Where is AMD going with CPU's?

[TheMagicalWallaby]

I have noticed that they have manily been focusing on the GPU's and APU's, but why not their CPU's. They seem to not be doing anything while Intel is beating the crap out of them. AMD doesn't even seem to be trying to fight Intel in the CPU market.

So what is AMD doing?

 

[lowriderflow]

THey have a new lineup coming... they're changing architectures. probably not out until late 2014 or early 15

i5 quad core beats the FX8350 in 'most games' now... but the games coded for use of 8 cores the FX usually wins. more and more games goin forward wil be coded for 8 cores since both the new consoles are 8core amd CPUs.

 

[TheMagicalWallaby]

THey have a new lineup coming... they're changing architectures. probably not out until late 2014 or early 15

i5 quad core beats the FX8350 in 'most games' now... but the games coded for use of 8 cores the FX usually wins. more and more games goin forward wil be coded for 8 cores since both the new consoles are 8core amd CPUs.

I figured that the 8 cores would be in use due to the new consoles, hence the reason why I have an FX-8350.

But now that Intel has 8 core CPU's, do you think AMD will try to beat that, or stick with 8.

 

[daswilhelm]

I have noticed that they have manily been focusing on the GPU's and APU's, but why not their CPU's. They seem to not be doing anything while Intel is beating the crap out of them. A quad core i5 4670k was equal to an 8 core FX-8350, and now their are 8 core i5's. I imagine those would beat the crap out of AMD, not to mention the i7's. AMD doesn't even seem to be trying to fight Intel in the CPU market.

So what is AMD doing?

there are 8 core i5's?

 

[TheMagicalWallaby]

I have noticed that they have manily been focusing on the GPU's and APU's, but why not their CPU's. They seem to not be doing anything while Intel is beating the crap out of them. A quad core i5 4670k was equal to an 8 core FX-8350, and now their are 8 core i5's. I imagine those would beat the crap out of AMD, not to mention the i7's. AMD doesn't even seem to be trying to fight Intel in the CPU market.

So what is AMD doing?

there are 8 core i5's?

Whoops I made a mistake.

 

[JOOK-D]

THey have a new lineup coming... they're changing architectures. probably not out until late 2014 or early 15

i5 quad core beats the FX8350 in 'most games' now... but the games coded for use of 8 cores the FX usually wins. more and more games goin forward wil be coded for 8 cores since both the new consoles are 8core amd CPUs.

Well the i5 beats the FX8350 in just about every game now. The only instance I've seen the FX win in is Crysis 3, and barely.

Don't forget 2 cores of the consoles are reserved for the OS and all that nonsense.

Multi-threaded games are still heavily reliant on having main threads that do the brunt of the work (loves intel's higher per-core performance) and subthreads that do a little work, which are of little importance. Hence why even in multithreaded games the intel often still pulls ahead.

I've heard the prediction for the new architecture being as late as 2016. In any case, their whole 'moar corez' platform took a nose-dive since release for the most part.

 

[JOOK-D]

I have noticed that they have manily been focusing on the GPU's and APU's, but why not their CPU's. They seem to not be doing anything while Intel is beating the crap out of them. A quad core i5 4670k was equal to an 8 core FX-8350, and now their are 8 core i5's. I imagine those would beat the crap out of AMD, not to mention the i7's. AMD doesn't even seem to be trying to fight Intel in the CPU market.

So what is AMD doing?

there are 8 core i5's?

Yes the new i5 4690 and i7 4790 CPU's have 8 cores.

I'm afraid not. The i5 is still 4 cores 4 threads, and the 4790 is 4 cores 8 threads.

The only 8 cores intel CPU's I've heard about are the extreme series.

 

[Gam3r01]

The place I want to see AMD going is full 8 physical core CPUs, none of this resource sharing modules, stronger cores etc.
Pretty much, new architecture, and abandon the AM3+ socket.

Phenom III true 8 cores are all I want to hear.

 

[TheMagicalWallaby]

I have noticed that they have manily been focusing on the GPU's and APU's, but why not their CPU's. They seem to not be doing anything while Intel is beating the crap out of them. A quad core i5 4670k was equal to an 8 core FX-8350, and now their are 8 core i5's. I imagine those would beat the crap out of AMD, not to mention the i7's. AMD doesn't even seem to be trying to fight Intel in the CPU market.

So what is AMD doing?

there are 8 core i5's?

Yes the new i5 4690 and i7 4790 CPU's have 8 cores.

I'm afraid not. The i5 is still 4 cores 4 threads, and the 4790 is 4 cores 8 threads.

The only 8 cores intel CPU's I've heard about are the extreme series.

Whoops I misread something.

 

[sapperastro]

AMD have a couple of major issues; They don't own a fab anymore, so while intel can decrease their nm size, AMD has to reply on other fabs and what they are tooled for. Intel is heading for 14nm while AMD is currently, and from what global foundries have said, stuck at 28nm for the time being. That means less transistors. Of course, the 28nm (even the 32nm of piledriver..) isn't really mature, and I have no doubt it can be improved and matured for much better performance, it still cannot really beat chips on 14nm that have a world of advantages on how many transistors can be placed on the chip.

Money. While AMD is once again heading back into the black from debt, their revenue base doesn't even approach the amount of money intel spends on R&D alone...think about that for a few seconds. Really, it is a miracle that AMD held the top spot for a few years at all, and is even somewhat competitive with intel now. By all rights, intel should be even further in front with the money they make.

The bulldozer architecture was an attempt to innovate their way past intels lead. It didn't work. Innovating has worked for them before, and really, they don't have any other way of catching intel but by using their resources a lot more wisely than intel. They cannot turn on the money hose and blast their way to the front like intel can.

Of course, there is a catch 22 system now in play. AMD needs money. Since their bulldozer experiment hasn't worked so far, enthusiasts are largely turning to intel. AMD knows this, so they turn to their money making lines; GPUs, APUs, and other lower end chips, etc. On top of this, they didn't build a Steam roller server chip, so they definately won't waste the megabucks on tooling just to make an FX line of steamroller chips that sell in small quantities.

Anyway, that 8350 of yours will still be good enough in gaming for years yet. i wouldn't worry about it if I were you. We will see what AMD can bring to the table in the future, but unless they make money, there won't be an AMD to make anything...and believe me, I don't want that to happen...nobody here will want that to happen. i can just see the $500+ i3 from intel....

 

[Calculatron]

AMD is marked to start production of their "K12" architecture in 2016; it's going to be ARM-based. Meanwhile, they plan on making an APU that will share ARM and X86 cores. (Skybridge, I think?)

Either way, I plan on keeping a close eye on AMD and their offerings. However, at the rate things are going, my next rig will likely be an Intel build. (Only the future will tell, though.)