Steam 설치
로그인
|
언어
简体中文(중국어 간체)
繁體中文(중국어 번체)
日本語(일본어)
ไทย(태국어)
Български(불가리아어)
Čeština(체코어)
Dansk(덴마크어)
Deutsch(독일어)
English(영어)
Español - España(스페인어 - 스페인)
Español - Latinoamérica(스페인어 - 중남미)
Ελληνικά(그리스어)
Français(프랑스어)
Italiano(이탈리아어)
Bahasa Indonesia(인도네시아어)
Magyar(헝가리어)
Nederlands(네덜란드어)
Norsk(노르웨이어)
Polski(폴란드어)
Português(포르투갈어 - 포르투갈)
Português - Brasil(포르투갈어 - 브라질)
Română(루마니아어)
Русский(러시아어)
Suomi(핀란드어)
Svenska(스웨덴어)
Türkçe(튀르키예어)
Tiếng Việt(베트남어)
Українська(우크라이나어)
번역 관련 문제 보고
Complete Bs! I do not belive these benchmarks at all! a 80 dollar cpu isnt gonna push more fps then a 180 dollar cpu, plus i love the fact how they just put all Intel cpus on top without overclocking the 8350 at all, completle BS! See thats what happens when you have a 1-sided review, you cant pick sides, you either overclock all cpus or you run em at stock clocks. You can keep these kind of benchmarks for urself thanks but no thanks.
most games rely heavily on 1-2 thread
Also depends what resolutions they are testing at, anything thats over 1600 is so gpu limited it woudnt even make sence to test. With Intel coming out on top with multi-gpu situations only, in single gpu tests this is NOT going to happen. And not all games rely on 1-2 threads, take Battlefield 3,4. Crysis games as well..... Show me some tests with intel pentium wining in these games then we can talk, all old games only run on 1-2 threads but thats the past, games will not be like this much longer dont worry.
When I brought the comparison up I was specifically referring to Microsoft FSX. It has extremely limited multi thread capability. From experience, my old i3 laptop runs right at the speed of my 8350.
Start playing newer, multi-threaded games and it is a different story.
The single threaded performance of this $80 chip looks to be close to the single threaded performance of the big dog intels. For a single thread heavy program I might be pleasantly surprised. I can build the whole pc and have it running for less than $500 bucks so Its worth trying