AMD Fusion with a lower clock speed beating the 2600K with a higher clock speed....can't wait for the buldozer..watch the vid.http://www.legitreviews.com/news/10565/

Intergrated graphics? Whats that? Wont work like that in the world of flight simulator I suspect!

3.99 FPS for Intel vs 19.21 FPS for AMD? Nonsense, I don't believe it. I mean really, I do not believe it whatsoever. Something is seriously askew in this "leaked test" if it is anything but a self serving test of integrated graphics.Kind regards,

Last I heard, FSX is a game of GHz, not cores/threads. GHz is not exactly AMD's strong point. I genuinely hope Bulldozer smacks Sandy Bridge around, but I'm not holding my breath. And yes, that "leaked test" is skewed by the onboard GPU. Everybody knows AMD's onboard GPU is much better than Intel's. Get used to these "leaks" as both AMD and Intel gear up in an all-out onboard GPU arms race.

It's a IGP comparison, not a CPU comparison. Looks like AMD destroys Intel there, but as Simon said, who cares? None of us are using integrated graphics anyway

As nice as this is, it has no bearing on FSX performance.

As nice as this is, it has no bearing on FSX performance.

Of course it does not, I was not trying to compare apples with oranges but I think AMD will have an ace in their sleeves, the leak I saw about the Buldozer said that it was quite faster compare to the SB, I guess we will have to wait and see...http://www.heaven4geeks.com/2011/03/amd-bulldozer-benchmarks-leaked.htmlhttp://www.rumorpedia.net/amd-bulldozer-benchmarks-leaked/http://www.tomshardware.com/news/Bulldozer-Interlagos-Phoronix-Test-Suite-Benchmark-16-core,12445.htmlhttp://www.crn.com/news/components-peripherals/229300942/amd-bulldozer-cpu-details-images-leaked.htm;jsessionid=azf30uXRw2p9LNpedkOZKA**.ecappj01http://news.softpedia.com/news/AMD-Bulldozer-Can-Reach-Up-to-4-1GHz-with-Turbo-Core-Enabled-196873.shtmlWho care anyway, Flight will run on an average PC right?.......wait until you add some 3rd party demanding addons....:He He:

AMD? No thanks!

AMD? No thanks!

Even if the FSX performance was better and price was competitive with Bulldozer?... Can't wait until we see the potential, one way or the other, of this chip.Of course you did buy one of those 975s so I'd expect a a really excited user statement!

Even if the FSX performance was better and price was competitive with Bulldozer?... Can't wait until we see the potential, one way or the other, of this chip.Of course you did buy one of those 975s so I'd expect a a really excited user statement!

Yeap... I'm too an Intel a really excited user... I bought a $1k CPU and oc'd +4GHz on april last year thinking it will be future proof (that's lying to yourself)... 9 months later sandy bridge came out and the 2600k can be easely oc'd to 5GHz at a fraction of the price of my CPU... You should know by now how that makes me feel... Now AMD is releasing a new CPU and apparently is equal or better than SB for a cheaper price... I think we have to wait and see before we rush to conclusions...Dexter...

It's very unlikely that Bulldozer will beat SB core for core/clock for clock. It seems it will be more of the same: more cores, but slower ones than their Intel counterpart. If BD performs at the level of Nehalem IPC wise, that will be a great success for AMD, but I don't think they'll even manage to do that. It's a 20-25% gap, and a 40% with Sandy Bridge. Way too much

It's very unlikely that Bulldozer will beat SB core for core/clock for clock. It seems it will be more of the same: more cores, but slower ones than their Intel counterpart. If BD performs at the level of Nehalem IPC wise, that will be a great success for AMD, but I don't think they'll even manage to do that. It's a 20-25% gap, and a 40% with Sandy Bridge. Way too much

I'd have to agree... But I still hope for healthy competition, especially clock for clock. I've been Nvidia/Intel since before I knew the difference, but I like options! Here's to hoping AMD knows something great that we don't! :Nail Biting: Though I'm realistic and don't expect miracles, it's still interesting.Regardless of brand, I want the best performance at a reasonable price. That means I've been stuck with the upper mid-range Intels since the later Core 2s. I really wish AMD would give us options that didn't perform like 2(+) year old Intels! I'm preaching to the choir, I know, so I digress.

For all the AMD a really excited user: This is good for you!For all the Intel a really excited user: This is good for you!For everyone else who doesn't give a hoot: This is good for you!Competition in the marketplace is what keeps prices low. If AMD simply ceased to exist, Intel could charge much more than they are now. Say what you will about AMD, but I like them being around to keep my CPU prices down down down... :)

Never had a AMD CPU, I always upgrade with the best CPU the day I upgrade, if AMD has the fastest CPU next time I upgrade I'll be upgrading with an AMD CPU.

If this would rile up Intel to release more faster CPUS sooner.. I am all for such videos.