AMD CPU speculation... and expert conjecture

[juanrga]

So wheres the experts then?

Well i am no expert but i just call it how i see it. I mean AMD does not just compete with Intel, they have Nvidia to worry about.
AMD having a 20nm cpu and gpu while Intel and Nvidia put out 14nm... then Intel does one better and goes 10nm.
What is there really to say... other than who is going to buy a 20nm gpu when they can have 14nm.
If AMD chooses to start working on 20nm for production they will be at major risk.
They could just pull out of the high performance gpu market and keep working on apu's and servers but even then.. the testing that Toms did on the latest laptop apu's where not so great from my point of view.

Should just not mess around and make a am4 with ddr4,14nm FX and 14nm Radeon. Is that not what everyone want's from them anyway?

AMD is far more competitive than you give credit, and Intel's 10nm node is really ~12nm...they have been giving misinformation for a long time by providing the length of the shortest node, as opposed to the method used by other companies.

Perhaps just let the people who were educated about the subject hash it out...though juanrga seems not to follow that advice either.

You are wrong. It is true that Intel 22nm is what rest of industry (e.g. TSMC) calls 26nm. However, Glofo 14nm is in reality a hybrid of 14nm and 20nm and TSMC 16nm is a hybrid of 16nm and 20nm. Finally Intel 10nm will be density equivalent to other foundries 10nm, not to ~12nm as you claim.

 

[juanrga]

http://vr-zone.com/articles/amd-continues-anti-gameworks-offensive/79726.html

 

[gamerk316]

http://vr-zone.com/articles/amd-continues-anti-gameworks-offensive/79726.html

I call BS on the .dll argument. .DLLs are par for the course, and preferred way to deal with external libraries, especially ones dealing with core functionality. You do not want to have to do a full recompile every time a .dll gets updated. Nevermind the increase in program size...

 

[cdrkf]

http://vr-zone.com/articles/amd-continues-anti-gameworks-offensive/79726.html

I call BS on the .dll argument. .DLLs are par for the course, and preferred way to deal with external libraries, especially ones dealing with core functionality. You do not want to have to do a full recompile every time a .dll gets updated. Nevermind the increase in program size...

I do kinda sympathise with AMD a little on gamesworks tho- I mean AMD release TressFX and that runs lovely on Nvidia hardware (albeit after a driver patch, however TressFX was available for Nvidia to optimise for). On the other hand, Gamesworks prevent AMD accessing the code, and the resulting effects will work poorly on AMD cards however there isn't much they can do to fix it.

Nvidia have even gone so far to release their own hair rendering tech- why do they need to, TressFX actually works well on both and is open.

 

[juanrga]

http://vr-zone.com/articles/amd-continues-anti-gameworks-offensive/79726.html

I call BS on the .dll argument. .DLLs are par for the course, and preferred way to deal with external libraries, especially ones dealing with core functionality. You do not want to have to do a full recompile every time a .dll gets updated. Nevermind the increase in program size...

Game developers confirm that access to source code is vital, as AMD said

http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/183411-gameworks-faq-amd-nvidia-and-game-developers-weigh-in-on-the-gameworks-controversy

http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/183411-gameworks-faq-amd-nvidia-and-game-developers-weigh-in-on-the-gameworks-controversy/2

And here game developers criticized Nvidia by hiding the source code and providing them only black-box dll with parameters

https://twitter.com/repi/statuses/452812842132332544

https://twitter.com/BartWronsk/statuses/452808968172482560

https://twitter.com/MichalDrobot/statuses/452816104256438273

...

 

[etayorius]

http://vr-zone.com/articles/amd-continues-anti-gameworks-offensive/79726.html

I call BS on the .dll argument. .DLLs are par for the course, and preferred way to deal with external libraries, especially ones dealing with core functionality. You do not want to have to do a full recompile every time a .dll gets updated. Nevermind the increase in program size...

I rather believe Huddy... he knows his stuff, he is basically a Graphics Guru who has worked for AMD, Intel, ATi, nVidia and others and also knows DirectX quite well.

 

[8350rocks]

FX 9590 relaunched today with Seidon120 for $349.99

 

[helloguy123]

By the way AMD's next CPU will be called "K12" and apparently it will have a 50% improvement over and AMD FX CPU right now

K12 is not a CPU but a new ARM architecture that will be used in future APUs/CPUs. I discussed the possible performance of K12 before

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/forum/352312-28-steamroller-speculation-expert-conjecture/page-264#13297034

the 46% increase over Piledriver that I got is an expected lower limit.

FX 9590 relaunched today with Seidon120 for $349.99

What a shame, I hoped for a AMD CPU with steamroller, oh well!

 

[logainofhades]

FX 9590 relaunched today with Seidon120 for $349.99

Still not worth it. Could get a 4970k, Z97 extreme3, and a TS 140 power for less, or similar cost as that thing with a good compatible board. Not that you would need to spend that much, since even a Xeon 1231v3 would beat out an FX. AMD really needs to stop with the piledriver space heaters and come out with something new. I don't care if it is just steamroller in FX form, something other than overclocked FX 8350's.

 

[de5_Roy]

fx 8320 with a cm seidon 120 - seems like a better alternative to the relaunched 9590.
no fuss with limited compatibility, the cpu is cheap, the cooler is also cheap, but together they make potentially good overclocking combo.

 

[juanrga]

FX 9590 relaunched today with Seidon120 for $349.99

I am one of the few that expected a Piledriver CPU, but a relaunch of the 9590 is very disappointed.

What a shame, I hoped for a AMD CPU with steamroller, oh well!

A Steamroller CPU was not in the menu by reasons explained in this thread since the past year.

 

[juanrga]

FX 9590 relaunched today with Seidon120 for $349.99

Still not worth it. Could get a 4970k, Z97 extreme3, and a TS 140 power for less, or similar cost as that thing with a good compatible board. Not that you would need to spend that much, since even a Xeon 1231v3 would beat out an FX. AMD really needs to stop with the piledriver space heaters and come out with something new. I don't care if it is just steamroller in FX form, something other than overclocked FX 8350's.

The new architecture has been announced for the year 2016. Piledriver is extended up to 2015. There is not Steamroller 8-core FX CPU planned. The only Steamroller FX are the mobile APUs. AM3+ is a life support status platform.

 

[etayorius]

FX 9590 relaunched today with Seidon120 for $349.99

I am one of the few that expected a Piledriver CPU, but a relaunch of the 9590 is very disappointed.

What a shame, I hoped for a AMD CPU with steamroller, oh well!

A Steamroller CPU was not in the menu by reasons explained in this thread since the past year.

I was also expecting AMD to release another Piledriver, but i was expecting lower TDP and little higher clocks, but daaamn AMD, DAAAMN... you shame yourself with this horrible offer.

 

[esrever]

People expecting more than the FX9590 don't really seem to get that even that cpu was binned so hard it had to release at $1000 and AMD couldn't even afford to sell it by itself until months later. Piledriver has been pushed to its limits and AMD will have nothing for high end for a long time.

 

[juanrga]

I was also expecting AMD to release another Piledriver, but i was expecting lower TDP and little higher clocks, but daaamn AMD, DAAAMN... you shame yourself with this horrible offer.

I was expecting higher TDPs of ~240--250W, but in any case I agree.

People expecting more than the FX9590 don't really seem to get that even that cpu was binned so hard it had to release at $1000 and AMD couldn't even afford to sell it by itself until months later. Piledriver has been pushed to its limits and AMD will have nothing for high end for a long time.

With water cooling a 9590 can be pushed above the 5GHz barrier. This is why I was expecting a '9990' with 300MHz higher clocks.

 

[iron8orn]

So many right wing comments everywhere... craptel.. hardly. Intel is for people that do not want to overclock and like power efficiency. Why even oc a new Haswell?
People need to realize the pure power that Intel offers and stop running Prime at 90c on them. i guess the K models are just to make more money when noobs kill them because they wanted a higher clock rate.
Only someone doing some really serious work needs a K model and they would know exactly how to safely oc it.
The 9590 at it's stupid price tag is a failure and is for people that eyes glow over a higher clock rate.
4.5ghz on a FX is good for any gamer but most cant figure it out before they start to damage the chip.

Both AMD and Intel need a real overclocking guide.. if that is what they want to sell to the average person.

Truth sucks^ when you realize they both just want to screw the average person for more money but if you what your doing you buy a Intel and never deal with overclocking garbage.

It pisses me off too the junk gaming build's Tom's tries to sell..

Please learn to be smart people. If you are on a budget don't mess with overclocking for no reason. Buy a damn locked I5 on a cheap mobo and use the discrete graphics until you can afford a nice card. That is what Tom's should be promoting for budget builds.

 

[iron8orn]

I was also expecting AMD to release another Piledriver, but i was expecting lower TDP and little higher clocks, but daaamn AMD, DAAAMN... you shame yourself with this horrible offer.

I was expecting higher TDPs of ~240--250W, but in any case I agree.

People expecting more than the FX9590 don't really seem to get that even that cpu was binned so hard it had to release at $1000 and AMD couldn't even afford to sell it by itself until months later. Piledriver has been pushed to its limits and AMD will have nothing for high end for a long time.

With water cooling a 9590 can be pushed above the 5GHz barrier. This is why I was expecting a '9990' with 300MHz higher clocks.

pff.. more clock rate? what a joke.

 

[logainofhades]

It is a am3+ option if you have a 990 board, nothing more. Only a fool would dump the 990 for a whole new craptel setup. The ignorance is abound on this forum from the same people who said amd is dead.

Even if I had a 990 board that supported this space heater, I would not buy it. Push an FX 8320 as far as you can or go Intel. Anything else is a waste of money. I could easily buy a Xeon 1231v3 and a Z97 board, if I wanted to keep CF/SLI capability, for only a little more than the cost of this reintroduced 9950. The power savings alone would make up the meager cost difference, easily, and I would have more performance as well.


PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-Z97X-SLI ATX LGA1150 Motherboard ($118.99 @ Amazon)
Other: Xeon 1231v3 ($247.98)
Total: $366.97
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available

Could go for less if I don't want SLI/CF but want broadwell support.

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

Motherboard: ASRock H97 PRO4 ATX LGA1150 Motherboard ($86.66 @ Newegg)
Other: Xeon 1231v3 ($247.98)
Total: $334.64
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available

And cheaper yet if I don't plan on ever swapping the CPU for the life of the system, and only need a single GPU.

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant

Motherboard: ASRock H81M-DGS R2.0 Micro ATX LGA1150 Motherboard ($48.38 @ Newegg)
Other: Xeon 1231v3 ($247.98)
Total: $296.36
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available

No matter how you slice it, once you go past FX 8320, AMD loses its value quickly.

 

[esrever]

I was also expecting AMD to release another Piledriver, but i was expecting lower TDP and little higher clocks, but daaamn AMD, DAAAMN... you shame yourself with this horrible offer.

I was expecting higher TDPs of ~240--250W, but in any case I agree.

People expecting more than the FX9590 don't really seem to get that even that cpu was binned so hard it had to release at $1000 and AMD couldn't even afford to sell it by itself until months later. Piledriver has been pushed to its limits and AMD will have nothing for high end for a long time.

With water cooling a 9590 can be pushed above the 5GHz barrier. This is why I was expecting a '9990' with 300MHz higher clocks.

Not really, Reviews of the 9590 had it top out at 5ghz. Thats pointless to release a chip that is just 5ghz base and no turbo when they have the 9590.

 

[con635]

I was really hoping for a richland style refresh on fx4*** and fx6*** cpus to keep in the budget market and counter the i3 and unlocked pentium.

 

[lilcinw]

So many right wing comments everywhere... craptel.. hardly. Intel is for people that do not want to overclock and like power efficiency. Why even oc a new Haswell?
People need to realize the pure power that Intel offers and stop running Prime at 90c on them. i guess the K models are just to make more money when noobs kill them because they wanted a higher clock rate.
Only someone doing some really serious work needs a K model and they would know exactly how to safely oc it.
The 9590 at it's stupid price tag is a failure and is for people that eyes glow over a higher clock rate.
4.5ghz on a FX is good for any gamer but most cant figure it out before they start to damage the chip.

Both AMD and Intel need a real overclocking guide.. if that is what they want to sell to the average person.

Truth sucks^ when you realize they both just want to screw the average person for more money but if you what your doing you buy a Intel and never deal with overclocking garbage.

It pisses me off too the junk gaming build's Tom's tries to sell..

Please learn to be smart people. If you are on a budget don't mess with overclocking for no reason. Buy a damn locked I5 on a cheap mobo and use the discrete graphics until you can afford a nice card. That is what Tom's should be promoting for budget builds.

First I think you need to realize that this thread is approaching 300 pages so most of the contributor's opinions are well known and deeply entrenched; you won't be presenting many new arguments or changing a lot of minds here.

Second, TH is focused on PC enthusiasts who are expected to know a great deal about hardware and will passionately argue every choice that they don't agree with. Take a look at the comments in the SBM articles and you will see what I mean. A large part of that community takes exception to the use of non-tweakable parts.

Third, OC capabilities are a value-add and are not officially supported by either AMD or Intel and the reason most enthusiasts attempt it is to increase the value of their purchase by potentially gaining performance of a higher class of chip. I purchased an FX-8320 because I looked at reported overclocks and decided that I could save $30 and in all likelihood achieve the same OC.

Last but not least, are you seriously recommending that people settle for Intel integrated graphics for any length of time? If you are doing anything beyond basic office work/web browsing that is a completely unacceptable solution in my opinion. I would rather delay the build for a few months than build what I would consider a broken system.

 

[iron8orn]

So many right wing comments everywhere... craptel.. hardly. Intel is for people that do not want to overclock and like power efficiency. Why even oc a new Haswell?
People need to realize the pure power that Intel offers and stop running Prime at 90c on them. i guess the K models are just to make more money when noobs kill them because they wanted a higher clock rate.
Only someone doing some really serious work needs a K model and they would know exactly how to safely oc it.
The 9590 at it's stupid price tag is a failure and is for people that eyes glow over a higher clock rate.
4.5ghz on a FX is good for any gamer but most cant figure it out before they start to damage the chip.

Both AMD and Intel need a real overclocking guide.. if that is what they want to sell to the average person.

Truth sucks^ when you realize they both just want to screw the average person for more money but if you what your doing you buy a Intel and never deal with overclocking garbage.

It pisses me off too the junk gaming build's Tom's tries to sell..

Please learn to be smart people. If you are on a budget don't mess with overclocking for no reason. Buy a damn locked I5 on a cheap mobo and use the discrete graphics until you can afford a nice card. That is what Tom's should be promoting for budget builds.

First I think you need to realize that this thread is approaching 300 pages so most of the contributor's opinions are well known and deeply entrenched; you won't be presenting many new arguments or changing a lot of minds here.

Second, TH is focused on PC enthusiasts who are expected to know a great deal about hardware and will passionately argue every choice that they don't agree with. Take a look at the comments in the SBM articles and you will see what I mean. A large part of that community takes exception to the use of non-tweakable parts.

Third, OC capabilities are a value-add and are not officially supported by either AMD or Intel and the reason most enthusiasts attempt it is to increase the value of their purchase by potentially gaining performance of a higher class of chip. I purchased an FX-8320 because I looked at reported overclocks and decided that I could save $30 and in all likelihood achieve the same OC.

Last but not least, are you seriously recommending that people settle for Intel integrated graphics for any length of time? If you are doing anything beyond basic office work/web browsing that is a completely unacceptable solution in my opinion. I would rather delay the build for a few months than build what I would consider a broken system.

Don't gotta explain to me basic overclocking and prices involved. Ego cough cough.
Not officially supporting overclocking is all a game of liability, lawyers and paper work when they could do right by people are give a real guide that would get them off the hook the same.

The new integrated graphics of Intel are perfectly fine with some high speed ram for someone who is smart enough to save for a nice video card and better than some of the junk old card's that Tom's would have a noob use for a budget gaming build that need to be overclocked for any kind of decent gaming performance. Same for the cpu's just garbage.

My friend with true genius for technology warned me not to come to Tom's for discussions because of ego and right wing bs. cough cough again!

I will still help noobs on the forums but I am out of this petty game.

 

[8350rocks]

If you were going to do that....get the A10-6800k and save money, and actually be able to play games...

Intel iGPU does not even get playable frames on most games @ 1080p. At least the AMD solutions can do that...regardless of what you think of one company's cores over the other, the total package favors AMD.

 

[iron8orn]

If you were going to do that....get the A10-6800k and save money, and actually be able to play games...

Intel iGPU does not even get playable frames on most games @ 1080p. At least the AMD solutions can do that...regardless of what you think of one company's cores over the other, the total package favors AMD.

Every time i have suggested that to someone on the forum and explained the better single thread performance of the Kaveri someone knocks it down.
I personally think it is a great deal and has free bf4.

 

[juanrga]

Not really, Reviews of the 9590 had it top out at 5ghz. Thats pointless to release a chip that is just 5ghz base and no turbo when they have the 9590.

The 9590 hits 5.5GHz with water cooling. I have seen some few 5.8GHz. AMD could release a 5GHz base FX with turbo.