AMD CPU speculation... and expert conjecture

[con635]

a8 is junk children.. the fx is hardly a gaming cpu because of the just barley useable memory latency and ipc.. if a cpu cant hold over 60fps in everything you should just buy a game system. most of the cpu's on tom's lists are a horrible waist of money except i guess if you go cheap intel you can at least get something good. overclocking does not count because 90 percent of people damage something before they figure it out.

I think your wrong (and some others on the console vs low end pc), my a8 worked fine until I got money for a dgpu and still works fine as an athlon, most people game on pc instead of console for the games no other reason, pc exclusives that is, 60+ fps is only useful for certain genre, Arma 2 mp etc dont hold 60+fps no matter the cpu.


edit ok only seen the above after my reply, place needs an ignore button or lightened by 1 member.

 

[gamerk316]

ignore really doesn't solve the problem; think we need the mods to start getting heavy handed here.

 

[gamerk316]

Looks like I was pessimistic:

http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/185823-gpu-rumor-mill-leaked-shots-of-gtx-880-surface-point-to-8gb-of-ram-while-amd-plans-august-update

 

[8350rocks]

a8 is junk children.. the fx is hardly a gaming cpu because of the just barley useable memory latency and ipc.. if a cpu cant hold over 60fps in everything you should just buy a game system. most of the cpu's on tom's lists are a horrible waist of money except i guess if you go cheap intel you can at least get something good. overclocking does not count because 90 percent of people damage something before they figure it out.

Considering that no game console can max 60 FPS @ 1080p in every game without dips well below that (try 30 FPS more likely as a steady baseline), and neither can any Intel product (there are some games that are just that taxing....)...what was your recommendation going to be? A Blue GeneQ for every household?

 

[8350rocks]

amd knows they are done in the desktop market for solid gaming and the only people that dont are on toms hardware

AMD is not done in HEDT. I can assure you of that...however, I can also bet you will be seeing a nice vacation soon. That way you can go back to where ever you came from and talk with your ignorant buddies that will pat you on the back because they know no better and think you are an expert.

 

[8350rocks]

Looks like I was pessimistic:

http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/185823-gpu-rumor-mill-leaked-shots-of-gtx-880-surface-point-to-8gb-of-ram-while-amd-plans-august-update

That is a test card, I am betting against 8 GB VRAM on next gen cards...

 

[jdwii]

amd knows they are done in the desktop market for solid gaming and the only people that dont are on toms hardware

I game on my 8350fx and in next gen games this CPU is not the bottleneck. IPC is not the whole story and either is single threaded performance for example under many applications this 8350fx is 10% slower in performance per clock compared to the phenom ii x6 i owned however under gaming it's around 20% faster why? Out of everything i do gaming is actually one area i did notice a difference when upgrading. Not trying to stick up for Amd or anything they need to redesign their architecture which is what they are doing but its not like their FX CPU's can't game.

 

[szatkus]

I game on my 8350fx and in next gen games this CPU is not the bottleneck. IPC is not the whole story and either is single threaded performance for example under many applications this 8350fx is 10% slower in performance per clock compared to the phenom ii x6 i owned however under gaming it's around 20% faster why?

Probably because FX has more instructions (games actually use them, really) and better optimized those which appeared with Phenom. Maybe larger cache also helps a little. There are many possible variables and gaming is rather peculiar workload.

 

[de5_Roy]

Probably because FX has more instructions (games actually use them, really) and better optimized those which appeared with Phenom. Maybe larger cache also helps a little. There are many possible variables and gaming is rather peculiar workload.

jdwii mentions clock-for-clock performance. fx8350 has a massive clockrate advantage over hex core phenom, more cores, default support for faster memory and better turbo.

 

[jdwii]

I game on my 8350fx and in next gen games this CPU is not the bottleneck. IPC is not the whole story and either is single threaded performance for example under many applications this 8350fx is 10% slower in performance per clock compared to the phenom ii x6 i owned however under gaming it's around 20% faster why?

Probably because FX has more instructions (games actually use them, really) and better optimized those which appeared with Phenom. Maybe larger cache also helps a little. There are many possible variables and gaming is rather peculiar workload.

Yeah that is my guess as well mainly with the added instructions if you look at the 8150fx however the phenom still beats(ties it or comes very close) it most of the time in gaming so its either the recently added instruction sets or maybe some other object.

 

[blackkstar]

Looks like I was pessimistic:

http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/185823-gpu-rumor-mill-leaked-shots-of-gtx-880-surface-point-to-8gb-of-ram-while-amd-plans-august-update

That is a test card, I am betting against 8 GB VRAM on next gen cards...

Every generation you can count on the hardware sites that don't know shit to make a few claims

1. There is an AMD GPU with untapped power, because they don't understand redundancy built into a chip to improve yields and they assume AMD is just like Nvidia that will release a full die and have awful yields.

2. Developer version of cards that ship with much more memory than will be available at retail get headlines of "OMG 8GB CARD SPOTTED!!!! IS THIS WHAT WE GET!?!?!?!"

Stars and Bulldozer are drastically different. Different architectures have strong points and weak points. It seems like a lot of people take Piledriver having bad benchmarks as some sort of revelation that Piledriver is horrible.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/835/9

Wow, amazing. AthlonXP loses to Pentium 4 sometimes. I guess AthlonXP isn't so great!

 

[8350rocks]

ooo cry cry babies all the toms experts laugh at your bull ego whenever and if ever they care to actually read this junk

8350 probably does not even know anyone at amd and he does not even list his stats right... also claimed he had 290x then his stats changed to a dif card.. hey nob your ram is at 2133 remember?

truthfully most games are shit because they a programmed for shit and run on one thread and that is one of purposes of mantle.. to make it easier for idiots. even past the programming.. they suck for the most out of the 150+ i have played maybe 10 are actually worth a recommendation.

ya know... i am pretty fuckn positive that call of duty has prided them selves in the past for achieving 60fps on a console so stfu and get your thumb out of your ass.

maybe all you dumb asses need a vacation to a retard home..

o fyi i could always just make another account if you did cry and report and they actually care... not they do and not that i do

FYI: My twitter account posted pictures of me with John Byrne and about 6-8 others @ AMD HQ in Austin a few weeks ago.

That CPU-Z verification is ages old, that shows my old G.Skill kit of 8 GB DDR3-2400 MHz and my old GPU of Sapphire HD 7870XT. Which have both since been replaced...

CoD cannot get Ghosts to run on a console @ 60 FPS with 1080p resolution reliably, in fact, there was a big raucous about how much trouble they were having with it a little while back. If you are from the CoD crowd, that explains a great deal about your attitude and knowledge, and further conversation is unwarranted beyond this point, as it will fall on deaf ears.

Also, it is called IP Ban, though someone as computer illiterate as you is probably not aware of what that actually does...

 

[8350rocks]

Looks like I was pessimistic:

http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/185823-gpu-rumor-mill-leaked-shots-of-gtx-880-surface-point-to-8gb-of-ram-while-amd-plans-august-update

That is a test card, I am betting against 8 GB VRAM on next gen cards...

Every generation you can count on the hardware sites that don't know shit to make a few claims

1. There is an AMD GPU with untapped power, because they don't understand redundancy built into a chip to improve yields and they assume AMD is just like Nvidia that will release a full die and have awful yields.

2. Developer version of cards that ship with much more memory than will be available at retail get headlines of "OMG 8GB CARD SPOTTED!!!! IS THIS WHAT WE GET!?!?!?!"

Stars and Bulldozer are drastically different. Different architectures have strong points and weak points. It seems like a lot of people take Piledriver having bad benchmarks as some sort of revelation that Piledriver is horrible.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/835/9

Wow, amazing. AthlonXP loses to Pentium 4 sometimes. I guess AthlonXP isn't so great!

^^^^Yep.

 

[palladin9479]

Problem solved. Sorry guys was busy last night and didn't see the troll go into action. As always, when someone is trolling like this the best course of action is to ignore them entirely.

 

[Fidgetmaster]

The FX line has issues man, like the 8350 even in BF4 some are doing really crappy performance....that is not acceptable....

 

[jdwii]

for your information, i am almost a science teacher and i might stay longer to be a professor.

if i had scientific conversations with my peers and professors the way you idiots talk... i would be laughed off campus. none of toms experts read your garbage egoistical conversations. you tards dont even deserve proper grammar

RIIIIIGHTT, a science teacher would spell wast as waist ?. more like a spoiled brat who has no foundation for a rational discussion that resorts to name calling. No matter just switch to your science teacher account because this one will be gone soon.

Well bill nye is a science guy and ken ham was a science teacher so i don't think merica really cares much.

The FX line has issues man, like the 8350 even in BF4 some are doing really crappy performance....that is not acceptable....

? Weird most state the 8350fx above the I5 in this game i have that game and that is one game that uses 6 out of 8 of my cores even in single player with my 770GTX i have everything on ultra except resolution scaling which is at 100%. Don't play much multiplayer but when i played for a few hours it seemed good. Probably had something to do with something else besides the CPU. Also keep in mind people still complain about issues they are generally having on BF4.

 

[gamerk316]

BF4 has always been an odd case, due to a very large speedup on Win8 compared to Win7, likely DX11.2 coming into play. Point being, on Win8, the i5/i7 tend to jump farther ahead, likely because the GPU is being less stressed, so with more pressure on the CPU rather then the GPU, the faster chips, in this case, Intel's, tend to look better. Also have different profiles between SP and MP. Still, at best, 8350~=2600k. But I've seen benches all over the place with that title, and I'm not sure if the various patches have affected performance in any real way.

That's the one major downside to day 1 performance reviews: Within a week or two, most config specific issues get fixed via patch, so within a month, the performance profiles between Intel/AMD and NVIDIA/AMD generally tighten up.

 

[jdwii]

Really one game i have issues with is Simcity which goes into the low 20FPS and that is higher then my X6 Phenom which got to 15Fps at times but still kinda want to always stay at 30+.

 

[palladin9479]

Yes BF4 can be all over the place depending on exactly what your doing and what system your doing it on. SP favors single threaded performance while MP favors four to six threaded performance. Also remember that the performance advantage gained from HT is different from SB/IB and Haswell. Intel adding that 4th ALU helped quite a bit in heavily threaded integer work on the i3/i7, not so much for the i5 (hard enough to keep 3 ALU's busy much less 4).

 

[Fidgetmaster]

That is true, BF4 really is just all over the place....I had to OC my my 920 a good bit to run it smoother without a lot of FPS drops/stutters, Went all the way up to 3.5ghz with stock HSF and 1.1v Core, seems pretty stable, FPS into 70-100ish etc before I would bog down to 45-60 at times. with HT off I was seeing some higher Peaks but the minimum is raised with HT on, thats what I wanted seems smoother to me with it on vs off despite everyone saying to turn it off in BF4....

I still get a really weird/intermittent Lag/stutter that last like a split second with major fps drop.... Game is just weird depending what Map you are on....

 

[palladin9479]

I still get a really weird/intermittent Lag/stutter that last like a split second with major fps drop.... Game is just weird depending what Map you are on....

This is why you want an i5 at a minimum, but preferably a fx8 or i7. There is a ton of dynamic object interaction happening and it's all very well threaded. So if your sitting there with nothing going on it'll only use one to two threads, but if there are a ton of people blowing stuff up with lots of environment effects then it'll six or more "cores" (actually it's a ton of threads that all get executed). It's a very dynamic platform that only use's resources when it needs them, which rarely happens in sanitized benchmark environments.

 

[Fidgetmaster]

No its not that... the 920 is doing fine....the usage is fairly high all the time even with HT going....

 

[gamerk316]

It likely is. From an OS perspective, the i7 920 can only handle 4 threads at a time, and BF4 uses about a dozen helper threads. So what happens, if one of those helper threads need to run, is one of the two heavy threads, either the main render or main program thread, needs to be stopped to allow it to run, causing a latency spike. That's probably what you are seeing. Hence why an i3 can get good FPS numbers, buck such at gameplay. That's your latency coming into play.

 

[vmN]

It likely is. From an OS perspective, the i7 920 can only handle 4 threads at a time, and BF4 uses about a dozen helper threads. So what happens, if one of those helper threads need to run, is one of the two heavy threads, either the main render or main program thread, needs to be stopped to allow it to run, causing a latency spike. That's probably what you are seeing. Hence why an i3 can get good FPS numbers, buck such at gameplay. That's your latency coming into play.

The core I7 920 can handle 8 threads simultaneously.

 

[gamerk316]

It likely is. From an OS perspective, the i7 920 can only handle 4 threads at a time, and BF4 uses about a dozen helper threads. So what happens, if one of those helper threads need to run, is one of the two heavy threads, either the main render or main program thread, needs to be stopped to allow it to run, causing a latency spike. That's probably what you are seeing. Hence why an i3 can get good FPS numbers, buck such at gameplay. That's your latency coming into play.

The core I7 920 can handle 8 threads simultaneously.

Ok, I forgot HTT, but its worth noting that HTT has its own limitations, so certain workloads CAN'T be run on a HTT/Physical core at the same time. Also, newer (SB and later) chips have a better HTT setup, which could also be affecting performance somewhat.