AMD CPU speculation... and expert conjecture

[hcl123]

Spoiler

If flame wars pop up, I just whip out my VIA Nano and preach to the world how superior it is to any other consumer processor. Flamers promptly bring their argument elsewhere.

Pfft
http://www.viaembedded.com/en/products/boards/1893/1/EPIA-M920.html

Via Nano QuadCore (they got Arm offerings too)

You gotta give them credit, they've pretty much cornered the market on x86 for industrial / integrated devices. They saw the war between AMD and Intel then said "f*ck that" and have completely ignored the desktop / mobile segments.

C'mon VIA Nano (old Cyrix) is a niche player on x86 that has no significant presence in any market wahtsoever.

the 4 core took i thing, 5 or 6 years to come out after the double core( when others might go 16 cores / chip). If AMD did that it had been dead by now. AMD problem is PR and marketing, and i pick your post because its very illustrative, everything serves to "bash", to speculate reasons of failure, what it can have been done better... most of the things written have some truth, but all companies do a lot of mistakes that only are so, when only visible, and to prevent that "visibility", massive whitewash and propaganda campaigns ensue, which amd never was able to do even when it was in much better shape...

At the end of the day amd problem is not technical but commercial, and you are right, if AMD could had been like VIA, going unnoticed nobody bashes it nobody bias reviews it, then probably it would be better, only it would sell less...

Perhaps downsizing and go ARM is not a bad idea for amd, goes directly according to that, go unnoticed for a while... just wonder then what Intel to sell will commend reviews of its x86 against what !?.. ARM ? ..which one ? ... and a bench of ARM to x86 is not comparable in any case... not really, complete different uarch...

Perhaps then VIA Nano (cyrix) would have to be financed heavily, even by Intel (hey! they already did that to Nvidia) and promoted for a while, even technically advised and helped, so that intel could have a partner in the short future to continue this "FREAK SHOW" that goes on today... the show just sells a lot and gives them a lot of promotion by negative endorsement, how stupid it might sound it seems to work...

Ahh you might not be versed in what those guys do. Via does lots of business in the integrated / industrial segments. Think medical machines, KIOSKs, digital ad bulletin boards, ATMs, cash registers, airport flight boards, robotic factory control systems, sensor boards and home automation (if your into that).

If you actually took the time to look you'd realize their boards are horrifically overpriced, if your goal was to run Crysis 3 or do iTunes. Otherwise they tend to come equipped with 3~4 serial ports that run at standard RS-232 speeds as well as RS-422/423. They also tend to have either 1~2 GPIO headers along with another 1~2 LVDS headers. Basically what their lacking in raw CPU power they more then make up for in IO capability and thermal tolerance. So you wouldn't ever buy one of these for your home PC, their graphics units really sucks. They make semi-decent low-power home servers though AMD finally caught up with them (Atom is still far behind). Their padlock technology is amazing, fastest AES encryption and SHA digest processing you can get though it's rather niche and requires it to be supported at the ASM level. Intel's AES-NI was a blatant copy of padlock btw.

Anyhow if you take the time to look around you'd notice many of the integrated systems surrounding you have a Via processor inside. Look for things that you would normally ignore like ATM's, billboards or the cash register (running Windows CE) at your local store.

My friend its truth that VIA has some business, otherwise there wouldn't be Quad core, the same with amd or any other IDM. But you put it as the king of the embedded business... which is a galaxy of difference. The king of embedded is ARM and its armada, actually the Original ARM was designed, with Apple on the venture, exactly and specifically for all those uses you mention. Phones and now Tablets only came latter (quite convinced the 64bit ARM will reach full desktop a server status).

EDIT: don't have numbers to say for sure, but doubt VIA is bigger than Texas Instruments or Freescale(which both have their own fabs) on embedded... and the same for quite some others for that matter, Maxwell has additional example... which have more specialized controllers even for car infotainment (an exploding sector) systems, where VIA has no presence i think.

 

[palladin9479]

Spoiler

If flame wars pop up, I just whip out my VIA Nano and preach to the world how superior it is to any other consumer processor. Flamers promptly bring their argument elsewhere.

Pfft
http://www.viaembedded.com/en/products/boards/1893/1/EPIA-M920.html

Via Nano QuadCore (they got Arm offerings too)

You gotta give them credit, they've pretty much cornered the market on x86 for industrial / integrated devices. They saw the war between AMD and Intel then said "f*ck that" and have completely ignored the desktop / mobile segments.

C'mon VIA Nano (old Cyrix) is a niche player on x86 that has no significant presence in any market wahtsoever.

the 4 core took i thing, 5 or 6 years to come out after the double core( when others might go 16 cores / chip). If AMD did that it had been dead by now. AMD problem is PR and marketing, and i pick your post because its very illustrative, everything serves to "bash", to speculate reasons of failure, what it can have been done better... most of the things written have some truth, but all companies do a lot of mistakes that only are so, when only visible, and to prevent that "visibility", massive whitewash and propaganda campaigns ensue, which amd never was able to do even when it was in much better shape...

At the end of the day amd problem is not technical but commercial, and you are right, if AMD could had been like VIA, going unnoticed nobody bashes it nobody bias reviews it, then probably it would be better, only it would sell less...

Perhaps downsizing and go ARM is not a bad idea for amd, goes directly according to that, go unnoticed for a while... just wonder then what Intel to sell will commend reviews of its x86 against what !?.. ARM ? ..which one ? ... and a bench of ARM to x86 is not comparable in any case... not really, complete different uarch...

Perhaps then VIA Nano (cyrix) would have to be financed heavily, even by Intel (hey! they already did that to Nvidia) and promoted for a while, even technically advised and helped, so that intel could have a partner in the short future to continue this "FREAK SHOW" that goes on today... the show just sells a lot and gives them a lot of promotion by negative endorsement, how stupid it might sound it seems to work...

Ahh you might not be versed in what those guys do. Via does lots of business in the integrated / industrial segments. Think medical machines, KIOSKs, digital ad bulletin boards, ATMs, cash registers, airport flight boards, robotic factory control systems, sensor boards and home automation (if your into that).

If you actually took the time to look you'd realize their boards are horrifically overpriced, if your goal was to run Crysis 3 or do iTunes. Otherwise they tend to come equipped with 3~4 serial ports that run at standard RS-232 speeds as well as RS-422/423. They also tend to have either 1~2 GPIO headers along with another 1~2 LVDS headers. Basically what their lacking in raw CPU power they more then make up for in IO capability and thermal tolerance. So you wouldn't ever buy one of these for your home PC, their graphics units really sucks. They make semi-decent low-power home servers though AMD finally caught up with them (Atom is still far behind). Their padlock technology is amazing, fastest AES encryption and SHA digest processing you can get though it's rather niche and requires it to be supported at the ASM level. Intel's AES-NI was a blatant copy of padlock btw.

Anyhow if you take the time to look around you'd notice many of the integrated systems surrounding you have a Via processor inside. Look for things that you would normally ignore like ATM's, billboards or the cash register (running Windows CE) at your local store.

My friend its truth that VIA has some business, otherwise there wouldn't be Quad core, the same with amd or any other IDM. But you put it as the king of the embedded business... which is a galaxy of difference. The king of embedded is ARM and its armada, actually the Original ARM was designed, with Apple on the venture, exactly and specifically for all those uses you mention. Phones and now Tablets only came latter (quite convinced the 64bit ARM will reach full desktop a server status).

EDIT: don't have numbers to say for sure, but doubt VIA is bigger than Texas Instruments or Freescale(which both have their own fabs) on embedded... and the same for quite some others for that matter, Maxwell has additional example... which have more specialized controllers even for car infotainment (an exploding sector) systems, where VIA has no presence i think.

ARM is not x86, go reread very carefully what I wrote and realize where selective reading kicked in. I actually listed the exact industries that VIA is heavily involved with. Industrial applications specifically. This is an area where ARM is actually not a big player as the software in play is legacy x86 with half of it running on DOS the other half running on Windows CE. This is an area where there is absolutely zero tolerance for bugs, similar to the financial mainframe sector. Their code has already been proofed and certified and their not going to risk having it recoded for a new architecture for absolutely zero gain .

Seriously, next time your at a convenience store check out line, see if you can peek right behind the middle section of the cash register, you should see what looks like the back-plate of a Mini-ITX board, USB, PS2, network and several serial ports. Guess what CPU is running on that board? It's not ARM (probably an old C3). If you ever get a chance to what's on the inside of a digital billboard, there is a back panel that pops open and allows access to the Mini-ITX VIA board bolted on the inside. Usually with a modem for remote configuration and upload though newer ones use Ethernet. Same with ATM's, their just VIA boards with a modem and several serial devices (Card reader / keypad / screen) connected. Another example is ... Burger King. Those digital menu boards they have over the counter, those aren't running on an ARM platform. It's just Windows CE on an embedded x86 platform. Now I never got a chance to look at the board, but my guess is on Via as I've never seen anyone else provide the digital IO needed on those boards.

I was completely surprised to see that they are everywhere, just not consumer level. Their reaping a windfall because nobody wants to upgrade their ancient legacy software due to it providing everything they need and "it just works". It's industrial x86 applications which is actually a huge field, their just really slow to upgrade or change anything.

-=edit=-
This is related to the OP because if AMD plays their cards right all they need is to get a board with GPIO, LVDS and multiple serial ports that can run without a fan. System integrators are always on the look out for cheaper boards (Via price gangs people).

Things you absolutely need in abundance.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Purpose_Input/Output
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low-voltage_differential_signaling
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RS-422

 

[Cataclysm_ZA]

where there is a shred of evidence of any of those assertions ??

The Techspot article link, references in the article a Techreport article, but none of them has a review, only the first poster showed a chart of AT.

Without wanting to be rude, or entering in polemic, isn't there anyone else review that might be much more representative ? (AT has proved throughout time of not being prove of nothing... sorry...)

At least a past posts showed a review in TH, and there seems Trinity still wins in most games though it loses in a lot of synthetics, which nevertheless Trinity might be less than a discrete 640 or 50 GPU of Nvidia... never expect the exact truth, but sorry there might be something a little more representative, a clue not a "close" bias...

I'm not sure what you're asking for? What assertions are you talking about? Your wording is very incoherent.

This is related to the OP because if AMD plays their cards right all they need is to get a board with GPIO, LVDS and multiple serial ports that can run without a fan. System integrators are always on the look out for cheaper boards (Via price gangs people).

I've seen a Bobcat board with GPIO ports, but it was only for testing. I'm not quite sure if AMD plans to get into that front properly yet. I know they do have an eye for the embedded market, though. The new G-series chips look very good on paper.

http://www.engadget.com/2013/04/23/amd-reveals-g-series-x-embedded-chips/

I wonder when we'll actually see one.

 

[sarinaide]

Looking at the richland pricing R1700 or $149 for the 6800K, I dont think I will be chucking my 5800K this time round.

R1700? Are you looking at a South African website?

Just estimated distributors costs, but is liable to change with the crashing economy.

Looking at the richland pricing R1700 or $149 for the 6800K, I dont think I will be chucking my 5800K this time round.

After buying the 6800K, get some LN2 and push it to DDR3-3200.

I can't get my APU stable beyond DDR3 2600 and even then its a bit of a push, the APU's are not good with conventional cooling overclocks but at DDR3 2400 and 38.1GB/s bandwidth its probably the equivlant to Richland with DDR3 2133.

Says FM2+ and will feature GDDR5/DDR3 controllers, dual channel controllers and HUMA, this is more or less what is expected.

And now you see why AMD wanted to delay Kaveri news as long as possible. Socket changes always put people off. Just look how many down talk Haswell because of the socket change.

Well FM2 is supportted but you lose the GDDR5 option. I have seen what is probably fud but the motherboards will have embedded GDDR5 exclusive to the iGPU and I am assuming an number of busses and controllers thus. Kaveri has to be impressive or I will be very sad

 

[sarinaide]

My take on APU's as such, the limitation on the APU is the x86 without doubt, if I was to take a Intel processor and throw on the Devastator Radeon core I would probably see around 10FPS difference without a doubt before running into bandwidth issues. So its all fine and well saying Kaveri needs GDDR5 and HuMA what it needs is a faster x86 core and if all come together right then there is no reason why Kaveri will not be a fine product.

As for AMD in general I have spent years and lots of money on AMD systems and moved to GPU's as well but for me its now about APU's as I find myself disinterested in the traditional CPU offerings. As for what my APU is giving me, well I play BF3 and DGL and I can say that the experience is fluid for what I demand, anything better is a bonus and from what I gather they say Richland is about on par now with the HD6670 that will be a nice offering.

PS: I get a HD7750 this week after a long search, I am told the DG with one is definite but now is the moment of truth, if it does then its 15% more performance than a HD6670+7660D and thats always good especially with more frame pacing drivers due.

 

[de5_Roy]

Computex 2013: Kabini in a BRIX, [strike]Haswell Too[/strike]
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7011/computex-2013-kabini-in-a-brix-haswell-too
anyone else see innuendos in these names?

Gigabyte rolls out Temash tablet
http://fudzilla.com/home/item/31566-gigabyte-rolls-out-temash-tablet

we need more boards like this
http://www.techpowerup.com/184888/gigabyte-also-shows-off-f2a85xn-wifi-feature-rich-mini-itx-motherboard.html

@centurion: is it possible to fit a 220w cpu in motherboards supporting up to 140w cpus? if yes, how? i asked before and got no answer....

 

[hcl123]

where there is a shred of evidence of any of those assertions ??

The Techspot article link, references in the article a Techreport article, but none of them has a review, only the first poster showed a chart of AT.

Without wanting to be rude, or entering in polemic, isn't there anyone else review that might be much more representative ? (AT has proved throughout time of not being prove of nothing... sorry...)

At least a past posts showed a review in TH, and there seems Trinity still wins in most games though it loses in a lot of synthetics, which nevertheless Trinity might be less than a discrete 640 or 50 GPU of Nvidia... never expect the exact truth, but sorry there might be something a little more representative, a clue not a "close" bias...

I'm not sure what you're asking for? What assertions are you talking about? Your wording is very incoherent.

well actually very coherent, in line with some quite few past posts about bias.

see past posts

http://www.techspot.com/news/51307-intel-haswell-integrated-graphics-are-on-par-with-geforce-gt-650m.html

on par with? hardly.

25% slower, sure.

Read the TechSpot article again. Did Intel say anything about being on par? NO. TechSpot did, and that's the problem that propagated through to other news sites once that article went up. Not even Tech Report said "on par" they actually

Where is the review on techspot ?

Don't get offended but this is insane, discussing hear say! ?... that is what i find strange in those posts.

At least making good faith in TH test (http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/core-i7-4770k-haswell-review,3521.html ) Trinity still wins for Haswell in games, which could had been even a larger difference than that shown if all game tests were at max settings, maybe yes may the contrary, at least it would make a good comparative.

But none of this review sites is responsible or know what is "inside" those test softwares, which has no guaranty of anything not even of origin (where is the md5 ?)... yet serves to make some of the most aggressive and peremptory arguments (will it be insanity ? )

What i meant with AT reference, is that at least i want to make some good faith on TH, reservations usually is not really about reviewers but the tools and some methods used, but of AT there is a long track record of no faith possible whatsoever (and no NEVER posted or participated on AT in any form or position)

Hope it clarifies, for me is enough, no pointless bickering with personal remarks i'll enter.

 

[hcl123]

@centurion: is it possible to fit a 220w cpu in motherboards supporting up to 140w cpus? if yes, how? i asked before and got no answer....

Usually not places i would visit or discuss but generally i'm convinced that enthusiast OCers extract much more than 220W with most of their exercises... yet none of those chip as been rated above 125w... but likewise expect no endorsement that officially touches guaranties and certifications.

UPDATE: also is not to discard, that this new FX is nothing but a fake news, like many other news, of someone with nothing better to do, or if truth not those 220W but under certification up to 140W ... its possible to tweak SOI processes that much, i think the IBM one with 600mm² chips and 5.5Ghz is even better than that which the new FX suggests.. only very few would believe it, the official "popular" mantra is quite different, and GF inspires lots of salt (lol)...

 

[de5_Roy]

Usually not places i would visit or discuss but generally i'm convinced that enthusiast OCers extract much more than 220W with most of their exercises... yet none of those chip as been rated above 125w... but likewise expect no endorsement that officially touches guaranties and certifications.

thanks.

 

[sarinaide]

Computex 2013: Kabini in a BRIX, [strike]Haswell Too[/strike]
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7011/computex-2013-kabini-in-a-brix-haswell-too
anyone else see innuendos in these names?

Gigabyte rolls out Temash tablet
http://fudzilla.com/home/item/31566-gigabyte-rolls-out-temash-tablet

we need more boards like this
http://www.techpowerup.com/184888/gigabyte-also-shows-off-f2a85xn-wifi-feature-rich-mini-itx-motherboard.html

@centurion: is it possible to fit a 220w cpu in motherboards supporting up to 140w cpus? if yes, how? i asked before and got no answer....

I have a ASRock A85X ITX and ASRock to date are the only company with A75 and A85 ITX boards but until I saw that Gigabyte board I am now in "must have" mode. Thats a sexy board.

 

[truegenius]

@centurion: is it possible to fit a 220w cpu in motherboards supporting up to 140w cpus? if yes, how? i asked before and got no answer....

yes but only those boards having good vrm system
boards having only 4 phase for cpu will not be able to support 220w cpu
atleast 8 phase (or 4 powIRstage ir3550 ic) for cpu is needed
boards like asus crosshair can support it as it have good vrm

 

[8350rocks]

@centurion: is it possible to fit a 220w cpu in motherboards supporting up to 140w cpus? if yes, how? i asked before and got no answer....

yes but only those boards having good vrm system
boards having only 4 phase for cpu will not be able to support 220w cpu
atleast 8 phase (or 4 powIRstage ir3550 ic) for cpu is needed
boards like asus crosshair can support it as it have good vrm

Asrock extreme and Gigabyte UD boards also have good VRMs...just stay away from the cheap Asrock boards...for some reason they're generally much lower QA than the extreme series.

 

[gamerk316]

That is a side issue... x87 has very few uses now, lest of all in the context of "client/desktop" systems.

No, no, no! You do not have the right to say "Don't ever change the software", followed by "Well, X87 processing isn't important." Once upon a time, the benchmark software was written in, gasp, X87 code. Using your argument of "never change the software", it would STILL be X87 code. And people like you would then be complaining about how slow X87 runs on AMD processors.

So no.

 

[The Q6660 Inside]

That is a side issue... x87 has very few uses now, lest of all in the context of "client/desktop" systems.

No, no, no! You do not have the right to say "Don't ever change the software", followed by "Well, X87 processing isn't important." Once upon a time, the benchmark software was written in, gasp, X87 code. Using your argument of "never change the software", it would STILL be X87 code. And people like you would then be complaining about how slow X87 runs on AMD processors.

So no.

X87 of all things... Isn't that what nVdia used to hobble PhysX on the CPU, thus reducing performance?

 

[gamerk316]

That is a side issue... x87 has very few uses now, lest of all in the context of "client/desktop" systems.

No, no, no! You do not have the right to say "Don't ever change the software", followed by "Well, X87 processing isn't important." Once upon a time, the benchmark software was written in, gasp, X87 code. Using your argument of "never change the software", it would STILL be X87 code. And people like you would then be complaining about how slow X87 runs on AMD processors.

So no.

X87 of all things... Isn't that what nVdia used to hobble PhysX on the CPU, thus reducing performance?

Initially, but they replaced the X87 backend as of v3 in late 2011. CPU performance still stinks, again, because multi-object dynamic physics is performed a LOT faster on the GPU.

 

[The Q6660 Inside]

That is a side issue... x87 has very few uses now, lest of all in the context of "client/desktop" systems.

No, no, no! You do not have the right to say "Don't ever change the software", followed by "Well, X87 processing isn't important." Once upon a time, the benchmark software was written in, gasp, X87 code. Using your argument of "never change the software", it would STILL be X87 code. And people like you would then be complaining about how slow X87 runs on AMD processors.

So no.

X87 of all things... Isn't that what nVdia used to hobble PhysX on the CPU, thus reducing performance?

Initially, but they replaced the X87 backend as of v3 in late 2011. CPU performance still stinks, again, because multi-object dynamic physics is performed a LOT faster on the GPU.

*Sticks in 8800GTX as PhysX card*

 

[gamerk316]

So HW gets about 7% in IPC over IB, and almost DOUBLE the CPU performance of Trinity.

EDIT: No idea why the second pic isn't loading right...

And about 40% more GPU performance over IB, and about 20% less GPU performance then Trinity [I'm disregarding Civ V from this].

So a very strong generational gain for Intel. GPU isn't there yet though...

 

[8350rocks]

@centurion: is it possible to fit a 220w cpu in motherboards supporting up to 140w cpus? if yes, how? i asked before and got no answer....

yes but only those boards having good vrm system
boards having only 4 phase for cpu will not be able to support 220w cpu
atleast 8 phase (or 4 powIRstage ir3550 ic) for cpu is needed
boards like asus crosshair can support it as it have good vrm

So HW gets about 7% in IPC over IB, and almost DOUBLE the CPU performance of Trinity.

EDIT: No idea why the second pic isn't loading right...

And about 40% more GPU performance over IB, and about 20% less GPU performance then Trinity [I'm disregarding Civ V from this].

So a very strong generational gain for Intel. GPU isn't there yet though...

Comparing the 3770k to the 5800k is a bit apples and oranges don't you think? I would think a low end i5 is a more appropriate comparison.

That's like comparing the FX8350 to an i3 in encryption or rendering.

 

[Cataclysm_ZA]

My eyes bleed and my head hurts now. What is this drivel? I don't even... forget it, its still Semi Accurate. Bloody con artists.

 

[hcl123]

https://semiaccurate.com/assets/uploads/2013/06/HaswellOpenCLandCPUBenchmarks1.png

So HW gets about 7% in IPC over IB, and almost DOUBLE the CPU performance of Trinity.

Perfectly alright, HW/IB have double the thread ability of Trinity, 4 cores 8 threads against 2 modules 4 threads, and more than double the size of cache room, and the CPU and the OpenCL results are much in line, which makes me suspect this is not the REAL OpenCL, or the OpenCL that is possible and AMD is pursuing of targeting most heavily the GPU, it could give more than an order of magnitude better performance than using the CPU alone.

 

[Cazalan]

Comparing the 3770k to the 5800k is a bit apples and oranges don't you think? I would think a low end i5 is a more appropriate comparison.

That's like comparing the FX8350 to an i3 in encryption or rendering.

More like apples to high priced organic apples.

Richland numbers would be more appropriate but what else can they compare with really? It's mainly an Intel vs Intel review with some AMD numbers (top APU) thrown in for reference.

Some people gladly pay twice as much for 2x CPU performance. Some would look at it from the other angle and say I'd rather pay half and get 15% better graphics.

What it does show is that SR needs a lot more than 30% to get near i7 levels. Not that it HAS to catch i7 to be competitive. Price is always key.

Haswell is 1.4billion transistors vs Trinity 1.3billion. Either way you slice it Intel is getting more performance from their transistors and at lower power.

 

[hcl123]

That is a side issue... x87 has very few uses now, lest of all in the context of "client/desktop" systems.

No, no, no! You do not have the right to say "Don't ever change the software", followed by "Well, X87 processing isn't important." Once upon a time, the benchmark software was written in, gasp, X87 code. Using your argument of "never change the software", it would STILL be X87 code. And people like you would then be complaining about how slow X87 runs on AMD processors.

So no.

X87 of all things... Isn't that what nVdia used to hobble PhysX on the CPU, thus reducing performance?

Initially, but they replaced the X87 backend as of v3 in late 2011. CPU performance still stinks, again, because multi-object dynamic physics is performed a LOT faster on the GPU.

I missed that past post, but i think you missed the point gamerk316.

x87 is important to you ( for me is quite irrelevant in the FP order of things), want to measure it, its perfectly ok with me. At least use a signed software, that is the "no change part of the story". Understand that software changes a lot, is prone to bugs to inefficient algorithm implementation that all can be corrected and or improved. Sign with md5, at least we would know that the same blob goes equal everywhere, along with some assurance of origin.

the net is full of fake news, fake reports, fake images... couldn't it ever be full of fake software ? (pretending to be something else... if you not agree, i have a Mercedes AMG done in my garage, top model, i'll do a real bargain for you lol )

 

[GOM3RPLY3R]

Even if AM3+ is the socket they need a new chipset, they are very far behind in that front and AM3+ as it is now is not a good platform.

Wasting money on flogging AM3+, I really don't understand this decision at all.

On Steamroller architecture, tightening up cache latencies, lowering branch mispredicts, improvements to IMC should see fair enough gains. If I was to be a betting man I think the requisite parts will be maybe 3-5% slower than SB/IB (FX8~i7/i5 and FX6 and FX4 should sit in between a i3 and i5 or match the mainsteam i5's) Where this puts them after Haswell maybe around 7-10% slower.

Kaveri APU's should be quite impressive though.

the force seems strong with you. i'll ask you this: why/how are the 8-core AMD's, with a clock speed faster than intel's, slower than the lowest i5.

I just want to say: Why is this such a huge thread?

Simple answer: Ranting about off topic things.

I'll sum up for everyone what they are complaining about:

In a performance aspect with prices out of the question, Nvidia and Intel are dominating the market.

With Prices in hand, they are about hand in hand, as wholes.

In conclusion, if you are on a tighter budget or want to use OpenCL, Bit Mine, or Video Edit, then hit up the AMD market.

If you have the money and you want kick-ass gaming for the performance, go for Intel and/or Nvidia.

Enough Said.

UPDATE: By the way, I encountered a problem with an AMD fan on a GAMING topic and he brought up Operating Systems and how AMD works better with these, his main point was Linux. Keep in mind, most of the World Population isn't a hardware geek and/or an intense gamer, so really the focus will be mostly Windows. Also that Linux is terrible with games.

^ Probably doesn't know that the Radeon 8000HD series hasn't came out yet to defeat his beloved titan. But hey if most people use it, it must be better yet just like Windows and Capitalization,

Also check your Tock haswell yet? Probably justifies it in some way.

Also i see nothing wrong with going off topic when their is no info it educates people and does not hurt anything.

I just think its funny how you guys are ranting about how good this next series will be. It's probably going to be about the same as anything else. An 8970 would be a slightly improved 7970 and be about on par with the 780, at most getting just under the Titan. I'd be surprised if they made something stronger. The only problem is power consumption. You can run something with a 750w PSU, and with Intel parts that take less power you can get more performance. Yeah it may not be much, but you can probably overclock Intel parts even more and get no more than the wattage AMD does.

Its reported to have twice the shaders, Also who cares about Power consumption on Desktops?

It could mean the difference between getting a 950 watt power supply or a 1050 watt power supply. That's usually a few extra 20-40$.

 

[8350rocks]

Even if AM3+ is the socket they need a new chipset, they are very far behind in that front and AM3+ as it is now is not a good platform.

Wasting money on flogging AM3+, I really don't understand this decision at all.

On Steamroller architecture, tightening up cache latencies, lowering branch mispredicts, improvements to IMC should see fair enough gains. If I was to be a betting man I think the requisite parts will be maybe 3-5% slower than SB/IB (FX8~i7/i5 and FX6 and FX4 should sit in between a i3 and i5 or match the mainsteam i5's) Where this puts them after Haswell maybe around 7-10% slower.

Kaveri APU's should be quite impressive though.

the force seems strong with you. i'll ask you this: why/how are the 8-core AMD's, with a clock speed faster than intel's, slower than the lowest i5.

I just want to say: Why is this such a huge thread?

Simple answer: Ranting about off topic things.

I'll sum up for everyone what they are complaining about:

In a performance aspect with prices out of the question, Nvidia and Intel are dominating the market.

With Prices in hand, they are about hand in hand, as wholes.

In conclusion, if you are on a tighter budget or want to use OpenCL, Bit Mine, or Video Edit, then hit up the AMD market.

If you have the money and you want kick-ass gaming for the performance, go for Intel and/or Nvidia.

Enough Said.

UPDATE: By the way, I encountered a problem with an AMD fan on a GAMING topic and he brought up Operating Systems and how AMD works better with these, his main point was Linux. Keep in mind, most of the World Population isn't a hardware geek and/or an intense gamer, so really the focus will be mostly Windows. Also that Linux is terrible with games.

^ Probably doesn't know that the Radeon 8000HD series hasn't came out yet to defeat his beloved titan. But hey if most people use it, it must be better yet just like Windows and Capitalization,

Also check your Tock haswell yet? Probably justifies it in some way.

Also i see nothing wrong with going off topic when their is no info it educates people and does not hurt anything.

I just think its funny how you guys are ranting about how good this next series will be. It's probably going to be about the same as anything else. An 8970 would be a slightly improved 7970 and be about on par with the 780, at most getting just under the Titan. I'd be surprised if they made something stronger. The only problem is power consumption. You can run something with a 750w PSU, and with Intel parts that take less power you can get more performance. Yeah it may not be much, but you can probably overclock Intel parts even more and get no more than the wattage AMD does.

Its reported to have twice the shaders, Also who cares about Power consumption on Desktops?

It could mean the difference between getting a 950 watt power supply or a 1050 watt power supply. That's usually a few extra 20-40$.

If you can't run an AMD gaming rig with a single GPU (HD 7970 GHz or less) on a 750W PSU, then your PSU must have voltage evaporating into thin air...(HD 7990/GTX 690 excluded, they're basically 2 GPUs in one card).

 

[GOM3RPLY3R]

AMD launching Richland this week.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kusJt9f7xAQ 0:00:55
May 31 so I guess it's this week

APUs, keep in mind. They consist of much higher end graphics than a regular CPU with onboard graphics that aren't very powerful. Yes they are cheaper, but they are not so fair as to compare them with regular CPUs.

It's like comparing a GTX 690 to a GTX 670. The 690's obviously going to win since its a dual GPU.