I striped the bench after the testing to make way for my sandybridge rigs. When I'm finished with those and AMD has passed me some 8150's I'll rerun the tests with MD5. Even in best/worse case senario I'm going to be shocked as hell to see anything over 5% difference between them.q_h wrote:MultiDynamics 5
![]()
AMD Bulldozer X8 FX-8150? (where's jrrshop at)
-
- KVRAF
- 1959 posts since 4 Nov, 2004 from Manchester
-
- KVRer
- 16 posts since 30 Sep, 2004
-
- KVRer
- 17 posts since 13 Nov, 2006 from Melbourne : Australia
You obviously already know the answer, why not share your results..
Also, how are you going with that list of DAW Hosts/Plugins/VI's that are not effected by the compiler redirecting the code due to the CPU ID ?
BTW: The Patcher is for executables, so does that mean the DAW hosts need to be patched , not the actual .dlls , or can you just patch the respective .dlls
Also , can you explain why the Bulldozers are performing even worse than the last generation AMD chips, is that again due to the compiler , and if so, why so, or is it simply AMD's new architecture has taken a backward step for common usage as most if not all independent analysts have already concluded.
