AMD FX-series processors clock speeds detailed

I recently bought a Gygabyte 870A-UD3 motherboard and I was greatly surprised because for a low price i got an AM3+ board that was still able to handle my old Phenom II processor. So I'm actually ready for these new processors and when they hit stores I'll just need to buy the cpu.
 
Really? A 920 will still perfectly fine way more than 3yrs after 2008.

Where as this AMD crap, you know it sucks when they have to crank it up to outragously high speeds to give it any hope of competing, which you know will be incredibly hard to cool.
 
Really? A 920 will still perfectly fine way more than 3yrs after 2008.

Where as this AMD crap, you know it sucks when they have to crank it up to outragously high speeds to give it any hope of competing, which you know will be incredibly hard to cool.

The High clocks are because of the architectural aspects. What you just stated was a kin to saying that a HD 6970 needs 1536 shader cores to compete with the GTX 580's 512 cuda cores. They are completely different architectures and comparing them by operating frequency makes no sense.

A 920 will still perfectly fine way more than 3yrs after 2008.
Huh?

which you know will be incredibly hard to cool
Oh really? You know this ?

BTW, I wonder how you arrive at the conclusion that 3.6Ghz (the speed of the 8150P flagship) is "outragously high speeds"? [sic]. Intel's flagship (i7 990) is clocked @ 3.46Ghz . So 3.46Ghz is just fine, and 3.6Ghz is "outrageous"? While the new AMD CPU's appear to be clocked a bit higher, I guess outrageous starts where the blue box ends ey?

Another great guest contribution.
 
On a related note Sandy Bridge-E will be shipping without a stock cooler....and according to VR-Zone, current steppings are running at ~180 watts and:

While I'd doubt that anyone looking at buying an X79 system doesn't already have (or will have) an 80 Plus certified PSU with at least 23A on mobo ATX rail, 180 watts doesn't sound overclocker friendly.
 
Back