AMD CPU speculation... and expert conjecture

[-Fran-]

As much as I'd like to see a Steamroller FX it is in AMD's best interest to stick to the APUs. The demand is much greater and thus more profitable for them. Intel seems to only update their higher end chips every other year. AMD could do the same with FX to save money.

A 5Bil company can only do so much to compete with a 100Bil company. Executing a few products well is more important than spreading too thin trying to compete in every segment.

Here's an idea... How much more expensive would be for AMD to release the FX line in FM2/FM2+/FM3 sockets? I know ditching the AM3+ socket would be such a sad thing, but you have a very good point there. If they fit the new FX'es in the same socket as the APU line, I wonder if they would save money instead of making the whole platform more expensive. This applies to servers as well. G34 is good and all, but getting a new chipset out for server APUs and low cost servers using GPU-less Opterons would be a great thing.

For MoBos makers, they could just make the DVI, HDMI and VGA connectors an additional dongle when the user picks the APU and keep the USB and eSATA ports in the back as usual. Man, that would be sweet.

Cheers!

 

[The Q6660 Inside]

As much as I'd like to see a Steamroller FX it is in AMD's best interest to stick to the APUs. The demand is much greater and thus more profitable for them. Intel seems to only update their higher end chips every other year. AMD could do the same with FX to save money.

A 5Bil company can only do so much to compete with a 100Bil company. Executing a few products well is more important than spreading too thin trying to compete in every segment.

Here's an idea... How much more expensive would be for AMD to release the FX line in FM2/FM2+/FM3 sockets? I know ditching the AM3+ socket would be such a sad thing, but you have a very good point there. If they fit the new FX'es in the same socket as the APU line, I wonder if they would save money instead of making the whole platform more expensive. This applies to servers as well. G34 is good and all, but getting a new chipset out for server APUs and low cost servers using GPU-less Opterons would be a great thing.

For MoBos makers, they could just make the DVI, HDMI and VGA connectors an additional dongle when the user picks the APU and keep the USB and eSATA ports in the back as usual. Man, that would be sweet.

Cheers!

#+1

 

[The Q6660 Inside]

8350rocks just seen both builds and intel machine even with the higher cost cpu is cheaper. Yes the amd system got an ssd but the intel system is amazingly cheaper. People forget intel motherboards don't cost much. Even with ssd $50 is the difference. $50 is less then 5% of the total cost of the machine. So what you posted makes no sense to get an fx8350 machine as it costs like £20-£30 a year more to run.

Care to look at my updated one? Remember that the AMD is using a far superior motherboard.
Update 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=4et7kDGSRfc#t=597s

In the uk its about £0.13 per kwh while on that video $0.128 is like £0.09. Also 70w is not the real difference between them if you are a heavy user its more like 100w and if you use it for like 5 hours a day intensively or 10 hours a day at 50% load. So overall in the UK it makes no sense to get an amd system as the intel system is much cheaper in the long run.

Either way, it will still be less than the 4770K, myth busted. Power is nothing for the heavy PC user, it is nothing compared to the cost of your fridge or A/C.

 

[The Q6660 Inside]

8350rocks just seen both builds and intel machine even with the higher cost cpu is cheaper. Yes the amd system got an ssd but the intel system is amazingly cheaper. People forget intel motherboards don't cost much. Even with ssd $50 is the difference. $50 is less then 5% of the total cost of the machine. So what you posted makes no sense to get an fx8350 machine as it costs like £20-£30 a year more to run.

Care to look at my updated one? Remember that the AMD is using a far superior motherboard.
Update 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=4et7kDGSRfc#t=597s

In the uk its about £0.13 per kwh while on that video $0.128 is like £0.09. Also 70w is not the real difference between them if you are a heavy user its more like 100w and if you use it for like 5 hours a day intensively or 10 hours a day at 50% load. So overall in the UK it makes no sense to get an amd system as the intel system is much cheaper in the long run.

Also, for four years@5 hours load, the 8350 costs 92 GBP to operate, that is still less than the BASE price of the 4770K (4770K Base price=265GBP, 8350=150GBP 8350+Power=242) don't act like the 4770K does not consume power also :lol:

 

[8350rocks]

Sorry, earlier I clicked the wrong MB, it was right next to the Sabertooth, build with equivalent MB to the AMD MB:

PCPartPicker part list: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/1fc4f
Price breakdown by merchant: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/1fc4f/by_merchant/
Benchmarks: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/1fc4f/benchmarks/

CPU: Intel Core i7-4770K 3.5GHz Quad-Core Processor ($329.97 @ OutletPC)
CPU Cooler: Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO 82.9 CFM Sleeve Bearing CPU Cooler ($29.98 @ Outlet PC)
Motherboard: Asus SABERTOOTH Z87 ATX LGA1150 Motherboard ($241.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Memory: G.Skill Ripjaws X Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1866 Memory ($71.99 @ Newegg)
Storage: Western Digital Caviar Blue 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($69.99 @ Newegg)
Video Card: XFX Radeon HD 7970 GHz Edition 3GB Video Card ($410.91 @ Newegg)
Case: Zalman Z12 Plus ATX Mid Tower Case ($64.99 @ Microcenter)
Power Supply: PC Power & Cooling Silencer Mk III 750W 80 PLUS Gold Certified ATX12V Power Supply ($99.99 @ Newegg)
Optical Drive: Asus DRW-24B1ST/BLK/B/AS DVD/CD Writer ($16.99 @ Newegg)
Total: $1436.79
(Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available.)
(Generated by PCPartPicker 2013-07-10 11:58 EDT-0400)

 

[The Q6660 Inside]

Sorry, earlier I clicked the wrong MB, it was right next to the Sabertooth, build with equivalent MB to the AMD MB:

PCPartPicker part list: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/1fc4f
Price breakdown by merchant: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/1fc4f/by_merchant/
Benchmarks: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/1fc4f/benchmarks/

CPU: Intel Core i7-4770K 3.5GHz Quad-Core Processor ($329.97 @ OutletPC)
CPU Cooler: Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO 82.9 CFM Sleeve Bearing CPU Cooler ($29.98 @ Outlet PC)
Motherboard: Asus SABERTOOTH Z87 ATX LGA1150 Motherboard ($241.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Memory: G.Skill Ripjaws X Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1866 Memory ($71.99 @ Newegg)
Storage: Western Digital Caviar Blue 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($69.99 @ Newegg)
Video Card: XFX Radeon HD 7970 GHz Edition 3GB Video Card ($410.91 @ Newegg)
Case: Zalman Z12 Plus ATX Mid Tower Case ($64.99 @ Microcenter)
Power Supply: PC Power & Cooling Silencer Mk III 750W 80 PLUS Gold Certified ATX12V Power Supply ($99.99 @ Newegg)
Optical Drive: Asus DRW-24B1ST/BLK/B/AS DVD/CD Writer ($16.99 @ Newegg)
Total: $1436.79
(Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available.)
(Generated by PCPartPicker 2013-07-10 11:58 EDT-0400)

Fixed it for you in a few posts above. http://pcpartpicker.com/p/1fb2D

 

[8350rocks]

8350rocks just seen both builds and intel machine even with the higher cost cpu is cheaper. Yes the amd system got an ssd but the intel system is amazingly cheaper. People forget intel motherboards don't cost much. Even with ssd $50 is the difference. $50 is less then 5% of the total cost of the machine. So what you posted makes no sense to get an fx8350 machine as it costs like £20-£30 a year more to run.

I clicked the wrong MB, see above...it's over $150 more expensive without the SSD

 

[Cazalan]

Here's an idea... How much more expensive would be for AMD to release the FX line in FM2/FM2+/FM3 sockets? I know ditching the AM3+ socket would be such a sad thing, but you have a very good point there. If they fit the new FX'es in the same socket as the APU line, I wonder if they would save money instead of making the whole platform more expensive. This applies to servers as well. G34 is good and all, but getting a new chipset out for server APUs and low cost servers using GPU-less Opterons would be a great thing.

For MoBos makers, they could just make the DVI, HDMI and VGA connectors an additional dongle when the user picks the APU and keep the USB and eSATA ports in the back as usual. Man, that would be sweet.

Cheers!

Technically they probably could as they still sell Athlon for FM2 which has graphics fused off. But the savings I'm talking about is the 100+million for every new die to be fabbed/tested for production.

The numbers I heard for APU:FX was 8:1. So 8 times as many APUs selling. Even if their margins were 100% higher for FX the APUs would still be 4 to 1 ratio. So where is it better to spend that 100mil?

If AMD wants more powerful APUs in the short term it would be better to make that 6 core APU and introduce an A12-xxxx series.

 

[8350rocks]

Sorry, earlier I clicked the wrong MB, it was right next to the Sabertooth, build with equivalent MB to the AMD MB:

PCPartPicker part list: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/1fc4f
Price breakdown by merchant: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/1fc4f/by_merchant/
Benchmarks: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/1fc4f/benchmarks/

CPU: Intel Core i7-4770K 3.5GHz Quad-Core Processor ($329.97 @ OutletPC)
CPU Cooler: Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO 82.9 CFM Sleeve Bearing CPU Cooler ($29.98 @ Outlet PC)
Motherboard: Asus SABERTOOTH Z87 ATX LGA1150 Motherboard ($241.99 @ SuperBiiz)
Memory: G.Skill Ripjaws X Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1866 Memory ($71.99 @ Newegg)
Storage: Western Digital Caviar Blue 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($69.99 @ Newegg)
Video Card: XFX Radeon HD 7970 GHz Edition 3GB Video Card ($410.91 @ Newegg)
Case: Zalman Z12 Plus ATX Mid Tower Case ($64.99 @ Microcenter)
Power Supply: PC Power & Cooling Silencer Mk III 750W 80 PLUS Gold Certified ATX12V Power Supply ($99.99 @ Newegg)
Optical Drive: Asus DRW-24B1ST/BLK/B/AS DVD/CD Writer ($16.99 @ Newegg)
Total: $1436.79
(Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available.)
(Generated by PCPartPicker 2013-07-10 11:58 EDT-0400)

Fixed it for you in a few posts above. http://pcpartpicker.com/p/1fb2D

Thanks

 

[The Q6660 Inside]

8350rocks just seen both builds and intel machine even with the higher cost cpu is cheaper. Yes the amd system got an ssd but the intel system is amazingly cheaper. People forget intel motherboards don't cost much. Even with ssd $50 is the difference. $50 is less then 5% of the total cost of the machine. So what you posted makes no sense to get an fx8350 machine as it costs like £20-£30 a year more to run.

I clicked the wrong MB, see above...it's over $150 more expensive without the SSD

+1, and with the SSD (see post above this), it ventures into the 1500s. Surely $92 in power can fix this

 

[8350rocks]

I have to say, an A12 APU (6 cores) with HD 7790ish iGPU...? I would buy that in a heartbeat...especially @ FX 6350 clock speed...even if it was $180-200 that's a steal...

FX 6350 ~$130-140
HD 7790 ~$140

So, ~$270-280 vs. ~$200...that's a no brainer...

 

[The Q6660 Inside]

I have to say, an A12 APU (6 cores) with HD 7790ish iGPU...? I would buy that in a heartbeat...especially @ FX 6350 clock speed...even if it was $180-200 that's a steal...

FX 6350 ~$130-140
HD 7790 ~$140

So, ~$270-280 vs. ~$200...that's a no brainer...

I had thought of something bit more ambitious a loong time ago before the trolls invaded, a 6-Core Kaveri with 8830-ish (Between 7790 and 7870) GPU performance and with FX 6300/6350+ overall CPU performance. I suspect something like you posted will be launched in a Kaveri refresh some time in 2014, but we have no evidence assuring us this will happen. I think that Excavator will introduce 8-Core APUs and the end of a 942 pin legend (20nm time lol).

 

[Cazalan]

Instead of rehashing old benchmarks and old chips, how about making some new benchmarks on what a 4C SR might perform like. I think you could do that by taking an FX-8350@4.6Ghz with odd cores disabled (1/3/5/7).

 

[The Q6660 Inside]

Instead of rehashing old benchmarks and old chips, how about making some new benchmarks on what a 4C SR might perform like. I think you could do that by taking an FX-8350@4.6Ghz with odd cores disabled (1/3/5/7).

8350rocks! Start benchmarking ! This could give us a neat analysis.

 

[cowboy44mag]

8350rocks just seen both builds and intel machine even with the higher cost cpu is cheaper. Yes the amd system got an ssd but the intel system is amazingly cheaper. People forget intel motherboards don't cost much. Even with ssd $50 is the difference. $50 is less then 5% of the total cost of the machine. So what you posted makes no sense to get an fx8350 machine as it costs like £20-£30 a year more to run.

Care to look at my updated one? Remember that the AMD is using a far superior motherboard.
Update 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=4et7kDGSRfc#t=597s

In the uk its about £0.13 per kwh while on that video $0.128 is like £0.09. Also 70w is not the real difference between them if you are a heavy user its more like 100w and if you use it for like 5 hours a day intensively or 10 hours a day at 50% load. So overall in the UK it makes no sense to get an amd system as the intel system is much cheaper in the long run.

Either way, it will still be less than the 4770K, myth busted. Power is nothing for the heavy PC user, it is nothing compared to the cost of your fridge or A/C.

+1 cutting through the BS and comparing two identical systems ie same psu, same dedicated graphics, and say you can get the memory and hard drive, cooler all for same price so the only difference is the cost of processor and cost of motherboard:

Intel i7 4770K Haswell 3.5 GHz - $349.99 USD
ASUS Sabertooth X79 LGA 2011 Intel X79 SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 ATX Intel Motherboard - $324.99 USD

VS

AMD FX 8350 Vishera 4.0 GHz - $199.99 USD
ASUS SABERTOOTH 990FX/GEN3 R2.0 AM3+ AMD 990FX SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 ATX AMD Motherboard -$199.99

ALL prices obtained from NEWEGG

That isn't a $50 difference, that is a $275 difference just for the processor and motherboard. If you can find one on a big sale you might do a little better, but if you can find one on sale you can find the other on sale too, so the price difference will always be the same for someone who is going to search the entire internet to find a deal.

How many years would you have to run your computer compared to an AMD build for your initial investment to pay off? By the time it does pay off your going to have a very old outdated processor and have probably updated anyway therefore you save NOTHING!!

People who build Intel over AMD aren't looking to save money, they already have bigger budgets that they can spend on their rig.

 

[The Q6660 Inside]

8350rocks just seen both builds and intel machine even with the higher cost cpu is cheaper. Yes the amd system got an ssd but the intel system is amazingly cheaper. People forget intel motherboards don't cost much. Even with ssd $50 is the difference. $50 is less then 5% of the total cost of the machine. So what you posted makes no sense to get an fx8350 machine as it costs like £20-£30 a year more to run.

Care to look at my updated one? Remember that the AMD is using a far superior motherboard.
Update 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=4et7kDGSRfc#t=597s

In the uk its about £0.13 per kwh while on that video $0.128 is like £0.09. Also 70w is not the real difference between them if you are a heavy user its more like 100w and if you use it for like 5 hours a day intensively or 10 hours a day at 50% load. So overall in the UK it makes no sense to get an amd system as the intel system is much cheaper in the long run.

Either way, it will still be less than the 4770K, myth busted. Power is nothing for the heavy PC user, it is nothing compared to the cost of your fridge or A/C.

+1 cutting through the BS and comparing two identical systems ie same psu, same dedicated graphics, and say you can get the memory and hard drive, cooler all for same price so the only difference is the cost of processor and cost of motherboard:

Intel i7 4770K Haswell 3.5 GHz - $349.99 USD
ASUS Sabertooth Z87 LGA 1150 Intel Z87 SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 ATX Intel Motherboard - $250.00 USD

VS

AMD FX 8350 Vishera 4.0 GHz - $199.99 USD
ASUS SABERTOOTH 990FX/GEN3 R2.0 AM3+ AMD 990FX SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 ATX AMD Motherboard -$199.99

ALL prices obtained from NEWEGG

That isn't a $50 difference, that is a $230 difference just for the processor and motherboard. If you can find one on a big sale you might do a little better, but if you can find one on sale you can find the other on sale too, so the price difference will always be the same for someone who is going to search the entire internet to find a deal.

How many years would you have to run your computer compared to an AMD build for your initial investment to pay off? By the time it does pay off your going to have a very old outdated processor and have probably updated anyway therefore you save NOTHING!!

People who build Intel over AMD aren't looking to save money, they already have bigger budgets that they can spend on their rig.

Fixed! Refer to my July 10, 2013 8:59:37 AM post for even more in depth analysis.

 

[gamerk316]

Interesting little tidbit for those following the new consoles: It appears that of the XB1s 8GB of RAM, only 5GB will be guaranteed for developer use, the rest reserved for the OS (probably due to the task switching, if I had to guess). And at least one dev (Respawn [Titanfall]) is complaining about this constraint.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=618996

This constraint would also lead me to believe that its unlikely we'll see a major shift toward 64-bit native titles this generation, as you can use a PC's HDD/paging to work within the 32-bit 4GB Address Space limit. Still. this would indicate that HDD's might become a performance bottleneck this generation...

 

[8350rocks]

Good breakdown of Kaveri architecture with clear diagrams:

http://www.info-pc.info/2013/07/amd-kaveri-apu-architecture-detailed.html

Supposed FX 9590 benchmarks:

http://www.info-pc.info/2013/07/amd-centurion-fx-9590-5-ghz-processor.html

Volcanic Islands GPU ES spotted:

http://www.info-pc.info/2013/07/amd-radeon-hd-9970-engineering-samples.html

http://wccftech.com/amd-radeon-hd-9970-engineering-samples-shipped-manufacturers/

Newest Intel Roadmap shows IB-E 6 Core and Hasfail are here to stay for quite a while (no 8 cores until 2H 2014 or early 2015):

http://www.info-pc.info/2013/07/leaked-intel-cpu-roadmap-reveals.html

 

[juanrga]

Let us see why people says hasfail, hasbeen, failwell...

Promised 15% increase in performance? Fail. Benchmarked 5% average. Regressions in some tests. Funny how one of you gave a Crysis 3 benchmark where the failwell i5 is slower than the ivy Bridge i5.

Promised graphics performance of 650M level? Fail. Those were with cheated synthetics. In real games it perform poor. Moreover, performance drops badly with increased resolution and the chip is power hungry and expensive. Most OEMs are rejecting Haswell GT3e.

Desktop Haswell consumes more power than Ivy. Efficiency is poor. Fail

Haswell OC poor than Ivy. Fail

Haswell runs hotter than Ivy. TDPs are higher as well. Fail

Tomshardware doesn't recommend any Haswell chip in the updated gaming hierarchy. And a clearly pro-Intel site as Anandtech said in a recent review that Haswell desktops "are a joke".

When did intel ever say Haswell would be 15% faster then ivy? I've never seen a slide even hinting at that. Haswell is just ivy with a reworked back end, more instruction sets, more powerful IGP and on die VRM's.

Who cares about the IGP :lol:

Haswell consumes more power then ivy? Since when? :lol:

Haswell doesnt overclock huh? The Costa Rica chips are showing up and they're overclocking oh so well compared to the Malaysia's

No offense to toms but who cares what they recommend? Everyone knows when you want the best performance you buy intel. Want 2nd best? Amd's the best choice

1)
The promised 15% increase over Ivy is quoted in lots of sites. Two of them:

http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/30007-haswell-targeting-up-to-15-percent-faster-cpus

http://www.extremetech.com/computing/154192-haswell-cpu-pricing-leaks-suggests-intel-is-shifting-focus-to-low-and-mid-range

2)
Intel cares about iGP enough to invent a new brand and then advertise about it. But Intel new brand is being massively rejected by OEMS.

3)
Yes Haswell consumes more power than Ivy

4)
Yes Haswell overclocks poor than Ivy and achieve unsafe temperatures

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2041337/intels-new-haswell-chips-may-be-hot-but-not-in-a-good-way.html

http://techreport.com/news/24950/intel-removes-modest-free-overclocking-from-standard-haswell-cpus

5)
Not only Toms is recommending Ivy over Haswell, but even a heavily pro-Intel site as Anandtech has said that Haswell desktop "is a joke".

Summary:

FAIL + FAIL + FAIL + FAIL + FAIL = Hasfail = Hasbeen = Failwell

 

[jdwii]

noob2222 going from 37w idle to 27w idle on same 22nm process but I believe a bit of that was due to new pch 32nm motherboard, is still impressive.

Why do people say hasfail when haswell is a game changer cpu. First intel cpus with igpus that are good enough to game even on the higher settings with the iris pro, lower idles, thinner form factor for laptops first real increase in battery life for like 10 years. Intel cpus are in an amazing level right now, no wonder amd are nowhere near it in a technological standpoint. I think amd were caught suprised by sandy bridge and there own bulldozer and piledriver cpus underformed and power usage was there biggest issue. Steamroller has to improve on a lot of things to make it noteworthy to be compareable as a whole cpu to sandy bridge levels. For example most amd users go on about price. If you forget price then you will see intel the leaders in innovation. Haswell has basically doubled virtually everything bit wise which may come in handy in terms of total performance in future and added avx2.

DOES ANYBODY CARE ABOUT POWER FOR THE LAST FRIGGEN TIME!!? Haswell is not bad, but it is lackluster for the Desktop performance upgrade, Iris Pro is basically a bit worse than 7660D with a jacked up price tag once it gets to 1600x900 or above. Just stop putting nonsense about power consumption and performance per watt (Use an icebox instead of a refrigerator if you are so worried) and understand this thread is comparing Steamroller to Piledriver with the occasional mention of Haswell. The Intel fanboy invasion seems to have started when GOM3R (no offense) was linked by 8350rocks.

No

 

[jdwii]

I am on about how much more cost effective intel are on the long run for a better cpu. People always make it sound like amd is cheaper but they are selling inferior technology at about the right price that costs more to run in the long run. Intel cpus cost a lot more to make and are significantly more advanced but still competitive in price. Also who pays retail price when theres discounts normally in a lot of places, there are so many ways to get it cheaper which cuts out the cost price between the cpus as resellers and outlets you can get intel machines much cheaper then the amd systems people build here from outlets or ebay.

Anyway its the biggest gap between the 2 companies in cpu at this current time in terms of performance per watt of there best cpus. AMD are a bit like a petrol engine now while intel are like a diesel engine, costs less to run. What makes me annoyed is that people think that amd can go ahead just because they increase performance by 30% when it will be slower then a sandy bridge 6 core extreme cpu still by a long way. I don't mind if amd go ahead but I know for sure they can't with steamroller as piledriver is so far off they need a miracle to go ahead with steamroller and amds predicted imrprovements mean they won't.

Steamroller if they improved by 30% and half the power consumption (remember cpu only power consumption) they would be on par with sandy bridge and this is very unlikely.

People don't appreciate how well intel cpus are doing like saying hasfail hasbeen etc when its probably intels biggest change in ages as igpu is now possible to max games out at 720p, much lower idles and in laptops 57.5% better battery life. Haswell 10 years from now would be considered revolutionary like the pentium m banias was 10 years ago.

Be honest with yourself what would you rather have in a new computer a 6970 or a 7870. AMD fx8350 is like 6970 while intels 4770k is like the 7870. People make it sound like intel cpus are so expensive when they are offering better performance for what like £30 more and sometimes even cheaper when theres a sale on. I mean people make it sound like paying £30 less for an inferior system makes amd great, its like buying cpus from a company who don't care of innovation cpu wise on desktop pcs and celebrate that fact they got one as its cheap when its more expensive in long run for an inferior product. Intel also have igpus with there cpus unlike the fx series that don't so that alone makes an intel cpu better.

Rant over, lets hope steamroller is amds biggest improvement from one cpu architecture to another from 32nm to 28nm as then amd will have a competitive cpu. AMD piledriver cpus are worse performance per watt still then 2008 45nm core 2 quads so as you know amd have a lot of catching up to do.

This has already been proven not to matter it would take 7 years to even make the difference between a I5 and 8350fx in the U.S and some other country's.

 

[jdwii]

Interesting little tidbit for those following the new consoles: It appears that of the XB1s 8GB of RAM, only 5GB will be guaranteed for developer use, the rest reserved for the OS (probably due to the task switching, if I had to guess). And at least one dev (Respawn [Titanfall]) is complaining about this constraint.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=618996

This constraint would also lead me to believe that its unlikely we'll see a major shift toward 64-bit native titles this generation, as you can use a PC's HDD/paging to work within the 32-bit 4GB Address Space limit. Still. this would indicate that HDD's might become a performance bottleneck this generation...

That is pretty sad i still can't understand microsoft fans why would anyone buy a Xbox 1? A PS4 i understand its a good value system and its cheaper and more powerful then a Xbox 1 and you WILL be able to notice in most games since its GPU has 50% more resources and 2.5 times more bandwidth.

 

[juanrga]

I think anandtech don't even have 1 benchmark out of like 30 that the fx8350 wins against the i7 4770k.

Anadtech benchmarks!!! ho ho ho

Anyway steamroller might just be false expectations, like bulldozer.

No, but Haswell is Intel bulldozer.

 

[8350rocks]

This article is a great read...I will quote the most relevant parts:

http://seekingalpha.com/article/1462371-how-big-of-a-win-were-consoles-for-amd

One of the barriers to features like HSA catching on is ensuring software is actually coded for HSA hardware. If extemetech.com is correct and both Microsoft's (MSFT) Xbox One and Sony's (SNE) PS4 are both HSA compliant, then programmers are already writing code with this shared memory architecture, and they're actually enjoying it. Not to mention a fellow contributor pointed out to me that the Xbox One is running a Windows kernel, and is reported to be an HSA device. I do not believe it's out of the question to think Microsoft could release a version of Windows optimized for HSA. Microsoft is pushing into the tablet and smartphone sectors. These devices use either x86 or ARM based SoCs at their core. Microsoft would benefit from the optimizations as much as chip vendors. Having programs optimized for HSA hardware could be big for Intel's competition. Having an operating system optimized for HSA could be huge.

A Look Back

For those of us that don't remember, luckily there is Tom's Hardware Guide. On THG, look at historical benchmarks as we made the shift from 32 bit to 64 bit processors. Intel also chose to handle data a little differently than AMD. AMD chose to do more work per clock cycle, whereas Intel focused on netburst to do smaller steps quicker. There is a good summary on geek.com. The arguments to who was the performance king between Intel and AMD were not so one sided. In 2005, there weren't as many players in the space Intel had to worry about.

Fast forward to AMD's Bulldozer. AMD bet incorrectly by sacrificing single-threaded performance for multiple-threaded performance and suffered. AMD's excuse was that the operating system did not know how to handle AMD's radical new design, making the new design inefficient. Supposedly Windows 8 was supposed to help, but benchmarks on Tom's Hardware Guide showed very little improvement (about 1%). The Bulldozer architecture is where I feel Intel really started gaining an insurmountable lead over AMD.

Learning from Mistakes

I bring up the x64/netburst and Bulldozer examples to show how the handling of data can make huge differences in CPU performance. In the first example, AMD had the advantage over Intel. In the Bulldozer example, not so much.

Looking at benchmarks of high end Ivy Bridge CPUs vs. Sandy Bridge, you can see a marginal performance increase; sometimes even the flagship i7-3770k Ivy Bridge is outperformed by an i5-2550k Sandy Bridge. Leaked benchmarks of an i7-4770k Haswell compared to an i7-3770k show again only a relatively small performance increase.

Compare these to benchmarks of generational changes of AMD processor lines, and you can see that AMD has larger generational changes compared to Intel, but still significantly lag Intel in terms of performance.

How Could HSA Change the CPU Landscape?

There are a few scenarios that could be important to investors.

1. HSA could fizzle out, and nothing comes of it. I feel this is highly unlikely since both next generation consoles should be HSA devices. In this scenario both Intel and AMD are likely to see revenue go up since neither have much of a current presence in the mobile space.

2. Individual programs could benefit from HSA on a case by case basis. This could give AMD or ARM based SoCs an advantage in these specific programs. I feel this is the most likely scenario, and will help diminish Intel's lead over AMD. Intel and AMD are still both likely to see revenues go up however, because they're both seeing revenue growth in new segments. But it could make AMD more attractive to consumers than the first scenario.

3. The biggest win for AMD and ARM would be if operating systems were optimized for HSA hardware. Intel currently has a very small market share of mobile devices. Seeking Alpha contributor Mr. Tom Luongo directed me to a post at semiaccurate hinting that there is one major unnamed player in the HSA foundation. I would never rely on rumors alone, but it's also foolish to ignore them. I use them as a tell-tale of things to look for. It was a well spread rumor that Xbox was using an AMD APU before Wall Street took notice.

If Microsoft optimizes Windows for HSA hardware, this would be the biggest win for AMD and ARM. Many people feel AMD's only position in the semiconductor industry is to prevent Intel from stagnating. You can see from my examples above of the x64 architecture and Bulldozer that how a CPU handles data can make much more of a difference than the silicon the CPU is made on. After all, CPUs and SoCs execute software. And I do not believe an HSA compliant Windows is out of the question, since it could aid Microsoft in their press into the mobile space. Again, to be clear, so far this is only a rumor, and it's not as wide spread as the rumor of Xbox One featuring an AMD APU was.

ARM is also a member of the HSA foundation. Intel is very close to eating ARM's lunch with Bay Trail. Intel's Clover Trail Atom looked very impressive when compared against Nvidia's Tegra 3. Intel's Bay Trail may be an even more compelling alternative to an ARM powered processor. If HSA takes off, an HSA optimized Android OS could neutralize some of Intel's process advantage by making ARM processors run more efficiently than Intel.

 

[juanrga]

A 40% faster clock per clock

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=159069

It was faster in everything except Whet (double-precision) where it was about half as fast. That however was a Sandy i3, not Ivy or Haswell.

I guess those are the time honored classic benchmarks but they don't apply much to real world application benchmarks. Even after this long it's been difficult to find many Kabini reviews.

Those benchmarks are more realistic for estimating the performance of the PS4 than biased cinebench and sysmark running on windows 7/8.

The jaguar was faster than the sandy bridge, therefore will be able to compete with ivy Bridge. The 8-core jaguar in the console will compete with an ivy Bridge i7 in a PC. Precisely an i7 is selected for comparisons. E.g. Epic uses a i7 + 16GB RAM + GTX-680.