AMD FX9590 @ 5GHz reviewed at Kitguru

Hopping forums tonight saw this comment, I thought was a kinda interesting comment from somebody on a thread about the review on another forum:

[QUOTE="railven"]For the record, Bulldozer is NOT 8-cores. It's 4 modules with 2-sub cores.

AMD is splitting hairs with their marketing.

Think of this way:
Phenom I - 1core == 2 Logic units
Phenom II - 1 core == 2 Logic units
Bulldozer - 1 core == 1 logic unit.

They've made a hardware version of hyperthreading. This is essentially why AMD gets smacked in anything that isn't single threaded or at that designed to not exceed 4 cores.

8 AMD cores today == 4 AMD cores of yesterday, which are all still less than 4 Intel cores of two yesterdays ago.

AMD is retarded and this price tag makes me think they are clearly losing their minds. This on the back of rumors of HD 9970 costing >$800, I have no confidence this company will recover from the last two-three years.

EDIT:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulldozer_(microarchitecture)#Bulldozer_core

AMD has re-introduced the "Clustered Integer Core" micro-architecture, an architecture developed by DEC in 1996 with the RISC microprocessor Alpha 21264. This technology is informally called CMT (Clustered Multi-Thread) and formally called "module" by the AMD. In terms of hardware complexity and functionality, this "module" is midway between a dual-core processor and its integer power (each thread having a fully independent integer core) and a single core processor that has the SMT ability, which can create a dual threads processor but with the power of one (each thread shares the resources of the module with the other thread)FaustArp

[QUOTE="FaustArp"]

Hopping forums tonight saw this comment, I thought was a kinda interesting comment from somebody on a thread about the review on another forum:

[QUOTE="railven"]mastershake575

His comment is baby tier understanding.

AMD simply is streamlining what multicore is.  Back when processors were all single core, redundancy wasn't an issue.  Then as CPUs developed more cores, certain aspects of the CPU were unnecessary to make redundant parts of.  Their initial iteration wasn't that great but the next revision was better and the next revision will be better still.  Mostly they are fine tuning what the CPU has too few of.

AMD did this to keep costs down and still be able to compete.  If AMD made CPUs the way intel did they would go out of business immediately

[QUOTE="godzillavskong"][QUOTE="2ndWonder"]I plan on doing that asap :P04dcarraher