AMD ''Vishera'' FX-Series CPU Pricing Leaked

[DjEaZy]

... i hope, that it will be good... i own FX-8120... a good multitasker... but some improvements on power usage side, less heat in OC and bit better performance would be nice... wee need competition... badly...

 

[davemaster84]

[citation][nom]southernshark[/nom]I still feel like these are not really 8 core processor, but more like 4 core + processors. I am still not trading in my Phenom II 6 core for one of these........ which is sad.[/citation]

They are 8 core processors, maybe in the design there are only 4 cores but it has eight integer cores, the 8150 was most of the time even with the x6 1100t , only a few times behind and also way better in some other things. I think there's no way your x6 will be keeping up with the 8350

 

[Onus]

The great majority of consumers do not overclock. Releasing a CPU that performs poorly at stock [vs. Intel] makes the CPU irrelevant to the mass market, no matter how well it overclocks. AMD's stock performance needs to be worth the price.

 

[bak0n]

[citation][nom]memadmax[/nom]How about some benchmarks instead?[/citation]

When did "pricing leaked" equate to "we have one on hand"?

 

[master_chen]

Even after this is released, I'll still recommend Phenom II to any of my clients that would wish for a trully high-quality AMD-based build.
I'll easily recommend Phenom II to anyone anytime, instead of a lame fail that is the entire FX line.

P.S. Faildozer's inept fanboys butthurt incoming!...in 3...2...1...

 

[luciferano]

[citation][nom]belardo[/nom]When Intel's Haswell comes out, it will still be 77w while gaining 10% more performance.The FX 8350 will need to equal the i7-3770 for anyone to take notice... At $250, to only equal the $215~230 i5-3570/K CPUs ($190 locally) with a hotter CPU without PCIe 3.0 or native USB3.0 support just won't impress anyone.Actually, PCIe 3.0 missing will always be a major hit on AMD. I'm not sure why they are even bothering with this?[/citation]

PCIe 3.0 is not a big deal at all, especially for CF where the second/third/fourth cards don't need as much bandwidth as the first one. Being native or not is also not a big deal for USB 3.0 (which is something that might be fixed in a new chipset anyway). Also, even the FX-8120 has better fully threaded performance than the i5s and the 83xx models would easily have much better fully threaded performance than any Haswell i5.

Sure, gaming performance isn't stellar at stock configurations, but for enthusiasts, that's easily rectified with fairly quick and easy core configuration modification and CPU/NB overclocking as well as CPU frequency overclocking. The FX-83xx models would probably be able to keep with the K edition i5s from Haswell without any issues if you simply spend a few minutes of work on them. The FX-8120 at $150 or $160 is already a very tempting offer for true computer enthusiasts. If the 83xx models can overclock much better at a given power consumption like they should, then assuming that they launch with adequate pricing, they could be great options.

 

[ubercake]

The prices seem good, but are these things going to make AMD competitive from a gaming standpoint or do we have to wait for an architecture upgrade (ie AM4) to see this?

 

[luciferano]

[citation][nom]willard[/nom]The Windows 8 changes he's referring to have absolutely nothing to do with Intel. It has to do with how Windows was scheduling threads and not taking into account that BD chips really have half as many cores as advertised. The performance gain comes from scheduling threads on different modules to help alleviate BD's crippling floating point performance problems.[/citation]

The scheduling improvements are about solving the front-end bottle-neck of each module (the front end is not sufficient for two Bulldozer integer cores) just as much as having only one FPU per module, if not more so. It also has to do with scheduling threads that rely on the same data sets to the same modules so that they can share data more quickly when they need to. Also, there are eight integer cores, not four, so it is a true 8-core CPU.

 

[master_chen]

Are these things going to make AMD competitive from a gaming standpoint?

Only with Llano/Kaveri, and not that much.

Do we have to wait for an architecture upgrade (AM4/AM4+ etc) to see this?

Basically this.

 

[luciferano]

[citation][nom]belardo[/nom]Keep in mind, Windows8 may improve Intel performance too. Windows8 runs pretty smooth, even on rather old 5year tech. But Win8 metro interface/retarded charms makes Windows8 a worthless OS.*I* will be buying my Win7pro-64bit next week or so for my next PC upgrade... $140. When I could simply use one of my 3 dusty WinXP licences to get Win8Pro for $40... Windows8 isn't worth $40 to me... thats a night of drinking at a club in which I'll get something out of it.[/citation]

Windows 8 improves AMD far more than it does Intel. It improves Intel because it is a lighter, faster OS. It improves AMD not only because of that, but also because MS is adding optimal scheduling support for AMD's modular architecture.

 

[master_chen]

It is a true 8-core CPU.

Here's a present for you, enjoy. >: )

 

[luciferano]

The prices seem good, but are these things going to make AMD competitive from a gaming standpoint or do we have to wait for an architecture upgrade (ie AM4) to see this?

For stock core configuration, excluding Windows 8, you might need to wait for Steamroller to get what you want. I've read that Steamroller will be on AM3+, so unless what I've read is wrong, you probably won't have to wait for AM4 which probably won't be around until late 2014 or early to mid 2015.

 

[ojas]

October is a very exciting month.

 

[ashinms]

[citation][nom]yobobjm[/nom]If that 8350 has anywhere near that 20% increase promised, and is still a 125w tdp, an upgrade will be a no brainer. I hope AMD doesn't dissapoint this time.[/citation]

Well, that's what you can extrapolate from the trinity benchmark, so I would say it's pretty much a done deal.

 

[spookyman]

And yet Intel is in the lead

 

[antilycus]

TOMS, when I click SUBMIT it takes me CARS.com and never posts my comment. FIX IT NOW

 

[antilycus]

to recap. the FX series isn't mean for desktop computing. Now everyone only cares about games. Most game programmers rely on the kernel (and windows kernels suck at this) to manage their thread management.

I run windows on top of Linux kerenel (which ends up managing the windows kernel) and I see a boot up and shutdown time of under 20 seconds. If you want thread management, ditch windows (yes even 8 and 7). As soon as Linux gets a driver to get direct access to the GPU, MS is in a for a nightmare. They can't write thread managment and either can game developres. No...they really cant. Stop trying to say otherwise, they really cant.

 

[antilycus]

above is for Windows Server 2008 + exchange servers + iis servers + SQL Servers + all the other darn servers. Every time I get better performance from Linux over Windows(server or home)

 

[dissbelief]

[citation][nom]master_chen[/nom]Even after this is released, I'll still recommend Phenom II to any of my clients that would wish for a trully high-quality AMD-based build.I'll easily recommend Phenom II to anyone anytime, instead of a lame fail that is the entire FX line.P.S. Faildozer's inept fanboys butthurt incoming!...in 3...2...1...[/citation]
Can we get something other than fanboyism and trolling?

 

[halcyon]

I think I'll give the 8350 an opportunity in my next VM host. I know AMD can do it, I know they can.

 

[halcyon]

[citation][nom]dissbelief[/nom]Can we get something other than fanboyism and trolling?[/citation]
You do know you're at THG don't you?

 

[nforce4max]

Still rocking my aging p2 x4 820 with L3 unlock, I hope that Steamroller makes its way to AM3+ before moving onto apu and server only.

 

[dissbelief]

[citation][nom]halcyon[/nom]You do know you're at THG don't you?[/citation]
I forgot.

As for the 8350, wait for the benchmarks and the price to drop.

 

[halcyon]

[citation][nom]dissbelief[/nom]I forgot. As for the 8350, wait for the benchmarks and the price to drop.[/citation]
8 actual, low-cost, cores with 32GB of RAM and 2xV.Raptors in RAID 0 and 2xSSDs in RAID0 would could make a pretty decent, low-cost, gadget for OS testing and network simulation. Yummy.

 

[ashinms]

[citation][nom]master_chen[/nom]Even after this is released, I'll still recommend Phenom II to any of my clients that would wish for a trully high-quality AMD-based build.I'll easily recommend Phenom II to anyone anytime, instead of a lame fail that is the entire FX line.P.S. Faildozer's inept fanboys butthurt incoming!...in 3...2...1...[/citation]

Here, allow me to respond to your troll bait:

Why? Vishera is pretty much an eight core phenom ii. Integer IPC per integer core was pretty much the same as phenom ii with the original bulldozer. The only difference is that the integer cores share some resources. Benchmarks on single threaded floating point math show that at stock clocks, bulldozer actually matches the 2600. On top of that, bulldozer and vishera support modern X86 extensions that phenom ii doesn't. You saying that even after vishera lands, you will still recommend phenom is a bit sad to me, and the stupid namecalling shows me your obvious level of immaturity.