AMD CPU speculation... and expert conjecture

[jdwii]

When Steamroller comes out Cowboy44mag you better bet several sites if not all of them will only review it with SC2, CIV5, SYSmark, and let’s not forget about Skyrim.
I only look at programs that actually show me what its capable of such as Cache speeds and the Memory controller and DhryStone and Whetstone FPU(to see the Raw performance), i really like Wprime and Fritz and yes even Cinebench I think that program relates to Amd’s FPU performance quite well . Also I kinda like PCmark.
With that Info above we can usually see Amd’s strong points (such as raw processing power) and their weak points (Cache speeds, memory controller maybe even their FPU all of this makes a weaker CPU in performance per clock (NOT IPC PER CLOCK even though that’s the industry’s terms la la )
Then after that I look at actual programs I use Handbrake, Photoshop as well as Lame MP3 player, Then games I have to find several sites for this so I don’t get the same 3 (SC2, Skyrim, CIV5), Plus I like overclocking so I like to see how good it is at that. I can almost care less about power consumption on my desktop unless it’s as bad as Bulldozer was when overclocked.
Of course my best matric is the Price/Performance one this should be the most important factor unless you like throwing money.

I wouldn't be caught dead with an I3 over a 6 Core fx or A10 and i would probably get the A10 on a budget and a 7750 i feel a A10 is a great value but that 50$ celeron is pretty good to if being paired with a video card but its not a very good APU and the A4 Richfield is probably pretty close to a AMD A4-5300(which has twice the performance of a I3 in terms of IGPU. Also when paired with a video card it doesn't do to bad http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aK-LDj-2HlU

 

[jdwii]

8350rocks i actually enjoy hearing everyone's opinions and how something thats 150$(50$ CPU plus 100$ video card) is better than 130$(single unit part) which proves to me they still don't understand the point of APU's and why even Intel is caring so much about. Anyways with the low-end market its just a good idea to save until you get into the mid-range market with the low-end market 20$ can give you 20-40% more performance.

 

[juanrga]

pipe dream.. amd prices their hardware much better because it doesnt perform as good as their competition.

an amd chip "close to equaling i7 Haswell" would be priced close to equaling an i7 haswell.

amd is cheap because they suck.

It is fascinating to see a cheap chip such as the FX-8350 beating the expensive i7-3770k on multithreaded games or in modern benchmarks. In some cases the cheap FX is a 18% or even a 42% faster than the expensive i7...

Sorry I couldn't find(too lazy, sorry :d) any benchmark comparisons between an AMD Athlon II X2 340/a4-5300 and a celeron g540 but I assume it will be quite even. (Though the a4 will probably beat the shit out of celeron in games with the internal gpu)

Passmark CPU score:
a4-5300: 2055
celeron g550: 2346

The CPU difference with the celeron is a 14%, which is irrelevant for the kind of ordinary tasks those chips will be doing. The big difference is on the integrated graphics

GPU score:
a4-5300: 460
celeron g550: 214.

The a4 is both faster and cheap.

 

[noob2222]

Technically AMD doesn't even have to "get first tier of hierarchy chart", all they have to do is come very close to equaling i7 Haswell and they have already won as AMD prices their hardware much better than their competition.

pipe dream.. amd prices their hardware much better because it doesnt perform as good as their competition.

an amd chip "close to equaling i7 Haswell" would be priced close to equaling an i7 haswell.

amd is cheap because they suck. i still can't justify a quad-core AMD APU build when an IB celeron + 7750 would run circles around it.

provided you NEVER plan on upgrading at all, possibly and only if your sole purpose was gaming. If you ever plan on upgrading, might as well throwh that celeron in the trash. We know your not attempting to argue about non-gaming performance, you know thats futile to even pretend its true.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6347/amd-a10-5800k-a8-5600k-review-trinity-on-the-desktop-part-2/4

But lets look at what happens should you decide that the 7750 isn't enough for your tastes.

ya .. good thing AMD sucks so bad that even the sb g645 gets beat by amd's bottom tested PII x2 555. Even Inte's favorite I3 3225 can't keep more than a single gpu from bottlenecking.

so ... $144 for the 3225 vs $109 for the a8 5600k APU, 49.4 vs 48.4 fps ... ya ... AMD sucks soo bad that youd go with a celeron at 17.7 fps. good choice.

I guess the only point where it makes sense for your arguement is the fact that you spent $20 more for the IB celeron +7750 when $20 on a $200 barebones build (cpu, mb, video) is a huge difference in itself.

 

[griptwister]

Says: pipe dream.. amd prices their hardware much better because it doesnt perform as good as their competition.

Uses AMD HD 7750 and celeron to demonstrate his point of view. :lol:

Now, If you want a more fair comparison...

Celeron + GT 630 vs AMD A10 5800K APU with 2133Mhz Memory. I doubt that the Intel/Nvidia build would be the better option here.

 

[cowboy44mag]

I see a lot of recent posts are people concerned mostly with gaming. One can not overlook the FACT that the vast majority of games are made for console gaming systems (ie PS4, Xbox). Is Intel Inside going to be powering the next gen consoles? Even if all the Intel fan boys are right and Haswell crushes Steamroller (which I don't believe will be the case) the software studios are going to have to make video games optimized for AMD, they will have to use what they got. The games are going to be optimized to run on multiple cores, not single, dual, or even tri core as most of the last generation of games were. The new games will be running between 4-8 cores at least, and lets face facts, Intel's strong suite is single core per core power/execution, not multi treading. For a pure "gaming" system people better start looking more towards AMD.

As far as "The i5 destroys FX chips in single threaded performance, and is quite close in terms of multi threaded performance. Every benchmark I've found heavily favors Intel over AMD. The i5 3570k is close to the FX 8350 in terms of multi threaded performance, and no doubt the i5 4670k will beat it in everything, even with just a 10% gain over Ivy. Please, prove me wrong." Name me ONE of those benchmarks your looking at that weren't heavily influenced by Intel. Intel outright buys those benchmark scores plain and simple, they use their power and money to ensure all the benchmark test favor their processors over AMD. These benchmarks people want to hang their hat on are synthetic, and at best don't reflect actual real life computing. You want to know how much those synthetic benchmark scores "on paper" are worth in the real world: pre WWII France was supposed to have the most modern best trained and equipped army. All the top military experts in the allied world agreed that Germany "on paper" was no match for the mighty French, guess those military "experts" were a bit off. Lesson is "on paper" and "synthetic" doesn't mean much in the real flesh and blood world. Heck I'm playing Crysis 3 on Ultra with a Phenom II 965BE, something that "on paper" and according to Intel fan boys isn't possible.

 

[montosaurous]

Please show me a benchmark having AMD perform close to Intel's similarly priced offerings, or at least any sort of evidence to back your claims.

 

[cowboy44mag]

Please show me a benchmark having AMD perform close to Intel's similarly priced offerings, or at least any sort of evidence to back your claims.

Just as soon as an unbiased benchmark exists. Intel shells out a lot of money and incentives to ensure that doesn't happen. Its easy to win when the entire benchmark industry has a large dildo shoved up their collective arses labeled INTEL.

No matter how good Steamroller is Intel fan boys will always be able to take solace in the fact they will always win the benchmark tests as the benchmark tests are coded expressly for Intel, with a minor tweak here and there for AMD so they can stay "legit". The end of this year and going into 2014 when games are released for PS4, optimized for AMD hardware, those are the "benchmarks" I want to see. Intel fan boys will have their precious benchmark scores to hold close and still feel superior, however Steamroller systems are going to be out performing them in the new generation of games.

The age of single core gaming is over with the impending release of the next gen consoles. The age of heavily multi-threaded gaming is just beginning. The few multi-threaded games that are around right now show Piledriver besting the "mighty, unbeatable, processor to end all processors ...." i7. Now imagine a heavily multi-threaded game expressly customized for AMD. Keep your benchmarks they are as worthless as tits on a bull.

 

[jdwii]

Please show me a benchmark having AMD perform close to Intel's similarly priced offerings, or at least any sort of evidence to back your claims.

Do you really want me to pull out the I3 vs A10 and the I3 VS 6 core FX PD? Also the 8350 is usually 180$ on newegg and amazon which is 40$ cheaper(or 19% cheaper) than the unlocked I5.

"perform close to Intel's similarly priced offerings"

At least make it harder by speaking about games only or better yet the big 3 Civ 5, SC2, and skyrim.

 

[juanrga]

Just as soon as an unbiased benchmark exists. Intel shells out a lot of money and incentives to ensure that doesn't happen. Its easy to win when the entire benchmark industry has a large dildo shoved up their collective arses labeled INTEL.

No matter how good Steamroller is Intel fan boys will always be able to take solace in the fact they will always win the benchmark tests as the benchmark tests are coded expressly for Intel, with a minor tweak here and there for AMD so they can stay "legit". The end of this year and going into 2014 when games are released for PS4, optimized for AMD hardware, those are the "benchmarks" I want to see. Intel fan boys will have their precious benchmark scores to hold close and still feel superior, however Steamroller systems are going to be out performing them in the new generation of games.

The age of single core gaming is over with the impending release of the next gen consoles. The age of heavily multi-threaded gaming is just beginning. The few multi-threaded games that are around right now show Piledriver besting the "mighty, unbeatable, processor to end all processors ...." i7. Now imagine a heavily multi-threaded game expressly customized for AMD. Keep your benchmarks they are as worthless as tits on a bull.

Agree. After being shown that 'benchmarks' such as Sysmark and cinebench cheat against AMD, Anandtech and other sites continue using Sysmark and other cheating benchmarks in their Intel vs AMD

http://sharikou.blogspot.com.es/2009/12/ftc-accuses-intel-of-rigging-benchmarks.html

http://news.softpedia.com/news/AMD-Nvidia-and-VIA-Quit-BAPCo-Call-SYSmark-2012-Biased-207412.shtml

That is why when one goes from biased benchmarks to non-biased ones (including open benchmarks) AMD chips perform so well and even beat Intel chips in several benchmarks.

When Steamroller was released, it will be a great chip. My bet is that it will be slightly faster than Haswell because a FX-8350 is only about a 10% (the gap is less because the current version of the open benchmarking software lacks some piledriver support) behind a i7-3770k and the i7-4770k is about a 5--7% faster. My bet is also that sites such as Anandtech will be using Sysmark to review the new chips.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Lets take your numbers.
Intel: 110
AMD 100

HsW: 117
AMD needs to be 17% faster, then only equals HSW in most benches, and loses more than wins.
My guess is, it will win more than weve seen lately, but lose most.
But, will be closer than theyve been in a long while

 

[kettu]

To anyone wanting a benchmark of AMD chips performing well against Intel chips:
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=amd_fx8350_visherabdver2&num=1

 

[sarinaide]

I haven't tested it due to the unavailability of HD7750's but apparently and people have said it can be done, the HD7750 can operate in dual graphics with the 7660D and is roughly 15% faster than with a 6670. So in theory a A10 5800K + 7750 in dual graphics in a game like BF3 that is flawless with SLI and Crossfire will see the A10 beat more than a Celeron or Pentium, it will probably beat a i3 on the same configuration.

Its very sad to still see the APU largely dismissed, it packs a tremendous punch for its cost. They never intended it to be the fastest but it is the most adaptable and flexible, with a rather mean amount of horsepower. L3 cache doesn't make a serious CPU but the A10 can hang with the FX4000 and Phenom II x 4s quite well.

 

[amdfangirl]

To anyone wanting a benchmark of AMD chips performing well against Intel chips:
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=amd_fx8350_visherabdver2&num=1

I know those benchmarks look good but unfortunately the majority of the people who frequent this forum don't use Linux.

It's like saying because x brand's racing car is the best at racing I should buy x brand's consumer car because it must have the best mileage.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Actually, its more like, X brand goes over dirt better than Y brand
Where, Y brand wins on asphalt

 

[8350rocks]

The i5 destroys FX chips in single threaded performance, and is quite close in terms of multi threaded performance. Every benchmark I've found heavily favors Intel over AMD. The i5 3570k is close to the FX 8350 in terms of multi threaded performance, and no doubt the i5 4670k will beat it in everything, even with just a 10% gain over Ivy. Please, prove me wrong.

Yes, they do heavily favor intel, in the most biased way possible in synthetic benchmarks...glad you clarified yourself.

 

[sarinaide]

If buying brand x means Intel because you have your face shoved full of it with an almost oblivious knowledge as to the existance of AMD then sure. Intel had locked AMD into the long spiral when despite having potent arches from 2000-2005 and even Athlon II's were really good in Vista, Intel stopped AMD from entering lucrative markets and even with a failed Arch Intel outsold AMD considerably. The 1.6BN payout was probably around 15-20BN short of what AMD's ultimate losses where, the lucrative OEM and server markets where basically locked out with money and shady tactics. I liken this to playing a football game where one team can make up the rules as they go along, you can't win.

 

[kettu]

I'm aware of prevalence of windows. I just wanted to point out that the hardware AMD makes is pretty good if the software is not holding it back. In any case those benchmarks are real and relevant when discussing hardware capabilities. They add another perspective.

JAYDEEJOHN's analogy is spot on by the way.

 

[de5_Roy]

y brand's consumer cars seem to have more features for price. while an x brand car can have (arguably) faster engine, the cost becomes too high to put in more features. x brand always compares their race cars with the entry level consumer cars to make the race cars look better.
seemingly, x brand wins dirt races even though y brand sponsored it with their 'racing evolved' program.
according to the c.y.l.f. conspiracy theories: x brand has so much money that they paid the tire companies to sell bad tires to y brand, they built the roads so that x brand car will run better, they bought off the broadcasting tv channels who edit footages to make x brand seem far ahead of y brand while in reality, y brand is just slightly behind. x brand also seems to have higher mileage and better engine while y brand quickly blows a gasket when performance is demanded and/or performs like a reliant robin/regal. drivers praise x brand as a smoother ride even though y brand gets people from point a to point b just fine.
[strike]old and senile[/strike] veteran y brand users, holding on to the past(momentary) glory days of y brand, fly into rage, when some poor x brand user mentions how happy s/he is with her/his fast x brand car, saying y brand cars can do everything x brand cars can do and the future is multicylinder (won't mention inferior turbo or heat).
right now, x brand's unlawfully and unfairly gained monopoly/supremacy is being successfully challenged by a foreign z brand who make cheap, fuel-efficient, smaller cars which are taking away revenues from x brand despite x brand's superior factories.
y brand needs more cooling as the engine overheats easily and depsite their forward-looking drivetrain, their transmission is poorly designed....?
and so on.

this is where i ran out of my automobile-related knowledge. i don't even know if the last one was correct... or any of them....
forgive my poor knowledge on automobiles which resulted in poor analogies. it's been a slow week.

edit:
amd's volcanic island exposed
http://semiaccurate.com/2013/05/20/amds-volcanic-islands-architecture/

 

[montosaurous]

Consoles have never shown to have too much of an effect on the coding of PC games. It is true the whole industry is Intel based, and Intel has paid off some vendors in attempts to sabotage AMD. However Intel still wins the performance crown and the efficiency crown, and that is undeniable.

 

[cowboy44mag]

y brand's consumer cars seem to have more features for price. while an x brand car can have (arguably) faster engine, the cost becomes too high to put in more features. x brand always compares their race cars with the entry level consumer cars to make the race cars look better.
seemingly, x brand wins dirt races even though y brand sponsored it with their 'racing evolved' program.
according to the c.y.l.f. conspiracy theories: x brand has so much money that they paid the tire companies to sell bad tires to y brand, they built the roads so that x brand car will run better, they bought off the broadcasting tv channels who edit footages to make x brand seem far ahead of y brand while in reality, y brand is just slightly behind. x brand also seems to have higher mileage and better engine while y brand quickly blows a gasket when performance is demanded and/or performs like a reliant robin/regal. drivers praise x brand as a smoother ride even though y brand gets people from point a to point b just fine.
[strike]old and senile[/strike] veteran y brand users, holding on to the past(momentary) glory days of y brand, fly into rage, when some poor x brand user mentions how happy s/he is with her/his fast x brand car, saying y brand cars can do everything x brand cars can do and the future is multicylinder (won't mention inferior turbo or heat).
right now, x brand's unlawfully and unfairly gained monopoly/supremacy is being successfully challenged by a foreign z brand who make cheap, fuel-efficient, smaller cars which are taking away revenues from x brand despite x brand's superior factories.
y brand needs more cooling as the engine overheats easily and depsite their forward-looking drivetrain, their transmission is poorly designed....?
and so on.

this is where i ran out of my automobile-related knowledge. i don't even know if the last one was correct... or any of them....
forgive my poor knowledge on automobiles which resulted in poor analogies. it's been a slow week.

edit:
amd's volcanic island exposed
http://semiaccurate.com/2013/05/20/amds-volcanic-islands-architecture/

I would like to know how you are claiming "x brand also seems to have higher mileage and better engine while y brand quickly blows a gasket when performance is demanded and/or performs like a reliant robin/regal"? X brand in your little analogy is Intel, Y brand is AMD. So explain to me how X brand gets "higher mileage" when there are still plenty of people getting good performance out of Phenom II processors? My processor is four years old and still playing the newest games at highest settings, I transcode video, and depend on my computer for advertising my business, my very livelyhood. So how is that you claim AMD has no longevity compared to Intel? And I just love the "better engine while y brand quickly blows a gasket when performance is demanded" part there. I liken it to a drag racer vs a Mustang Cobra. The Drag racer sports a larger engine, very powerful, but can only beat the Cobra in one area- flat long straight away areas. What happens when you have to take a corner or turn that drag racer? The Cobra will beat it every time if your outside of the drag racers custom "box". Your powerful Intel iCore systems (drag racer) are great in Single thread applications, but that is the only place they shine, they are one trick ponies. Throw the iCore a few curves (multi-threaded applications) and software not expressly coded for it and Piledriver (Cobra) beats it. Steamroller will be better than Piledriver and further close the one remaining gap in single core execution, further eroding the fairy tale story of Intel superiority.

Could you be any more of an Intel fan boy if you tried? At least know the processors (outside of Intel controlled benchmarks) before you prove the depths of fan-boyism ignorance.

 

[cowboy44mag]

Consoles have never shown to have too much of an effect on the coding of PC games. It is true the whole industry is Intel based, and Intel has paid off some vendors in attempts to sabotage AMD. However Intel still wins the performance crown and the efficiency crown, and that is undeniable.

The console systems of this generation are going to be the closest they have ever been to computers. Were not talking about some odd configured Cell processor this time around. If the studios can do a quick port of the console version to PC they will, as it will be time and cost effective. That quick port isn't going to be totally recoded just to give Intel the edge. Only time will tell if the new generation of console games is coded and how far from PC version they actually are.

As far as "Intel still wins the performance crown and the efficiency crown, and that is undeniable" I agree that Intel processors are more energy efficient in the current generation. Only time will tell if Steamroller can increase performance while being more energy efficient (more than Haswell I highly doubt, but I'm expecting nice efficiency over Piledriver). The "performance crown" that depends on how you are judging performance. If you are only using single core execution benchmarks and staying in Intel's make believe bubble of computing performance, yes Intel is the undisputed heavyweight champion of the world. But when the "performance crown" is based on all around computing, and multi threading, I'm not saying AMD is always the winner, but Intel sure aint the undisputed champion anymore.

 

[kettu]

The i5 3570k still wins at most multi threaded programs (compared to the FX 8320), and consoles have never shown to have too much of an effect on the coding of PC games. It is true the whole industry is Intel based, and Intel has paid off some vendors in attempts to sabotage AMD. However Intel still wins the performance crown and the efficiency crown, and that is undeniable.

This is the first time in history that the consoles and PC have essentially the same architecture so I don't think we can make inferences from past generations. Yes intel wins performance crown in every application except in those that it doesn't. Efficiency I can understand since power consumption is AMD's weakest link in CPUs currently. But Intel is not a clear cut performance winner.

Here's a windows bench 3570k vs 8320
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/701?vs=698

Looks pretty good in multithreaded benchmarks especially considering the price difference and how 8350 performed in those Linux benchmarks. It's pretty clear that FX8 series is better than i5 series when all 8 cores are loaded.

 

[de5_Roy]

I would like to know how you are claiming "x brand also seems to have higher mileage and better engine while y brand quickly blows a gasket when performance is demanded and/or performs like a reliant robin/regal"? X brand in your little analogy is Intel, Y brand is AMD.

whoaaa, hold your horses, cowboy (or don't get your cinches in a bunch or don't get a wooden block under your saddle or... so on... (credit:google, wikipedia)). you're the one putting tech brands on arbitrary variables used as car brands. :lol:

So explain to me how X brand gets "higher mileage" when there are still plenty of people getting good performance out of Phenom II processors? My processor is four years old and still playing the newest games at highest settings, I transcode video, and depend on my computer for advertising my business, my very livelyhood. So how is that you claim AMD has no longevity compared to Intel? And I just love the "better engine while y brand quickly blows a gasket when performance is demanded" part there. I liken it to a drag racer vs a Mustang Cobra. The Drag racer sports a larger engine, very powerful, but can only beat the Cobra in one area- flat long straight away areas. What happens when you have to take a corner or turn that drag racer? The Cobra will beat it every time if your outside of the drag racers custom "box".

see, the car comparisons flew waaay over my head. but using a pc for such diverse workloads - good for you, man!
i don't even know ([strike]or care[/strike]) what a mustang cobra is.

Your powerful Intel iCore systems (drag racer) are great in Single thread applications, but that is the only place they shine, they are one trick ponies. Throw the iCore a few curves (multi-threaded applications) and software not expressly coded for it and Piledriver (Cobra) beats it. Steamroller will be better than Piledriver and further close the one remaining gap in single core execution, further eroding the fairy tale story of Intel superiority.

i see that there is more of that car comparison thingie going on... but i've already mentioned of my limited knowledge on automobiles. looks like a lot of googling to do (i am doing it right now, but....such a hassle...). it is perfectly fine what car model you call the cpus. i could call intel a golf cart and amd a sultan (from gta san andreas games). the whole thing (i.e. my earlier) post is arbitrary and any similarity to real tech products or cars is simply an un/fortunate coincidence.

Could you be any more of an Intel fan boy if you tried? At least know the processors (outside of Intel controlled benchmarks) before you prove the depths of fan-boyism ignorance.

this last bit looks like personally aimed, so i am requesting moderators' advice on this.

are you calling me an intel fanboy? ROFL. looks like i've gained some kind of accolade from you even without trying. i could, for example, try to prove how neutral i am but i won't do that since you seem to have already made up your mind (so fast!). good thing is, i don't have to prove anything to a random forum poster on a random day on the internet where personally aimed remarks are an everyday occurance - not even worth caring for (just enough to type this bit ). i discuss ideas present in forum posts, nothing personally aimed. i will only say this: your claim(me possibly being a fanboy (of any brand)) is baseless and wrong in every way. i will not take the bait though, i am better than this.

like i have said before, any real life similarities with disposable tech products or cars is a coincidence. moreover, if people put their self worth in disposable tech products and take offense at discussing disposable tech-products-made-by-corporations - they just prove their shallowness (and other bad traits). i know, i know, but it's true - i have said this multiple times before.

"fanboy! irony is thy name!" :lol:

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Yea, lets leave directly calling someone out other than with facts.

This is hot potato not hand grenades here