loaded system, performs better on the Intel 2500K versus the AMD 8150, with stock clocks.

Thanks Skuzzy! I have the 2500k in my wishlist waiting for lower prices. Probably after the 1st of the year. Can't wait!

[Noir]

thanks for the feedback skuzzy, pretty much confirms whats written allover the net. Even if I could stick a bulldozer in my AM3 motherboard, I'm not sure the performance is that much better over my current PII 965 BE...