<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<title>Core i7 3960 is up to 36 percent better than i7 990X</title>
		<description>Discuss Core i7 3960 is up to 36 percent better than i7 990X</description>
		<link>http://fudzilla.com/home/item/24473-core-i7-3960-is-up-to-36-percent-better-than-i7-990x</link>
		<lastBuildDate>Wed, 19 Jun 2013 11:36:14 +0100</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>JComments</generator>
		<atom:link href="http://www.fudzilla.com/component/jcomments/feed/com_k2/24473/10" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<item>
			<title>madseven says:</title>
			<link>http://fudzilla.com/home/item/24473-core-i7-3960-is-up-to-36-percent-better-than-i7-990x#comment-32876</link>
			<description><![CDATA[In order for AMD to succeed the board at AMD has to go. Their hiring of Incompetent CEO's and the letting go or firing some of their top designers is the board's fault.period. They have squandered investors money on payout's ie Hector Ruiz when they could of spent it on R&D. Blame the board.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>madseven</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 17 Oct 2011 07:31:29 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://fudzilla.com/home/item/24473-core-i7-3960-is-up-to-36-percent-better-than-i7-990x#comment-32876</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>The blue fox says:</title>
			<link>http://fudzilla.com/home/item/24473-core-i7-3960-is-up-to-36-percent-better-than-i7-990x#comment-32864</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I am glad to see this places is not totally over run with AMD fan's. Who blame BD poor performance on Window's 7. AMD had lot's of time to work with MS and get there chip to work right, but chose not to.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>The blue fox</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 16 Oct 2011 17:50:54 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://fudzilla.com/home/item/24473-core-i7-3960-is-up-to-36-percent-better-than-i7-990x#comment-32864</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>milkod2001 says:</title>
			<link>http://fudzilla.com/home/item/24473-core-i7-3960-is-up-to-36-percent-better-than-i7-990x#comment-32862</link>
			<description><![CDATA[i was going to buy Poopdozer but after all this crap AMD is giving us, over 5 years of development, many delays and they give us this- low patetic performance CPU...? with some code to give Microsoft? C'mon AMD u have to do better than that I only hope Intel don't get too greedy and don't charge me too much for IvyBitch.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>milkod2001</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 16 Oct 2011 12:15:31 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://fudzilla.com/home/item/24473-core-i7-3960-is-up-to-36-percent-better-than-i7-990x#comment-32862</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>romulous says:</title>
			<link>http://fudzilla.com/home/item/24473-core-i7-3960-is-up-to-36-percent-better-than-i7-990x#comment-32860</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I think there's a market for multi core cpus. Developers can get there hands on some cheap 8 core cpus for testing. Beats shelling out for a server.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>romulous</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 16 Oct 2011 00:29:33 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://fudzilla.com/home/item/24473-core-i7-3960-is-up-to-36-percent-better-than-i7-990x#comment-32860</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Super XP says:</title>
			<link>http://fudzilla.com/home/item/24473-core-i7-3960-is-up-to-36-percent-better-than-i7-990x#comment-32852</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I don't know how to answer this, but I stand corrected. AMD should have done anything in there power to ensure Windows 7 was 100000% compatible with Bulldozer BEFORE Release. Good Point...]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Super XP</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 15 Oct 2011 15:47:24 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://fudzilla.com/home/item/24473-core-i7-3960-is-up-to-36-percent-better-than-i7-990x#comment-32852</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Super XP says:</title>
			<link>http://fudzilla.com/home/item/24473-core-i7-3960-is-up-to-36-percent-better-than-i7-990x#comment-32851</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I wouldn't say it's waistful, I would say it's more geared for the future. AMD needs to now learn how to balance present and future performance improvements and hopefully they do with a B3 revision which should come sometime late in 2011 or Q1 2012. Now it's upto GLOF to resolve there own issues with 32nm, because AMD is suffering from them.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Super XP</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 15 Oct 2011 15:45:19 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://fudzilla.com/home/item/24473-core-i7-3960-is-up-to-36-percent-better-than-i7-990x#comment-32851</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>SlickR says:</title>
			<link>http://fudzilla.com/home/item/24473-core-i7-3960-is-up-to-36-percent-better-than-i7-990x#comment-32850</link>
			<description><![CDATA[You obviously haven't been around the Pentium era have you? Thanks god AMD is still here at any kind of capacity or you will be seeing mid range processors for $300 again.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>SlickR</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 15 Oct 2011 14:40:08 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://fudzilla.com/home/item/24473-core-i7-3960-is-up-to-36-percent-better-than-i7-990x#comment-32850</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>The_Countess says:</title>
			<link>http://fudzilla.com/home/item/24473-core-i7-3960-is-up-to-36-percent-better-than-i7-990x#comment-32848</link>
			<description><![CDATA[sandy bridge 9MB of cache bulldozer 16.5 MB of cache die size: sandy bridge 216mm2 bulldozer 312mm2 (note the much higher transistor density) AMD's main problem, besides a immature 32nm process, is its l3 latency. that resulted in needing a large l2, which means again higher latency. intel did a amazing job with making that much L3 cache be accessible that quickly. as a result their very small L2's are also fast and their cores compact. it caught AMD off-guard on that one.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>The_Countess</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 15 Oct 2011 12:15:33 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://fudzilla.com/home/item/24473-core-i7-3960-is-up-to-36-percent-better-than-i7-990x#comment-32848</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>techno says:</title>
			<link>http://fudzilla.com/home/item/24473-core-i7-3960-is-up-to-36-percent-better-than-i7-990x#comment-32844</link>
			<description><![CDATA[They've just gone too wide for the desktop space. 2 modules would have been fine 3 at most, particularly if they could have put Intel type hyperthreading on top. Then they would have had less heat to be concerned about and could have concentrated on improving performance per clock and clock speed.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>techno</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 15 Oct 2011 08:08:01 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://fudzilla.com/home/item/24473-core-i7-3960-is-up-to-36-percent-better-than-i7-990x#comment-32844</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>techno says:</title>
			<link>http://fudzilla.com/home/item/24473-core-i7-3960-is-up-to-36-percent-better-than-i7-990x#comment-32842</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Just wonder if it would also be possible for them to impliment some kind if Intel type hyperthreading as well as their module design. Do hope they are able to sort it all out...but the trouble is on a per core basis they have to improve performance 100% to match a 2500K core.....thats a lot of tweaking.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>techno</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 15 Oct 2011 08:01:59 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://fudzilla.com/home/item/24473-core-i7-3960-is-up-to-36-percent-better-than-i7-990x#comment-32842</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
