AMD CPU speculation... and expert conjecture

[jdwii]

Don't feed the troll... Or even worst, don't waste words on a blind folk who refuses to see ~__________________~

Anyway, in regards to the IPC numbers you threw gamerk, AMD actually promised a 15% increase in IPC alone from gen to gen, right? Given that, then it might as well translate as the overall 7-9% we saw from BD to PD. That's not bad I guess.

Cheers!

No they did not they said 15% IPC AND Power efficiency or TDP.

 

[cowboy44mag]

AM3+ will release new SB1050 chipset boards for SR so like FM2+ may require a board upgrade so don't buy until you know or you will be locked in. That said a 8350 is plenty processor.

Last time I looked at official AMD statements there was no confirmed news that Steamroller will use SB1050. To say that Steamroller will use SB1050 is speculation at best. In fact I highly doubt that AMD will bother with a motherboard upgrade to SB1050 at all.

1. Asus works very closely with AMD and Intel and produces the best motherboards available for both brands. Asus just released the Sabertooth 990FX R2.0/Gen3 motherboard. The only difference between the Sabertooth 990FX R2.0 and the Gen 3 is the Gen 3 has PCI-Express 3.0. Right now video cards still aren't tapping out PCI-Express 2.0, so that was the upgrade for the future. I'm sure if AMD was planning on releasing SB1050 with Steamroller Asus would have held off on the Gen 3 to include SB1050 support.

2. AMD has already confirmed that Steamroller will end the FX line of processors. After Steamroller FX all AMD is going to be unified going forward with FM2, FM3 APUs. There will still be an enthusiast level of the FM2, FM3 APUs I'm sure, and they may even have FX somewhere in their naming, but the true FX AM3+ processor line is ending. I can't see AMD pushing out a new motherboard (1050FX SB1050, 990FX SB1050, ect) for a product line they are ending. The only way I can see a 1050FX SB1050 type board is if AMD decided to continue the FX line and releases AM4 for the next series of Steamroller, going into Excavator.

 

[de5_Roy]

^^ iirc there was a rumor of 1090 (or was it 1070?) chipset. it was never confirmed and after another strong rumor of amd internally cancelling certain cpus, those chipset rumors disappeared along with it.
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/AMD-1090FX-1070-SB1060-pcie-3,13918.html

 

[cowboy44mag]

Marginally less 100w is what the normal difference from an i3 ivy bridge to fx4300 or i5 to fx6300 or fx8350 to i7 3770k.

For the two latter chips it is more as 40-80W.

The 3770k consumes around 45w on full load if it was just the cpu. Also theres a reason why intel cpus take half the power consumption to do the same task as in 3770k vs fx8350. Haswell even improves on that.

you are one delusional individual. www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2012/04/23/intel-core-i7-3770k-review/8

133w cpu load for 3770k, 137 for hw and this is from a very pro-intel website, and one of the closest power between sb and hasbeen, most give sb a 10-20 watt advantage.

45W .... wtf.

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/61451-intel-haswell-i7-4770k-i5-4670k-review-25.html

Haswell even improves slightly on ivy bridge. I am just on about the processor rating when under full load is like 45w. Theres a reason why laptop intel cpus perform identical at same clock speeds as desktops, the only difference ins laptop cpus have lower base clocks normally. I think the 4770k is intels lowest end cpu for the high end market power consumption wise they released since the pentium 3 cpu days. AMD really should be battering these i7 3770k or 4770k with these high wattage cpus.

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/61451-intel-haswell-i7-4770k-i5-4670k-review-25.html

If you forget the price its a bit like comparing a low power consuming gt640 to a 7870 and the gt640 being more faster which is what intel are basically doing since the sandy bridge i7 2600k. BTW i know the 7870 destroys the gt640 but I am using it as an exampleof what would happen if one company had suc a big margin performance per watt what they could do.

This is getting way, way off topic. This thread isn't "look how wonderful Haswell is, and bask in its Intel goodness". I'm sure there are lots of threads out there for that. This thread is AMD Steamroller speculation, the only way Hasfail figures into this thread is AMD doesn't have too far to improve to catch up to Intel because of Hasfail's shortcomings. No matter how you try to justify Hasfail to yourself or any other mindless Intel drone, it didn't deliver on its promises, it isn't a huge leap forward even for laptop only users, and enthusiasts would be much better sticking with Ivy Bridge which overclocks much better with fewer problems.

Hasfail may look better in laptop configurations than Ivy Bridge did, however what little improvement Intel may have made for laptops won't be looking so good after Kaveri laptops become available. If your looking for someone to stroke your mindless Intel drone ego, this isn't the place for it.

 

[cowboy44mag]

^^ iirc there was a rumor of 1090 (or was it 1070?) chipset. it was never confirmed and after another strong rumor of amd internally cancelling certain cpus, those chipset rumors disappeared along with it.
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/AMD-1090FX-1070-SB1060-pcie-3,13918.html

+1 The 1090FX board, I knew 1050FX didn't seem right. I remember reading that AMD would be releasing 1090FX SB1090 motherboards a long time ago, and then it just vanished. AMD internally cancelling certain cpus along with the 1090FX seems to fit the bill perfectly.

At any rate, when Steamroller FX releases AMD will be wanting to showcase the processors "horsepower", however they will be focusing much more on FM2 Kaveri APUs and FM3 next gen Kaveri going into Excavator. I don't see them spending the time and effort to release a chipset update for the AM3+ board which in at the end of its long service. Really with as good as the Sabertooth 990FX boards are they don't have to upgrade the chipset to showcase Steamroller FX

 

[8350rocks]

Sapphire shows a proof of concept MB for trinity to use in digital signage...(look out VIA)

http://semiaccurate.com/2013/06/18/sapphire-shows-multidisplay-board-computex/

New AMD server roadmap:

http://semiaccurate.com/2013/06/17/amd-announces-seattle-berlin-and-warsaw-for-servers/

Commentary about the digital signage software...(and 18 display setup):

http://semiaccurate.com/2013/06/13/sapphire-shows-18-screen-demo-in-computex/

Radeon HD 8670D (Richland top end iGPU) reviewed:

http://semiaccurate.com/2013/06/05/amds-radeon-hd-8670d-a-review/

EDIT: This is older, but worth reading...Intel intends to shut out GPUs in it's hardware using Intel only graphics in the near future:

http://semiaccurate.com/2012/12/18/how-intel-can-slam-the-door-on-gpus/

 

[sarinaide]

Marginally less 100w is what the normal difference from an i3 ivy bridge to fx4300 or i5 to fx6300 or fx8350 to i7 3770k.

For the two latter chips it is more as 40-80W.

The 3770k consumes around 45w on full load if it was just the cpu. Also theres a reason why intel cpus take half the power consumption to do the same task as in 3770k vs fx8350. Haswell even improves on that.

you are one delusional individual. www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2012/04/23/intel-core-i7-3770k-review/8

133w cpu load for 3770k, 137 for hw and this is from a very pro-intel website, and one of the closest power between sb and hasbeen, most give sb a 10-20 watt advantage.

45W .... wtf.

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/61451-intel-haswell-i7-4770k-i5-4670k-review-25.html

Haswell even improves slightly on ivy bridge. I am just on about the processor rating when under full load is like 45w. Theres a reason why laptop intel cpus perform identical at same clock speeds as desktops, the only difference ins laptop cpus have lower base clocks normally. I think the 4770k is intels lowest end cpu for the high end market power consumption wise they released since the pentium 3 cpu days. AMD really should be battering these i7 3770k or 4770k with these high wattage cpus.

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/61451-intel-haswell-i7-4770k-i5-4670k-review-25.html

If you forget the price its a bit like comparing a low power consuming gt640 to a 7870 and the gt640 being more faster which is what intel are basically doing since the sandy bridge i7 2600k. BTW i know the 7870 destroys the gt640 but I am using it as an exampleof what would happen if one company had suc a big margin performance per watt what they could do.

You have compared a quad core to a octocore that is also clocked higher and based it on efficiency. Ruling out core performance it is quite obvious a higher clocked, higher core count chip will consume more power than a quad core. What you are doing is comparing a apple to an orange and wondering why there is a difference. Clocking a IB or HW up to 4.4Ghz alone will drive total wattage up by 50-60w, so for that power is distorted in that despite 8 Threads it only has 4 cores to power compared to the 8 on the FX8350.

AM3+ will release new SB1050 chipset boards for SR so like FM2+ may require a board upgrade so don't buy until you know or you will be locked in. That said a 8350 is plenty processor.

Last time I looked at official AMD statements there was no confirmed news that Steamroller will use SB1050. To say that Steamroller will use SB1050 is speculation at best. In fact I highly doubt that AMD will bother with a motherboard upgrade to SB1050 at all.

1. Asus works very closely with AMD and Intel and produces the best motherboards available for both brands. Asus just released the Sabertooth 990FX R2.0/Gen3 motherboard. The only difference between the Sabertooth 990FX R2.0 and the Gen 3 is the Gen 3 has PCI-Express 3.0. Right now video cards still aren't tapping out PCI-Express 2.0, so that was the upgrade for the future. I'm sure if AMD was planning on releasing SB1050 with Steamroller Asus would have held off on the Gen 3 to include SB1050 support.

2. AMD has already confirmed that Steamroller will end the FX line of processors. After Steamroller FX all AMD is going to be unified going forward with FM2, FM3 APUs. There will still be an enthusiast level of the FM2, FM3 APUs I'm sure, and they may even have FX somewhere in their naming, but the true FX AM3+ processor line is ending. I can't see AMD pushing out a new motherboard (1050FX SB1050, 990FX SB1050, ect) for a product line they are ending. The only way I can see a 1050FX SB1050 type board is if AMD decided to continue the FX line and releases AM4 for the next series of Steamroller, going into Excavator.

SB1050 relates to SB chipset like most AM3+ run the SB950, even if SR has the same pin count there will nevertheless be optimised benefits to a SR running off a tailored chipset.

 

[juanrga]

AMD has already confirmed that Steamroller will end the FX line of processors.

This has been my bet as well. Could you provide a link with AMD confirming that?

P.S.: Don't feed the Hasfail troll.

 

[8350rocks]

AMD has already confirmed that Steamroller will end the FX line of processors.

This has been my bet as well. Could you provide a link with AMD confirming that?

P.S.: Don't feed the Hasfail troll.

If steamroller gains quite a bit of market share, I would be willing to bet we see that idea pared back and they continue supporting the FX series. Though what happens there is going to be anyone's guess.

 

[The Q6660 Inside]

AMD has already confirmed that Steamroller will end the FX line of processors.

This has been my bet as well. Could you provide a link with AMD confirming that?

P.S.: Don't feed the Hasfail troll.

It is likely going to happen, by after Kaveri, AMD could be sporting 8860-ish GPUs in their A8 and A10 APUs.

 

[blackkstar]

Marginally less 100w is what the normal difference from an i3 ivy bridge to fx4300 or i5 to fx6300 or fx8350 to i7 3770k.

For the two latter chips it is more as 40-80W.

The 3770k consumes around 45w on full load if it was just the cpu. Also theres a reason why intel cpus take half the power consumption to do the same task as in 3770k vs fx8350. Haswell even improves on that.

you are one delusional individual. www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2012/04/23/intel-core-i7-3770k-review/8

133w cpu load for 3770k, 137 for hw and this is from a very pro-intel website, and one of the closest power between sb and hasbeen, most give sb a 10-20 watt advantage.

45W .... wtf.

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/61451-intel-haswell-i7-4770k-i5-4670k-review-25.html

Haswell even improves slightly on ivy bridge. I am just on about the processor rating when under full load is like 45w. Theres a reason why laptop intel cpus perform identical at same clock speeds as desktops, the only difference ins laptop cpus have lower base clocks normally. I think the 4770k is intels lowest end cpu for the high end market power consumption wise they released since the pentium 3 cpu days. AMD really should be battering these i7 3770k or 4770k with these high wattage cpus.

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/61451-intel-haswell-i7-4770k-i5-4670k-review-25.html

If you forget the price its a bit like comparing a low power consuming gt640 to a 7870 and the gt640 being more faster which is what intel are basically doing since the sandy bridge i7 2600k. BTW i know the 7870 destroys the gt640 but I am using it as an exampleof what would happen if one company had suc a big margin performance per watt what they could do.

You should be questioning the meaning of your life if you're here to make money for pro-Intel posts as part of Intel PIE or something. They pay, what? $.10USD per post? Is it really worth it?

 

[anxiousinfusion]

AMD has already confirmed that Steamroller will end the FX line of processors. After Steamroller FX all AMD is going to be unified going forward with FM2, FM3 APUs. There will still be an enthusiast level of the FM2, FM3 APUs I'm sure, and they may even have FX somewhere in their naming, but the true FX AM3+ processor line is ending.

[Citation needed]

I thought that AMD was riding out the remaining life in AM3+ up to Excavator CPUs. Look at what they're doing with the Centurion chips. AMD recognizes that there is still a market for bragging rights CPUs just as Intel with their extreme series. 990FX is a tired, old chipset and I wouldn't be surprised to see one last refresh for AM3+ before they finally take it out to the barn and shoot it.

 

[hcl123]

Don't feed the troll... Or even worst, don't waste words on a blind folk who refuses to see ~__________________~

Anyway, in regards to the IPC numbers you threw gamerk, AMD actually promised a 15% increase in IPC alone from gen to gen, right? Given that, then it might as well translate as the overall 7-9% we saw from BD to PD. That's not bad I guess.

Cheers!

No they did not they said 15% IPC AND Power efficiency or TDP.

That was a slide quite before the HotChip2012 presentation. There they claimed 30% ops per cycle, which can be translated directly as IPC, being the only caveat they included in the "simulation" "visual computing, meaning FP counts, while IPC in the traditional sense only integer counts.

 

[8350rocks]

Marginally less 100w is what the normal difference from an i3 ivy bridge to fx4300 or i5 to fx6300 or fx8350 to i7 3770k.

For the two latter chips it is more as 40-80W.

The 3770k consumes around 45w on full load if it was just the cpu. Also theres a reason why intel cpus take half the power consumption to do the same task as in 3770k vs fx8350. Haswell even improves on that.

you are one delusional individual. www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2012/04/23/intel-core-i7-3770k-review/8

133w cpu load for 3770k, 137 for hw and this is from a very pro-intel website, and one of the closest power between sb and hasbeen, most give sb a 10-20 watt advantage.

45W .... wtf.

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/61451-intel-haswell-i7-4770k-i5-4670k-review-25.html

Haswell even improves slightly on ivy bridge. I am just on about the processor rating when under full load is like 45w. Theres a reason why laptop intel cpus perform identical at same clock speeds as desktops, the only difference ins laptop cpus have lower base clocks normally. I think the 4770k is intels lowest end cpu for the high end market power consumption wise they released since the pentium 3 cpu days. AMD really should be battering these i7 3770k or 4770k with these high wattage cpus.

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/61451-intel-haswell-i7-4770k-i5-4670k-review-25.html

If you forget the price its a bit like comparing a low power consuming gt640 to a 7870 and the gt640 being more faster which is what intel are basically doing since the sandy bridge i7 2600k. BTW i know the 7870 destroys the gt640 but I am using it as an exampleof what would happen if one company had suc a big margin performance per watt what they could do.

You should be questioning the meaning of your life if you're here to make money for pro-Intel posts as part of Intel PIE or something. They pay, what? $.10USD per post? Is it really worth it?

 

[hcl123]

AMD has already confirmed that Steamroller will end the FX line of processors.

This has been my bet as well. Could you provide a link with AMD confirming that?

P.S.: Don't feed the Hasfail troll.

Where ? AFAIK none official statement was made, its less than 2 years before re-intoduction, FX beats all OC records, its the best chip for the enthusiast world by far. Why should they end it ?

 

[-Fran-]

Sapphire shows a proof of concept MB for trinity to use in digital signage...(look out VIA)

http://semiaccurate.com/2013/06/18/sapphire-shows-multidisplay-board-computex/

New AMD server roadmap:

http://semiaccurate.com/2013/06/17/amd-announces-seattle-berlin-and-warsaw-for-servers/

Commentary about the digital signage software...(and 18 display setup):

http://semiaccurate.com/2013/06/13/sapphire-shows-18-screen-demo-in-computex/

Radeon HD 8670D (Richland top end iGPU) reviewed:

http://semiaccurate.com/2013/06/05/amds-radeon-hd-8670d-a-review/

EDIT: This is older, but worth reading...Intel intends to shut out GPUs in it's hardware using Intel only graphics in the near future:

http://semiaccurate.com/2012/12/18/how-intel-can-slam-the-door-on-gpus/

From the last link:

"In the end, Intel is simply shutting the door on discrete GPUs by moving the low bar higher with their integrated performance, the high bar lower with PCIe limits, and offering their own solution in the middle. Broadwell will start the squeeze on mobile CPUs, and you can be sure that mainstream desktops won’t be far behind. Essentially the window on what a discrete GPU can do when connected to an Intel CPU will narrow with each successive generation."

That part is really... Scary.

Can AMD leverage performance so that Intel actually gives a damn about enthusiasts? Ugh...

Cheers!

 

[noob2222]

Marginally less 100w is what the normal difference from an i3 ivy bridge to fx4300 or i5 to fx6300 or fx8350 to i7 3770k.

For the two latter chips it is more as 40-80W.

The 3770k consumes around 45w on full load if it was just the cpu. Also theres a reason why intel cpus take half the power consumption to do the same task as in 3770k vs fx8350. Haswell even improves on that.

you are one delusional individual. www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2012/04/23/intel-core-i7-3770k-review/8

133w cpu load for 3770k, 137 for hw and this is from a very pro-intel website, and one of the closest power between sb and hasbeen, most give sb a 10-20 watt advantage.

45W .... wtf.

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/61451-intel-haswell-i7-4770k-i5-4670k-review-25.html

Haswell even improves slightly on ivy bridge. I am just on about the processor rating when under full load is like 45w. Theres a reason why laptop intel cpus perform identical at same clock speeds as desktops, the only difference ins laptop cpus have lower base clocks normally. I think the 4770k is intels lowest end cpu for the high end market power consumption wise they released since the pentium 3 cpu days. AMD really should be battering these i7 3770k or 4770k with these high wattage cpus.

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/61451-intel-haswell-i7-4770k-i5-4670k-review-25.html

If you forget the price its a bit like comparing a low power consuming gt640 to a 7870 and the gt640 being more faster which is what intel are basically doing since the sandy bridge i7 2600k. BTW i know the 7870 destroys the gt640 but I am using it as an exampleof what would happen if one company had suc a big margin performance per watt what they could do.

IBV motherboard - Intel dz77ga-70k ... has a 6-phase VRM, not great at all compared to a high end board from msi.
HW motherboard - MSI z87 g45 comes with a 16 phase initial vrm

so you found one review that had the 3770k at a higher power draw than HW ... what about the other 20+ that say just the opposite. Think there might be a reason for that or is that one review the only one that matters? The truth is HW pulls more power at full cpu load, period. The HW built in VRM is only 82% efficient. motherboards are up to 95%. this means the faster you go, the worse it gets. Hasbeen is not this greatest thing ever created. Its great of ULP but that 82% efficiency sucks at DT speeds, taking it from the lowest idle power (wich no one is arguing since thats what it was designed for) to a higher load power, and even higher overclocked.

but we are all fanboys ... your the one saying HW is the best thing ever.

 

[griptwister]

lol, this thread has so many deluded amd fanboys in it. Imagine if steamroller was close to haswell these amd fanboys would be saying now we closed the gap but intels 2x better performance per watt on total power consumption to compete a task needs revolutionary work by amd and no I don't work for intel.

AMD cpus are much better performance per watt in laptop cpus compared to the desktop cpus but still not even close to where intel are though. I predict 2017 will be the year when amd catch up intel ivy bridge performance per watt as amd don't seem to care about efficiency in desktop cpus.

edit look at the bottom part sandy bridge cpu then ivy bridge improves efficiency then haswell oc improves power consumption dramatically and the 5w difference at stock is more then made up for by the performance gain:
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2013/06/01/intel-core-i7-4770k-cpu-review/7

Delusional? Lol, you're the one talking about power savings for desktop users. Don't get me wrong, What Intel is doing with Quad Cores and power consumption is incredible. But it doesn't relate to me because I'm a desktop user. Aka, Power user. Also, watch this yo! (This'll piss most of you un-biased guys off)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8p9rSwc_uQ

 

[-Fran-]

Mods, please, make the horrible troll stop 8(

Cheers! 8(

 

[GOM3RPLY3R]

I think you misunderstand me...the future will see a day where 1 THz CPUs are common, just like no one thought we would ever hit 1 GHz, and look now...that's slow.

I can picture...AMD FX 11990 BE 1 THz (completely pulling nomenclature out of the sky)...maybe by then windows will be as smart as Linux.

I can agree, wishful thinking will solve nothing of today's problems, please stay on topic to what I was talking about, and answer my questions.

 

[GOM3RPLY3R]

lol, this thread has so many deluded amd fanboys in it. Imagine if steamroller was close to haswell these amd fanboys would be saying now we closed the gap but intels 2x better performance per watt on total power consumption to compete a task needs revolutionary work by amd and no I don't work for intel.

AMD cpus are much better performance per watt in laptop cpus compared to the desktop cpus but still not even close to where intel are though. I predict 2017 will be the year when amd catch up intel ivy bridge performance per watt as amd don't seem to care about efficiency in desktop cpus.

edit look at the bottom part sandy bridge cpu then ivy bridge improves efficiency then haswell oc improves power consumption dramatically and the 5w difference at stock is more then made up for by the performance gain:
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2013/06/01/intel-core-i7-4770k-cpu-review/7

Delusional? Lol, you're the one talking about power savings for desktop users. Don't get me wrong, What Intel is doing with Quad Cores and power consumption is incredible. But it doesn't relate to me because I'm a desktop user. Aka, Power user. Also, watch this yo! (This'll piss most of you un-biased guys off)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8p9rSwc_uQ

Lol, your funny. This can't completely prove anything. Give me another video doing the same but the the AMD CPU and Nvidia GPU, and Intel CPU and AMD GPU. The reason that these are "bias" are because that AMD has technology that can use the CPU and GPU more in conjunction with each other. Another this is, how do we know that the 660 Ti isn't under clocked and that the 7950 isn't over clocked? Food for thought.

 

[GOM3RPLY3R]

I think you misunderstand me...the future will see a day where 1 THz CPUs are common, just like no one thought we would ever hit 1 GHz, and look now...that's slow.

I can picture...AMD FX 11990 BE 1 THz (completely pulling nomenclature out of the sky)...maybe by then windows will be as smart as Linux.

If Windows were as smart as Linux, I would think it wouldn't be as user friendly, meaning most people might switch to apple, even the gamers. About 70% of the population (of computer users), is either a gamer, or an everyday user. If that user friendly service is taken away from people, where will they go? Probably apple, if they don't change (which they probably wont).

 

[hcl123]

60-70% ? doesn't compute. Try it with a radeon, and it can be better for sure.

Nvidia on an AMD platform... ummm doesn't spell anything good, if not intentionally cripple, doubt nvidias does any tiny bit of *driver* optimization for its archirival ... sometimes what we can't see is what delude us.

Why SuperPI (kind of useless in any case) have disappeared from reviews !?
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?286448-The-Book-of-Bulldozer-Revelations-Episode-2-%28SuperPI-x87%29

The software / hardware interactions have more than meets the eye, or the benchmark lol (imagine a BD winning lol ->see that thread)

 

[hcl123]

I like efficient computing and hope steamroller improves 60% performance per watt over piledriver and then it makes things respectable again.

That would be wonderful... but not the stupid borged intel way. That is, keep the same power and so improve performance by 60% lol

With DVFS (dynamic voltage and frequency scaling) i think power shouldn't sell anymore, most of times a desktop/client system idling.

So the ratings are borged. The becnhmarks are borged, forcing the artificially crippled to waste more. Those power measurements done by software is super-borged, measure with precision instrumentation the all system power from the wall, tells nothing of the CPU/processor.

Yes Intel is clearly better at power, it has a chipset tailored for that (hasfail), it has a fab process tailored for that, and it has the best DVFS of all... but who really cares that much, passing a certain point it doesn't matter anymore, and if you OC you don't mind for sure... even Intel"processores" can waste 300W when running a very intensive game, even with all that DVFS and tricks.

( you can be sure, power is "load" dependent... but can you appreciate the difs, 84w to 300w ?)

 

[GOM3RPLY3R]

60-70% ? doesn't compute. Try it with a radeon, and it can be better for sure.

Nvidia on an AMD platform... ummm doesn't spell anything good, if not intentionally cripple, doubt nvidias does any tiny bit of *driver* optimization for its archirival ... sometimes what we can't see is what delude us.

Why SuperPI (kind of useless in any case) have disappeared from reviews !?
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?286448-The-Book-of-Bulldozer-Revelations-Episode-2-%28SuperPI-x87%29

The software / hardware interactions have more than meets the eye, or the benchmark lol (imagine a BD winning lol ->see that thread)

What you just said is complete bogus. There are many people who use AMD CPUs and Nvidia GPUs, I have no idea what you are talking about. Please give me your reasoning as to why you say its false, and then tell my why you are trying to avoid the fault I pointed out.

I would like to note for you: Taking a poll of people who like baseball, and giving the poll to baseball fans, and that's it, wont show how many people in the world like that sport, its just a failed science experiment.

You need to test many people, not just one. If you took middle school / high school science classes you may understand.

Its the drivers dude. You go nvidia, you have to install their drivers right ?

You don't think that nvidia would use XOP/FMA4 in their drivers when on intel it would have to run by microcode(painful slow), do you ? .. There you have it, its only an example, and there are gazillion of issues for optimization, different from CPU to CPU, in any driver layer.

But its typical, ppl haven't yet realized, that many of this bickering and angry posts about hardware, what ppl in fact are bickering about are SOFTWARE differences in high percentage, much included all benchmarks. And you can't escape it, not only hardware without software is paper weight, its not really possible to completely isolate them.

So this should all be fun, knowing that ERROR MARGINS can even go quite above 10% sometimes, there are positive points for all tastes, its an approximation of potentialities, there is nothing absolute on those results

(understand relative (a clew) vs absolute ? )

You dont HAVE to use their drivers. People do tests with opposite drivers, and even play like that, all the time.

Also hardware differences are a major factor. The difference between your GTX 670 and 680, is that they use the exact same hardware yes, but the 670 has hardware that very slightly failed. Each model number down is a GPU processor that had failed more. For example: you know how each model down has (for the most part) less CUDA cores? That because more of the CUDA cores have failed (and other parts of the hardware), meaning originally there are always X Physical CUDA cores, but not all are usable as they have failed, so they put that in a certain model.

You can compare it to how the iPod gen 2 build had a slot for a forward facing Camera, but there was none there. The hardware is there, but not all is usable.

You always have to install drivers anyway dude, especially if you build your own. Other than that, the CPU differences wont very well matter on games that are more GPU based, which most games are.