AMD CPU speculation... and expert conjecture

[juanrga]

Besides DDR3 is already 2400MHz, that is, above bandwidth to now DDR4 2133, and way above in latency... nothing prevents AMD to commercialize DDR3 2400Mhz sticks... it could do plenty the trick for kaveri...

As said in a previous post DDR3 @ 2600MHz is already available. In fact my supplier sells DDR3 modules @ 2666MHz.

Matter of fact TeamGroup has DDR3 at 2800Mhz for "more than a year" now... and better was/is passively cooled and 1.65v.

http://www.teamgroup.com.tw/filterable_product/tabs_detail/data/en/9/600/zfKsFi.html

there are several others... G.Skill and Corsair i think... with DDR 3000Mhz now (at least Corsair is not passively cooled... i think)

this is the memory for those APUs, no real need for DDR4 for now.

The problem is "certification", none of those speeds are JEDEC (or other) certified. Max JEDEC is 2133Mhz (they are at sleep lol). I mentioned DDR3 2400Mhz because it has a good chance of being certified at 1.5v, the original voltage spec for DDR3... DDR3 2667Mhz i doubt it will ever be 1.5v.

For a vendor to sell certified products is half way to mass adoption, makes everything easier for other IDMs, mobo to components etc. DDR3 2400Mhz could be that new product, certified, fulfilling a hole while DDR4 does not push above 2667Mhz(theoretical max possible 4233Mhz) .

Cool! Yes I recall now seeing the 3000MHz ads in some sites. I checked the module that I mentioned before and you are right, it was tested at 1.65v.

 

[gamerk316]

Besides DDR3 is already 2400MHz, that is, above bandwidth to now DDR4 2133, and way above in latency... nothing prevents AMD to commercialize DDR3 2400Mhz sticks... it could do plenty the trick for kaveri...

As said in a previous post DDR3 @ 2600MHz is already available. In fact my supplier sells DDR3 modules @ 2666MHz.

GCC is the best compiler for Piledriver and Steamroller. BdverX was prepared by AMD (open source ).

No, ICC is about 50% faster then GCC for BD, and about 35% faster then MSVC:

http://www.behardware.com/articles/847-1/the-impact-of-compilers-on-x86-x64-cpu-architectures.html

GCC is actually the worst of ICC, MSVC, and GCC.

For Intel CPUs it is more like

ICC >~ GCC >> MSVC

For AMD chips, ICC uses the Cripple_AMD function to reduce performance.

Benchmarks and further info:

http://www.linuxforge.net/docs/bm/bench-gcc-icc.php

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1733627/anyone-here-has-benchmarked-intel-c-compiler-and-gcc

Not really. MSVC > GCC, and the benchmarks prove it. GCC is a DOG by modern compiler standards.

As for your linuxforge link, I note that single operation performance at the end of the day has VERY minimal impact on application performance. Instruction optimization has a much greater impact on overall performance. So trying to measure, say, the time to context switch for a given compiler tells you NOTHING about the final result. This is where GCC stumbles the worst.

Finally, if you actually READ the detailed description: The benchmarks with the "D" indication were run with the Dispatcher in place, where you can see that SSE3 in particular generally gave no benefit to AMD [Though SSS4 and above did]. The benchmarks without the "D" were run without the dispatcher in place, so all CPU's would be treated more or less equally. Hence why all the ICC modes show up twice in the final results.

And its again worth noting even then, ICC still outperforms every other compiler for AMD by a wide margin.

This test is using old compilers. Specially GCC has really picked up speed in the 4.7 version. MSVC has also some improvements in auto-vectorization in MSVC2012. So difficult to say how the current compilers compare. Plus the tests themselves use old code.

Maybe because the article is a few years old? Don't have a more recent one to cite, though I doubt either MSVC or GCC has caught up to ICC by any significant amount. I'm sure a few benchmarks have improved, but its not like ICC is standing still either...Also remember the benchmarks were compiling against different compilation modes; its quite possible the POV results in the latest GCC go away if certain optimization levels are not used.

 

[gamerk316]

I think they are still "tinkering" with the FX line for steamroller, hence no obvious news about SR powered Opterons in a format other than APUs. Plus, they may not go bigger than 8 core with SR, and the 12/16 core Opterons on PD architecture are holding their own against the current crop of Xeons.

Interesting bit about windows from S|A:

http://semiaccurate.com/2013/07/22/microsoft-drove-the-bus-off-the-cliff-now-it-tries-to-speed-up/

MSFT is where Commodore was 30 years ago.

Oh, wait a second...

What it comes down to though, is corporate users and gamers will be using Windows a while yet. Corporate, because they are very iffy about changing software, nevermind Windows has the best security of any OS [and its not even close], and gamers, because OpenGL stinks, limiting development for other OS's. [Really, its the most obtuse API I've ever used. Doesn't even reflect how the hardware works anymore. No wonder Value is doing an OpenGL->D3D wrapper when it ports its games to Linux, rather then using a native OpenGL API.] Nevermind the backlog of legacy apps.

 

[mayankleoboy1]

Maybe because the article is a few years old? Don't have a more recent one to cite, though I doubt either MSVC or GCC has caught up to ICC by any significant amount. I'm sure a few benchmarks have improved, but its not like ICC is standing still either...

Yes. It would be difficult for a third party compiler developer to optimise their compiler to produce best possible code.ICC would remain faster than GCC and MSVC (specially for Intel procs).

How likely is it that AMD will give Intel Compiler dev team, a detailed guide to the internal hardware implementation of their processors, in order that they can optimise code for AMD procs ?

 

[8350rocks]

I think they are still "tinkering" with the FX line for steamroller, hence no obvious news about SR powered Opterons in a format other than APUs. Plus, they may not go bigger than 8 core with SR, and the 12/16 core Opterons on PD architecture are holding their own against the current crop of Xeons.

Interesting bit about windows from S|A:

http://semiaccurate.com/2013/07/22/microsoft-drove-the-bus-off-the-cliff-now-it-tries-to-speed-up/

MSFT is where Commodore was 30 years ago.

Oh, wait a second...

What it comes down to though, is corporate users and gamers will be using Windows a while yet. Corporate, because they are very iffy about changing software, nevermind Windows has the best security of any OS [and its not even close], and gamers, because OpenGL stinks, limiting development for other OS's. [Really, its the most obtuse API I've ever used. Doesn't even reflect how the hardware works anymore. No wonder Value is doing an OpenGL->D3D wrapper when it ports its games to Linux, rather then using a native OpenGL API.] Nevermind the backlog of legacy apps.

It's much better than it was...but it's not D3D. The OpenGL board needs to get their act together and put out some newer stuff. The latest versions of OpenGL suffer primarily from the issue that, you can do things 5 different ways, and none of them are clearly the "best" or "fastest" way to do things. If they would put together an entire suite of tools like DX then that would really shore up some holes for them, however, they would still need to bring forth a few things. OpenGL 4.2(4.3?) has all the functions of D3D 9 and many of the functions available in D3D 11. The language is a bit archaic in some respects, and they could stand to kill off the older legacy garbage left in the API as most of that is convoluted and antiquated (or streamline it into a newer configuration).

Once CryENGINE 3 gets ported to Linux, I am going to dig back into OpenGL again and see what I can get it to do...I would love to do AA/AAA Title on Linux and Windows.

 

[gamerk316]

I think they are still "tinkering" with the FX line for steamroller, hence no obvious news about SR powered Opterons in a format other than APUs. Plus, they may not go bigger than 8 core with SR, and the 12/16 core Opterons on PD architecture are holding their own against the current crop of Xeons.

Interesting bit about windows from S|A:

http://semiaccurate.com/2013/07/22/microsoft-drove-the-bus-off-the-cliff-now-it-tries-to-speed-up/

MSFT is where Commodore was 30 years ago.

Oh, wait a second...

What it comes down to though, is corporate users and gamers will be using Windows a while yet. Corporate, because they are very iffy about changing software, nevermind Windows has the best security of any OS [and its not even close], and gamers, because OpenGL stinks, limiting development for other OS's. [Really, its the most obtuse API I've ever used. Doesn't even reflect how the hardware works anymore. No wonder Value is doing an OpenGL->D3D wrapper when it ports its games to Linux, rather then using a native OpenGL API.] Nevermind the backlog of legacy apps.

It's much better than it was...but it's not D3D. The OpenGL board needs to get their act together and put out some newer stuff. The latest versions of OpenGL suffer primarily from the issue that, you can do things 5 different ways, and none of them are clearly the "best" or "fastest" way to do things. If they would put together an entire suite of tools like DX then that would really shore up some holes for them, however, they would still need to bring forth a few things. OpenGL 4.2(4.3?) has all the functions of D3D 9 and many of the functions available in D3D 11. The language is a bit archaic in some respects, and they could stand to kill off the older legacy garbage left in the API as most of that is convoluted and antiquated (or streamline it into a newer configuration).

Once CryENGINE 3 gets ported to Linux, I am going to dig back into OpenGL again and see what I can get it to do...I would love to do AA/AAA Title on Linux and Windows.

As a dev, you know what I want my graphical API to look like? Glide. Best. API. Ever.

As for CryEngine3, I expect Crytek will do the same thing Value did: Make a D3D to OGL wrapper, rather then re-code the entire gamengine to OpenGL.

 

[8350rocks]

That is a very valid point...I haven't worked with anything on Value's Linux Engine though...do you still use all the D3D API tools and then it's modified to interface with OpenGL? Or is it a situation to where you're stuck using both tools?

 

[blackkstar]

Anyone have any idea when AMD will reveal their Desktop Roadmap for 2014? As skeptical as I am, I am hoping that they will reveal a 4m desktop CPU/APU with SR cores. If they do not, they are pushing some of their remaining loyalists like myself to the other side. I will pick up a 4770K if there is no 4m SR for 2014.

I'm not sure they have a Desktop Roadmap anymore. They have client (mobile/desktop) and server roadmaps.

The server roadmap leaves some open questions itself. The APUs already got a Richland update but for the servers they are still talking Piledriver "Warsaw" (12/16) at the high end. Also the 4/6/8 core server CPUs get replaced with 28nm Steamroller 4C APU.

AMD shed 15% of their employees last year. Adding a new ARM processor likely ate at their higher end desktop area.

Yeah, I've been aware of the server roadmap since it was released, but thanks anyway. This server roadmap is why I say I'm skeptical that they will reveal a 4M desktop part, because usually their FX line is based on 1P server offerings and since what we see for 2014 for 1P is only a 2M part, it seems unlikely that we will have a 4M part.

I think they are still "tinkering" with the FX line for steamroller, hence no obvious news about SR powered Opterons in a format other than APUs. Plus, they may not go bigger than 8 core with SR, and the 12/16 core Opterons on PD architecture are holding their own against the current crop of Xeons.

Interesting bit about windows from S|A:

http://semiaccurate.com/2013/07/22/microsoft-drove-the-bus-off-the-cliff-now-it-tries-to-speed-up/

What info do you have that makes you think they are still tinkering with their FX line as well as thinking that they are even going to offer an 8 core Steamroller part? I've been looking all over for any information regarding an 8 core Steamroller part and I can't find anything, nor about AMD working on the next version of their FX, outside of the 9590 of course, but that's already been released. All I have is that they are offering a dual core Steamroller part in Kaveri, nothing more. It's upsetting to say the least.

I've said something about this earlier. Compare market shares. I do not feel like looking them up yet again but AMD's situation looks something like this:

server marketshare: ~5%
overall marketshare: ~17%
steam gamer marketshare: ~27%.

AMD's market presence is far, far stronger for gamers. Why would you focus on server chips, which AMD is struggling with, when gaming chips are holding level or actually gaining marketshare? Doesn't that seem kind of backwards to you?

I lied, I did google it:
http://www.trefis.com/stock/amd/articles/193473/heres-how-amd-can-recapture-its-lost-server-market-share/2013-06-28

http://www.slashgear.com/pc-sales-to-decline-in-2012-for-the-first-time-in-11-years-10251339/

Alright, so 9.7 million x86 CPUs shipped in 2012, AMD had 4.4% of those, ~426,800
Desktops were 352 million, AMD had 16% of those, 56 million chips.

So, does someone want to explain to me why you still think AMD is going to focus on server? Even if AMD makes 10x more per Opteron it's not enough. And this isn't even accounting for AMD's (relatively) large market share in Steam hardware survey.

Looking at that it seems completely idiotic to make a server chip first and then adapt it to desktop. It should be desktop chips adapted to servers as you're going to sell more desktop chips.

I mean, correct me if I'm wrong, but all those numbers work out, right? Unless I really screwed something up, I see no reason for AMD to put priority in Server chips over Desktop like they have been where Desktop chips are just re-purposed server chips.

 

[gamerk316]

Anyone have any idea when AMD will reveal their Desktop Roadmap for 2014? As skeptical as I am, I am hoping that they will reveal a 4m desktop CPU/APU with SR cores. If they do not, they are pushing some of their remaining loyalists like myself to the other side. I will pick up a 4770K if there is no 4m SR for 2014.

I'm not sure they have a Desktop Roadmap anymore. They have client (mobile/desktop) and server roadmaps.

The server roadmap leaves some open questions itself. The APUs already got a Richland update but for the servers they are still talking Piledriver "Warsaw" (12/16) at the high end. Also the 4/6/8 core server CPUs get replaced with 28nm Steamroller 4C APU.

AMD shed 15% of their employees last year. Adding a new ARM processor likely ate at their higher end desktop area.

Yeah, I've been aware of the server roadmap since it was released, but thanks anyway. This server roadmap is why I say I'm skeptical that they will reveal a 4M desktop part, because usually their FX line is based on 1P server offerings and since what we see for 2014 for 1P is only a 2M part, it seems unlikely that we will have a 4M part.

I think they are still "tinkering" with the FX line for steamroller, hence no obvious news about SR powered Opterons in a format other than APUs. Plus, they may not go bigger than 8 core with SR, and the 12/16 core Opterons on PD architecture are holding their own against the current crop of Xeons.

Interesting bit about windows from S|A:

http://semiaccurate.com/2013/07/22/microsoft-drove-the-bus-off-the-cliff-now-it-tries-to-speed-up/

What info do you have that makes you think they are still tinkering with their FX line as well as thinking that they are even going to offer an 8 core Steamroller part? I've been looking all over for any information regarding an 8 core Steamroller part and I can't find anything, nor about AMD working on the next version of their FX, outside of the 9590 of course, but that's already been released. All I have is that they are offering a dual core Steamroller part in Kaveri, nothing more. It's upsetting to say the least.

I've said something about this earlier. Compare market shares. I do not feel like looking them up yet again but AMD's situation looks something like this:

server marketshare: ~5%
overall marketshare: ~17%
steam gamer marketshare: ~27%.

AMD's market presence is far, far stronger for gamers. Why would you focus on server chips, which AMD is struggling with, when gaming chips are holding level or actually gaining marketshare? Doesn't that seem kind of backwards to you?

I lied, I did google it:
http://www.trefis.com/stock/amd/articles/193473/heres-how-amd-can-recapture-its-lost-server-market-share/2013-06-28

http://www.slashgear.com/pc-sales-to-decline-in-2012-for-the-first-time-in-11-years-10251339/

Alright, so 9.7 million x86 CPUs shipped in 2012, AMD had 4.4% of those, ~426,800
Desktops were 352 million, AMD had 16% of those, 56 million chips.

So, does someone want to explain to me why you still think AMD is going to focus on server? Even if AMD makes 10x more per Opteron it's not enough. And this isn't even accounting for AMD's (relatively) large market share in Steam hardware survey.

Looking at that it seems completely idiotic to make a server chip first and then adapt it to desktop. It should be desktop chips adapted to servers as you're going to sell more desktop chips.

I mean, correct me if I'm wrong, but all those numbers work out, right? Unless I really screwed something up, I see no reason for AMD to put priority in Server chips over Desktop like they have been where Desktop chips are just re-purposed server chips.

Question: Who care's about market share? All that measures is product you sold in the past.

Product Margins is the ONLY real statistic that matters: How much you make per product sold. If the margins are high enough, even though there's a very low market penetration, you could easily out-profit other, higher penetrating but lower margin product lines. And the margins for sever chips are far and away above the margins for desktop/mobile parts. Why do you think SPARC and MIPS are still hanging around, making money? Why do you think ARM is desperately trying to get into the sever space? Margins.

Even though AMD sells fewer chips there, I can guarantee they make more profit overall from selling sever chips then they do selling their desktop ones.

Besides, AMD chips are not well suited for mobile, and desktop is slowing down (at least near term). Server is really the one market they could theoretically grow in.

 

[gamerk316]

That is a very valid point...I haven't worked with anything on Value's Linux Engine though...do you still use all the D3D API tools and then it's modified to interface with OpenGL? Or is it a situation to where you're stuck using both tools?

Haven't toyed with it recently, though I'd imagine the toolchain hasn't been touched in any significant way. Any D3D API's probably go through the same wrapper.

Sub-optimal? Yes. But cuts development costs and eases development.

 

[Cazalan]

I mean, correct me if I'm wrong, but all those numbers work out, right? Unless I really screwed something up, I see no reason for AMD to put priority in Server chips over Desktop like they have been where Desktop chips are just re-purposed server chips.

Market segments with the largest growth potential are indeed these "light" servers. That is what AMD is focusing on and it does make sense for them.

Coupled with the fact that even the higher end servers for compute are going to a higher GPU to CPU ratio. The need to cram as many high cost CPUs together in a 2U/4U rack is waning. AMD doesn't have the funds to make big risks in a market that is moving sideways at best.

I think if Cray didn't have a sizable order for Bulldozer a year before it was ready, it may have been cancelled.

 

[8350rocks]

That is a very valid point...I haven't worked with anything on Value's Linux Engine though...do you still use all the D3D API tools and then it's modified to interface with OpenGL? Or is it a situation to where you're stuck using both tools?

Haven't toyed with it recently, though I'd imagine the toolchain hasn't been touched in any significant way. Any D3D API's probably go through the same wrapper.

Sub-optimal? Yes. But cuts development costs and eases development.

Hmm, interesting...D3D on Linux...LOL...never thought I would see the day that would become a possibility. Though it's really a good thing, as OpenGL hasn't kept up.

 

[-Fran-]

That is a very valid point...I haven't worked with anything on Value's Linux Engine though...do you still use all the D3D API tools and then it's modified to interface with OpenGL? Or is it a situation to where you're stuck using both tools?

Haven't toyed with it recently, though I'd imagine the toolchain hasn't been touched in any significant way. Any D3D API's probably go through the same wrapper.

Sub-optimal? Yes. But cuts development costs and eases development.

Hmm, interesting...D3D on Linux...LOL...never thought I would see the day that would become a possibility. Though it's really a good thing, as OpenGL hasn't kept up.

I think I posted this in one of the old VGA threads last year... But I'll put it here again.

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=mesa_gallium3d_d3d11&num=1

I haven't kept track on the development for Gallium, but they're slow to say the least.

Cheers!

 

[hcl123]

That is interesting... a Gallium3D "state tracker"...

Direct3D used to be supported but by the "wine" layer... kind of "emulation"... now this could be much better, wonder how it fares!..

 

[GOM3RPLY3R]

I kind of skipped around, so I thought that for now i'll just expand on the 3930k vs the 9590.

Completely agree that the 9590 is overpriced. That being, even at 4.7 Ghz may get close to or even on par with a 3930k stock, but the OC abilities on the 9590 will definitely be more limited than the 3930k. Consider per core performance, then multiply how much extra OCing there will be. I'd say with a stock water cooling system that is in push, but using cool air from the outside, could get a 3930k up to 5.0 Ghz @ ~1.27 - 1.28 V-core, maybe even 5.2 Ghz but max. The 9590, considering that AMD is known for heating up greatly under loads, even if it has more than enough cores, if you are encoding video, there's a 100% chance that it'll be over 50 % usage total, which will prompt great heat. Thus being said, the 9590 on that cooling system may make it to 6.2Ghz, probably 6.5 Ghz the max before a superior cooling solution will have to be used. Even if it will be a 1.5-1.8 Ghz improvement, the 3930k will also have similar improvements, at a ~ lower heat signature.

On another note, bringing into perspective the power draw, which many people bringing up, is being misused. That point is certainly valid, but only when talking about the performance.

CPU X gets 10 points of work done in Time A with power @ 5
However CPU Y gets 6-7 points of work done in Time A with power @ 7-8

It's really showing that with what amounts of power (according to standard clocks and V-cores), the system can use. In terms of the product being used for total power usage, it will come in concern with laptops. HOWEVER, if it is used in the sense that a processor is better at it's job than the other, then that's the valid term.

It's a very complex way of thinking about it, but essentially I can understand what these people are saying. They just are showing that, as an example: Person A gets full and satisfied by eating 1 meal, but person B needs 2 meals to be satisfied.

Thus I must say, people, stop saying this. The intention that is given by the conspicuous, can only be understood by the unique, otherwise, it is seen as ignorant.

You are talking about perfect case scenarios which differ because no chips are the same. I have seen very few Sandy E's do 5ghz without hitting 1.4v ranges and spiking heat displacement most average out at 4.5ghz before they reach instability. I did a youtube recording once with three identical i5 2500K's in the exact same builds running simultaneously and the most was 4.8ghz the one barely ran 4.5ghz stable. I have also shown that a month of running a 2500K at its limits is enough to kill the chip and everyone by now or those that do sub zero cooling that Intel is notorious for its cold bug, at very low temperatures a Intel CPU can instantly die. Since no intel records are really set on maximum cores yet AMD have legitimate 8ghz results on 4 cores and even a certified 8ghz on a FX8350 one can conclude that the extra TDP on the 9590 was designed to break records.

The long and the short is that the FX9590 is not a benching part, it is not a gaming part it is a pure enthusiast overclockers part, one that knows and is experienced in keeping CPU's cool.

If you take stock of everything yes Intel have lowered TDP but to say their thermals are under control is a gross exaggeration, a 4770K on stock TIM roasts at 4ghz and since a Intel chip is more susceptable to heat degradation and failure that is quite severe and despite running down the process and lowering TDP's the heat effect is actually magnifying rather than discipating. Noob2222 had posted links of 14nm then Broadwell DT prototypes having severe thermal degredation and now we know that Broadwell DT is about as much of a mystery as to whether it will ever happen. Its just that Intel hide it and reviewers don't really exploit the inner workings just punch the numbers.

On the AMD front the FX9590 can probably do 5.3ghz on a good cooler endorsed to cool it, it is designed to be withing the threshold and the difference between a 4.7 and 5.3 FX9590 is not linear, some benches are showing 15% or higher improvements.

Two points:

- Most Sandy Bridge E 3930ks overclocked to 4.5 Ghz, would do a 1.28 Ghz max. A little search and run finds that many people recommend, and it used at ~ 1.26 V-core. For 5 Ghz, I can see it getting ~ 1.30 -1.32, however nothing more than that, or else you are literally burning your CPU to a crisp.

- I did not say that the Intel were completely under control, but, as for the record, they do get hot. However under load (if you are comparing the CPUs of a certain time frame, say, 2012), AMD's chips will run slightly, if not, more hotter than an Intel under load to do similar amounts of work. Obviously, if you are a noob, and can't get the lower end V-core on a certain clock, then your CPU is gone within a few months, and it'll run hotter making it run worse.

Obviously, most CPUs that are overclock more than ~ .5 Ghz wont work on a stock cooler, and thats when you get a Water Cooling System!

I watched a video (actually two), a few months back with the corsair h100i with a 3930k and 3770k. Both CPU's on stock V-core, were able to OC pretty high. I believe that the 3770k got to 4.3 Ghz, and the 3930k got to 4.0 Ghz. This is obviously on the edge where it'll stop working and restart, so, .1 or ,2 down would make it stable. Thus being said, increasing the V-core past 1.4, especially on a 3930k, is just a stupid mistake, unless you are using liquid nitrogen and going past 6.0 Ghz.

Also, even if the FX-8350 got over 8.0 Ghz, was it under load? Keep that in mind, as it was not. The only few tests that used load that high, failed because it got too hot. (Estimation) 8 Physical cores clocked that high, could probably do as much work as a non HT 3930k running at ~6.5-7.0 with 2 less cores, allowing it to do that same work but at a much lower temperature.

You may think I'm just applying less clock = lower temps, but just look at a 4.0 Ghz i7-3770k vs a 4.0 Ghz Fx-8350, the i7 will run cooler when on the same Water cooling system, maybe even a fan system.

 

[Cazalan]

The better "The Stilt" got 5.6 Ghz on water, and 6.3 Ghz on a "vapo" system... this is usable, LN2 is not.

also "average" power for stock clocks is below the 100W

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?286367-Richland-the-best-OC-APU-infos-experience-issues

Is the VapoChill LS still in the $800 range? Thats the only price I could find for one.

 

[sarinaide]

As a overclocker the Stilt is nothing short of Gandalf level. 8.2ghz on a APU package is simply mindblowing.

 

[Cazalan]

VR-Zone now saying they have internal documents to verify the Kaveri delay.

"The target launch into channel is now mid-February 2014."

So another 8-9 months of speculation an conjecture to go.

Read more: http://vr-zone.com/articles/new-confirmed-details-on-amds-2014-apu-lineup-kaveri-delayed/47455.html#ixzz2aFClBo87

 

[hcl123]

I still believe AMD roadmaps are not "misleading" (can be wrong of course)...

Kaveri "mobile" will be here with some vendors ready for the cristmas season.

What will be late is the "desktop" version, a "different" fab process strikes the mind, simply 28nm "bulk" is already too late on Glofo to be "reasonable"... they are 2 years behind TSMC.

Of course "bulk" is crap for high performance designs, only Intel has the money to push it to decent levels, and they need finfet, which will take yet 2 years more for others to catch up.

But FD-SOI is kind of straightforward and is much better than bulk even with finfets... Glofo pointed long ago 2014 as the time for full production ramp-up, if that is the case, nothing is really late.

 

[hcl123]

The better "The Stilt" got 5.6 Ghz on water, and 6.3 Ghz on a "vapo" system... this is usable, LN2 is not.

also "average" power for stock clocks is below the 100W

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?286367-Richland-the-best-OC-APU-infos-experience-issues

Is the VapoChill LS still in the $800 range? Thats the only price I could find for one.

Don't know never bought one, but AFAIK those systems also don't fit in any "case"(box)... the condensers are "bulky", check that out before you jump into one.

 

[-Fran-]

I wonder if they still have too many Richland and Trinity APUs to sell and in the hands of OEMs. Last time, IIRC, that was the main cause of the delay.

Cheers!

 

[GOM3RPLY3R]

Congratulations, you've lost the game. You showed that you are worse troll than hafijur.

8350rocks is not a troll.

hafijur is here for trolling, and you have been helping him with your anti-AMD rants. Up to now your tactic to fuel the troll was very astute and almost inappreciable. Now that you moved to insulting several posters here, everything is easier.

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/ou/is-amd-being-hypocritical-about-benchmark-ethics/438
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/ou/strike-3-for-amd-hypocrisy-on-benchmarking/463

AMD go even further they use benchmarks they get spanked on mainly but 1 out of a few they win they post to show they are better lol. Another thing is they use there apu or cpu performance and compare it to an intel cpu+igpu to make it sound like they are so superior at gaming lol instead of cpu tasks as they compare the processors, its quite funny them showing cpus so low end and trying to make it sound like amd are so much better. Haswell now stops amd from showing these benchmarks like they used to all the time and now intel focused on igpu amd fanboys call it hasfail as amds worst nightmares came true with haswell. Its common nature for both companies to show there cpus in the best frame but amd mainly nowadays just boast about there graphics performance in there apus lol and forget the apu cpu especially in laptops get beaten by core 2 duos as an all round chip from 7 years ago.

The irony is amds higher end graphics cards only work properly at full performance with an intel cpu so without intel there 8970m with an a10-5750m would get less then half the performance in games. The i7 4700mq one of intel entry level i7 mobile hasfail cpus you like to say beats out the fx8350 on multithreaded tasks.

http://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-Radeon-HD-8970M.90656.0.html
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Core-i7-4700MQ-Notebook-Processor.92959.0.html

TROLLING ALGORITHM:

while ( 3 > 1 )
{
  post nonsense;
  ignore corrections;
}

+1 I could agree that hes not a troll. The only bad thing is that he exaggerates sometimes, but that's it.

 

[The Q6660 Inside]

The better "The Stilt" got 5.6 Ghz on water, and 6.3 Ghz on a "vapo" system... this is usable, LN2 is not.

also "average" power for stock clocks is below the 100W

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?286367-Richland-the-best-OC-APU-infos-experience-issues

Is the VapoChill LS still in the $800 range? Thats the only price I could find for one.

Don't know never bought one, but AFAIK those systems also don't fit in any "case"(box)... the condensers are "bulky", check that out before you jump into one.

Aren't that the successors to the compressors used to cool the Northbridge in this classic THG video ? I think they started to be integrated to cases.

 

[juanrga]

VR-Zone now saying they have internal documents to verify the Kaveri delay.

"The target launch into channel is now mid-February 2014."

So another 8-9 months of speculation an conjecture to go.

Read more: http://vr-zone.com/articles/new-confirmed-details-on-amds-2014-apu-lineup-kaveri-delayed/47455.html#ixzz2aFClBo87

Interesting read. I waited Carrizo to be based in a kind of Steamroller '2.0' (somewhat as Richland was Piledriver with some teaks), but they confirm that Carrizo will use Excavator cores. Also interesting that Carrizo will be 65W. Kaveri top model is 100W.

 

[The Q6660 Inside]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wnam6Abo-Fw

lol, are amd serious, you get better packaging with memory cards.

When you have an 8350 with way better packaging (Better than Intel IMO), you're gonna have a bad time.