is the bulldozer get the biased result from ASUS crosshair V+580

It makes common sense for the reason that I am presuming Asus has an contract with AMD to build its mother boards the certified ones for testing. Also all web sites have used a 580 GTX thread minimal graphics restricted access. I have the same opinion it’s a sound justification.
I confirmed at several other sites as well. The Asus + 580GTX have been used so much all over the place. This is enormously strange. Please go through the web sites on Google manually.
So to conclude:
1. Can (Toms and others) please do an examination with extra nine hundred and ninety boards?
2. Can we please have a contrast with extra Nvidia cards and AMD?
3. Who do us faith? Isn't a biased evaluation entirely anti alongside AMD from day one ?
4. Can somebody else separately run benches with the 8150,2500K, and 2600K using dissimilar cards and mother boards?
5. Is there an Nvidia [Intel nexus] to make confident 8150 looks awful? Was the (BFBC3) patch doctored for extra than only RAGE??
I am not a conspiracy nut or an AMD fan. I use equally builds and utilize Nvidia too. So let’s keep this discussion friendly and open. Thank you …

You have a extremely fine point, all the check sites did use the one things and not the definite retail chip so I have been inquiry though only little reviews have even bothered to talk about it, not unexpected. In the subsequently week we'll see what is in actuality going on with the chip. Windows 7 updates, BIOS revisions and possibly even maybe other stuff. I wouldn't be anxious about it so much.
There is clearly somewhat incorrect with the benchmarks and I think a lot of users would have the same opinion. Not greatly you can do if it's a physical imperfection or architecture imperfection; here's hoping it's just a OS, BIOS, application problem. I have been looking at every the review sites for myself and have been coming up for some reviews to go up from an unmarked retail chip and haven't seen several yet.

When the 6970 was released I memorize very purposely that AMD located it below the 580 and a direct contestant to the 570. That's precisely what it was. AMD knows where to put its goods. They had located the 8150 halfway amid the 2600K and 2500K. So, why the massive disappointment are logic here?
is for Business intelligence???? Or other reason?

I have the same opinion mate. But obtain any other review for case. The (580GTX) was on the top in its earliest ever reviewed. So was the (2500K). Why the huge dissimilarity here. And isn't day one reviews what actually matters? These reviews are what people will seem at when import next for the next full year!!!!!

Well I am of the same mind with the entire your points. The simply counter fight I'm going to toss out there is, it is a new structural design, latest motherboard etc. So it's promising that there is a restricted access in the chip itself. Motherboard, BIOS, with any luck all these kinks will be worked out. anyway that benchmark looks pretty good and I want to say it's hundred percent truthful because they didn't use the similar motherboard as the entire the other reviewers.
I am interested if a lot of reviewers are above some kind of section NOT to use extra motherboards. I'm not convinced how the review procedure works. I'm just pending the overflow of videos on YouTube within the next week with immediate benchmarks with the sell chips and then we'll observe what happens.

I'm regarding prepared to make a buy but am wondering which CPU (8 core AMD vs i7 2600K) would carry out better for the next 3-4 years. I have (dual 6950s) and will be moving to Windows 8 and immediately the 2600K looks a lot additional tempting following reading reviews of the 8150. But if the (8150) might do improved on OS Windows 8 and future applications within this occasion span along with dual GPUs it could build all the dissimilarity. Also would be attractive to know which chip is most excellent for dual workstation and gaming use (web development, virtual machines, programming, and gaming).

I feel you guys should become aware of: Sites have a different way of testing their goods. This gives different scores.
Case: FPS, are those negligible, standard, most? In several sites they don’t identify.
Case: indicate what is towering; very soaring settings (all maxed on extremely elevated?).
Case: Are you playing an unlock place to test ? Are you playing a versus or a versus (star craft two).
It’s simple to adapt the parameters to acquire the outcome "you" desire to acquire. Finally note that there are numerous different games being tested. But i think it’s secure to assume that the bulldozer will have a tough time since processor concentrated games (like star craft 2) seem to be running improved on Intel.

Possibly, All i identify is I’m receiving soon a Laptop for gaming, and I’m going with an i5[-2430M] previous to the i7-[2630] Due to improved presentation in games of a dual core higher cooler and clocked than a quad. This is the kind of information that I’m guessing Intel Doesn’t desire out there.
I believe even this processor is not yet fully utilized.

Why approximately all the processor gaming benchmarks are carry out on a resolution superior than ((1440x900 + AA )) where GPUs turn into the restricted access?
There should be a appraisal with lower resolution with no AA and only then we actually be capable to see who is improved for games: SB or BD

Could it be that NVIDIA'S drivers formed a clash with bulldozer's procedures in order to yield unenthusiastic results? I mean if we begin to distrust AMD now, we will absolutely be extra doubtful of Southern Islands (GPU), which NVIDIA stands to misplace from considerably because it'll be out a lot of months before KEPLER'S latest iteration. To be truthful I distrust it would be ASUS; they stand to misplace a significant dealing customer by screwing them over. After all, they do build AMD MOBOS and GPUs.