AMD CPU speculation... and expert conjecture

[BeastLeeX]

http://wccftech.com/rumor-amd-phenom-iv-x12-170-baeca-25nm-cpu-leaked-features-12-cores-6-ghz-core-clock-am4-socket-compatbility/

This would be absolutely awesome! Sadly none of those specs even come close to matching up (25nm, 6.0Ghz with 75w TDP along with 12 cores)

I think that if this processor was released hafijur, could not troll about how Intel has a huge advantage in power consumption.

 

[BeastLeeX]

http://wccftech.com/rumor-amd-phenom-iv-x12-170-baeca-25nm-cpu-leaked-features-12-cores-6-ghz-core-clock-am4-socket-compatbility/

This would be absolutely awesome! Sadly none of those specs even come close to matching up (25nm, 6.0Ghz with 75w TDP along with 12 cores)

I think that if this processor was released hafijur, could not troll about how Intel has a huge advantage in power consumption.

Everything about that is BS. 1.436v 75w tdp lol 25nm lol no one is on 25nm in cpu market. This seems a phenom x4 cpu photshopped on cpuz lol. That person is just trolling.

Just like you, eh?

 

[GOM3RPLY3R]

@gamerk316:

Why do I get the feeling that Linux benchmarks will, once again, be dramatically faster for AMD architecture when all the dust settles?

Oh, that's right...the Linux kernel is light years ahead of Windows kernel...

Spoiler

No, it's because the Linux kernel is much less for graphics than performance. It's all about performance, and works better obviously, with more physical cores, and something about AMD's architecture. I have to keep telling you this. In Real Life (not sure if you know about it), almost every computer that is sold either comes with Windows or OSx. Also, Linux is (at least to me) no more useful than to code and create programs, which, I don't do very much, so there's no point in having it. Plus for the gaming market, there may be a couple games that run much better on it, however, that's only ~ 5% of the whole game populous, so there's no advantage there.

You're doing what people thought I was doing: Talking about stuff that no one cares about and trolling.

Cool, Linux works for you, and it benefits AMD. However, it's not a large enough advantage to use in the real world. Now instead of blabbering about how amazing it is, put up some actual information [in-fer-mey-shuhn] about it, so we can build on it, instead of you starting another useless and random flame war.

http://wccftech.com/rumor-amd-phenom-iv-x12-170-baeca-25nm-cpu-leaked-features-12-cores-6-ghz-core-clock-am4-socket-compatbility/

This would be absolutely awesome! Sadly none of those specs even come close to matching up (25nm, 6.0Ghz with 75w TDP along with 12 cores)

I think that if this processor was released hafijur, could not troll about how Intel has a huge advantage in power consumption.

Everything about that is BS. 1.436v 75w tdp lol 25nm lol no one is on 25nm in cpu market. This seems a phenom x4 cpu photshopped on cpuz lol. That person is just trolling.

Just like you, eh?

+100

 

[noob2222]

http://wccftech.com/rumor-amd-phenom-iv-x12-170-baeca-25nm-cpu-leaked-features-12-cores-6-ghz-core-clock-am4-socket-compatbility/

This would be absolutely awesome! Sadly none of those specs even come close to matching up (25nm, 6.0Ghz with 75w TDP along with 12 cores)

I think that if this processor was released hafijur, could not troll about how Intel has a huge advantage in power consumption.

someone missed april 1st, but its still quite comical, the funny part being someone actually believing it enough to post the information as if it were possible (wccf).

 

[The Q6660 Inside]

http://wccftech.com/rumor-amd-phenom-iv-x12-170-baeca-25nm-cpu-leaked-features-12-cores-6-ghz-core-clock-am4-socket-compatbility/

This would be absolutely awesome! Sadly none of those specs even come close to matching up (25nm, 6.0Ghz with 75w TDP along with 12 cores)

I think that if this processor was released hafijur, could not troll about how Intel has a huge advantage in power consumption.

someone missed april 1st, but its still quite comical, the funny part being someone actually believing it enough to post the information as if it were possible (wccf).

It seems unlikely.

 

[esrever]

Should i buy fx-8320 now, or wait for steamroller. Do you guys thing Vishera with microsoft hotfix will be very close to preformance of steamroller?

The question is, if you want to wait about a year more for about 30% more performance.

 

[jdwii]

Should i buy fx-8320 now, or wait for steamroller. Do you guys thing Vishera with microsoft hotfix will be very close to preformance of steamroller?

no, also can you wait one more year if not then jump on the 8350fx for 200$.

 

[Ranth]

The question is, if you want to wait about a year more for about 30% more performance.

...for maybe 30% more performance, and maybe an price increase. If it's 30% more performance it's gonna cost more which could make it worth getting an i5 instead (Unless you need the 8 cores)

 

[esrever]

The question is, if you want to wait about a year more for about 30% more performance.

...for maybe 30% more performance, and maybe an price increase. If it's 30% more performance it's gonna cost more which could make it worth getting an i5 instead (Unless you need the 8 cores)

If AMD can't get a 30% improvement, they might as well not release the chip and just do another piledriver refresh.

 

[juanrga]

I wait a 20% improvement over Piledriver and a 30% over Bulldozer.

 

[juanrga]

@gamerk316:

Why do I get the feeling that Linux benchmarks will, once again, be dramatically faster for AMD architecture when all the dust settles?

Oh, that's right...the Linux kernel is light years ahead of Windows kernel...

Spoiler

No, it's because the Linux kernel is much less for graphics than performance. It's all about performance, and works better obviously, with more physical cores, and something about AMD's architecture. I have to keep telling you this. In Real Life (not sure if you know about it), almost every computer that is sold either comes with Windows or OSx. Also, Linux is (at least to me) no more useful than to code and create programs, which, I don't do very much, so there's no point in having it. Plus for the gaming market, there may be a couple games that run much better on it, however, that's only ~ 5% of the whole game populous, so there's no advantage there.

You're doing what people thought I was doing: Talking about stuff that no one cares about and trolling.

Cool, Linux works for you, and it benefits AMD. However, it's not a large enough advantage to use in the real world. Now instead of blabbering about how amazing it is, put up some actual information [in-fer-mey-shuhn] about it, so we can build on it, instead of you starting another useless and random flame war.

I would not say that Linux benefits AMD. There is nothing in Linux designed specifically for AMD. Linux works for essentially processor arch and brand. What happens is that Windows is often optimized for Intel: Wintel.

Linux is used in Real Life / Real World. Linux is used in supercomputers, servers, workstations, laptops, desktops, game consoles... Linux is used by end users and by Governments. Toms has a recent article about the market share of linux and concludes that there are more Linux users than Windows users (Toms counts Android users as well).

 

[mayankleoboy1]

I would not say that Linux benefits AMD. There is nothing in Linux designed specifically for AMD. Linux works for essentially processor arch and brand. What happens is that Windows is often optimized for Intel: Wintel.

Could it be because only intel has those features ? I am mostly looking at power saving features on the mobo, as well as deeper CPU sleep states that only Intel has.

Any other 'optimization' that windows does for intel , unless Windows also has a "punish_AMD" runtime switch, that uses only SSE2 even on a AVX AMD proc.

 

[thaares]

One year, wasn't steamroller supposed to come out this year around the same time hd9000 series come out?

 

[gamerk316]

"The roof of all evil" is not so well multithreaded as "Welcome of the jungle". Look to the six-core performing exactly as the eight-core. Why? because that section of the game is ignoring the extra cores...

More like: Its not CPU bottlenecked, so those cores don't add anything to performance.

Hence my primary point: If the CPU is getting its work done, more cores adds NOTHING to performance. Its exactly the result that you are going to see over and over and over again.

What's going on in that benchmark is EXACTLY what I've been saying since before the BD launch: Despite the fact Crysis 3 does favor Quads (see i3 vs i5 at almost the same clock), PD simply lags behind, despite its more cores. Thats you per-core performance holding back the rest of the chip.

So even though you have a level that scales to 8 cores (up to 9, according to GPUView), 4 cores is enough to get the work done. As a result, the performance difference between PD and IB is the difference between clock/IPC, not number of cores. And IB wins that by about 15% or so, which is reflected in the benchmark results.

That's also the same reason why the i3 hangs around the FX-4300: Even though its bottlenecked, its IPC is enough to still be competitive with a quad at a much higher clock. Hence my wondering about how a i3 @ 4GHz would fare...

 

[sarinaide]

My Kaveri/SR predictions just so I may throw it out there well in advance before any definite leaks come out;

x86 - Tweaks to Cache, IMC and subsystems along with evolutionay tweaks to the architecture will see performance per watt and performance per clock improvements. Over the A10 6800K at same clocks should see around 20-40% improvements depending on the application, around 15% general performance increase along with power improvements.

iGPU - Spectre should be around 2x faster than the HD8670D on Richalnd

 

[cowboy44mag]

At this point I'm still really hoping that AMD releases a Steamroller FX processor for AM3+. If not next year I will be moving to socket FM2+ (or maybe FM3 if its going to be coming out soon). Would much rather stick with AM3+ for a couple more years. I just wish AMD would confirm one way or the other.

 

[sarinaide]

At this point I'm still really hoping that AMD releases a Steamroller FX processor for AM3+. If not next year I will be moving to socket FM2+ (or maybe FM3 if its going to be coming out soon). Would much rather stick with AM3+ for a couple more years. I just wish AMD would confirm one way or the other.

Kaveri and its successor are confirmed FM2+ similar to FM2 and Trinity and Richland keeps continuity and a upgrade for the socket. FM3 will probably only be in 2015

 

[cowboy44mag]

At this point I'm still really hoping that AMD releases a Steamroller FX processor for AM3+. If not next year I will be moving to socket FM2+ (or maybe FM3 if its going to be coming out soon). Would much rather stick with AM3+ for a couple more years. I just wish AMD would confirm one way or the other.

Kaveri and its successor are confirmed FM2+ similar to FM2 and Trinity and Richland keeps continuity and a upgrade for the socket. FM3 will probably only be in 2015

Good to know, I really don't want to make the switch to APU yet though, so I'm still hoping for confirmation on Steamroller FX on AM3+.

 

[jdwii]

One year, wasn't steamroller supposed to come out this year around the same time hd9000 series come out?

Amd doesn't have a guideline for the Enthusiast chips yet, they really do need to show some information on it however even for the stock market, it would be nice to know if their still serious about PC gaming when the PS4/Xbone comes out.

Right now they're doing what Nvidia did last year wait too long to release their newer GPU's the radeon 7000 series has been for 2 years coming this december

 

[jdwii]

I really don't want any APU in my gaming build unless its for a budget i would rather have that 40% of die space filled with more cores or bigger cores. If however they can make a strong 8 core APU i will move to it.

 

[juanrga]

I would not say that Linux benefits AMD. There is nothing in Linux designed specifically for AMD. Linux works for essentially processor arch and brand. What happens is that Windows is often optimized for Intel: Wintel.

Could it be because only intel has those features ? I am mostly looking at power saving features on the mobo, as well as deeper CPU sleep states that only Intel has.

Any other 'optimization' that windows does for intel , unless Windows also has a "punish_AMD" runtime switch, that uses only SSE2 even on a AVX AMD proc.

I was thinking on terms of performance. However, regarding power consumption, I recall that one of the hotfixes released by Microsoft for AMD FX chips altered the behaviour of Core Parking, preventing modules from entering a C6 sleep state and increasing the power consumption of the chips.

"The roof of all evil" is not so well multithreaded as "Welcome of the jungle". Look to the six-core performing exactly as the eight-core. Why? because that section of the game is ignoring the extra cores...

More like: Its not CPU bottlenecked, so those cores don't add anything to performance.

Hence my primary point: If the CPU is getting its work done, more cores adds NOTHING to performance. Its exactly the result that you are going to see over and over and over again.

What's going on in that benchmark is EXACTLY what I've been saying since before the BD launch: Despite the fact Crysis 3 does favor Quads (see i3 vs i5 at almost the same clock), PD simply lags behind, despite its more cores. Thats you per-core performance holding back the rest of the chip.

So even though you have a level that scales to 8 cores (up to 9, according to GPUView), 4 cores is enough to get the work done. As a result, the performance difference between PD and IB is the difference between clock/IPC, not number of cores. And IB wins that by about 15% or so, which is reflected in the benchmark results.

That's also the same reason why the i3 hangs around the FX-4300: Even though its bottlenecked, its IPC is enough to still be competitive with a quad at a much higher clock. Hence my wondering about how a i3 @ 4GHz would fare...

As I said above performance depends on IPC, number of cores, frequency... If "the CPU is getting its work done", as you say, then adding more cores, or increasing the IPC, or overclocking, or any combination of those will not increase performance. Before, we discussed benchmarks showing how an OC 4770k was obtaining the same FPS than at stock.

You can continue negating benchmarks, you can continue negating that the FX-8350 @ 4Ghz is much faster than the FX-4300 @ 3.8 GHz and that the difference in FPS cannot be explained by freq. You can also negate that the i7-3770k @ 3.5GHz is much faster than the i5-3570k @ 3.4GHz and that the difference in FPS cannot be explained by freq.

You can negate game developers claiming that the FX-8350 will be better than an i5, because the games they are developing for the 8-core consoles are well-threaded.

You can negate that Intel released Haswell i5/i7, but not i3/Pentium or any other dual chip for desktop, because quads are the more important chips. You can negate that Intel is going to release a new series of six-core chips and already announced its first octa-core, whereas you fantasize about an imagined i3 @ 4GHz.

You can negate everything, my question is what will change? I know the answer: nothing.

 

[noob2222]

I really don't want any APU in my gaming build unless its for a budget i would rather have that 40% of die space filled with more cores or bigger cores. If however they can make a strong 8 core APU i will move to it.

couldn't agree more.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/675?vs=700

office apps and productivity don't make much difference, but if your gaming, an APU is not what you want. 20% loss in performance, no thanks. Kaveri APU would need +40% increase in cpu to impress as an "CPU" replacement for any high end gaming machine.

 

[juanrga]

My Kaveri/SR predictions just so I may throw it out there well in advance before any definite leaks come out;

x86 - Tweaks to Cache, IMC and subsystems along with evolutionay tweaks to the architecture will see performance per watt and performance per clock improvements. Over the A10 6800K at same clocks should see around 20-40% improvements depending on the application, around 15% general performance increase along with power improvements.

iGPU - Spectre should be around 2x faster than the HD8670D on Richalnd

I wait a 20% over Piledriver and probably a clock reduction from Richland: 4.1Ghz --> 4 GHz

Based exclusively in GPU cores, I wait about a 30% over Richland/Trinity plus a clock boost up to 900 MHz. This could add to about a 40% increase. How do you got the 2x estimation?

 

[juanrga]

I really don't want any APU in my gaming build unless its for a budget i would rather have that 40% of die space filled with more cores or bigger cores. If however they can make a strong 8 core APU i will move to it.

couldn't agree more.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/675?vs=700

office apps and productivity don't make much difference, but if your gaming, an APU is not what you want. 20% loss in performance, no thanks. Kaveri APU would need +40% increase in cpu to impress as an "CPU" replacement for any high end gaming machine.

None of those apps are using the iGPU; it is natural you are not seeing difference. When the iGPU is used, then the APU is much faster.

Look to what happens when the iGPU is used

For Kaveri, the improvement will be larger with HSA: about 5x the performance of the CPU alone.

 

[GOM3RPLY3R]

http://wccftech.com/rumor-amd-phenom-iv-x12-170-baeca-25nm-cpu-leaked-features-12-cores-6-ghz-core-clock-am4-socket-compatbility/

This would be absolutely awesome! Sadly none of those specs even come close to matching up (25nm, 6.0Ghz with 75w TDP along with 12 cores)

I think that if this processor was released hafijur, could not troll about how Intel has a huge advantage in power consumption.

someone missed april 1st, but its still quite comical, the funny part being someone actually believing it enough to post the information as if it were possible (wccf).

@gamerk316:

Why do I get the feeling that Linux benchmarks will, once again, be dramatically faster for AMD architecture when all the dust settles?

Oh, that's right...the Linux kernel is light years ahead of Windows kernel...

Spoiler

No, it's because the Linux kernel is much less for graphics than performance. It's all about performance, and works better obviously, with more physical cores, and something about AMD's architecture. I have to keep telling you this. In Real Life (not sure if you know about it), almost every computer that is sold either comes with Windows or OSx. Also, Linux is (at least to me) no more useful than to code and create programs, which, I don't do very much, so there's no point in having it. Plus for the gaming market, there may be a couple games that run much better on it, however, that's only ~ 5% of the whole game populous, so there's no advantage there.

You're doing what people thought I was doing: Talking about stuff that no one cares about and trolling.

Cool, Linux works for you, and it benefits AMD. However, it's not a large enough advantage to use in the real world. Now instead of blabbering about how amazing it is, put up some actual information [in-fer-mey-shuhn] about it, so we can build on it, instead of you starting another useless and random flame war.

I would not say that Linux benefits AMD. There is nothing in Linux designed specifically for AMD. Linux works for essentially processor arch and brand. What happens is that Windows is often optimized for Intel: Wintel.

Linux is used in Real Life / Real World. Linux is used in supercomputers, servers, workstations, laptops, desktops, game consoles... Linux is used by end users and by Governments. Toms has a recent article about the market share of linux and concludes that there are more Linux users than Windows users (Toms counts Android users as well).

I could agree that Linux is used that much (didn't really say against it), however the compatibility for it is really for those scientists and custom coders, I would say. On a realistic basis you wouldn't use Linux on a gaming rig or rendering rig (rendering is arguable, but most likely not). Even there, where there are the performance gains of AMD for Linux, the actual software (mostly games) isn't compatible (unless you sit there and re-code the whole thing), thus making the whole system null.

Some thoughts:

Spoiler

I would say for myself, the high core count CPU's come in handy with ArmA / DayZ, which is my main game, and benefits even more if each processor core is stronger. Thus is why I'm getting a 3930k, since the base core power is much higher than most AMD's. In the cfg you can set how many cores it recognizes, set the affinity, and in the Properties or DayZ Commander, you can set instructions to how many threads it recognizes. The thing that I think is cool though, is that if you set it to more than the actual threads it has, it goes back to thread 0, and basically "using it again". So for example, it already recognizes 1 thread, which is thread 0. The start instructions for extra threads, I believe, is " ex_Thread= X " (something like that) X being the extra thread count.

So with my current 4 core / thread CPU, I would set it to "ex_thread = 3", so then it uses all 4 threads. However, if I set the number to 4, it'll use all the threads, but then use thread 0, twice, and so on with however many numbers you put. For that CPU, it barely helps, and make's it a little hotter, but it's possible.

That's why with the 3930k, I can use the 12 threads, and then double over them to get better performance. I'll test it, but it shouldn't be a problem if it's overclocked to 4.5 Ghz.