# AMD "Vishera" FX-Series CPU Specifications Confirmed



## btarunr (Aug 27, 2012)

A leaked AMD document for retail partners spelled out specifications of the first three FX "Vishera" processors by AMD. The new CPUs incorporate AMD's "Piledriver" architecture, and much like the first-generation "Zambezi" chips, will launch as one each of eight-core, six-core, and four-core chips. The eight-core FX-8350 is confirmed to ship with 4.00 GHz nominal clock speed, with 4.20 GHz TurboCore speed. The six-core FX-6300 ships with 3.50 GHz nominal, and 4.10 GHz TurboCore speed. The quad-core FX-4320, on the other hand, ships with the same clock speeds as the FX-8350. In addition, the document confirmed clock speeds of several socket FM2 A-series APUs, such as the A10-5700 and the A8-5500. 





*View at TechPowerUp Main Site*


----------



## DarkOCean (Aug 27, 2012)

65w for the apus nice.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Aug 27, 2012)

about time these showed up. I wasnt expecting PD to be anything bigger than BD, I suspect some fixes to what was actually broken in BD- Power draw and Single/Dual Thread IPC


----------



## librin.so.1 (Aug 27, 2012)

I can already see myself bugging my retailer to daily, ask if FX-8350 is "already in stock"; after it gets released. Too bad hardware is always at least a week or two behind in availability here where I live. But still - these are great news! Kinda foreshadowing that the Piledriver is right around the corner and is going to "show up" soon! Weee~! ^___^


----------



## eidairaman1 (Aug 27, 2012)

Ya Id like to see reviews of it here actually, Not that My Bro needs it


----------



## TheLostSwede (Aug 27, 2012)

E2-1800 @ 65W TDP


----------



## LAN_deRf_HA (Aug 27, 2012)

I figure it'll finally beat out the old X6s (across the board, instead of half half) and find it's way to under $200 with more tame power consumption. Probably not a total disaster like BD.

Sad this is the limit of my expectations though.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Aug 27, 2012)

LAN_deRf_HA said:


> I figure it'll finally beat out the old X6s (across the board, instead of half half) and find it's way to under $200 with more tame power consumption. Probably not a total disaster like BD.
> 
> Sad this is the limit of my expectations though.



which is fine, considering even x4 BEs gave FX 81** series a hard run while costing way less


----------



## HumanSmoke (Aug 27, 2012)

200MHz max turbo ? I guess AMD were really gunning for that "4GHz stock" marketing bullet point


----------



## eidairaman1 (Aug 27, 2012)

IIRC PD FX and APUs were supposed to have Clock Meshing



HumanSmoke said:


> 200MHz max turbo ? I guess AMD were really gunning for that "4GHz stock" marketing bullet point



thats what the average joe still looks at actually ive noticed


----------



## Zubasa (Aug 27, 2012)

I might trade in my 8150 for a 8350, depends on how this turns out to be.


----------



## Frick (Aug 27, 2012)

What is "AMD Wireless Display"? Sounds cool.

Also, the A10 looks hugely interesting.


----------



## NC37 (Aug 27, 2012)

PD will likely be what BD should have been, an actual upgrade over the Phenoms. But it still won't touch Intel.

Also consider that those cores will prolly be the same as BD. Not actual cores, just AMD's version of Hyper Threading.


----------



## TheLostSwede (Aug 27, 2012)

Frick said:


> What is "AMD Wireless Display"? Sounds cool.
> 
> Also, the A10 looks hugely interesting.



Wi-Fi Direct/Miracast - http://www.wi-fi.org/media/press-re...tified-miracast™-deliver-display-applications


----------



## TheLostSwede (Aug 27, 2012)

NC37 said:


> PD will likely be what BD should have been, an actual upgrade over the Phenoms. But it still won't touch Intel.
> 
> Also consider that those cores will prolly be the same as BD. Not actual cores, just AMD's version of Hyper Threading.



Clearly you don't understand how it works then. Hyper Threading is virtual CPU cores, i.e. they're not physically inside the CPU, but it's rather the ability of one core to run multiple (two in Intel's case) threads.

AMD's route is very different, as their CPU's actually have the stated amount of cores. However, each core doesn't have a dedicated FPU and the cache is shared between the two integer processors.

Neither is ideal, but AMD clearly has a lack of FPU power and the shared cache caused some additional head ache, especially during bad predictions. But no, BD/PD is not AMD's version of Hyper Threading, instead it's AMD's attempt at adding more integer performance at the cost of FPU performance which doesn't really make sense... Now if they could do Hyper Threading on the FPU...


----------



## Gede Widjaya (Aug 27, 2012)

AMD FX 4320 will be my next upgrade, base clock of 4GHz looks awesome


----------



## dj-electric (Aug 27, 2012)

Mehhhh, with a lot of air


----------



## Melvis (Aug 27, 2012)

Well im ready and waiting, ive got my GA-990FXA-UD3 mobo sitting here waiting for a decent CPU to put in it. (alot better then my 965) Im looking at you 8350....


----------



## NC37 (Aug 27, 2012)

TheLostSwede said:


> Clearly you don't understand how it works then. Hyper Threading is virtual CPU cores, i.e. they're not physically inside the CPU, but it's rather the ability of one core to run multiple (two in Intel's case) threads.
> 
> AMD's route is very different, as their CPU's actually have the stated amount of cores. However, each core doesn't have a dedicated FPU and the cache is shared between the two integer processors.
> 
> Neither is ideal, but AMD clearly has a lack of FPU power and the shared cache caused some additional head ache, especially during bad predictions. But no, BD/PD is not AMD's version of Hyper Threading, instead it's AMD's attempt at adding more integer performance at the cost of FPU performance which doesn't really make sense... Now if they could do Hyper Threading on the FPU...



Oh I know how it works.

But it depends on what you count as the core. If you count the module as a core then AMD is not making 8 core CPUs but Quad core. If you count the integer processors per module then you got your 8 core CPU. 

Its the closest term I can think to really call it if you consider it as a quad module, which I do. Each core does the work of two. Resources shared. Yeah its not virtual but it still isn't separate physical cores like it was with Phenom. 

Personally, yeah I want to see AMD make something competitive but I cannot see this design as a true 8 core machine. When you consider that AMD can't make it's own HTT tech without paying Intel, this is the best solution AMD could pull. Is it a good start since it isn't virtual, but there should be an * by the 8 core part.

AMD in their past docs have listed the FX cores in reference to the module itself. The core would consist of 2...etc. So if AMD says those are the cores then by their own definition these are quad cores. But for advertising that just doesn't sound good enough. Quad core that does 8T without virtual HTT tech....nah, not gonna sell people on that. So, name it 8 core.

Will I buy a PD in the end, likely. I've been waiting for it. But I'm not gonna get hopes up then be disappointed. PD originally looked good on paper when the first info on it started coming out. But since then...10-15% improvement...ehhh.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Aug 27, 2012)

Melvis said:


> Well im ready and waiting, ive got my GA-990FXA-UD3 mobo sitting here waiting for a decent CPU to put in it. (alot better then my 965) Im looking at you 8350....



not really actually- You can only hope the PD is better than BD clock for clock. After BD being a disappointment in gaming Im not holding my breath. Ill take this with a grain of salt till the chips are tested here at TPU.

http://www.techspot.com/review/452-amd-bulldozer-fx-cpus/page10.html



NC37 said:


> Oh I know how it works.
> 
> But it depends on what you count as the core. If you count the module as a core then AMD is not making 8 core CPUs but Quad core. If you count the integer processors per module then you got your 8 core CPU.
> 
> ...





TheLostSwede said:


> Clearly you don't understand how it works then. Hyper Threading is virtual CPU cores, i.e. they're not physically inside the CPU, but it's rather the ability of one core to run multiple (two in Intel's case) threads.
> 
> AMD's route is very different, as their CPU's actually have the stated amount of cores. However, each core doesn't have a dedicated FPU and the cache is shared between the two integer processors.
> 
> Neither is ideal, but AMD clearly has a lack of FPU power and the shared cache caused some additional head ache, especially during bad predictions. But no, BD/PD is not AMD's version of Hyper Threading, instead it's AMD's attempt at adding more integer performance at the cost of FPU performance which doesn't really make sense... Now if they could do Hyper Threading on the FPU...



Read this Please for a Decent Understanding of AMDs Bulldozer design

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulldozer_(microarchitecture)#Architecture


----------



## Hustler (Aug 27, 2012)

Well unless these new CPU's have increased their IPC rate by at least 30% over Bulldozer, which obviously they wont, they're still a waste of time.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Aug 27, 2012)

Hustler said:


> Well unless these new CPU's have increased their IPC rate by at least 30% over Bulldozer, which obviously they wont, they're still a waste of time.



that isn't plausible because AMD had to develop these in response to BDs issues. The biggest complaint of Zambezi was the Single/Dual Threaded Performance was not equal or greater than Deneb/Thuban


----------



## librin.so.1 (Aug 27, 2012)

Hustler said:


> Well unless these new CPU's have increased their IPC rate by at least 30% over Bulldozer, which obviously they wont, they're still a waste of time.



Indeed - You did waste some [unmeasured] amount of time to write that post. Huh! BD's and PD's time wasting circuits really do their job well - they even managed to make _You_ waste time! Astounding! I'm _definitely_ getting myself a PD now.


----------



## HossHuge (Aug 27, 2012)

Most of this info is known.  How about a date?


----------



## eidairaman1 (Aug 27, 2012)

HossHuge said:


> Most of this info is known.  How about a date?



Probably Wont be till FY2013


----------



## slybunda (Aug 27, 2012)

looks like another fail from amd. 4.2ghz clock speed and will probably be on par with a 3ghz ivybridge using half the number of cores.
move along folks nothing to see here.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Aug 27, 2012)

slybunda said:


> looks like another fail from amd. 4.2ghz clock speed and will probably be on par with a 3ghz ivybridge using half the number of cores.
> move along folks nothing to see here.



so wheres your system specs?


----------



## Lionheart (Aug 27, 2012)

slybunda said:


> looks like another fail from amd. 4.2ghz clock speed and will probably be on par with a 3ghz ivybridge using half the number of cores.
> move along folks nothing to see here.



All I see is a troll


----------



## eidairaman1 (Aug 27, 2012)

Lionheart said:


> All I see is a troll



yup i noticed this, Anything that relates to AMD and CPU all the fucktard thread crappers come out.

The 2 that posted recently amount to nothing honestly- they havent helped any users out solving problems or nothing


----------



## HossHuge (Aug 27, 2012)

eidairaman1 said:


> Probably Wont be till FY2013



 Hopefully Q4 but u may be right.  If it's in 2013, fail.

Production of AMD "Piledriver" FX Processors Begin Q3 2012


----------



## eidairaman1 (Aug 27, 2012)

HossHuge said:


> Hopefully Q4 but u may be right.  If it's in 2013, fail.
> 
> Production of AMD "Piledriver" FX Processors Begin Q3 2012



Fiscal Year 2013 starts in October of this year so it would technically be Q4 by the Calandar Year for the US


----------



## Super XP (Aug 27, 2012)

Can't wait for some Benchmarks.


----------



## librin.so.1 (Aug 27, 2012)

IDK, in the news post that came right before this one, the very first sentence reads:


			
				btarunr said:
			
		

> It has been known since Computex that AMD plans to synchronize launch of its second-generation "Trinity" desktop APUs and second-generation "Vishera" desktop CPUs, in late-Q3 or early-Q4, 2012.



In other words - according to that post, they are planning to launch 'em all Pretty Soon Now™.


----------



## Melvis (Aug 27, 2012)

eidairaman1 said:


> not really actually- You can only hope the PD is better than BD clock for clock. After BD being a disappointment in gaming Im not holding my breath. Ill take this with a grain of salt till the chips are tested here at TPU.
> 
> http://www.techspot.com/review/452-amd-bulldozer-fx-cpus/page10.html



Thats what i mean, i sure do hope there better then BD and PII, if not ill just get a better Phenom II and call it a yr.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Aug 27, 2012)

Melvis said:


> Thats what i mean, i sure do hope there better then BD and PII, if not ill just get a better Phenom II and call it a yr.



you really dont need a better Phenom II, if You can get the 965 BE to 3.7 GHz or higher youre pretty much golden already.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Aug 27, 2012)

eidairaman1 said:


> you really dont need a better Phenom II, if You can get the 965 BE to 3.7 GHz or higher youre pretty much golden already.




aww dont say that, Golden shmolden i need moar cpus, imho Vishera will be out partying with me this christmass, im lead to believe this by the start up of PR leaks and the price cuts across the board, a typical Amd tactic 2-3 months prior to release to clear stocks, also with vishera already taped out and the fx4130 out in the wild it is perfectly reasonable to assume they are on course to have enough 6-8 cores binned by xmass all imho, admittedly a very eager dude tho.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Aug 27, 2012)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> aww dont say that, Golden shmolden i need moar cpus, imho Vishera will be out partying with me this christmass, im lead to believe this by the start up of PR leaks and the price cuts across the board, a typical Amd tactic 2-3 months prior to release to clear stocks, also with vishera already taped out and the fx4130 out in the wild it is perfectly reasonable to assume they are on course to have enough 6-8 cores binned by xmass all imho, admittedly a very eager dude tho.



He was talking about if Vishera isnt any better than BD.


----------



## librin.so.1 (Aug 27, 2012)

Based on my experience with BD, I would choose 8 PD "cores" for compiling over a supercharged PII or Intel's [lol]HyperThreading[/lol].


----------



## eidairaman1 (Aug 27, 2012)

Ya but you have to realize it may not be for gaming. Plus when you look at a Quad Core (Phenom II X4) vs a Dual Module 2 thread CPU (FX 41**) Gaming Performance is what the PHII has over it. Only time a Quad core gets bested is by the 81** series which then the PH II X6 bests the 81** series. Also not everyone can afford to get an "8 Core" CPU

If the Single/dual thread performance is much higher than BD ever was and higher than Phenom II it will sell better than BD ever did. Most who already had a PHII didnt upgrade to BD after seeing performance numbers, either they stuck with their PHII, overclocked it or switched to Intel


----------



## repman244 (Aug 27, 2012)

I hope PD is at least 10% faster than BD and that they also lowered the power consumption.


----------



## librin.so.1 (Aug 27, 2012)

@eidairaman1 last time I checked, compiling wasn't a form of gaming 
*sigh* I do a lot more of it than gaming these days...
P.S. I have noticed that "using" HT "cores" for compiling is worse than *not* using it. It just makes things choke up. :shadedshu


----------



## eidairaman1 (Aug 27, 2012)

Vinska said:


> @eidairaman1 last time I checked, compiling wasn't a form of gaming
> *sigh* I do a lot more of it than gaming these days...
> P.S. I have noticed that "using" HT "cores" for compiling is worse than *not* using it. It just makes things choke up. :shadedshu



for most consumers here they game more, Im sure the BD shines in stuff other than gaming but If AMD is to acutally do well they need to fix that minor flaw. This same stuff happened during the Pentium 4 era, except AMD actually gained the upper hand with both the Athlon XP and then Athlon 64.


----------



## ryanmartin (Aug 27, 2012)

TheLostSwede said:


> E2-1800 @ 65W TDP



I've heard its only 18W. Maybe its a spec sheet error.


----------



## xenocide (Aug 27, 2012)

Vinska said:


> Based on my experience with BD, I would choose 8 PD "cores" for compiling over a supercharged PII or Intel's [lol]HyperThreading[/lol].



HyperThreading may seem "lol" but the fact is Intel's CPU's are powerful enough that even with it being a kind of hacked on feature they shine.  The numbers don't lie;  http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/434?vs=287



eidairaman1 said:


> Ya but you have to realize it may not be for gaming. Plus when you look at a Quad Core (Phenom II X4) vs a Dual Module 2 thread CPU (FX 41**) Gaming Performance is what the PHII has over it. Only time a Quad core gets bested is by the 81** series which then the PH II X6 bests the 81** series. Also not everyone can afford to get an "8 Core" CPU
> 
> If the Single/dual thread performance is much higher than BD ever was and higher than Phenom II it will sell better than BD ever did. Most who already had a PHII didnt upgrade to BD after seeing performance numbers, either they stuck with their PHII, overclocked it or switched to Intel



Basically the new design caused a hit on per thread performance but you now could run 8 threads so it was supposed to be an even trade off.  The downside was they didn't consider that most applications (if someone brings up compiling or video-editing I will choke them, you are incredibly niche and make up less of the market than gamers even) do not use more than 2-4 threads, so Intel's offerings and even AMD's older offerings were better.  Not sure why but Tom's Hardware also noticed the FX series bottlenecked GPU's like crazy.

I hope Vishera is a marked improvement at least for AMD's sake.  I honestly am pretty pleased with having gone for SB instead of waiting for BD :x



eidairaman1 said:


> for most consumers here they game more, Im sure the BD shines in stuff other than gaming but If AMD is to acutally do well they need to fix that minor flaw. This same stuff happened during the Pentium 4 era, except AMD actually gained the upper hand with both the Athlon XP and then Athlon 64.



Role-reversal is fun like that.  I wouldn't say BD "shines" in anything.  I'm sure I'll get crucified for that, but everything I've seen indicates that in an optimal environment (basically one that heavily favors AMD) it is at least on par for SB\IB chips, but the remaining 90%+ of the time Intel edges them out.  I would say this is kind of more troubling for AMD than Netburst was for Intel.  Intel had tons of capital and a massive market share, so gambling on a new architecture was acceptable.  AMD really has neither of those, so BD being released in the condition it was in was a huge risk.  Luckily their GPU and APU sales are doing great.


----------



## iO (Aug 27, 2012)

Sweet. My brother gets a FX-8350 and i´ll get his 8150


----------



## AvonX (Aug 27, 2012)

I think AMD fans should buy vishera to support them if they want to see another performance desktop cpu from AMD. Because the word on the street says that they wont be doing performance desktop cpus after vishera piledriver is released.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Aug 27, 2012)

AvonX said:


> I think AMD fans should buy vishera to support them if they want to see another performance desktop cpu from AMD. Because the word on the street says that they wont be doing performance desktop cpus after vishera piledriver is released.



Cant see that being the case, imho vishera May be the last desktop cpu persay, as what follows will allways be an APU from there on, this would fit in with their HSA push and does not mean there wont be a high performance part, just it will be different from its prior gen.


----------



## TheLaughingMan (Aug 27, 2012)

AvonX said:


> I think AMD fans should buy vishera to support them if they want to see another performance desktop cpu from AMD. Because the word on the street says that they wont be doing performance desktop cpus after vishera piledriver is released.



That is not true. They current don't plan to release another dedicated CPU. The next generation is suppose to be improvements in the core design, drop to smaller fab, and addition of a on-die GPU. This would bring their top end CPU's in line with Intel current model of including a on-die GPU on every chip.

The question there would be will it be wasted space or will AMD be smart enough to leverage that extra GPU to its advantage on a software side. Example: While NOT gaming, AMD ZeroCore can turn your dedicated GPU completely off and handle day to day tasks with the on-die GPU. OpenCL and Direct Compute used to run physics calculations on the on-die while dedicated card renders game. etc.


----------



## pantherx12 (Aug 27, 2012)

AMD need to hurry up and release high end cpus with GPU cores built in, if they push open cl hard that will solve the weak points of the CPU, I think that's what they are aiming anyway.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Aug 27, 2012)

TheLaughingMan said:


> That is not true. They current don't plan to release another dedicated CPU. The next generation is suppose to be improvements in the core design, drop to smaller fab, and addition of a on-die GPU. This would bring their top end CPU's in line with Intel current model of including a on-die GPU on every chip.
> 
> The question there would be will it be wasted space or will AMD be smart enough to leverage that extra GPU to its advantage on a software side. Example: While NOT gaming, AMD ZeroCore can turn your dedicated GPU completely off and handle day to day tasks with the on-die GPU. OpenCL and Direct Compute used to run physics calculations on the on-die while dedicated card renders game. etc.



so pretty much what i said with more words, ill bloat my waffle next time


----------



## NHKS (Aug 27, 2012)

AvonX said:


> I think AMD fans should buy vishera to support them if they want to see another performance desktop cpu from AMD. Because the word on the street says that they wont be doing performance desktop cpus after vishera piledriver is released.



that 'word on the street'(abt AMD's high end cpus) may have spread faster than BD's gaming capabilities, but apparently AMD has denied it according to this info and quoting AMD's reply:


> AMD remains committed to the performance processor market



A high end desktop-CPU market with just Intel as player would be just boring..


----------



## AvonX (Aug 27, 2012)

TheLaughingMan said:


> That is not true. They current don't plan to release another dedicated CPU. The next generation is suppose to be improvements in the core design, drop to smaller fab, and addition of a on-die GPU. This would bring their top end CPU's in line with Intel current model of including a on-die GPU on every chip.
> 
> The question there would be will it be wasted space or will AMD be smart enough to leverage that extra GPU to its advantage on a software side. Example: While NOT gaming, AMD ZeroCore can turn your dedicated GPU completely off and handle day to day tasks with the on-die GPU. OpenCL and Direct Compute used to run physics calculations on the on-die while dedicated card renders game. etc.



Well if that is the case, no more AMD stuff for me. 
I see no reason at all for them to stop doing dedicated desktop cpus. Since these cpus come from the server parts, i find it silly for them to don't make the extra cash.
I see bad management again for AMD. APUs are not ready for really high performance yet.
I see AMD sinking and fast. If they have the same mindset for servers as well, then they will sink for sure.


----------



## Frick (Aug 27, 2012)

eidairaman1 said:


> for most consumers here they game more, Im sure the BD shines in stuff other than gaming



BD for servers review.



AvonX said:


> Well if that is the case, no more AMD stuff for me.
> I see no reason at all for them to stop doing dedicated desktop cpus. Since these cpus come from the server parts, i find it silly for them to don't make the extra cash.
> I see bad management again for AMD. APUs are not ready for really high performance yet.
> I see AMD sinking and fast. If they have the same mindset for servers as well, then they will sink for sure.



You do know pretty much every Intel CPU have integrated GPUs as well don't you? Even the 3770k has it.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Aug 27, 2012)

AvonX said:


> Well if that is the case, no more AMD stuff for me.
> I see no reason at all for them to stop doing dedicated desktop cpus. Since these cpus come from the server parts, i find it silly for them to don't make the extra cash.
> I see bad management again for AMD. APUs are not ready for really high performance yet.
> I see AMD sinking and fast. If they have the same mindset for servers as well, then they will sink for sure.



dont be silly APU's already possess way more computational performance then Cpu's, the software stack decides what it will use, and that isnt the gpu part often enough, but Amd ,Arm ,Qualcom ,also indirectly associated but still intel and nvidia are all moveing towards a hetrogeneouse future with all cpu's configured with an on die gpu/GPGPU unit, thats ALL of them ARE makeing the same thing ,APU i believe is trademarked by AMD, but they are all makeing them and soon Arm will have a high performance APU in its IP stack, as will AMD, if you arent buying that shit then you wont be upgradeing your pc at all soon then.


 APU server parts are already in the market place afaik.


----------



## Steevo (Aug 27, 2012)

Reviews, and they have horrible advertising still. It looks like something a middle school child would make to tout the benefits of them being class president.


----------



## Covert_Death (Aug 27, 2012)

YAYYYYYYYY I passed up on BD and am glad i did... Im looking at you 8350 and hoping for a ~$200 price tag!

I run a PII x4 955 @ 3.99Ghz day in day out and this MIGHT actually be an upgrade if it overclocks well! HerEs to hoping! (and hoping arma3 is more CPU optimized!)


----------



## Oberon (Aug 27, 2012)

So, can anyone explain the presence of APU-specific features (AVC, "dual-graphics" [distinct from CF for AMD], eyefinity, etc.) for the FX CPUs that don't have a GPU on-board? Smells fishy to me.


----------



## AvonX (Aug 27, 2012)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> dont be silly APU's already possess way more computational performance then Cpu's, the software stack decides what it will use, and that isnt the gpu part often enough, but Amd ,Arm ,Qualcom ,also indirectly associated but still intel and nvidia are all moveing towards a hetrogeneouse future with all cpu's configured with an on die gpu/GPGPU unit, thats ALL of them ARE makeing the same thing ,APU i believe is trademarked by AMD, but they are all makeing them and soon Arm will have a high performance APU in its IP stack, as will AMD, if you arent buying that shit then you wont be upgradeing your pc at all soon then.
> 
> 
> APU server parts are already in the market place afaik.



You cant compare those things with a dedicated cpu and a discrete graphics card for gaming.
Way more powerful than APU's currently.


----------



## pantherx12 (Aug 27, 2012)

AvonX said:


> You cant compare those things with a dedicated cpu and a discrete graphics card for gaming.
> Way more powerful than APU's currently.



Yes two dedicated pieces of hardware would be faster.

How ever no where near as efficient power wise, production wise and space wise. Oh and lets not forget performance for price where they would own two dedicated pieces of hardware.


Pretty much every device in the future will be a combination of CPU/GPU AMD are right when they say the future is fusion.


----------



## AvonX (Aug 27, 2012)

Frick said:


> BD for servers review.
> 
> 
> 
> You do know pretty much every Intel CPU have integrated GPUs as well don't you? Even the 3770k has it.



You do know that the 3770k is way way faster than any AMD dedicated CPU or APU don't you?
That is the main difference. I think you may have misunderstood me.
The point that i want to make here is: Even if AMD has no plans to do dedicated cpu's they still have to innovate and push harder to be faster. Currently they really don't have those things in place. So its a big risk from my point of view to go full APU from now because they are not ready for that yet.


----------



## AvonX (Aug 27, 2012)

pantherx12 said:


> Yes two dedicated pieces of hardware would be faster.
> 
> How ever no where near as efficient power wise, production wise and space wise. Oh and lets not forget performance for price where they would own two dedicated pieces of hardware.
> 
> ...



The only thing that Intel needs to do is to improve their integrated gpu.
I think they have already improved on that lately if i am not mistaken.
So AMD will be miles behind again soon enough  in "CPU/GPU"
They still have to improve allot on the CPU side.


----------



## Frick (Aug 27, 2012)

AvonX said:


> You do know that the 3770k is way way faster than any AMD dedicated CPU or APU don't you?
> That is the main difference. I think you may have misunderstood me.
> The point that i want to make here is: Even if AMD has no plans to do dedicated cpu's they still have to innovate and push harder to be faster. Currently they really don't have those things in place. So its a big risk from my point of view to go full APU from now because they are not ready for that yet.



Ah yes I did misunderstand. But they have a lot of caching up to do (if they want to compete at the higher end) anyway so I'm not sure I agree with you. The APU technology is maturing.



AvonX said:


> The only thing that Intel needs to do is to improve their integrated gpu.
> I think they have already improved on that lately if i am not mistaken.



Indeed they have. The HD4k GPU isn't that bad. It's not as good as AMD's offerings but it was a step forward.


----------



## repman244 (Aug 27, 2012)

AvonX said:


> The point that i want to make here is: Even if AMD has no plans to do dedicated cpu's they still have to innovate and push harder to be faster. Currently they really don't have those things in place. So its a big risk from my point of view to go full APU from now because they are not ready for that yet.



It's not a risk (Intel went full APU even tho the GPU still lacks a lot), you need to remember that it is a lot cheaper to make only one chip, AMD had to produce both Llano (which is based on the old stars core) and BD based chips.
They want to combine those two so that the production cost drops, and that is planned for the FM2 socket.



AvonX said:


> The only thing that Intel needs to do is to improve their integrated gpu.
> I think they have already improved on that lately if i am not mistaken.
> So AMD will be miles behind again soon enough  in "CPU/GPU"
> They still have to improve allot on the CPU side.



Don't forget that Trinity's GPU is still based on the VLIW4 architecture, when they introduce a GCN based APU it will bring a lot better performance (and great compute power!) and efficiency.
And looking at the Trinity benchmarks it's actually a great improvement compared to Llano.


----------



## Dent1 (Aug 27, 2012)

Frick said:


> Ah yes I did misunderstand. But they have a lot of caching up to do (if they want to compete at the higher end) anyway so I'm not sure I agree with you. The APU technology is maturing.





The thing is neither AMD or Intel truly care about competing on the high end or low end, they only care about generating revenue. 

The high end segment doesn't exist anymore in gaming like it used to. We've getting to a point where even a CPU from 2009 can play the latest games well or a cheap £50 CPU from today is plenty. There really isn't any need to spend £200+ on a high-end CPU for gaming. The high end CPU gaming market is dying and APUs are putting the last nail in the coffin.

IMO, in a decade or so there will only be APUs. And dedicated video cards will be reserved for the elite gamers whom want to SLI or CF their dedicated cards with their APU.


----------



## suraswami (Aug 27, 2012)

blah blah.

I guess we will know what crap shoot this is when reviews are posted.


----------



## GLD (Aug 27, 2012)

Sign me up for a 95w FX-4320 please.


----------



## techtard (Aug 27, 2012)

Just like last time, not going to expect too much from AMD. Looking forward to reviews. 
Might even buy a Piledriver rig just to play with and overclock.

As a side note, I recently played some games at a friends house (dude is an AMD fanboy trapped in the AthlonXP glory days) on his Bulldozer FX-8120 rig, and everything was just fine.
If you don't measure the FPS on screen, you wouldn't know you were playing on an 'inferior' CPU. Everything was pretty smooth.

Also, it doesn't matter how improved Piledriver may be if the Intel compiler still forces all non genuine-intel CPUs to run non-optimal codepaths.


----------



## AvonX (Aug 27, 2012)

Dent1 said:


> The thing is neither AMD or Intel truly care about competing on the high end or low end, they only care about generating revenue.
> 
> The high end segment doesn't exist anymore in gaming like it used to. We've getting to a point where even a CPU from 2009 can play the latest games well or a cheap £50 CPU from today is plenty. There really isn't any need to spend £200+ on a high-end CPU for gaming. The high end CPU gaming market is dying and APUs are putting the last nail in the coffin.
> 
> IMO, in a decade or so there will only be APUs. And dedicated video cards will be reserved for the elite gamers whom want to SLI or CF their dedicated cards with their APU.



You could be correct. If that is the case, i have a great idea but i don't have the cash to do it. 
I was thinking of an all in one system. A system which would be a console for games and a pc at the same time. APU style.


----------



## N3M3515 (Aug 27, 2012)

Exciting news, not for gamers....
SB still wipes the floor with piledriver in games.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Aug 27, 2012)

One Thing I noticed is Bd was marketed incorrectly. N btw Intle at time was still using unfair business practices hence antitrust cases



xenocide said:


> HyperThreading may seem "lol" but the fact is Intel's CPU's are powerful enough that even with it being a kind of hacked on feature they shine.  The numbers don't lie;  http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/434?vs=287
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## YautjaLord (Aug 27, 2012)

Been visiting the front page for any info like that on daily basis: finally some info, ffs! 

Now all i need to know is when the FM2/1090FX mobos will be released. Here's for larger (16M?) L3 cache, real 10 - 15% performance improvements over BD & just about everything else BD lacked. Dreaming yeah, but you can't take it from me now, do you?


----------



## SIGSEGV (Aug 27, 2012)

AvonX said:


> Well if that is the case, no more AMD stuff for me.
> I see no reason at all for them to stop doing dedicated desktop cpus. Since these cpus come from the server parts, i find it silly for them to don't make the extra cash.
> I see bad management again for AMD. APUs are not ready for really high performance yet.
> I see AMD sinking and fast. If they have the same mindset for servers as well, then they will sink for sure.



blah blah blah blah,..

http://gmplib.org/pi-with-gmp.html
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2008/07/atom-nano-review/6/
http://www.agner.org/optimize/blog/read.php?i=49
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_C++_Compiler


----------



## AvonX (Aug 27, 2012)

YautjaLord said:


> Been visiting the front page for any info like that on daily basis: finally some info, ffs!
> 
> Now all i need to know is when the FM2/1090FX mobos will be released. Here's for larger (16M?) L3 cache, real 10 - 15% performance improvements over BD & just about everything else BD lacked. Dreaming yeah, but you can't take it from me now, do you?



 For the 1090FX mobos i think yes you are dreaming. 
Even if they finally decide to do it, its still far away from now.
Somewhere about near the end of 2013.


----------



## pantherx12 (Aug 27, 2012)

AvonX said:


> The only thing that Intel needs to do is to improve their integrated gpu.
> I think they have already improved on that lately if i am not mistaken.
> So AMD will be miles behind again soon enough  in "CPU/GPU"
> They still have to improve allot on the CPU side.




Yeah but the thing is AMDs graphics is better than intels graphics to the degree that Intels cpus are better than AMDs.

So when the software catches up with the hardware they'll both offer decent performance with AMD theoretically having better compute power. ( so better for media creation, editing,rendering and gaming)


----------



## cdawall (Aug 27, 2012)

slybunda said:


> looks like another fail from amd. 4.2ghz clock speed and will probably be on par with a 3ghz ivybridge using half the number of cores.
> move along folks nothing to see here.



Who cares? Why is clockspeed the deciding factor here? If it pulls the same wattage who gives two flying shits if its clocked at 1ghz or 100ghz performance per watt is the only thing that should make any difference. If you think any differently maybe you should rethink things.



Hustler said:


> Well unless these new CPU's have increased their IPC rate by at least 30% over Bulldozer, which obviously they wont, they're still a waste of time.



Phenom I vs Phenom II with the increased clock speeds as long as we see a 10-15% jump it will be enough to compete in a middle of the road market. Seeing how GPU's continue to be the lag point for video gaming price point yet again will be a deciding factor for gamers. 



eidairaman1 said:


> which is fine, considering even x4 BEs gave FX 81** series a hard run while costing way less



Hence why I have not bothered to buy anything that wasn't Phenom II based. I think everyone should remember the huge performance jump from Phenom I to Phenom II.



Frick said:


> BD for servers review.



When you use the correct programs to render BD does quite well. Weird how an Intel based rendering program favors well Intel. There is a reason AMD added certain things to its technology and it wasn't to continue using Intel styled shit.


Now personally I don't understand why everyone is against AMD improving products and releasing new chips. You do understand that if it was an Intel only market we would not see improvements like we do now, prices would skyrocket etc...Just remember on release the Athlon X2 4200+ was $537 Intel was the same pricing. I am all for a "crappy" Piledriver chip for $200. Intel can keep its $500+ chips.


----------



## ensabrenoir (Aug 27, 2012)

Cpu releases are so much fun....tbis is all too fimilar though..  All we need is for someone to say is amds gonna mop the floor with intel then itll be like old times.  Would be ironlc if tbe chip no one belives in actually does it.  But physics and reality gonna step in. just looking foward to some new tech. Dont care if  fisher price made it.


----------



## AvonX (Aug 27, 2012)

cdawall said:


> Hence why I have not bothered to buy anything that wasn't Phenom II based. I think everyone should remember the huge performance jump from Phenom I to Phenom II.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



AMD's Improving products???
You know why bulldozer sucks so hard? Because they decided to go cheap and they were using lots of automation tools, synthesis tools, automatic place and route tools, etc  which resulted somewhere about 25% slower and 25% less efficient. Now if AMD still has that cheap style mindset, don't expect much from them.


----------



## erocker (Aug 27, 2012)

AvonX said:


> AMD's Improving products???
> You know why bulldozer sucks so hard? Because they decided to go cheap and they were using lots of automation tools, synthesis tools, automatic place and route tools, etc  which resulted somewhere about 25% slower and 25% less efficient. Now if AMD still has that cheap style mindset, don't expect much from them.



From what information I have read, Piledriver is refined from Bulldozer meaning "hand engineered" like a good CPU should be. That being said I'm not expecting any miracles, just a chip that is a bit more competitive with the competition. I'm expecting something similar from Phenom I to Phenom II.


----------



## librin.so.1 (Aug 27, 2012)

techtard said:


> Also, it doesn't matter how improved Piledriver may be if the Intel compiler still forces all non genuine-intel CPUs to run non-optimal codepaths.



This.

(I personally see no reason to use that intel compiler for anything whatsoever. *shrug* why does it even exist, anyway? )


----------



## Frick (Aug 27, 2012)

cdawall said:


> When you use the correct programs to render BD does quite well. Weird how an Intel based rendering program favors well Intel. There is a reason AMD added certain things to its technology and it wasn't to continue using Intel styled shit.



They say this in the conclusion:



> On the other side of the coin, it is clear that some of the excellent features of the new Opteron are not leveraged by the current software base.



So it is what it always is, needs and moneys.


----------



## erocker (Aug 27, 2012)

Frick said:


> On the other side of the coin, it is clear that some of the excellent features of the new Opteron are not leveraged by the current software base.



Meh... Our cars have some excellent features and performance, unfortunately there are very few roads our car can actually drive on.

I don't like that excuse.


----------



## techtard (Aug 27, 2012)

erocker said:


> From what information I have read, Piledriver is refined from Bulldozer meaning "hand engineered" like a good CPU should be. That being said I'm not expecting any miracles, just a chip that is a bit more competitive with the competition. I'm expecting something similar from Phenom I to Phenom II.



That was a welcome improvement. I went from Phenom I to II, it was a pleasant surprise.
Better performance, and higher overclocking too. Plus no more TLB error bug.

If they can achieve that, it will be a solid chip. There's no need for them to have the same performance as Ivy or even Sandybridge, though it would be nice.


----------



## camoxiong (Aug 27, 2012)

Pretty nice for AMD to clock their CPUs at and over 4.0ghz at stock.


----------



## Norton (Aug 27, 2012)

erocker said:


> From what information I have read, Piledriver is refined from Bulldozer meaning "hand engineered" like a good CPU should be. That being said I'm not expecting any miracles, just a chip that is a bit more competitive with the competition. I'm expecting something similar from Phenom I to Phenom II.




That should work out fine. FX suits my needs now so a PI to PII bump would be ideal.

They shouldn't even call it Piledriver... FX II would be an ideal name 

Got a couple of sockets waiting so bring em on!


----------



## cadaveca (Aug 27, 2012)

erocker said:


> From what information I have read, Piledriver is refined from Bulldozer meaning "hand engineered" like a good CPU should be. That being said I'm not expecting any miracles, just a chip that is a bit more competitive with the competition. I'm expecting something similar from Phenom I to Phenom II.



Hmmm.


So, would you then say, that current FM1 APUs, that use Phenom II cores + IGP with almsot no cache, compared to the next-gen FM2 APU with PileDriver cores and IGP, would correctly relate what AMD intended with Bulldozer?



Because, you know, I've bad PD-based APU for over a month now, right? And I have no NDA either?



Do you think we should post a review? APU, vs APU? Just screw launch dates, get the info out now?


OH yeah, my chip:








Oh, and so that socket change, from FM1 to FM2, is kinda like the Phenom to FX AM3 to AM3+ or 890FX to 990FX change? A thing about better power delivery?


I mean, I know nothing, just got a chip here, and I kinda like to speculate myself....what is it really, and how fast is it?




 I DO NOT KNOW!!!


----------



## AvonX (Aug 27, 2012)

cadaveca said:


> Hmmm.
> 
> 
> So, would you then say, that current FM1 APUs, that use Phenom II cores + IGP with almsot no cache, compared to the next-gen FM2 APU with PileDriver cores and IGP, would correctly relate what AMD intended with Bulldozer?
> ...



Nice photoshopping. LoL


----------



## Frick (Aug 27, 2012)

erocker said:


> Meh... Our cars have some excellent features and performance, unfortunately there are very few roads our car can actually drive on.
> 
> I don't like that excuse.



which is the point. different scenarios, different resources, different applications. Its why we have to research beforw buying.


----------



## cadaveca (Aug 27, 2012)

AvonX said:


> Nice photoshopping. LoL



MSPaint, actually.


----------



## tacosRcool (Aug 28, 2012)

I would like a nice performance increase please!


----------



## eidairaman1 (Aug 28, 2012)

tacosRcool said:


> I would like a nice performance increase please!



Wouldnt we all


----------



## librin.so.1 (Aug 28, 2012)

eidairaman1 said:


> Wouldnt we all



Intel fanboys wouldn't =]


----------



## cadaveca (Aug 28, 2012)

Vinska said:


> Intel fanboys wouldn't =]



I feel such comments are almost like racism. Anti-Intel Racism.




:shadedshu


----------



## eidairaman1 (Aug 28, 2012)

cadaveca said:


> I feel such comments are almost like racism. Anti-Intel Racism.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



theres more Racism towards AMD here honestly.


----------



## xorbe (Aug 28, 2012)

Oberon said:


> So, can anyone explain the presence of APU-specific features (AVC, "dual-graphics" [distinct from CF for AMD], eyefinity, etc.) for the FX CPUs that don't have a GPU on-board? Smells fishy to me.



This.


----------



## Lionheart (Aug 28, 2012)

erocker said:


> From what information I have read, Piledriver is refined from Bulldozer meaning "hand engineered" like a good CPU should be. That being said I'm not expecting any miracles, just a chip that is a bit more competitive with the competition. I'm expecting something similar from Phenom I to Phenom II.



You read my mind


----------



## eidairaman1 (Aug 28, 2012)

xorbe said:


> This.



Re-Read the Chart, in Post Number 1


----------



## Covert_Death (Aug 28, 2012)

well... sitting on a PII x4 955 @ 4.0Ghz with a 990FX MoBo. the 8350 should be an upgrade... i never expect the first generation of a brand new design to go "as intended" but now they have had a year to look at it and IMPROVE what exists. I DO expect PD to be an upgrade because of this fact...

need this upgrade soooon


----------



## Rauelius (Aug 28, 2012)

AMD should aim these at the Celeron, Pentium and i3. The FX 4xxx could compare favorable to the SB Celerons, the 6xxx compares favorably to the SB Pentiums and the FX 8xxx compares to the i3. AMD's big issue is pricing...because despite the high possibility that the 8350 will likely Game slower than an IB based i3, AMD will launch this as a $300+ processor. First they have to get away from using "cores" they are not full cores. If AMD launched the FX series in respect to a Quad-Module and priced them like their old dual cores reviewers would have been much kinder and AMD would have looked better when considering the 8150 is really an upgrade from the 965 and NOT the x6 series.


----------



## AvonX (Aug 28, 2012)

Lionheart said:


> You read my mind



Wait until the benchmarks. Remember what happened with bulldozer?
I was one of those who was clever enough to wait until it was benched.
Too much reading minds and wild guesses is useless don't you think?
Damn my 1090T smokes these bulldozers.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Aug 28, 2012)

AvonX said:


> Wait until the benchmarks. Remember what happened with bulldozer?
> I was one of those who was clever enough to wait until it was benched.
> Too much reading minds and wild guesses is useless don't you think?
> Damn my 1090T smokes these bulldozers.



its already been proven with Charts, a FX 41** is no where near equivalent to a X4 9**


----------



## Melvis (Aug 28, 2012)

eidairaman1 said:


> you really dont need a better Phenom II, if You can get the 965 BE to 3.7 GHz or higher youre pretty much golden already.




This is true, and if these new CPU's dont cut it either than that's what ill be doing and leaving it for many many yrs to come.

I cant be beeped to spend much more money on computer stuff these days, gotta focus on fixing up my lawn and house now, yes im getting old.


----------



## cdawall (Aug 28, 2012)

AvonX said:


> Wait until the benchmarks. Remember what happened with bulldozer?
> I was one of those who was clever enough to wait until it was benched.
> Too much reading minds and wild guesses is useless don't you think?
> Damn my 1090T smokes these bulldozers.



My 1090T smoked dozer as well. Why would you hope for anything, but progress for the new chips especially with a lot of parts going EOL.



Melvis said:


> This is true, and if these new CPU's dont cut it either than that's what ill be doing and leaving it for many many yrs to come.



That's the exact reason I run what I do. For what I do bulldozer doesn't cut it...For sure isn't worth the upgrade away from my stellar 790FX mobo.


----------



## jpierce55 (Aug 28, 2012)

The A10-5700 sounds like a very good move.


----------



## AvonX (Aug 28, 2012)

Never mind. I would buy the 8350 since it could be their last performance desktop cpu.
I think that those supposed leaked specs might be wrong.
There is a good chance that they could be clocked even higher *if they they managed to keep power consumption low enough. And i will also buy an APU for daily use when i am not gaming to save some money off my electricity bill.


----------



## xorbe (Aug 28, 2012)

eidairaman1 said:


> Re-Read the Chart, in Post Number 1



I guess you're going to have to spell it out for me.  What I see is that an FX-8350 does not have on-die graphics, but has a big check mark for QuickStream which uses the graphics portion of an APU for videos.


----------



## Coffebreak (Aug 29, 2012)

cadaveca said:


> Hmmm.
> 
> 
> So, would you then say, that current FM1 APUs, that use Phenom II cores + IGP with almsot no cache, compared to the next-gen FM2 APU with PileDriver cores and IGP, would correctly relate what AMD intended with Bulldozer?
> ...



I just registered to say this to you: How stupid do you think people are? Some nobrainer in a forum has an unreleased APU with a serial number of 1? Are you kidding me?


----------



## cadaveca (Aug 29, 2012)

Coffebreak said:


> ? Some nobrainer in a forum has an unreleased APU with a serial number of 1? Are you kidding me?




I don't think people are stupid, at all. Thanks for registering.

And actually, I want people to believe I have an unreleased APU, that was made over 8 months ago, and wasn't public. I want you to beleive that certain CEO was fired because of it, and directly, because of what he did(or did not do) with it @ a certain trade show.


----------



## AvonX (Aug 29, 2012)

cadaveca said:


> I don't think people are stupid, at all. Thanks for registering.
> 
> And actually, I want people to believe I have an unreleased APU, that was made over 8 months ago, and wasn't public. I want you to beleive that certain CEO was fired because of it, and directly, because of what he did(or did not do) with it @ a certain trade show.
> 
> http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=48263&stc=1&d=1346228846



Great another photoshop. 

How does the sucker perform?


----------



## cadaveca (Aug 29, 2012)

AvonX said:


> Great another photoshop.
> 
> How does the sucker perform?



Ah, well, you see, boards are another story, for another day. All I need is a good board, with no NDA....


Was that my doorbell?!?


----------



## Coffebreak (Aug 29, 2012)

cadaveca said:


> I don't think people are stupid, at all. Thanks for registering.
> 
> And actually, I want people to believe I have an unreleased APU, that was made over 8 months ago, and wasn't public. I want you to beleive that certain CEO was fired because of it, and directly, because of what he did(or did not do) with it @ a certain trade show.
> 
> http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=48263&stc=1&d=1346228846



Oh well. In that case consider yourself luckiest man on earth at that time lol


----------



## AvonX (Aug 29, 2012)

cadaveca said:


> Ah, well, you see, boards are another story, for another day. All I need is a good board, with no NDA....
> 
> 
> Was that my doorbell?!?



I think the police is there to grab you. 
Well since you managed to get that sucker 8 months ago, get me the steamroller based chip.
I promise i wont tell anyone.


----------



## librin.so.1 (Aug 29, 2012)

cadaveca said:


> Ah, well, you see, boards are another story, for another day. All I need is a good board, with no NDA....



In other words - You don't have a mobo with BIOS that would recognize this CPU, so You have not tested it yet?
(did I get it right?)


----------



## cadaveca (Aug 29, 2012)

Coffebreak said:


> Oh well. In that case consider yourself luckiest man on earth at that time lol



That depends. I tend to have quite a bit of unreleased hardware these days, and really, it's a lot to manage. I'm sure there are others out there with chips..I just got one with 0001, and I don't seem to recall ever signing any sort of NDA about the chip.


You can buy these chips, or well, different bins of the same chip, already. Laptops and a few desktops are laready out with slower-speed A8 APUs. It's really no big deal right now.



Vinska said:


> In other words - You don't have a mobo with BIOS that would recognize this CPU, so You have not tested it yet?
> (did I get it right?)



Honestly, I dunno what i got. I've got stuff that this CPU will fit into the socket of. It all waits in line for other reviews to be finished. Will AMD launch their product before my review goes public? Time will tell. You'll just have to keep watching the front page.


----------



## Coffebreak (Aug 29, 2012)

cadaveca said:


> That depends. I tend to have quite a bit of unreleased hardware these days, and really, it's a lot to manage. I'm sure there are others out there with chips..I just got one with 0001, and I don't seem to recall ever signing any sort of NDA about the chip.
> 
> 
> You can buy these chips, or well, different bins of the same chip, already. Laptops and a few desktops are laready out with slower-speed A8 APUs. It's really no big deal right now.



Well if you got an 83xx somewhere lying around I'll buy it off you so one thing less to worry about haha.


----------



## cadaveca (Aug 29, 2012)

Hmm. maybe if I publish early, AMD will notice, and get me CPUs...wait...I foil their launch...and expect to get something they don't give me already....does that make sense?


----------



## AvonX (Aug 29, 2012)

Coffebreak said:


> Well if you got an 83xx somewhere lying around I'll buy it off you so one thing less to worry about haha.



LoL count me in as well.


----------



## Coffebreak (Aug 29, 2012)

cadaveca said:


> Hmm. maybe if I publish early, AMD will notice, and get me CPUs...wait...I foil their launch...and expect to get something they don't give me already....does that make sense?



Well they said at first that the Trinity APU's would be avalible August for public anyway so..I guess go ahead  Hell with AMD, I just want to see how the new PD cores match up with BD.


----------



## cadaveca (Aug 29, 2012)

AvonX said:


> LoL count me in as well.



Honestly, guys, if I had such a chip, I'd have posted pictures. Unfortunately, AMD has denied me contact through marketing reps, so I have no early access to parts for reviews. I do, however, have this chip, and have for some time. Not 8 months...that's just the datecode on the chip, that says "1202", which would be the second week of 2012.

That in and of itself raises some interesting questions.


----------



## AvonX (Aug 29, 2012)

cadaveca said:


> Honestly, guys, if I had such a chip, I'd have posted pictures. Unfortunately, AMD has denied me contact through marketing reps, so I have no early access to parts for reviews. I do, however, have this chip, and have for some time. Not 8 months...that's just the datecode on the chip, that says "1202", which would be the second week of 2012.
> 
> That in and of itself raises some interesting questions.



Just bench that sucker and save us from all the curiosity we have about how it performs. 
Post the results by tonight. Don't know if you would have AMD staff knocking on your door though.


----------



## Coffebreak (Aug 29, 2012)

AvonX said:


> Just bench that sucker and save us from all the curiosity we have about how it performs.



I'm with you on this one.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Aug 29, 2012)

I think the issue Dave has is the NDA on the Fm2 socketed motherboards, eagerly awaiting that review myself though


----------



## AvonX (Aug 29, 2012)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> I think the issue Dave has is the NDA on the Fm2 socketed motherboards, eagerly awaiting that review myself though



No issues with Dave, he has everything in order.
He is just worried about the early benchmark release and of course the consequences.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Aug 29, 2012)

xorbe said:


> I guess you're going to have to spell it out for me.  What I see is that an FX-8350 does not have on-die graphics, but has a big check mark for QuickStream which uses the graphics portion of an APU for videos.



http://support.amd.com/us/kbarticles/Pages/AMDQuickStreamTechnology.aspx

its a software layer that possibly utilizes some of the CPUs characteristics. Its mainly bandwidth prioritization. Since Vishera doesnt have a GPU in the CPU, it will utilize an AMD video card


----------



## cadaveca (Aug 29, 2012)

AvonX said:


> No issues with Dave, he has everything in order.
> He is just worried about the early benchmark release and of course the consequences.



Honestly, I do have everything in order, and it is as I said...I have other  hardware for reviews I received before this chip. Everything gets put in order on my shelf, and like a store, first in is the first out. I have a board and memory review to finish this week, next week board and memory again, and then the following week two boards.


But, I just got my right arm out of a sling last monday, and am doing physio every morning, so whiel I have high hopes to move up to 2 reviews per week, I might miss that target a bit, depending on how my arm holds up. I aim to have some A10 APU info up the week after next for sure though. If AMD doesn't launch by then, well...oh well.


----------



## Crap Daddy (Aug 29, 2012)

Is this the chip we are talking about? It's old news regarding leaks.

here's the source:

http://www.legitreviews.com/news/12666/


----------



## cadaveca (Aug 29, 2012)

Yeah, same chip, and yes, there is quite a bit of info out already, hence me posting what I am..which is nothing that isn't already out there, really. I'm pretty sure Anandtech had liek nearly a full review of the APU.


Hoping a A8 3870K shows up on my doorstep within the next week or so so I don't have to buy one to do the review. I got an A8 3800, but that chip is locked, so I don't think the compare is accurate.


----------



## Durvelle27 (Aug 29, 2012)

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6201/amd-details-its-3rd-gen-steamroller-architecture


----------



## Super XP (Aug 30, 2012)

O.K. interesting regarding the quote below. So this tells me that we are going to have both Piledriver and Steamroller released within the year 2013. WOW, obviously good news for people in the market for change. 

Piledriver = Improve Power Efficiency and Performance over Bulldozer.
Steamroller = Further improve Power Efficiency and Performance over Piledriver.

The way I read this is Bulldozer was suppose to be this future Steamroller 




> The architecture is still slated to debut in 2013 on GlobalFoundries' 28nm bulk process. The improvements look good on paper, but the real question remains whether or not Steamroller will be enough to go up against Haswell.


----------



## AvonX (Aug 30, 2012)

Super XP said:


> O.K. interesting regarding the quote below. So this tells me that we are going to have both Piledriver and Steamroller released within the year 2013. WOW, obviously good news for people in the market for change.
> 
> Piledriver = Improve Power Efficiency and Performance over Bulldozer.
> Steamroller = Further improve Power Efficiency and Performance over Piledriver.
> ...



Nope, steamroller would be pretty much the same shit. 
They will focus highly more on power efficiency and execution.
Its more server oriented and apu's of course. Nothing to do with the enthusiasts market.


----------



## librin.so.1 (Aug 30, 2012)

AvonX said:


> Nope, steamroller would be pretty much the same shit.
> They will focus highly more on *power efficiency* and execution.
> Its more server oriented and apu's of course. Nothing to do with the enthusiasts market.



I'd say, more TDP headroom for those OC'ing on air / stock cooling.


----------



## naoan (Aug 30, 2012)

AvonX said:


> Nope, steamroller would be pretty much the same shit.
> They will focus highly more on power efficiency and execution.
> Its more server oriented and apu's of course. Nothing to do with the enthusiasts market.





> There are some very big numbers in this slide, given what they represent. Branch mispredictions drop by 20%, instruction cache misses by 30%. Per-thread instruction dispatches that use the full width of the execution units are up by a quarter. Overall, these changes add up to a whopping 30% improvement in ops dispatched per clock cycle—and these numbers are based on simulation, not just hopeful estimation. Even more notably, this 30% figure comes from simulated client-focused workloads, including "digital media, productivity and gaming applications," not just the server-class applications for which the original Bulldozer core was so obviously tuned.



http://techreport.com/articles.x/23485

Said slide: http://www.techpowerup.com/img/12-08-28/154o.jpg

Of course, we should take this with a gigantic grain of salt.


----------



## AvonX (Aug 30, 2012)

naoan said:


> http://techreport.com/articles.x/23485
> 
> Said slide: http://www.techpowerup.com/img/12-08-28/154o.jpg
> 
> Of course, we should take this with a gigantic grain of salt.



Don't understand why you have quoted me.
Are you into apu's? First of all there is no road map at all for dedicated desktop cpus.
This is all for servers and apu's.


----------



## naoan (Aug 30, 2012)

AvonX said:


> Don't understand why you have quoted me.
> Are you into apu's? First of all there is no road map at all for dedicated desktop cpus.
> This is all for servers and apu's.



So what's on APU that didn't fit into enthusiasts market?

Beside the integrated GPU part since the article I quoted mention nothing about it.


----------



## cdawall (Aug 30, 2012)

cadaveca said:


> Honestly, guys, if I had such a chip, I'd have posted pictures. Unfortunately, AMD has denied me contact through marketing reps, so I have no early access to parts for reviews. I do, however, have this chip, and have for some time. Not 8 months...that's just the datecode on the chip, that says "1202", which would be the second week of 2012.
> 
> That in and of itself raises some interesting questions.



That datacode means nothing. AMD has been making most of its chips roughly a year in mass before release. I sold like 8 phenom II 945BE ES chips RB-C1 with a working DDR3 memory controller. Chips were straight out of the foundry.

FACOC AC 0825FPM on my 945BE chip...


----------



## cadaveca (Aug 31, 2012)

cdawall said:


> That datacode means nothing. AMD has been making most of its chips roughly a year in mass before release.



I bought my latest Intel chip a week after it was "minted". Making chips that far in advance DOES mean something, just maybe not to you.

Also, my chip is NOT an "ES", it's full retail. If it was "ES", then you're right, it wouldn't mean much.


----------



## cdawall (Aug 31, 2012)

cadaveca said:


> I bought my latest Intel chip a week after it was "minted". Making chips that far in advance DOES mean something, just maybe not to you.
> 
> Also, my chip is NOT an "ES", it's full retail. If it was "ES", then you're right, it wouldn't mean much.



True but we have stuff like my "prerelease" 955BE AACYC stepping and all.


----------



## cadaveca (Aug 31, 2012)

cdawall said:


> True but we have stuff like my "prerelease" 955BE AACYC stepping and all.



Which means nothing to me. Let me explain why.


Nearly all the staff at AMD back then(Phenom II days) are gone, and there is definitely a bunch of new faces on the executive side. While doing "the same old thing" may be OK with you, I do expect more from AMD under the new leadership, and things like not having enough chips to meet demand, as has happened recently with AMD, are just not acceptable.


AMD, at financial briefings, has more than once admitted they just simply cannot produce chips fast enough. They are selling each and every one. They might not be the best performance-wise, but they are in very high demand, for servers, desktops, and portable PCs. A company with such high demand must continually evolve in my books, and if they are just simply going to release the same chip they've been capable of making for the past 8 months, as shown by my own sample, then I fear for AMD's ability to capaitalize on the technology they have access to.


Like what you had, and what I have now...doesn't matter. Physical things. I do motherboard reviews, got a chip. Many other reviewers did too ,and they have posted reviews some time ago. But behind the scenes, there is far more to AMD than most consider, I think, and this may be part of AMD's downfall. They have morphed into being more transparent in what they do, but not enough.


Liek really, I think that this info that spawn this news posting should have been released by AMD themselves, directly, rather than by the channels it did. There's nothing for them to lose...as anyone expecting big gains from Piledriver is going to be sorely mistaken. AMD is talknig about Steamroller, now, because that's the really interesting chip..the rest of AMD's products are just biding time while they mint 'em.


----------



## Super XP (Aug 31, 2012)

AvonX said:


> Don't understand why you have quoted me.
> Are you into apu's? First of all there is no road map at all for dedicated desktop cpus.
> This is all for servers and apu's.


There was already a road map that showed Piledriver based desktop CPU's, but it ended there. Either way, there is no way AMD is going to stop releasing desktop enthusiast CPU's. Bulldozer, Piledriver, Steamroller & Excavator should be branched out into servers, workstations, desktop, mobile and APU's.

Desktops may be somewhat shrinking but there's still a strong PC gaming presence (Thanks to Steam) and so desktops aren't going aywhere anytime soon.


----------



## AvonX (Aug 31, 2012)

Super XP said:


> There was already a road map that showed Piledriver based desktop CPU's, but it ended there. Either way, there is no way AMD is going to stop releasing desktop enthusiast CPU's. Bulldozer, Piledriver, Steamroller & Excavator should be branched out into servers, workstations, desktop, mobile and APU's.
> 
> Desktops may be somewhat shrinking but there's still a strong PC gaming presence (Thanks to Steam) and so desktops aren't going aywhere anytime soon.



Well for your information i have a recent road map sitting right here on my pc. 
There is no mention at all for desktop products. The only thing that it says its talking about HSA, servers and APU's that are joining the server market.
They are planning to go full APU in all the markets. Desktops and Servers included.
That's all folks. Honestly i am not kidding.


----------



## AvonX (Aug 31, 2012)

cadaveca said:


> Which means nothing to me. Let me explain why.
> 
> 
> Nearly all the staff at AMD back then(Phenom II days) are gone, and there is definitely a bunch of new faces on the executive side. While doing "the same old thing" may be OK with you, I do expect more from AMD under the new leadership, and things like not having enough chips to meet demand, as has happened recently with AMD, are just not acceptable.
> ...



I totally agree with you but i don't think Steamroller will bring much to the table.
Pretty much it will be the same thing in performance as Piledriver.
I am going to sound like a bad person but i really hope they fail soon to get over and done with this management at AMD. Its leading nowhere. I am afraid that this would be the final hit at AMD but this is where things lead to. I really hope AMD has one more chance at it but with other management and not the current one.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Aug 31, 2012)

AvonX said:


> Well for your information i have a recent road map sitting right here on my pc.
> There is no mention at all for desktop products. The only thing that it says its talking about HSA, servers and APU's that are joining the server market.
> They are planning to go full APU in all the markets. Desktops and Servers included.
> That's all folks. Honestly i am not kidding.



Read up on HSA, Amd's joint vision of the computing future(with the HSA foundation), then consider, in 4 years if every bit of software ran better using an on die Gpu(not going to happen i know but some killer apps will be this way by then for sure) then why on earth would Amd not use this feature on enthusiast parts as the top end part would be slower then a mid  teir Apu at some tasks, and as has been said to you, INTEL ARE ALREADY DOING THIS( all intel cpus are likely fabbed WITH a gpu,and look at Knights corner it has gpu shader components incorporated) and to me it looks like they are on a similar wavelengh to Amd here, hope that clarity helps you figure this out a bit better



AvonX said:


> Well for your information i have a recent road map sitting right here on my pc.
> There is no mention at all for desktop products. The only thing that it says its talking about HSA, servers and APU's that are joining the server market.
> They are planning to go full APU in all the markets. Desktops and Servers included.
> That's all folks. Honestly i am not kidding.



even if you do have this roadmap you havent attached / paintshopped yet, im starting to think you are just trolling people now , double postings a no no, edit your prior post.

oh and see my first comment,ie Enthusiast Cpu's will all have a gpu soon enough regardless of your short sighted opinion.


Or if your going to keep this stupid ass opinion then at least hate on Intel and Nvidia too, as Nvidias future Maxwell is a Gpu centric chip WITH a processor built in (allegged) and they deffinately are makeing project denver, essentially an Arm / kepler(afaik??) APU, intel are already onit as i said.


----------



## AvonX (Aug 31, 2012)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> Read up on HSA, Amd's joint vision of the computing future(with the HSA foundation), then consider, in 4 years if every bit of software ran better using an on die Gpu(not going to happen i know but some killer apps will be this way by then for sure) then why on earth would Amd not use this feature on enthusiast parts as the top end part would be slower then a mid  teir Apu at some tasks, and as has been said to you, INTEL ARE ALREADY DOING THIS( all intel cpus are likely fabbed WITH a gpu,and look at Knights corner it has gpu shader components incorporated) and to me it looks like they are on a similar wavelengh to Amd here, hope that clarity helps you figure this out a bit better
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Well that is your opinion, No hard feelings there. 
I did not call you stupid, apparently you have.
There is no point and meaning discussing this with you any further.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Aug 31, 2012)

AvonX said:


> Well that is your opinion, No hard feelings there.
> I did not call you stupid, apparently you have.
> There is no point and meaning discussing this with you any further.



I didnt mean to call you stupid , just your opinion , i have stupid opinions on some things, i dont usually wish a company to fold completely due to them, either way no great offence ment.

also i was not giving an opinion, I was telling you what is going on now in the industry.


----------



## AvonX (Aug 31, 2012)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> I didnt mean to call you stupid , just your opinion , i have stupid opinions on some things, i dont usually wish a company to fold completely due to them, either way no great offence ment.
> 
> also i was not giving an opinion, I was telling you what is going on now in the industry.



The industry might lead to where you are saying, but the core speed is not there for AMD to keep up with that, END of discussion. 
Have a nice day


----------



## eidairaman1 (Aug 31, 2012)

AvonX said:


> I totally agree with you but i don't think Steamroller will bring much to the table.
> Pretty much it will be the same thing in performance as Piledriver.
> I am going to sound like a bad person but i really hope they fail soon to get over and done with this management at AMD. Its leading nowhere. I am afraid that this would be the final hit at AMD but this is where things lead to. I really hope AMD has one more chance at it but with other management and not the current one.



AMD has had changes in Management over the past year. Piledriver is what I call a stop gap because they are focusing on the steam roller currently, basically BD is a major lesson learned as previous products were beating it, they tried doing more with less but it didnt work out that way.


----------



## Covert_Death (Aug 31, 2012)

what i don't understand is what is sooooo wrong with building just a simple... BAD ASS CPU...

Stop with the gimmicks, your not fooling anyone, ESPECIALLY in the enthusiast market where we are... enthusiastsss. the concept of BD and PD cores are "cool" to an extent but what i really want is just raw power, stop playing games AMD, i want you to make the most efficient CORE that you can and throw 4-8 of them on a single chip. no cutting corners, no sharrrrring between "cores" just make a core as best you can and throw multiple on a chip and sell that bad boy! i'd buy 2 of em day one if they just did things the right way

sorry for the rant but it just doesn't make sense what they are doing... they are trying to compete with hyperthreading (a program essentially) by making twice the cores and then chopping out certain components, this just seems like a bad idea to begin with

ill still buy a PD when they release but only because i have a rock solid 990fx board and need an upgrade and can't afford the ridiculous prices of Intel


----------



## AvonX (Aug 31, 2012)

eidairaman1 said:


> AMD has had changes in Management over the past year. Piledriver is what I call a stop gap because they are focusing on the steam roller currently, basically BD is a major lesson learned as previous products were beating it, they tried doing more with less but it didnt work out that way.



The problem is that they are still working less and nothing has really changed from the previous management. The lesson hasn't been learned unfortunately.
When you said about "less" the more proper word to use is "cheap". They decided to go cheap and that hasn't changed one bit.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Aug 31, 2012)

AvonX said:


> The problem is that they are still working less and nothing has really changed from the previous management. The lesson hasn't been learned unfortunately.
> When you said about "less" the more proper word to use is "cheap". They decided to go cheap and that hasn't changed one bit.



have you actually ever used an Apu desktop variant, Im not all about AMD or anything but i will say ,in the real world where people surf, play games, and run 3dmark11 endlessly on ever more gfx, your straight wrong, and any cpu Amd does above a quad at 3 Ghz let alone 4 will play all games smoothly at reasonable fps and with xfire and sli configs decent results are possible, i went cheap check my rig, i dont have any issues gameing, and eagerly await the Fx8350, i just hope they dont keep selling out fast like bulldozer did initially, bye now im off to the real world:shadedshu

by the way your arguments are so random ,why bring up core speed, Amd have the fastest user stock frequency comercially available, and also a max cpu frequency world record, also the highest stock graphics frequency btw.

retort add nauseum


----------



## AvonX (Aug 31, 2012)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> have you actually ever used an Apu desktop variant, Im not all about AMD or anything but i will say ,in the real world where people surf, play games, and run 3dmark11 endlessly on ever more gfx, your straight wrong, and any cpu Amd does above a quad at 3 Ghz let alone 4 will play all games smoothly at reasonable fps and with xfire and sli configs decent results are possible, i went cheap check my rig, i dont have any issues gameing, and eagerly await the Fx8350, i just hope they dont keep selling out fast like bulldozer did initially, bye now im off to the real world:shadedshu
> 
> by the way your arguments are so random ,why bring up core speed, Amd have the fastest user stock frequency comercially available, and also a max cpu frequency world record, also the highest stock graphics frequency btw.



I can see now where you are coming from. Let me ask you a question.
What is your current specs of your pc?
If you still have that 960T in your rig, why did you not upgrade to the fx series cpu? I know the answer but i was just curious. LoL
And what is the performance per clock ratio of that frequency you are talking about? 
And you also forgot to mention how much power consumption those cpus have once they are overclocked.


----------



## erocker (Sep 1, 2012)

Article posted yesterday showing roadmap: http://hexus.net/tech/news/cpu/44429-amd-steamroller-details-hot-chips-symposium/


----------



## librin.so.1 (Sep 1, 2012)

erocker said:


> Article posted yesterday showing roadmap: http://hexus.net/tech/news/cpu/44429-amd-steamroller-details-hot-chips-symposium/



I really like most of the stuff they do to improve the architecture. But darn, this _really_ calls for a process shrink, and if that article to be believed, they plan not to do it for steamroller.


----------



## AvonX (Sep 1, 2012)

Covert_Death said:


> what i don't understand is what is sooooo wrong with building just a simple... BAD ASS CPU...
> 
> Stop with the gimmicks, your not fooling anyone, ESPECIALLY in the enthusiast market where we are... enthusiastsss. the concept of BD and PD cores are "cool" to an extent but what i really want is just raw power, stop playing games AMD, i want you to make the most efficient CORE that you can and throw 4-8 of them on a single chip. no cutting corners, no sharrrrring between "cores" just make a core as best you can and throw multiple on a chip and sell that bad boy! i'd buy 2 of em day one if they just did things the right way
> 
> ...



I feel you there but that ain't going to happen because  mr. rory said its enough.
I was the first one to say to scrap this arc and start from scratch. Better be late than sorry.
If they shrunk the phenom 2 line and done some optimizations, hell they would of got allot more performance than this crap.
But they are just lazy and cheap.


----------



## Super XP (Sep 1, 2012)

Phenom II's have dragged on for way too long. Bulldozer may not have been what we expected, but way got done is done. AMD in the past made some poor decisions. Anyhow scrapping Bulldozer is utterly ridiculous especially at this time. 

We should expect performance improvements as this design becomes more familiar.
Bulldozer > Piledriver > Steamroller > Excavator > Tower-Crane> and so on.

At this point Piledriver performance numbers are all speculation, though I believe it will defeat Bulldozer clock 4 clock at least 10% to 15%. Other sites estimate about 20% to 30%. In about a months time we will finally find out. :


----------



## AvonX (Sep 1, 2012)

Super XP said:


> Phenom II's have dragged on for way too long. Bulldozer may not have been what we expected, but way got done is done. AMD in the past made some poor decisions. Anyhow scrapping Bulldozer is utterly ridiculous especially at this time.
> 
> We should expect performance improvements as this design becomes more familiar.
> Bulldozer > Piledriver > Steamroller > Excavator > Tower-Crane> and so on.
> ...



The good news is that one site claims to have the new fx 8350 and he is going to benchmark it this weekend. Don't know if this is legit but here is the site: http://www.obr-hardware.com/
He will make a direct comparison between the 8150 and the 8350 at 4.2 Ghz


----------



## Frick (Sep 1, 2012)

Ahh OBR. Wasn't he the guy that released a bunch of BD performance figures and it turned out they were projections?


----------



## AvonX (Sep 1, 2012)

Frick said:


> Ahh OBR. Wasn't he the guy that released a bunch of BD performance figures and it turned out they were projections?



I don't know. Just found this site while i was surfing.
Maybe he has allot of photoshopping to do. LoL
The die shot looks fake to me though.


----------



## librin.so.1 (Sep 1, 2012)

AvonX said:


> The die shot looks fake to me though.



Either BD and PD have identical dies (according to my eyes), or that "PD die shot" is just a palette-swapped BD die shot.


----------



## AvonX (Sep 1, 2012)

Vinska said:


> Either BD and PD have identical dies (according to my eyes), or that "PD die shot" is just a palette-swapped BD die shot.



Exactly the way i see it as well.
If you look on the left side of the die there is some type of error there that does not add up.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Sep 2, 2012)

Pd is a developement of BD so they do indeed as they should, look very similar i do see enough slight deviations from a flipped negative to make me think they may be legit, notably the four dark patches surounding the centres , but could be anything too.


----------



## AvonX (Sep 2, 2012)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> the four dark patches surounding the centres



Yeah, ive noticed that as well, that is why i think its fake.
It looks to be the same chip but who knows, it could be legit.


----------



## Super XP (Sep 2, 2012)

AvonX said:


> The good news is that one site claims to have the new fx 8350 and he is going to benchmark it this weekend. Don't know if this is legit but here is the site: http://www.obr-hardware.com/
> He will make a direct comparison between the 8150 and the 8350 at 4.2 Ghz


They should do a clock for clock comparison @ 3.60GHz and 4.20GHz. This looks fake, but who knows, let's see what he comes up with.


----------



## largon (Sep 2, 2012)

I don't think the changes in Piledriver would make the die shot look any different. 
Hoping for a perf/W increase for Piledriver over Bulldozer. Just to make it look like an upgrade from Stars family.


----------



## Coffebreak (Sep 2, 2012)

Reading his earlier posts on that orb hardware page it all looks like a scam. Already the site itself looks suspisious to say the least. But oh well, we can only wait what he comes up with.


----------



## librin.so.1 (Sep 2, 2012)

largon said:


> I don't think the changes in Piledriver would make the die shot look any different.



If I remember correctly, PD increased the transistor count compared to BD by ~200M and increased the die area a little. (can't find the source ATM, but I read it a bit after this news post was posted. I will try to dig it out later). If that is true, I don't think BD's and PD's die shots should look this similar then.


----------



## AvonX (Sep 2, 2012)

Vinska said:


> If I remember correctly, PD increased the transistor count compared to BD by ~200M and increased the die area a little. (can't find the source ATM, but I read it a bit after this news post was posted. I will try to dig it out later). If that is true, I don't think BD's and PD's die shots should look this similar then.



First of all wouldn't this guy need a bios to run this thing that he claims to have?
Except if he knows someone that he can provide him that bios, i don't see him running that chip or if it runs it won't be stable at all to test it anyway.
I don't think Asus has released any bios for that board to run a piledriver cpu. (Crosshair V Formula-Z)


----------



## largon (Sep 2, 2012)

OBR does have his sources for unreleased stuff. 
I think he works for some distributor or importer.

Personally, I think he's a sensationalist douchebag. 
(And by the looks of the site, a silly gun toter)


----------



## AvonX (Sep 2, 2012)

First test results have been posted, of course with a huge grain of salt. 
Here it is: http://www.obr-hardware.com/2012/09/preview-amd-fx-8350-piledriver-last.html
AMD its pretty much dead, and if they will not release other dedicated cpus after this i am switching to intel.
Z77 and 2700k here i come weeee. LoL
What a pile of s... you know the rest. LoL One whole year they haven't even touched this arc. 
They just tweaked it and overclocked it, that's it. According to Rory "Its enough" LoL 
I hope this is a good excuse to fire that idiot Rory. Lets get it done already.
This idiot is taking AMD to the graveyard.
I would guess Rory's boss won't be happy, this reflects to the servers as well. There goes his stupid talks about "its enough" Its never enough idiot.
Just fire that sucker already.


----------



## AvonX (Sep 2, 2012)

I can't wait for the youtube videos. LoL


----------



## repman244 (Sep 2, 2012)

I don't even know why he bothered to make these, we already know how Trinity performs which is using PD modules so basically everyone can make some sort of projection of how Vishera will perform.

And also, people shouldn't expect it being more than 15% faster than BD. It's just a tweaked BD.


----------



## largon (Sep 2, 2012)

Don't pay attention to OBR's "last performance desktop CPU" nonsense. 
He can't even write proper english so reading comprehension is prolly as bad, too, and the sources he uses for this claim (eg. the slide he links in the article) do not say anything to support that. 

Sensational BS, that's all. 

Though, I have no doubts about Piledriver's performance displayed in the aforementioned article.


----------



## AvonX (Sep 2, 2012)

largon said:


> Don't pay attention to OBR's "last performance desktop CPU" nonsense.



Its not whether you like him or not, but it is true.
All the slides and road maps confirms this. This is the last one.
Besides don't you think it would be stupid for AMD to announce this now? They would lose much more sales cause this thing is crap.
Perhaps instead of hating him, you should ask Rory what they have been doing all this time.
They haven't done shit.


----------



## TheLaughingMan (Sep 2, 2012)

So everyone is already crying foul about something that has not been released because someone posted some unconfirmable BS tests? Wow, you guys are a little too sensitive.

I mean I have an FX-8150 and I haven't seen this mythical failure of all that is processor everyone keeps crying about. Show me a real world example of when an FX-8150 complete craps its pants compared to a Sandy Bridge CPU.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Sep 2, 2012)

AvonX said:


> Its not whether you like him or not, but it is true.
> All the slides and road maps confirms this. This is the last one.
> Besides don't you think it would be stupid for AMD to announce this now? They would lose much more sales cause this thing is crap.
> Perhaps instead of hating him, you should ask Rory what they have been doing all this time.
> They haven't done shit.



your reasoning isnt very sound, If a guy makes shitter apples then the next man and still sells every last one (at a slightly lower cost) is he then going to stop makeing apples out of some self hateing im not the best vanity, your simply not right.

and Amd wont stop makeing Cpus, they will allways have some binned chips with non working gfx portions even if they went all APU, which i personally am not expecting for a fair few years anyway, you should start a blog on that site yourself where you bore the pants off people with troll like rants about Amd's demise and rory's shitness, then i might not read it.


----------



## AvonX (Sep 2, 2012)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> your reasoning isnt very sound, If a guy makes shitter apples then the next man and still sells every last one (at a slightly lower cost) is he then going to stop makeing apples out of some self hateing im not the best vanity, your simply not right.
> 
> and Amd wont stop makeing Cpus, they will allways have some binned chips with non working gfx portions even if they went all APU, which i personally am not expecting for a fair few years anyway, you should start a blog on that site yourself where you bore the pants off people with troll like rants about Amd's demise and rory's shitness, then i might not read it.



I don't know where you are getting at with this, but the results speak on their own.
Now if you are expecting for something that does not even exist on paper or on a road map, feel free to do so.


----------



## _JP_ (Sep 2, 2012)

So OBR has posted some benchmarks. Ok, so now we know it won't be anything like that.  Good.












[offtopic]Btw, AvonX, you started off fine (though I would switch the grain of salt by a truck load, considering it's OBR), but spazzing out like that afterwards...yeah, nice show you put on there. Also Z77+2700k doesn't make sense (to me) unless you already have the cpu.[/offtopic]


----------



## repman244 (Sep 2, 2012)

AvonX said:


> Its not whether you like him or not, but it is true.
> All the slides and road maps confirms this. This is the last one.
> Besides don't you think it would be stupid for AMD to announce this now? They would lose much more sales cause this thing is crap.
> Perhaps instead of hating him, you should ask Rory what they have been doing all this time.
> They haven't done shit.



Can you point me where AMD confirmed (not some made-up stories) that they are pulling out?

And I fail to see what Rory has anything to do with BD/PD or even SR. He was not in charge when those plans were made. These things take huge amount of time and you don't know for certain what performance you will get.
Give the man some time, no one can change a company in a year.



TheLaughingMan said:


> So everyone is already crying foul about something that has not been released because someone posted some unconfirmable BS tests? Wow, you guys are a little too sensitive.
> 
> I mean I have an FX-8150 and I haven't seen this mythical failure of all that is processor everyone keeps crying about. Show me a real world example of when an FX-8150 complete craps its pants compared to a Sandy Bridge CPU.



I bet people will expect 50% more performance with PD like it's a completely new architecture and not just a tweaked BD.

However I slightly disagree with the second, any CPU that isn't faster than the previous generation is a failure (The same way Pentium 4 was a failure, the situation here is very similar).
I can tell you now that I compared a 3930k (at stock clocks) vs my 1090T (which has similar performance as the 8150) in PS Lightroom (which is quite a simple program), the difference is massive.
You can check all the benchmarks and the 2600k beats the 8150 in almost everything, sometimes they are very close but don't forget that the 2600k is using much less power for that performance.
And when you start overclocking the power consumption of the 8150 is very high (which also puts a strain on the VRM).

If BD was faster than Phenom II in multithread and even slightly faster in single thread then IMO it wouldn't be a failure.
But since it isn't faster (except MT), those who use a Thuban have no CPU to upgrade to.

Now imagine if Haswell turned out to be slower in single thread than SB/IB and about the same in multithread + having high power consumption. Would you call it a solid CPU? I very much doubt it.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Sep 2, 2012)

AvonX said:


> I don't know where you are getting at with this, but the results speak on their own.
> Now if you are expecting for something that does not even exist on paper or on a road map, feel free to do so.



im not stupid enough to argue for or against, tests done on a alegged eng sample, Amd will have had ES 8350 chips for 6 months now that dosnt make it the final retail version to me.

Also on the last shown roadmap it clearly shows steamroller then excavator, it does not on that same page or anywhere in that PR bumph state that excavator or steamroller arch will be server only or the last cpu only chips from Amd, 
, those are actual facts anything your implying is made up BS from someone Imho who knows nothing of the cpu business. 

hows about you show me a slide where it says "this will be the last desktop cpu from Amd"" it can say something similar to that but circle it on the pic 

yet again your arguments are random, just because it dosnt list the next 5 gens of cpu Arch dosnt mean there wont be any, by your logic i should start looking for a new job because I dont personally know my companys next 2 gens of anything, they might not be planning to do any work in 2014, they might just be giving up and retireing.

ohh and Yawwn


----------



## AvonX (Sep 2, 2012)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> Also on the last shown roadmap it clearly shows steamroller then excavator, it does not on that same page or anywhere in that PR bumph state that excavator or steamroller arch will be server only or the last cpu only chips from Amd



However it does state with huge letters on the top left corner "AMD OPTERON FUTURE TECHNOLOGY" Have you missed that? Just asking.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Sep 2, 2012)

AvonX said:


> However it does state with huge letters on the top left corner "AMD OPTERON FUTURE TECHNOLOGY" Have you missed that? Just asking.



thats because that slide used to back up yours and OBS's bs claims was taken from server PR bumph, but it clearly states they have a plan for the future, anyhow you disagree with me , i get it, i wont change your mind nor you mine, now stop quoteing me with your trolling shinanigins 

it does not on that same page or anywhere in that PR bumph state that excavator or steamroller arch will be server only or the last cpu only chips from Amd,    


still stands as valid also


----------



## repman244 (Sep 2, 2012)

AvonX said:


> However it does state with huge letters on the top left corner "AMD OPTERON FUTURE TECHNOLOGY" Have you missed that? Just asking.



Well Steamroller will be used on desktop platforms (for now, all we know is they will use it for APU's). 
And if SR performs well for APU's why not use it instead of PD?







It could be that they are focusing on HSA, and that there will be nothing new (on performance end) until 2014 where we could maybe see performance Steamroller on 28nm along with integrated GPU (and a new socket, there were talks about an FM2 socket).


My speculation aside *there is no official info about performance parts being dropped and at the same time , no official info on new chips.
So people should really stop spreading FUD until we get official info.*


----------



## AvonX (Sep 2, 2012)

repman244 said:


> Well Steamroller will be used on desktop platforms (for now, all we know is they will use it for APU's).
> And if SR performs well for APU's why not use it instead of PD?
> 
> http://www.cpu-world.com/news_2012/images/L_AMD_desktop_roadmap_2012_2013.jpg
> ...



Sorry but this is an old road map and it still haves vishera piledriver on it for 2013 but its a release for 2012 and not for 2013.


----------



## repman244 (Sep 2, 2012)

AvonX said:


> Sorry but this is an old road map and it still haves vishera piledriver on it for 2013 but its a release for 2012 and not for 2013.



You should look a bit better. And it's not old, it's from February and AFAIK there are no newer roadmaps.


----------



## AvonX (Sep 2, 2012)

repman244 said:


> You should look a bit better. And it's not old, it's from February and AFAIK there are no newer roadmaps.



This is what Mark Papermaster said at AFDS summed up in these slides.
Now get a life and the other guy above. Cheers
Here is the link: http://www.2shared.com/document/_8ub9F--/AFDS_2012_Keynotes_Mark_Paperm.html

Now if you see anything about dedicated desktop cpus, i think you should get your eyes checked.

Enjoy


----------



## repman244 (Sep 2, 2012)

AvonX said:


> This is what Mark Papermaster said at AFDS summed up in these slides.
> Now get a life and the other guy above. Cheers
> Here is the link: http://www.2shared.com/document/_8ub9F--/AFDS_2012_Keynotes_Mark_Paperm.html
> 
> Enjoy



Thanks for the link, and you should really try to communicate more civil. We are only discussing here, not pointing knifes at each other 

Like I said (even from the PDF from your link), there is no information about anything being canceled (Not talking about something != canceled). They are moving towards APU's and implementing HSA, like they say: The future is fusion. And it is.
I don't see why they couldn't make an APU (GCN based GPU) with 3 or 4 steamroller modules later down the road. Even if you look at their older slides, you will see that there were talks of integrating the GPU on the "performance" parts.






Yes the slide is old but the idea is there. A potential problem with such design could be the TDP/power consumption (Imagine 4 BD modules and a GPU inside:shadedshu).

EDIT: From the linked article:






I speculate that the "Future Server APU" will probably be same die as some desktop counterpart and it could maybe scale up to 6/8 cores as it suggests.


----------



## AvonX (Sep 2, 2012)

repman244 said:


> I speculate that the "Future Server APU" will probably be same die as some desktop counterpart and it could maybe scale up to 6/8 cores as it suggests.



You cannot cherry pick one slide to speculate and make up your own conclusions.  Anyway its a server road map, doesn't say anything about desktops there.
In those slides i have uploaded to you there is two more slides of great importance  and it clarifies a few things to what AMD is planing to do. 

By the way this is an original AMD pdf file. Don't know about those other slides you have posted above.


----------



## erocker (Sep 2, 2012)

_JP_ said:


> So OBR has posted some benchmarks. Ok, so now we know it won't be anything like that.  Good.



If I remember correctly the tests he did before Bulldozer was released were pretty accurate. Everyone was upset that the results were poor. Sure enough the retail versions were quite poor as well. The results I'm seeing with Vishera look to be quite plausible.


----------



## AvonX (Sep 2, 2012)

erocker said:


> If I remember correctly the tests he did before Bulldozer was released were pretty accurate.



I haven't seen it, but i have read the same thing to what you are saying in other forums.


----------



## _JP_ (Sep 2, 2012)

*You're bumming me out!! Stop it!! *



erocker said:


> If I remember correctly the tests he did before Bulldozer was released were pretty accurate. Everyone was upset that the results were poor. Sure enough the retail versions were quite poor as well. The results I'm seeing with Vishera look to be quite plausible.


Where those tests also done with unpatched BIOS versions and ES samples?
Because I don't really remember.


----------



## erocker (Sep 2, 2012)

_JP_ said:


> Where those tests also done with unpatched BIOS versions and ES samples?
> Because I don't really remember.



Yes, but as we all know it didn't really matter that much.


----------



## Steevo (Sep 2, 2012)

According to my single threaded score my CPU is faster than the proposed results. 


1.18 Single on Cinebench 1 thread
6.50 on Multithreaded


----------



## repman244 (Sep 2, 2012)

AvonX said:


> You cannot cherry pick one slide to speculate and make up your own conclusions.  Anyway its a server road map, doesn't say anything about desktops there.
> In those slides i have uploaded to you there is two more slides of great importance  and it clarifies a few things to what AMD is planing to do.
> 
> By the way this is an original AMD pdf file. Don't know about those other slides you have posted above.



Well we don't have more slides, so I can only go by one there is/the latest one, and speculating isn't a conclusion, it's just guess work 
I went by the fact that they will make a lower end server chip (and if you look at the roadmap, Delhi is using AM3+) so it could remain the same in the future (But like I said this is just me speculating since AMD isn't saying anything).

The other slides I posted are much older (they are official AMD slides tho), but I just used them to make some kind of guess as to what was originally planned (and still is in some sort).

By the two other slides you mean the ULP parts and focusing onto APU's? If yes, that was expected from AMD long ago, it was/is the plan and the future.
We have the roadmap for mainstream APU's which obviously are here to stay/be improved.
The main question is, will they ever make an APU with 6/8 cores (Piledriver or Steamroller) to make it a "performance" part? I don't see why they shouldn't IF Steamroller is quite a big improvement. The main problem is that having 2 different dies is expensive (It would have to be the same as with BD now where all chips are the same dies with locked modules).

If however (and it's possible) Piledriver is the last higher end part, then we are at a loss here. With no competition Intel is free to do anything (imagine having fully locked CPU's with no option to overclock/tweak it).


----------



## AvonX (Sep 2, 2012)

repman244 said:


> Well we don't have more slides, so I can only go by one there is/the latest one, and speculating isn't a conclusion, it's just guess work
> I went by the fact that they will make a lower end server chip (and if you look at the roadmap, Delhi is using AM3+) so it could remain the same in the future (But like I said this is just me speculating since AMD isn't saying anything).
> 
> The other slides I posted are much older (they are official AMD slides tho), but I just used them to make some kind of guess as to what was originally planned (and still is in some sort).
> ...



I think this says it all:






No more dedicated desktop cpus, and i think in the near future AMD may be moving towards having an APU-only lineup from APU to FX to Opteron chips.


----------



## _JP_ (Sep 2, 2012)

erocker said:


> Yes, but as we all know it didn't really matter that much.


Got it. I just wanted to know if similar conditions were met.
Well, guess there's no reason to hold my breath. I was aiming to get a 4170 anyway...I won't  have the cash for the 4320, probably.


----------



## repman244 (Sep 2, 2012)

AvonX said:


> I think this says it all:
> 
> http://s8.postimage.org/6cg5tt4o5/Road_Map.jpg
> 
> No more dedicated desktop cpus, and i think in the near future AMD may be moving towards having an APU-only lineup from APU to FX to Opteron chips.



Correct, they want to move all their CPU's to APU's (ok maybe except high end opterons, but even there could be a benefit from the integrated GPU).
Right now it's very expensive to produce 2 different dies (Llano and BD), if they could move it to just one it would cut down the costs a lot.

But all we need now is a 6/8 core APU but those aren't seen on the roadmap (for 2013 at least, maybe we get some slides when Piledriver is release as to what is planned for 2014).
Maybe they want to see how Steamroller will perform (as an APU with 4 core), and if the power and performance requirements are met they release a 6/8 core version (with the GPU) as well.

All guess work for now tho.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Sep 2, 2012)

repman244 said:


> Right now it's very expensive to produce 2 different dies (



they produce 3 0r 4 cpu arch , and 3 types of gpu arch, thats why they have gone modular, plus they are doing the exact oposite and trying to get into designed for use oem arch IP insertion, enough said really, they will add a gpu , when it becomes limiting not to or just before, but not before a die shrink, and not before excavator imho ,which means to me AM3+ is likely to support steamroller then a new socket for excavator(+gpu) thats how i imagine it might go

above all bearing in mind they will be busy designing proprietary chips for microsoft sony and nintendo right now.


----------



## repman244 (Sep 2, 2012)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> they produce 3 0r 4 cpu arch , and 3 types of gpu arch, thats why they have gone modular, plus they are doing the exact oposite and trying to get into designed for use oem arch IP insertion, enough said really, they will add a gpu , when it becomes limiting not to or just before, but not before a die shrink, and not before excavator imho ,which means to me AM3+ is likely to support steamroller then a new socket for excavator(+gpu) thats how i imagine it might go
> 
> above all bearing in mind they will be busy designing proprietary chips for microsoft sony and nintendo right now.



I imagine it quite similar. A new socket is a certain, there is no doubt about it unless they intend to use FM2 for ages but I doubt it. I don't know when PCI-E 3 (CPU integrated) is planned but AFAIK that will require a new socket.
Also not to forget about DDR4 (2014->) and a possibility of switching to quad channel (APU's need it badly IMO, the GPU has huge benefits from the bandwidth as was shown with overclocking the RAM on Llano/Trinity).


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 2, 2012)

FM2 could probably work with Steamroller. FM1 -> FM2 = AM3 -> AM3+(ie. real changes are in power delivery). Steamroller is still a ways out yet, which gives FM2 a more than adequate lifespan. Even if they don't board cost si so low it doesn't really matter, anyway. High-end FM1 boards were $129, and most were priced @ $69-$89, so you could get a $200-$250 platform swap, CPU included. Same old ram works, it'll all be DDR3 for a while yet.


----------



## AvonX (Sep 2, 2012)

repman244 said:


> Maybe they want to see how Steamroller will perform



Mark said its already been designed and its ready.
So i suppose they already know how it performs.


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 2, 2012)

AvonX said:


> Mark said its already been designed and its ready.
> So i suppose they already know how it performs.



Too bad they couldn't just dump Piledriver and launch Steamroller in October. But maybe they will, and hence the launch delay.


----------



## AvonX (Sep 2, 2012)

cadaveca said:


> Too bad they couldn't just dump Piledriver and launch Steamroller in October. But maybe they will, and hence the launch delay.



I think they should.


----------



## repman244 (Sep 2, 2012)

cadaveca said:


> FM2 could probably work with Steamroller. FM1 -> FM2 = AM3 -> AM3+(ie. real changes are in power delivery). Steamroller is still a ways out yet, which gives FM2 a more than adequate lifespan. Even if they don't board cost si so low it doesn't really matter, anyway. High-end FM1 boards were $129, and most were priced @ $69-$89, so you could get a $200-$250 platform swap, CPU included. Same old ram works, it'll all be DDR3 for a while yet.



Do you think that the transition to GCN based integrated GPU won't require a change in socket? I know it is kind of a silly question but still.


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 3, 2012)

repman244 said:


> Do you think that the transition to GCN based integrated GPU won't require a change in socket? I know it is kind of a silly question but still.



I don't see any reason why. GCN uses a similar memory interface as previous chips, and uses similar power, if not less. The changes within the GPU core design aren't really what I think would affect socket design, at all. IT would make hte most sense for them to implement those change NOW, with the FM2-switch, as they should be relatively minort, if for power delivery.

Of course, I could very well be wrong, but who knows. Overall pwoer consumption soulhd decrease, while perforamcne increases overall. The APUs have the benefit of being able to show increase from both CPU adn GPU design hcanges, while future CPUs will only have the core changes to rely on, which has me far mroe excited for APUs, anyway.


----------



## TheLaughingMan (Sep 3, 2012)

Is it too late or too early to play this card:


----------



## AvonX (Sep 3, 2012)

cadaveca said:


> I don't see any reason why. GCN uses a similar memory interface as previous chips, and uses similar power, if not less. The changes within the GPU core design aren't really what I think would affect socket design, at all. IT would make hte most sense for them to implement those change NOW, with the FM2-switch, as they should be relatively minort, if for power delivery.
> 
> Of course, I could very well be wrong, but who knows. Overall pwoer consumption soulhd decrease, while perforamcne increases overall. The APUs have the benefit of being able to show increase from both CPU adn GPU design hcanges, while future CPUs will only have the core changes to rely on, which has me far mroe excited for APUs, anyway.



That is if they make it that far and they don't completely shut down the company.


----------



## Super XP (Sep 3, 2012)

Interesting, if this is true, then AMD is going to release the 8-Core FX CPU's in October 2012 and the 6-Core and Quad-Core in December 2012. Who knows, and I am wondering if it would be worth upgrading my current FX-8120 for the upcoming FX-8320  Performance speaks, it all has to do with gaming performance. 



> *October* A10-5800B
> 3.8GHz / 4MB L2 / 4 cores / Socket FM2
> A10-5800K
> 3.8GHz / 4MB L2 / 4 cores / Unlocked / Socket FM2
> ...


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 3, 2012)

TheLaughingMan said:


> Is it too late or too early to play this card:
> 
> http://img.techpowerup.org/120902/JF-AMD Summon.jpg



Didn't you hear? That card was banned at the last rule roadmap update.


----------



## WC (Sep 3, 2012)

*FPU hopes...*



TheLostSwede said:


> Clearly you don't understand how it works then. Hyper Threading is virtual CPU cores, i.e. they're not physically inside the CPU, but it's rather the ability of one core to run multiple (two in Intel's case) threads.
> 
> AMD's route is very different, as their CPU's actually have the stated amount of cores. However, each core doesn't have a dedicated FPU and the cache is shared between the two integer processors.
> 
> Neither is ideal, but AMD clearly has a lack of FPU power and the shared cache caused some additional head ache, especially during bad predictions. But no, BD/PD is not AMD's version of Hyper Threading, instead it's AMD's attempt at adding more integer performance at the cost of FPU performance which doesn't really make sense... Now if they could do Hyper Threading on the FPU...



From all that I have read and what I can estimate, AMD is gearing towards leveraging their GPU to perform the necessary FPU calculations for the CPU. That is why I believe they are pushing HSA and OpenGL programming. They are making headway into clearing up the FMAC and breaking up the decode into one per module though on the CPU so hopefully we can see some performance improvements. I still think there is plenty of headroom for improvements and advancements. This one is a wait and see event, I think AMD has something here, but new architecture is always rough when first starting out.


----------



## Steevo (Sep 3, 2012)

WC said:


> From all that I have read and what I can estimate, AMD is gearing towards leveraging their GPU to perform the necessary FPU calculations for the CPU. That is why I believe they are pushing HSA and OpenGL programming. They are making headway into clearing up the FMAC and breaking up the decode into one per module though on the CPU so hopefully we can see some performance improvements. I still think there is plenty of headroom for improvements and advancements. This one is a wait and see event, I think AMD has something here, but new architecture is always rough when first starting out.



AMD does have something, I believe it has been called a turd already, now they are just attempting to polish it. 

Poor compared to any equally priced Intel offering, and a step back in performance from the last generation of chips in all except a few specific benchmarks and applications. 

On the server side it isn't much better with their "server" chip. 

AMD has the issue of promising great things and underwhelmingly falling short of even the smallest semblance of those ideas, now their APU series is good for laptops and light weight gaming, but not much else. Now they are talking about "fabric" and all of a sudden they are trying to leverage hardware to run software they hasn't been built, and won't until someone see the need, or pays for it, and historically they won't. And by the time the performance need catches up with the production of such hardware and software the performance of the CPU may overtake what is reasonably needed, thus creating the void AMD keeps falling into. 



Famous for creating hardware with functions that aren't needed to run software that doesn't exist, to fill a self proclaimed need, only to later ignore it. AMD, yep, that's us.


----------



## Melvis (Sep 3, 2012)

IF OBR slides are correct then im sorta happy realy, i was after a CPU that is as good as a 2600K and going by that it is. Which was AMD's original plan with the 8150, so to bring it up to the 2600K level is good enough for me and worth the upgrade


----------



## AvonX (Sep 3, 2012)

Steevo said:


> AMD does have something, I believe it has been called a turd already, now they are just attempting to polish it.
> 
> Poor compared to any equally priced Intel offering, and a step back in performance from the last generation of chips in all except a few specific benchmarks and applications.
> 
> ...



I am impressed, i could not have put it better myself.
That pretty much sums this up Folks.
You better get use to it.


----------



## largon (Sep 3, 2012)

OFFS. 
Some surprise there's no mention of desktop Steamroller in a presentation about plans for HSA family. 


There _will_ be a desktop non-APU Steamroller as long as there's an enterprise non-APU Steamroller in the pipe.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Sep 3, 2012)

largon said:


> OFFS.
> Some surprise there's no mention of desktop Steamroller in a presentation about plans for HSA family.
> 
> 
> There will be a desktop non-APU Steamroller as long as there's an enterprise non-APU Steamroller in the pipe.



+1idge


----------



## AvonX (Sep 3, 2012)

largon said:


> OFFS.
> Some surprise there's no mention of desktop Steamroller in a presentation about plans for HSA family.
> 
> 
> There _will_ be a desktop non-APU Steamroller as long as there's an enterprise non-APU Steamroller in the pipe.



Keep dreaming 
Why was it not mentioned at all then, in any of their presentations?
They did not even show what they have coming up with vishera piledriver.
Now you can fall on the floor and start crying.


----------



## largon (Sep 3, 2012)

1. The presentation was about enterprise CPUs, HSA and Fusion 
2. Desktop Steamroller is not part of any of the categories above
3. You said it, wonder why upcoming desktop Piledriver (Vishera) was not mentioned, either. Strange is it not?

PS.
Relax, no need to take this as emotionally as you do.


----------



## AvonX (Sep 4, 2012)

largon said:


> 1. The presentation was about enterprise CPUs, HSA and Fusion
> 2. Desktop Steamroller is not part of any of the categories above
> 3. You said it, wonder why upcoming desktop Piledriver (Vishera) was not mentioned, either. Strange is it not?
> 
> ...



Well they mentioned all the rest except the dedicated performance cpus.
Doesn't this tell you something?
Lats time i checked, previous presentation was all about the same things and they have not mentioned anything about performance desktop cpus. Finally someone jumped up and asked them and they responded to that not very warmly. I mean two times in a row????
I think that tells me something.


----------



## ensabrenoir (Sep 4, 2012)

I.....think ill wait till the moonraker chips come out.....


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Sep 4, 2012)

AvonX said:


> I think this says it all:
> 
> 
> 
> No more dedicated desktop cpus, and i think in the near future AMD may be moving towards having an APU-only lineup from APU to FX to Opteron chips.




and i think this says it all

a new intel PR bumphlet about,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,Harnessing the potential of the gpu to increase application performance, intel must be about to close and fall apart and stop selling cpus after all ive not seen a chart for intel past 2020, the end is comeing

http://software.intel.com/sites/bil...iles/PDFs/ISA_GPUProgramming_09Aug(final).pdf


----------



## Recus (Sep 4, 2012)

AvonX said:


> I can't wait for the youtube videos. LoL



Here you go.


----------



## Goodman (Sep 4, 2012)

Recus said:


> Here you go.



Stupid people & the driver

As you can see it as a flat wheel maybe something appends that was not his fault?
But then again the guy seems drunk?

Anyway punching a guy for that is stupid the best thing to do is get in the "bulldozer" & take the key out so the guy can't go anywhere & wait for police to get there , sad seeing how we still not civilize...

Cars can be replace we all do have insurance for that sort of thing...

Back on topic , I am not hoping for something great on the next gen of bulldozer but lets hope it will be at least 15% (25% be better) more performance across the board that would be at least a step forward...


----------



## AvonX (Sep 4, 2012)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> and i think this says it all
> 
> a new intel PR bumphlet about,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,Harnessing the potential of the gpu to increase application performance, intel must be about to close and fall apart and stop selling cpus after all ive not seen a chart for intel past 2020, the end is comeing
> 
> http://software.intel.com/sites/bil...iles/PDFs/ISA_GPUProgramming_09Aug(final).pdf



Did you see what he said? 
"use of GPGPU in that space may be a few years away"
So always AMD is ahead of time and they fail. The thing is what do we use now.
And the bulldozer idea was a stupid idea. Tell me how many software and apps have used this arc until now or even games?


----------



## techtard (Sep 4, 2012)

AvonX said:


> Did you see what he said?
> "use of GPGPU in that space may be a few years away"
> So always AMD is ahead of time and they fail. The thing is what do we use now.
> And the bulldozer idea was a stupid idea. Tell me how many software and apps have used this arc until now or even games?



None, because most games and apps are still 32-bit and built for WinXP. Blame Microsoft for holding back the industry again.

I don't understand fanboys. You want AMD to fail, yet you don't understand the ramifications. 

Intel has already slowed down innovation. Pretty soon they will be back to their old ways of charging premium prices for marginal upgrades. 
If that happens, the consumer loses.


----------



## Steevo (Sep 4, 2012)

techtard said:


> None, because most games and apps are still 32-bit and built for WinXP. Blame Microsoft for holding back the industry again.
> 
> I don't understand fanboys. You want AMD to fail, yet you don't understand the ramifications.
> 
> ...



Microsoft? Try again, they, the game designers are lazy and want to keep reusing the same engine and do a few minor updates. DX11 has been out for quite awhile, and yet look at what we have, the Xbox and PS3 are both multi-core CPU. 

I don't want AMD to fail, no one does. We just grow tired of their bullshit. Call it what it is, and stop trying to dress it up, its fine if they want to sell bulldozer as the worlds fastest 8 core as its the only one, its fine if they want to tout their few wins, but this whole new technology that never materializes is utter crap and is the cause for many to never purchase their hardware again. 

3D gates and 22nm, Knights Corner...... yeah, slowing down.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Sep 4, 2012)

AvonX said:


> So always AMD is ahead of time and they fail. The thing is what do we use now



oh and good question ,,, what is your system, whys yours not listed


i really should try ignoreing your trolling but, intel were first to have an on chip vga component,,,  intel were way before Amd fitting Fpu units in chips but behind them in x64 so whos best, neither  , your way behind the whole concept of progress, and adoption rates,,,

when everybodys carrying around a quadcore cpu with quad core gpu/gpgpu in their pockets and laptop bags there wont be the issue of who will benefit and what software will use it as it will start to become the norm, and thats not far off in the west, progress happens quicker then you think sometimes ,look at gpu's and soundcards for that matter, literally burst into being the norm from not even existing, you kids sometimes

Another thing has me perplexed, how is a chip thats on par with and sometimes better then a 2600K bad anyway, its a tock + to intel , and a stepping + to AMD , isnt it a bit unreasonable to expect it to beat ivy bridge , i certainly wasnt expecting that, and i love the importance people put on IPC these days , since if they went by the good old time standards of how does it game and do word processing/ photo editing a 5800K APU would piss a 3770K in some benchmarks(clearly soley using onboard gpu/igpu)


----------



## AvonX (Sep 5, 2012)

techtard said:


> Intel has already slowed down innovation. Pretty soon they will be back to their old ways of charging premium prices for marginal upgrades.
> If that happens, the consumer loses.



I do not agree with the other things you said on that post.

Well that is why i want AMD out of the way already. They are just flooding the market with useless products. They have no competition at all against intel in any market. They are not doing any good to us "consumers". And all this is due to the fact they have decided to go "cheap" a long time ago and they are still cheap on making cpus. With AMD out of the way, the world would be a better place.

I think they should just hand over the x86 licences they have to someone else who knows how to design chips. "Sooner the better"


----------



## techtard (Sep 5, 2012)

AvonX said:


> I do not agree with the other things you said on that post.
> 
> Well that is why i want AMD out of the way already. They are just flooding the market with useless products. They have no competition at all against intel in any market. They are not doing any good to us "consumers". And all this is due to the fact they have decided to go "cheap" a long time ago and they are still cheap on making cpus. With AMD out of the way, the world would be a better place.
> 
> I think they should just hand over the x86 licences they have to someone else who knows how to design chips. "Sooner the better"



You should probably stop posting. All do is spout ignorant garbage.


----------



## AvonX (Sep 5, 2012)

techtard said:


> You should probably stop posting. All do is spout ignorant garbage.



You probably should stop responding altogether already.
You have no idea of what you are talking about. 
When you say that Microsoft is holding back the industry, i should have probably stopped from reading  any further.


----------



## Covert_Death (Sep 5, 2012)

avonx, your main problem is that your are comparing AMD to intel instead of just observing AMD. AMD makes a fine product, for the price its even better. the FX series flunked at what they marketed it towards which was gaming but it does AMAZING in other areas like rendering. they make a good product and keep intel prices at least in the realm of comprehension, if amd goes away nobody will replace them for quiet sometime, nobody has the money or the R&D setup to replace them either. 

facts are AMD is smaller then intel and thats just the way it is, they don't have the money intel has and that is fine because they make do with what they have. they make a good chip, maybe not by your standards but all that means is you need to stop considering AMD... just buy intel, thats fine with me and everyone else in the world. no one is forcing you to buy AMD, hell i haven't even seen a post of someone ASKING you to buy AMD so why the fuss really? go back to the intel threads and just relax...


----------



## AvonX (Sep 5, 2012)

Covert_Death said:


> avonx, your main problem is that your are comparing AMD to intel instead of just observing AMD. AMD makes a fine product, for the price its even better. the FX series flunked at what they marketed it towards which was gaming but it does AMAZING in other areas like rendering. they make a good product and keep intel prices at least in the realm of comprehension, if amd goes away nobody will replace them for quiet sometime, nobody has the money or the R&D setup to replace them either.
> 
> facts are AMD is smaller then intel and thats just the way it is, they don't have the money intel has and that is fine because they make do with what they have. they make a good chip, maybe not by your standards but all that means is you need to stop considering AMD... just buy intel, thats fine with me and everyone else in the world. no one is forcing you to buy AMD, hell i haven't even seen a post of someone ASKING you to buy AMD so why the fuss really? go back to the intel threads and just relax...



Who told you that nobody has the money? That is a big fat lie.
AMD has the X86 licenses and that is the only thing that keeps them in in the cpu business.
Because AMD does not know how to design cpus anymore. They are only causing damage to the consumers with low performance products which leaves most consumers at the hands of Intel and they have no other choices.


----------



## Steevo (Sep 5, 2012)

AvonX said:


> Who told you that nobody has the money? That is a big fat lie.
> AMD has the X86 licenses and that is the only thing that keeps them in in the cpu business.
> Because AMD does not know how to design cpus anymore. They are only causing damage to the consumers with low performance products which leaves most consumers at the hands of Intel and they have no other choices.



This is simply not true. AMD has pioneered a LOT of new hardware standards, where do you think Intel got X64 from? It certainly had nothing to to do with the horrible Itanium debacle. Nor anything to do with Prescott EE melt your face it gets so hot.

Not everyone can afford a Ferrari, so thus we have AMD. 

My beef is their crappy marketing, the 7/10 times their ideas flop due to lack of support from them, and turd polishing.


----------



## Super XP (Sep 5, 2012)

Steevo said:


> Microsoft?
> 
> 3D gates and 22nm, Knights Corner...... yeah, slowing down.


You can thank AMD 4 pushing innovation for Intel's 3D gates. One thing people fail to understand is Intel can afford to screw up, where as AMD cannot. Intel messed up and tried to stall innovation many times in History. If it wasn't for AMD's blunt headstrong innovation to succeed, we would all be still using Pentium 5 or 6's right now.

AND with its limited R & D still led the industry in a much better path vs. What Intel wanted to do, not to mention AMD designing some nice hardware that competed strong.

or x86 microprocessor innovations, AMD has shown the way as well.
First superscalar RISC - K5 
First to use "Flip-Chip" technology - K6 
First on-chip L2 cache - K6-3 
First use of copper interconnects - K7 
First fully pipelined, superscalar floating point unit - K7 
First to extend x86 to 64-bits (AMD64) - K8
First IMC (Integrated Memory Controller) - Athlon 64
First Dual-Core processors Athlon 64 x2 
First Quad-Core processors
First 8- Core processors - Bulldozer
Etc......


----------



## nt300 (Sep 5, 2012)

Dont forget about AMD pushing DDR2 versus Intel and the RD Ram. Who won in the end? AMD


----------



## eidairaman1 (Sep 5, 2012)

nt300 said:


> Dont forget about AMD pushing DDR2 versus Intel and the RD Ram. Who won in the end? AMD



that was DDR actually


----------



## repman244 (Sep 5, 2012)

Super XP you forgot about first IMC.

But anyway, let's not get off-topic here (because we all know how a thread of Intel vs AMD ends up).
I don't see a problem IF AMD chooses not to make high end desktop parts, it's their money and perhaps they want to spend in on things that they think it's important.
If you want them to make high end chip, be my guest and invest a few billions, these things don't fall from the sky.
They obviously shifted their focus onto APU's and if they see the future in that good for them (remember when people said the following: why do you need a 64-bit CPU when a 32-bit is enough, why do you need 2 cores when you only need 1 etc. same thing with APU's).
Not having a roadmap for so called high end chips is not the end of the world.


----------



## Super XP (Sep 5, 2012)

Great point. Also AMD rules in overall value especially if you are looking to build a gaming PC.

Anyhow, if Piledriver ends up faster, runs cooler and OC's like a madman, who's in for one?
For me it has to perform upwards of 15% or more in my favorite games. Even then I am quite happy with my FX 8120 @4.40 GHz with all 8 Cores enabled...


----------



## nt300 (Sep 6, 2012)

Super XP said:


> Great point. Also AMD rules in overall value especially if you are looking to build a gaming PC.
> 
> Anyhow, if Piledriver ends up faster, runs cooler and OC's like a madman, who's in for one?
> For me it has to perform upwards of 15% or more in my favorite games. Even then I am quite happy with my FX 8120 @4.40 GHz with all 8 Cores enabled...


Maybe I upgrade but what I have is doing just fine for now. Would be nice to see the Piledrivers do well though.


----------



## AvonX (Sep 6, 2012)

Covert_Death said:


> avonx, your main problem is that your are comparing AMD to intel instead of just observing AMD. AMD makes a fine product, for the price its even better. the FX series flunked at what they marketed it towards which was gaming but it does AMAZING in other areas like rendering. they make a good product and keep intel prices at least in the realm of comprehension, if amd goes away nobody will replace them for quiet sometime, nobody has the money or the R&D setup to replace them either.
> 
> facts are AMD is smaller then intel and thats just the way it is, they don't have the money intel has and that is fine because they make do with what they have. they make a good chip, maybe not by your standards but all that means is you need to stop considering AMD... just buy intel, thats fine with me and everyone else in the world. no one is forcing you to buy AMD, hell i haven't even seen a post of someone ASKING you to buy AMD so why the fuss really? go back to the intel threads and just relax...



And one more thing, there is lots of huge companies with "lots" of money but they know the current status of AMD. AMD is left with lots of unskilled and inexperienced engineers who are just copy pasting cores and they are not innovating, plus they are left with no "fabs" of their own. That is why huge investors with the huge "bucks" don't invest their money at AMD.


----------



## Steevo (Sep 6, 2012)

AvonX said:


> And one more thing, there is lots of huge companies with "lots" of money but they know the current status of AMD. AMD is left with lots of unskilled and inexperienced engineers who are just copy pasting cores and they are not innovating, plus they are left with no "fabs" of their own. That is why huge investors with the huge "bucks" don't invest their money at AMD.



What part of this is even close to anything other than your own opinion?

Please stop now.


----------



## pantherx12 (Sep 7, 2012)

AvonX said:


> And one more thing, there is lots of huge companies with "lots" of money but they know the current status of AMD. AMD is left with lots of unskilled and inexperienced engineers who are just copy pasting cores and they are not innovating, plus they are left with no "fabs" of their own. That is why huge investors with the huge "bucks" don't invest their money at AMD.



Actually AMD do quite well in the server/oem market.


----------



## erocker (Sep 7, 2012)

Wow, this thread just goes in one circle after another. Here's an idea... Stop responding to the one who keeps repeating the same things over and over again and this dead horse beating show will stop.

Thanks.


----------



## Super XP (Sep 7, 2012)

Hey, did I miss something? 
I call upon the Piledriver gods to grant a 25% performance increase with lower volts for our beloved Vishera processors.


----------



## TRWOV (Sep 7, 2012)

Who cares what tier AMD CPUs are? Anything above Conroe performance levels (read: everything current) is enough for most tasks.


----------



## Robnof (Sep 7, 2012)

trwov said:


> who cares what tier amd cpus are? Anything above conroe performance levels (read: Everything current) is enough for most tasks.



+1.


----------



## Super XP (Sep 7, 2012)

Piledriver fixes a lot of problems over Bulldozer, but the one to watch for major design changes is Steamroller. 
http://semiaccurate.com/2012/09/06/a-brief-look-at-amds-steamroller-core/


----------



## GSquadron (Sep 7, 2012)

How comes a more powerful cpu with a better gpu uses the same 65W as other cpus?


----------



## nt300 (Sep 7, 2012)

Aleksander Dishnica said:


> How comes a more powerful cpu with a better gpu uses the same 65W as other cpus?


The manufacturing process plays a role next to the design. Better process should get you better wattage.


Super XP said:


> Piledriver fixes a lot of problems over Bulldozer, but the one to watch for major design changes is Steamroller.
> http://semiaccurate.com/2012/09/06/a-brief-look-at-amds-steamroller-core/


It says Steamroller was suppose to be the Bulldozer 1.5 years ago because it changes a lot and is going to be much faster. Good read.


----------



## de.das.dude (Sep 7, 2012)

wondering how steam roller is going to be priced. and if they will decrease the bulldozer prices then.


----------



## TRWOV (Sep 7, 2012)

AMD already lowered BD prices about two weeks ago, IIRC


----------



## Prima.Vera (Sep 7, 2012)

techtard said:


> None, because most games and apps are still 32-bit and built for WinXP. Blame Microsoft for holding back the industry again.



I only blame M$ for killing 3D sound on PC. I still don't understand how in 2012 games are sounding way worst than the games 10 years ago. Unreal, Deus Ex, Thief, FEAR anyone? :shadedshu


----------



## eidairaman1 (Sep 7, 2012)

Prima.Vera said:


> I only blame M$ for killing 3D sound on PC. I still don't understand how in 2012 games are sounding way worst than the games 10 years ago. Unreal, Deus Ex, Thief, FEAR anyone? :shadedshu



Direct Sound and EAX/ were smooshed with the new driver model of Vista and higher cuz you guessed it- Realtek...:shadedshu

Environmental sound helped even 2.1 systems considerably, since not everyone can have a 5.1/7.1 system


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Sep 7, 2012)

It will be very interesting to see just how well these new chips Oc, what with Amd switching to High Densitylaugh: isnt everything HD now) cell libraries i cant help but think that wont do OCing any good, i mean Gpu's use them now and i dont remember anyone getting one of them to 5Ghz+, my longed for end goal this year


----------



## de.das.dude (Sep 7, 2012)

TRWOV said:


> AMD already lowered BD prices about two weeks ago, IIRC



wait what? their prices went up a little in india! the FX4100 is now at Rs7000, similar to a phenom II 965


----------



## Super XP (Sep 8, 2012)

de.das.dude said:


> wondering how steam roller is going to be priced. and if they will decrease the bulldozer prices then.


SteamRoller is scheduled to be released sometime in mid to late Q2 2013 (April/May/June) (In AMD's time it may probably be Q3 2013) to completely replace the Bulldozer & Piledriver lineups. So you mean will Piledriver based CPU's decrease in price, not Bulldozer. Piledriver is replacing Bulldozer completely. 

Obviously AMD has something planned for Steamroller. There's been Major Architectural changes versus Piledriver. Piledriver may have fixed a lot of Bulldozer's issues by way of tweaks and latencies, but it is Steamroller that will bring major performance improvements from what has been said as of late. 

Interesting times for AMD


----------



## Covert_Death (Sep 8, 2012)

piledriver is probably the end of the line for AM3+ socket boards though, i doubt steamroller would run on such an "old" socket. time for AM4!!


----------



## Super XP (Sep 8, 2012)

Covert_Death said:


> piledriver is probably the end of the line for AM3+ socket boards though, i doubt steamroller would run on such an "old" socket. time for AM4!!


Well the way AMD made it sound, Steamroller is Socket AM3+ and Excavator may be Socket AM4. It may also be based on DDR4? Sometime in 2014 AMD plans to relese improved version of Steamroller with better overall power and performance along with Excavator coming right after it.

AMD is really good at sticking with long term compatibility. But of course it's all speculation in relation to how AMD's past long term socket support.


----------



## Covert_Death (Sep 8, 2012)

hmmmm it'd be nice if it were AM3+ but i need an upgrade nowwww, hopefully piledriver is a step up from my 955 @ 4.0 Ghz... if it proves worthy ill buy in, if not i guess ill push my 955 to its limit and wait for steamroller... either way im NOT buying another board for a long time


----------



## eidairaman1 (Sep 8, 2012)

Covert_Death said:


> hmmmm it'd be nice if it were AM3+ but i need an upgrade nowwww, hopefully piledriver is a step up from my 955 @ 4.0 Ghz... if it proves worthy ill buy in, if not i guess ill push my 955 to its limit and wait for steamroller... either way im NOT buying another board for a long time



no need for it, you have the next to top tier board right there


----------



## Super XP (Sep 8, 2012)

Yes and I don't plan on replacing my Crosshair V (AM3+) for a long time.  Though I would like to one day plug in a nice FX 8520 Steamroller 8-Core in it.


----------



## librin.so.1 (Sep 8, 2012)

Super XP said:


> Yes and I don't plan on replacing my Crosshair V (AM3+) for a long time.  Though I would like to one day plug in a nice FX 8520 Steamroller 8-Core in it.



Ditto - I would like to keep my mobo for a long time and have a steamroller in it eventually
*crosses fingers for AM3+ for Steamroller*


----------



## AvonX (Sep 9, 2012)

Vinska said:


> Ditto - I would like to keep my mobo for a long time and have a steamroller in it eventually
> *crosses fingers for AM3+ for Steamroller*



Don't understand you guys, why you insist on AM3+?
They should leave AM3+ behind but i will not be surprised if AMD will release SR on AM3+.


----------



## librin.so.1 (Sep 9, 2012)

AvonX said:


> Don't understand you guys, why you insist on AM3+?
> They should leave AM3+ behind but i will not be surprised if AMD will release SR on AM3+.



'Cause I don't like the idea to throw away my current mobo just so I could use the "bulldozer done right" (even though my mobo is not the top notch one, but is quite high-end (and expensive) nonetheless).


----------



## Covert_Death (Sep 9, 2012)

Vinska said:


> 'Cause I don't like the idea to throw away my current mobo just so I could use the "bulldozer done right" (even though my mobo is not the top notch one, but is quite high-end (and expensive) nonetheless).



exactly.... Intel boys are too used to buy boards and chips together at the same time... that's a $500-$600 upgrade EVERYTIME!!!!!! I'd much rather stick to what i can afford to upgrade every few years and stick to $200-$300


----------



## AvonX (Sep 9, 2012)

Vinska said:


> 'Cause I don't like the idea to throw away my current mobo just so I could use the "bulldozer done right" (even though my mobo is not the top notch one, but is quite high-end (and expensive) nonetheless).



The real situation here is that AMD doesn't have something really good to offer for performance desktop cpus. And that is why there is no new boards rolling out. If they had a good cpu upgrade they would of left AM3+ behind just as in trinity parts they have new boards.


----------



## Super XP (Sep 9, 2012)

AvonX said:


> The real situation here is that AMD doesn't have something really good to offer for performance desktop cpus. And that is why there is no new boards rolling out. If they had a good cpu upgrade they would of left AM3+ behind just as in trinity parts they have new boards.


lol, Are you kidding 
Who said AMD doesn't have anything good to offer via performance desktop CPU's. How about the best they can currently offer, such as the FX 8150, 8120, and a bunch of PII's lying around. They hold great price/performance and can do anything you throw at them including gaming. 

Your logic is flawed but you do have a right to your opinion. AMD should stick with AM3+ up until Steamroller, then move onto a different socket for Excavator. 

AMD made some mistakes with the Bulldozer Design which still needs a lot of refining. But nevertheless for now, they are alive and kicking when plugged into a compatible mobo


----------



## Frick (Sep 9, 2012)

Super XP said:


> lol, Are you kidding



I think this needs to be reposted:



erocker said:


> Wow, this thread just goes in one circle after another. Here's an idea... Stop responding to the one who keeps repeating the same things over and over again and this dead horse beating show will stop.
> 
> Thanks.


----------



## Super XP (Sep 9, 2012)

Frick said:


> I think this needs to be reposted:


Oh so he is the  yes now I get it lol.

Anyhow let's chew on this:


> Many say that Steamroller will not be able to face Haswell, but the reality is that Steamroller is apparently a proper implementation of the FlexFP concept. The doubling of the cache, dispatch and fetching units will greatly increase the performance.
> 
> Many are estimating conservative values ranging between a 20% and a 30% performance improvement over the current Bulldozer processors, but sources inside the engineering department at AMD are reportedly expecting 45% performance improvements.


http://news.softpedia.com/news/AMD-s-Steamroller-To-Be-Faster-than-Intel-Haswell-289980.shtml


----------



## Steevo (Sep 9, 2012)

I am waiting for GTA 5 to see what my next system will be. If AMD doesn't get its crap together I will be Intel and Nvidia.


----------



## Dent1 (Sep 10, 2012)

Steevo said:


> I am waiting for GTA 5 to see what my next system will be. If AMD doesn't get its crap together I will be Intel and Nvidia.



I don't think AMD's CEOs are losing any sleep over you.


----------



## Steevo (Sep 10, 2012)

Dent1 said:


> I don't think AMD's CEOs are losing any sleep over you.



While I don't think they are either there are a lot of businesses with people like me, who buy, build and support all the systems in use, so a switch to Intel exclusively means a loss of motherboard, GPU, and CPU sales on. Then all the systems I build for people, and my own system. While it might only be 20 or so systems a year when you piss me off, when 1,000 other people like me get tired of it also that's 20,000 per year of chipsets, GPU, and CPU's that you don't sell.

But don't worry, I am sure they aren't concerned, they plan on never making another better performing chip anytime in the future.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Sep 10, 2012)

Covert_Death said:


> exactly.... Intel boys are too used to buy boards and chips together at the same time... that's a $500-$600 upgrade EVERYTIME!!!!!! I'd much rather stick to what i can afford to upgrade every few years and stick to $200-$300



that was the whole idea of a custom pc.

idk if steamroller supports ddr3 but in event it does along with 970 chipset that cpu is replacing then phii in my bros machine and a hd 8 or 9 series gpu is going in with ram topped at 32GB.

The machine has 8Gb in it already.


----------



## Super XP (Sep 10, 2012)

eidairaman1 said:


> that was the whole idea of a custom pc.
> 
> idk if steamroller supports ddr3 but in event it does along with 970 chipset that cpu is replacing then phii in my bros machine and a hd 8 or 9 series gpu is going in with ram topped at 32GB.
> 
> The machine has 8Gb in it already.


Intel don't plan on supporting DDR4 up until after late 2014. I don't see AMD moving to it, and IMO AMD will make its next socket change when it chooses to support DDR4. This is why I see Excavator perhaps supporting it. It could also be Excavators successor Steamshovel or its successor Dumptruck.


----------



## Covert_Death (Sep 10, 2012)

Super XP said:


> Intel don't plan on supporting DDR4 up until after late 2014. I don't see AMD moving to it, and IMO AMD will make its next socket change when it chooses to support DDR4. This is why I see Excavator perhaps supporting it. It could also be Excavators successor Steamshovel or its successor Dumptruck.



where do all these names get made up and how far down the line is backhoe lol????


----------



## largon (Sep 10, 2012)

^Heh, or "Dumper"?
"Jackhammer" would've been fitting for Bulldozer, IMO. 



> [...] sources inside the engineering department at AMD are reportedly expecting 45% performance improvements.
> 
> http://news.softpedia.com/news/AMD-s-Steamroller-To-Be-Faster-than-Intel-Haswell-289980.shtml


Uh-oh... 
Reminds me of this. 

I think it's safe to expect performance progression anywhere between -5% to _n_%.


----------



## Frick (Sep 10, 2012)

Steevo said:


> I am waiting for GTA 5 to see what my next system will be. If AMD doesn't get its crap together I will be Intel and Nvidia.


Just out of curiosity, why dump amd graphic cards if their cpus doesnt deliver?


----------



## AvonX (Sep 10, 2012)

Frick said:


> Just out of curiosity, why dump amd graphic cards if their cpus doesnt deliver?



I am not so sure if AMD will continue to deliver on the graphics cards.



Super XP said:


> Many are estimating conservative values ranging between a 20% and a 30% performance improvement over the current Bulldozer processors, but sources inside the engineering department at AMD are reportedly expecting 45% performance improvements.



Now we have another myth expecting nearly 50%  performance improvements? 
You have allot of chewing to do. LoL


----------



## Frick (Sep 10, 2012)

AvonX said:


> I am not so sure if AMD will continue to deliver on the graphics cards.



Why? If you've already answered you can provide a link to that post.


> Now we have another myth expecting nearly 50%  performance improvements?
> You have allot of chewing to do. LoL



Yeah, I'll call that a myth as well. It would be magic if it happened, but magic isn't real.


----------



## AvonX (Sep 10, 2012)

Frick said:


> Why? If you've already answered you can provide a link to that post



Well the new leader John Gustafson will be focusing on parallel compute. CPU/GPU Obviously this is all about APU's.
So i don't see how that will work out. Only time will tell.


----------



## v12dock (Sep 10, 2012)

AvonX said:


> I am not so sure if AMD will continue to deliver on the graphics cards.



GCN 2.0 v GK110 

Maxwell (2014) vs ? (2013-2014?)

I think AMDs graphics division is the only I would bet on


----------



## Covert_Death (Sep 10, 2012)

AvonX said:


> Well the new leader John Gustafson will be focusing on parallel compute. CPU/GPU Obviously this is all about APU's.
> So i don't see how that will work out. Only time will tell.



STOP TROLLING!!!!!!!!!!

seriously lol

yes APU's are a BIG focus as its the future and AMD is headed there quick, that in NO WAY means lesser quality dedicated graphics, none whatsoever. 

now. STOP TROLLING!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## AvonX (Sep 10, 2012)

Covert_Death said:


> STOP TROLLING!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> seriously lol
> 
> ...



Well you can "lol" all you want. I just posted on what has been said.
Can you provide us a link or a source based on what you have just said?


----------



## v12dock (Sep 10, 2012)

AvonX said:


> Well you can "lol" all you want. I just posted on what has been said.
> Can you provide us a link or a source based on what you have just said?



I think the fact that AMD released the 7970 Ghz Ed speaks volumes. I think they are dedicated as ever to creating a competitive high end gpu market.


----------



## AvonX (Sep 10, 2012)

v12dock said:


> I think the fact that AMD released the 7970 Ghz Ed speaks volumes. I think they are dedicated as ever to creating a competitive high end gpu market.



Well that is based on what they currently have. No surprises there.
I am waiting to see what they have coming in the next gen GPU's.


----------



## v12dock (Sep 10, 2012)

AvonX said:


> Well that is based on what they currently have. No surprises there.
> I am waiting to see what they have coming in the next gen GPU's.



You could say the same thing about Nvidia. AMD has GCN 2 and Nvidia has GK110/Maxwell.

They would not just abandon a product that has great success


----------



## Super XP (Sep 10, 2012)

AvonX said:


> Well that is based on what they currently have. No surprises there.
> I am waiting to see what they have coming in the next gen GPU's.


Year after year AMD made huge profits on discrete. Without R&D via discrete high end, there wouldn't be medium, low and APU "EFFICIENTLY DESIGNED" graphics by them.

Why would anybody wand AMD to fail? You know as much as everybody we need competition so we have a choice.


----------



## librin.so.1 (Sep 10, 2012)

Indeed!

As Super XP said - we need a competition.
If AMD were to go away, then Intel would be the only x86 manufacturer left. That would mean there would be nothing stopping Intel to, say, for example, raise their prices by 500%. Also one more [even more horrible thing] - there would be no need for Intel to spend money developing better chips. They could simply sell the current design for years - as there would be no alternative to compete against [by making better chips].


----------



## nt300 (Sep 10, 2012)

Covert_Death said:


> where do all these names get made up and how far down the line is backhoe lol????


I think he ment as joke. I thought Excavator successor is ripper or rotating grab or sheep's or foot compactor or skeleton bucket or snow blower or stump grinder or tiltrotator or trencher


----------



## AvonX (Sep 10, 2012)

Vinska said:


> Indeed!
> 
> As Super XP said - we need a competition.
> If AMD were to go away, then Intel would be the only x86 manufacturer left. That would mean there would be nothing stopping Intel to, say, for example, raise their prices by 500%. Also one more [even more horrible thing] - there would be no need for Intel to spend money developing better chips. They could simply sell the current design for years - as there would be no alternative to compete against [by making better chips].



Yes we do need competition but we have no competition on the CPU side.
Its like AMD does not even exist.
If AMD had a true competition against Intel, Intel's prices would drop even more.


----------



## AvonX (Sep 10, 2012)

Super XP said:


> Year after year AMD made huge profits on discrete. Without R&D via discrete high end, there wouldn't be medium, low and APU "EFFICIENTLY DESIGNED" graphics by them.
> 
> Why would anybody wand AMD to fail? You know as much as everybody we need competition so we have a choice.



First of all i did not say that i want AMD to fail. Where did you get that from? 
Don't understand you really.


----------



## Norton (Sep 10, 2012)

nt300 said:


> I think he ment as joke. I thought Excavator successor is ripper or rotating grab or sheep's or foot compactor or skeleton bucket or snow blower or stump grinder or tiltrotator or trencher



Wasn't the order:
Excavator, Lawn Mower, Weed Trimmer, Electric Toothbrush  

On Topic- I have 4 AM3+ sockets waiting for some Vishera silicon so bring it on!!!


----------



## Steevo (Sep 10, 2012)

Frick said:


> Just out of curiosity, why dump amd graphic cards if their cpus doesnt deliver?



Have you seen the most recent Nvidia offerings? Not so much of a flip on both due to CPU's, but more of performance that is offered without issues.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Sep 10, 2012)

Steevo said:


> I am waiting for GTA 5 to see what my next system will be. If AMD doesn't get its crap together I will be Intel and Nvidia.



Imho you wont need to upgrade at all, If rockstar dont include a free mem leak this time, Gta 4 runs well on mine now , but i cant be assed finishing it and GTA5 does not look that much better graphically ,and i wouldnt worry about PD's performance, in games and normal use it will be a good chip, i may have to go back to single card gfx but time will tell , your system specs sound spot on and if i had a 6 core i wouldnt be bothered upgradeing , yet.

I think a valid point that some should note is just how good a chip sandybridge was ,ivybridge isnt a bad follow up but sandy stepped up the game more ,so to me if this chip is as good as a 2600K and the right price then alls good, oh but it has to be 5Ghz capable , then its another reasonably cheap upgrade


----------



## erocker (Sep 10, 2012)

Steevo said:


> Have you seen the most recent Nvidia offerings? Not so much of a flip on both due to CPU's, but more of performance that is offered without issues.



LIES!!! Seriously though, this 7970 is the best card I've ever owned in terms of not having problems. Still, I can understand the disappointment of AMD users. Not here or there though... I don't bother speculation about AMD's CPU's anymore. Too much misinformation. Someone on the internet is WRONG!


----------



## nt300 (Sep 10, 2012)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> Imho you wont need to upgrade at all, If rockstar dont include a free mem leak this time, Gta 4 runs well on mine now , but i cant be assed finishing it and GTA5 does not look that much better graphically ,and i wouldnt worry about PD's performance, in games and normal use it will be a good chip, i may have to go back to single card gfx but time will tell , your system specs sound spot on and if i had a 6 core i wouldnt be bothered upgradeing , yet.
> 
> I think a valid point that some should note is just how good a chip sandybridge was ,ivybridge isnt a bad follow up but sandy stepped up the game more ,so to me if this chip is as good as a 2600K and the right price then alls good, oh but it has to be 5Ghz capable , then its another reasonably cheap upgrade


People keep forgeting how much more money Intel has for R&D not to mention having its own fabs. AMD may have slipped with the Bulldozer and its aggressive marketing but now they need time to fix the issues. AMDs new management seem to be on the ball and are trying to stick with the release dates without delays. It interesting to note after the release of Piledriver AMD is releasing the Steamroller quickly after. So Piledriver will be short lived. What we should be talking about is Steamroller and how it should have ben the Bulldozer from the start.


----------



## erocker (Sep 10, 2012)

Okay,  I lied.. I'm going to speculate a little. From what I gather Bulldozer was created by software. Actual people are now taking this chip made by robots and refining it. I suppose I expect Piledriver (Vishera) to be like going from a PII 940 to a PII 965 on a good day.


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 10, 2012)

nt300 said:


> at we should be talking about is Steamroller and how it should have ben the Bulldozer from the start.



I don't think so.

AMD launched Athlon, tweaked it for years, it became Athlon64, before moving on to Phenom. They tweaked that for a while, several years, then they released FX.

They will tweak that for several years, and then we'll get something new.


FX chips appeal quite well to servers, not so much to desktops, but AMD focusing on the server side of things is not new either.


In fact, it's just the same old story, yet better, because AMD is selling basically every chip it can make now, CPU and GPU alike. They are very much a success right now, business-wise. Performance-wise...well..not everyone needs a BMW.

That was my whole ponit about posting my pic of the FM2 APU, an unreleased chip that was minted like 9 months ago. They needed that ime to build stock, while they sold out on fab time. AMD is back on the way up, but I don't think high peroframnce is worth the risk they would have to take, so really ,I find no fault at all with AMD of their products.


I just wish Eyefinity adn Multi-GPU Crossfire got a bit more support.


----------



## librin.so.1 (Sep 10, 2012)

erocker said:


> From what I gather Bulldozer was created by software.



Uhm, in at least 2 articles [that were noted in this thread], it said about how Bulldozer was mostly "hand-made", and that now they are using automated means to "clean" it up as allegedly when designing  "manually", there is a lot of room to oversights, etc. yadda, yadda, yadda...


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 10, 2012)

erocker said:


> Okay,  I lied.. I'm going to speculate a little. From what I gather Bulldozer was created by software. Actual people are now taking this chip made by robots and refining it. I suppose I expect Piledriver (Vishera) to be like going from a PII 940 to a PII 965 on a good day.



Yeah, it's the opposite of what you think. AMD has publically stated that it(Bulldozer) was done by hand, and Steamroller will include the automated tool optimizations, that yield a 30% savings in die space, which will also shorten the pipeline physically, leading to a decent performance boost.

See below:


----------



## erocker (Sep 10, 2012)

I clearly remember reading the opposite... I even remember it coming from W1zzard's keyboard. Meh, this is why speculation is lame. I retract my statement in this thread as until the chip is released nothing matters.


----------



## Steevo (Sep 10, 2012)

erocker said:


> LIES!!! Seriously though, this 7970 is the best card I've ever owned in terms of not having problems. Still, I can understand the disappointment of AMD users. Not here or there though... I don't bother speculation about AMD's CPU's anymore. Too much misinformation. Someone on the internet is WRONG!



I like the ability to overclock the AMD offerings better, but seriously, all the shit they have spewed about Open CL and much else and they have failed, seriously failed for years at making anything of it. 

Then the last few drivers have had some minor issues, and 12.8 has caused me a couple issues with my card that has been rock solid for years now. 

If they can't figure out a way to deliver a solid product across the platforms I use I don't see a good reason to use them anymore. I'm not disappointed in my 1100T, nor my 5870 in terms of longevity, but the newer "upgrades" that I have to choose from make me sick. So either I stay with a older CPU and buy a new GPU, or build a whole new system and AMD is still not playing in the same game as Intel, how may years after the Phenom bullshit?

Real men use real cores......FFS. Marketing a crap sandwich.


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 10, 2012)

erocker said:


> I clearly remember reading the opposite... I even remember it coming from W1zzard's keyboard. Meh, this is why speculation is lame. I retract my statement in this thread as until the chip is released nothing matters.



There has been a fair bit of news in recent months about CPUs/GPUs failing form being done just by automated tools, which is probably why you think that you heard that about Bulldozer before.

Nvidia even publically admitted that the Fermi problems were 100% related to using automated tools to design the chip, and that those tools, or a lack of using an updated version of teh tools, led to the Fermi problem.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Sep 10, 2012)

Afaik phenomII was the hand crafted one, Bulldozer used automated system but low density libraries made for cpu's, piledriver is automated  design yet hand tweaked, and steamroller is automated and also using High density libraries(used already on GPU's by AMD) with their autorouting software

corrected


----------



## Frick (Sep 10, 2012)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> Afaik phenomII was the hand crafted one, Bulldozer used automated system but low density libraries made for cpu's, piledriver is automated  design yet hand tweaked and also using High density libraries(used already on GPU's) with their autorouting software



See cadaveca's post above with their own slides saying BD was handcrafted.


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 10, 2012)

Frick said:


> See cadaveca's post above with their own slides saying BD was handcrafted.



Their own slides, shown by Mark Papermaster, when talking about STEAMROLLER.

Piledriver will NOT see the design library enhancement. Piledriver will not really offer all that much more over Bulldozer. I expect maybe 15%, and most of that due to clockspeed increases.


----------



## Frick (Sep 10, 2012)

cadaveca said:


> Their own slides, shown by Mark Papermaster, when talking about STEAMROLLER.
> 
> Piledriver will NOT see the design library enhancement.



Oh missed that. Still, BD handmade.


----------



## AvonX (Sep 10, 2012)

I don't think BD was hand made.
They are just saying this to have an excuse to continue using automated tools.
Personally i think its BS that BD was hand made.


----------



## Frick (Sep 10, 2012)

AvonX said:


> I don't think BD was hand made.
> They are just saying this to have an excuse to continue using automated tools.
> Personally i think its BS that BD was hand made.



Yeah well it's hard to prove anything in this matter.


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 10, 2012)

AvonX said:


> I don't think BD was hand made.
> They are just saying this to have an excuse to continue using automated tools.
> Personally i think its BS that BD was hand made.



Hard to prove either way, but given the process used, and the time given to use it, it's more than likely that a large part of the chip WAS hand-made, since the company producing the tools, AMD's foundry partner, would have largely been using AMD tech to build those tools.

WHatever the truth of it is, that's AMD's official stand on it, so what we think, and the truth, hardly matters. What matters is that AMD manages to capitalize on these chagnes, and turn them into either power savings, or extra perforamnce, so that they can stay relevant to the market as a whole.


----------



## AvonX (Sep 10, 2012)

cadaveca said:


> Hard to prove either way, but given the process used, and the time given to use it, it's more than likely that a large part of the chip WAS hand-made, since the company producing the tools, AMD's foundry partner, would have largely been using AMD tech to build those tools.
> 
> WHatever the truth of it is, that's AMD's official stand on it, so what we think, and the truth, hardly matters. What matters is that AMD manages to capitalize on these chagnes, and turn them into either power savings, or extra perforamnce, so that they can stay relevant to the market as a whole.



I remember back then that they did not even get the correct transistor count of BD when asked. 
Yeah sure it was handmade.


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 10, 2012)

AvonX said:


> I remember back then that they did not even get the correct transistor count of BD when asked.



"They".


They fact remains, who was "they".


Liek I get that, but you know, the whoel Fermi thing, and why i brougth htat up, was that Jen-Hsun admitted that the rel problem with Fermi was a alck of proper leadership. Like, he actaully admitted he failed. HE got red in the face, but he did admit it. My respect for him increased over 9000.





So, bad figures, eh? Someone got a number wrong? COuld have been a typo, could have been on purpose, could have been subterfuge to mis-lead the competition. Could have just been stupidity. Personally, that was all before Papermaster took over, so I don't care.


----------



## Super XP (Sep 10, 2012)

cadaveca said:


> Their own slides, shown by Mark Papermaster, when talking about STEAMROLLER.
> 
> Piledriver will NOT see the design library enhancement. Piledriver will not really offer all that much more over Bulldozer. I expect maybe 15%, and most of that due to clockspeed increases.


Agreed Piledriver won't be physically modified but it was stated they tweaked the he'll out of it such as tightening and enhancing the L2, L3, Branch Prediction and so on, things requiring to get ironing out before they slap together Steamroller via the new 28nm process. 

Personally I can see Piledriver being at least 10% faster clock for clock versus Bulldozer with another 5% faster due to higher clock speeds, hence we have our 15%.


----------



## nt300 (Sep 11, 2012)

Any official work on the Vishera to be released?


----------



## AvonX (Sep 11, 2012)

nt300 said:


> Any official work on the Vishera to be released?



Hope they will just skip it and release SteamRoller. 
A plus 35-45% would not hurt anyone. 
I need to upgrade my 1090T, its been too long.


----------



## Covert_Death (Sep 11, 2012)

honestly is SteamRoller comes out 1H 2013 and supports AM3+, ill wait for it


----------



## AvonX (Sep 11, 2012)

Covert_Death said:


> honestly is SteamRoller comes out 1H 2013 and supports AM3+, ill wait for it



Forget about AM3+, go directly to AM4 with PCIE 3.0 and some DDR4 memory. 
If they do that it will sell madly. First motherboard to support DDR4.
But that is just a wild dream.


----------



## librin.so.1 (Sep 11, 2012)

AvonX said:


> If they do that it will sell madly. First motherboard to support DDR4.



Remind me please, what is the current availability for DDR4 memory modules, and what availability is expected to be at the start of 2013?


----------



## AvonX (Sep 11, 2012)

Vinska said:


> Remind me please, what is the current availability for DDR4 memory modules, and what availability is expected to be at the start of 2013?



I haven't checked lately what is going on with that, but i think whoever wishes to use it, its available. I think samsung has the lead on that.
Well of course they will use it on servers first. But why not? Lets see something different for a change.

Edit: http://tech2.in.com/news/pc-memory/ddr4-memory-coming-to-pcs-notebooks-in-2013/305022


----------



## Super XP (Sep 11, 2012)

AvonX said:


> Forget about AM3+, go directly to AM4 with PCIE 3.0 and some DDR4 memory.
> If they do that it will sell madly. First motherboard to support DDR4.
> But that is just a wild dream.


Steamroller on AM3+ would be awesome. DDR4 ain't happening until 2015, and if that. Like I said before Intel is not going DDR4, they are sticking to DDR3 for a few years more. 

We don't need DDR4 for desktops right now, DDR3 does the job just fine.
Now Servers & Workstations are all different story. DDR4 will be coming out for those probably in 2014.



> Benefits
> 
> Its primary benefits compared to DDR3 include a higher range of clock frequencies and data transfer rates (2133–4266 MT/s compared to DDR3's 800 and higher) and lower voltage (1.05–1.2*V for DDR4, compared to 1.2–1.5*V for DDR3) with current remaining the same. DDR4 also anticipates a change in topology. It discards the multiple DIMMs per channel approach in favor of a point-to-point topology where each channel in the memory controller is connected to a single DIMM. Switched memory banks are also an anticipated option for servers.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DDR4_SDRAM


----------



## Steevo (Sep 11, 2012)

That is not true, DDR4 (or even 5) would be a welcome performance boost for most platforms, go read the newest Corsair 2600 review to see.


----------



## AvonX (Sep 11, 2012)

Super XP said:


> Steamroller on AM3+ would be awesome. DDR4 ain't happening until 2015, and if that. Like I said before Intel is not going DDR4, they are sticking to DDR3 for a few years more.
> 
> We don't need DDR4 for desktops right now, DDR3 does the job just fine.
> Now Servers & Workstations are all different story. DDR4 will be coming out for those probably in 2014.



Maybe not in intel's case but AMD could benefit from the speeds of DDR4 to feed the CPU.
Something related to that is this: http://vr-zone.com/articles/how-amd-can-steamroller-the-competition-in-2013/17105.html

I think DDR4 is coming sooner than you think it will. They are pushing hard to use this technology sooner.


----------



## Super XP (Sep 11, 2012)

Steevo said:


> That is not true, DDR4 (or even 5) would be a welcome performance boost for most platforms, go read the newest Corsair 2600 review to see.


I fully agree, I like the DDR4 Specification. What I meant is this is going to the Server/Workstation market, them comes the desktop. I mean I can always just sell my Crosshair V (my gaming buddy ), but I will have to be convinced going DDR4 is the right move in terms of price/performance and hassle of ripping my PC apart. Which yes I would EnJoY....



AvonX said:


> Maybe not in intel's case but AMD could benefit from the speeds of DDR4 to feed the CPU.
> Something related to that is this: http://vr-zone.com/articles/how-amd-can-steamroller-the-competition-in-2013/17105.html
> 
> I think DDR4 is coming sooner than you think it will. They are pushing hard to use this technology sooner.


Wow, great find. I am starting to get exited. Anything to breath new life in AMD and for competition...

And here is a killer Quote. It's great he works for AMD...


> Jim Keller (our sources from AMD/Intel/NVIDIA claim he's arguably the best CPU architect of all times)
> 
> Read more: http://vr-zone.com/articles/amd-pus...erformance-increases/17088.html#ixzz26CiHTA00


----------



## AvonX (Sep 11, 2012)

Yes i have read that one to.
And something else as well: http://www.jedec.org/ddr4workshop


----------



## Super XP (Sep 12, 2012)

I am itching for a Piledriver upgrade providing it offers better gaming performance over what I have. 
So reading the article, it looks like we are going to see Steamroller & Excavator sooner than we think. Piledriver may now be short lived, because all the news is about Steamroller.


----------



## AvonX (Sep 12, 2012)

Super XP said:


> I am itching for a Piledriver upgrade providing it offers better gaming performance over what I have.
> So reading the article, it looks like we are going to see Steamroller & Excavator sooner than we think. Piledriver may now be short lived, because all the news is about Steamroller.



Yes PileDriver may be  short lived.
Here's hopping Jim Keller can fix this crap they have been doing at AMD.


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 12, 2012)

AvonX said:


> Here's hopping Jim Keller can fix this crap they have been doing at AMD.



I knew, and posted on here before the release, that the problem with Bulldozer was poor cache bandwidth, specifically, L2.


Why that performance is poor, I dunno, but THAT is what needs to change, and it doesn't take anyone special to be able to recognize that.


----------



## Super XP (Sep 12, 2012)

cadaveca said:


> I knew, and posted on here before the release, that the problem with Bulldozer was poor cache bandwidth, specifically, L2.
> 
> 
> Why that performance is poor, I dunno, but THAT is what needs to change, and it doesn't take anyone special to be able to recognize that.


Agreed, but also having a single decoder killed BD. Steamroller seems to fix this and some. I also have to give thumbs up for AMD trying something way out of the box. Talk about having Balls of Steel.


----------



## Steevo (Sep 12, 2012)

Calling bullshit on the core starvation, single threaded clock for clock it performs worse than the older generation. Perhaps that is caused by L2 bandwidth, but that can be checked with some math, that is unless they had to introduce artificial latency to keep the core clock up or for other reasons.

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2011/10/11/amd_bulldozer_fx8150_desktop_performance_review/4


----------



## Super XP (Sep 12, 2012)

Steevo said:


> Calling bullshit on the core starvation, single threaded clock for clock it performs worse than the older generation. Perhaps that is caused by L2 bandwidth, but that can be checked with some math, that is unless they had to introduce artificial latency to keep the core clock up or for other reasons.
> 
> http://www.hardocp.com/article/2011/10/11/amd_bulldozer_fx8150_desktop_performance_review/4





> The history of AMD's Bulldozer architecture is a painful one. The old management lead by Hector Jesus Ruiz and Dirk Meyer deliberately delayed the arrival of K10 "Barcelona" and got usurped by Intel's Core architecture. The mad rush to the original Bulldozer caused a lot of sacrifices in design and ultimately, lead AMD engineering team to cancel the architecture in 2008. Instead of creating a master-core, AMD's engineers envisioned a multi-step approach to increase the performance of its architecture.



*Major Improvements. Steamroller should have been the original Bulldozer.* Didn't want to underline the whole thing, so the link is below.


> Comparing Steamroller to Bulldozer makes much more sense, since the two architectures are starting to differ in greater detail. First and foremost, AMD finally addressed the core starvation. Originally, Bulldozer had a single Fetch and single Decode unit, which were in charge of feeding both Integer and Float schedulers. It turns out that the size of those units were too small and quite often you'd waste precious cycles with either ALU or FPU pipelines not doing a thing. Steamroller goes back to square one and keeps the Fetch unit as a single entity, but the Decode part is now doubled. Each Decode unit feeds one INT unit (4 pipelines) and the FP Scheduler, which has three dedicated units (two 128-bit FMAC units which can act as a single 256-bit unit when you need 256-bit AVX. For legacy code, the MMX Unit is now a single separate entity (instead of multiple side half-units in Bulldozer design). Also, one of major improvements is the increase in the instruction cache size. Up until Bulldozer, AMD featured the largest L1 cache in the field - both L1 Instruction (I-Cache) and Data (D-Cache) were the same size (64KB). With 128KB of L1 cache, AMD easily compensated for the size deficit in L2 and L3 cache versus Intel Nehalem and Sandy Bridge architectures. Bulldozer sliced down L1 cache to "better than Pentium 4, but still crap", as one of our sources put it bluntly (16KB L1 D-Cache and 64KB L1 I-Cache). Steamroller increases the size of Instruction cache beyond K7/K8/K10/K10.5/BD, but L1 D-Cache won't remain the same either.
> 
> According to Mark Papermaster, the improvements should yield up to 30% performance increase, but our sources inside the company beg to differ.
> 
> ...



In response to Steevo's post below, I fully agree AMD has major cache issues. For example 8MB of say L2 or L3 would bring a significant performance boost for Intel, but not so much AMD.


----------



## Steevo (Sep 12, 2012)

And again, single threaded so one scheduler feeding one core has WORSE performance per clock than a Phenom II. 

So for the most part throw that scheduler bullshit out the window. 

Next up the cache, yeah, it is crap. Increasing frequency to compensate for nothing to do is still a waste of time, Intel proved that with P4. 

The ONLY way to get away from more cache is to have near perfect branch prediction, and AMD has missed it by a lot. Then they decided to compensate by using less cache, whoever made that decision I'm sure has been fired. 

Last, http://www.anandtech.com/show/4955/the-bulldozer-review-amd-fx8150-tested/6
since you don't get hints. 

AMD has a huge issue with latency in bulldozer, either due to the size of the chip, or soe other issues.


----------



## AvonX (Sep 12, 2012)

Super XP said:


> I also have to give thumbs up for AMD trying something way out of the box. Talk about having Balls of Steel.



That's not balls of steel, that is stupidity. Lets leave the performance aside because obviously it did not deliver. Windows did not utilize those cores properly or this arc at all.  
Going for something completely different to Intel was silly to begin with. At least do it right but they did not do that also. They should have stayed with true cores and not this crap.
I am sure Jim Keller wants to throw this crap out of the window, but he will do what they tell him to do and he has no choice but to stick with it. What bulldozer needs is a complete redesign to fix all the faults of this arc and this will take some time. If you think that the only fault is the "L2" then you are mistaken.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Sep 12, 2012)

AvonX said:


> That's not balls of steel, that is stupidity. Lets leave the performance aside because obviously it did not deliver. Windows did not utilize those cores properly or this arc at all.
> Going for something completely different to Intel was silly to begin with. At least do it right but they did not do that also. They should have stayed with true cores and not this crap.
> I am sure Jim Keller wants to throw this crap out of the window, but he will do what they tell him to do and he has no choice but to stick with it. What bulldozer needs is a complete redesign to fix all the faults of this arc and this will take some time. If you think that the only fault is the "L2" then you are mistaken.



I can only guess Steamroller is the next major engineering sample of the Arch, for all we know Steamroller may go back to what Was Great about Athlon 64 FX and Phenom II X2-X6 architecturally.


----------



## Covert_Death (Sep 12, 2012)

i hope so.... i really think PD is simply BD v2.0 and that PD is the true FX chip in the family


----------



## eidairaman1 (Sep 12, 2012)

Covert_Death said:


> i hope so.... i really think PD is simply BD v2.0 and that PD is the true FX chip in the family



reading that flow chart the PD is to have a IPC increase, dont know how much but reviews here should specify it.

If PD doesnt improve anything AMD really needs to kill bulldozer arch off.


----------



## Covert_Death (Sep 12, 2012)

eidairaman1 said:


> reading that flow chart the PD is to have a IPC increase, dont know how much but reviews here should specify it.
> 
> If PD doesnt improve anything AMD really needs to kill bulldozer arch off.



what i meant with my statement was i expect improvements with PD but marginal ones. with SteamRoller i expect dramatic improvement. i think PD will be a worthy upgrade from PII atleast, which may tempt me to buy it, but if its similar to my PII x4 @ 4.0 Ghz then ill wait for Steamroller


----------



## eidairaman1 (Sep 12, 2012)

Covert_Death said:


> what i meant with my statement was i expect improvements with PD but marginal ones. with SteamRoller i expect dramatic improvement. i think PD will be a worthy upgrade from PII atleast, which may tempt me to buy it, but if its similar to my PII x4 @ 4.0 Ghz then ill wait for Steamroller



Hope AMD learned a lesson about designs this time around since their K6, K7 and K8 archs were beating on Intel pretty hard in the day,


----------



## AvonX (Sep 12, 2012)

eidairaman1 said:


> reading that flow chart the PD is to have a IPC increase, dont know how much but reviews here should specify it.
> 
> If PD doesnt improve anything AMD really needs to kill bulldozer arch off.



+1 for that.
Fighting with something that takes a huge amount of effort and time is useless.
It will only take you back even further.
I am sure Keller has something in mind and lets hope they listen to him before its to late.
But the bad news is that this will come with Excavator and not with Steamroller.
I just hope they let him do his job how he wants it to be.


----------



## Super XP (Sep 12, 2012)

eidairaman1 said:


> reading that flow chart the PD is to have a IPC increase, dont know how much but reviews here should specify it.
> 
> If PD doesnt improve anything AMD really needs to kill bulldozer arch off.


Internal figures show Piledriver @ 15% gain and Steamroller @ 45% gain over Bulldozer. They won't shoot down this architecture, they already put way too many years and money in it.

Also did you read this:
The history of AMD's Bulldozer architecture is a painful one. The old management lead by Hector Jesus Ruiz and Dirk Meyer deliberately delayed the arrival of K10 "Barcelona" and got usurped by Intel's Core architecture. The mad rush to the original Bulldozer caused a lot of sacrifices in design and ultimately, lead AMD engineering team to cancel the architecture in 2008. Instead of creating a master-core, AMD's engineers envisioned a multi-step approach to increase the performance of its architecture.



AvonX said:


> +1 for that.
> Fighting with something that takes a huge amount of effort and time is useless.
> It will only take you back even further.
> I am sure Keller has something in mind and lets hope they listen to him before its to late.
> ...


Steamroller is getting a architecture overhaul. Steamroller looks different. The major design change will be with Excavator such as you stated. If the rumored 45% Steamroller holds any water, I wonder how much Excavator will give us over BD? Perhaps when playing with the math, I can see approx: 75%.


----------



## AvonX (Sep 12, 2012)

Super XP said:


> Steamroller is getting a architecture overhaul. Steamroller looks different. The major design change will be with Excavator such as you stated. If the rumored 45% Steamroller holds any water, I wonder how much Excavator will give us over BD? Perhaps when playing with the math, I can see approx: 75%.



By the time we reach to Excavator it will no longer be a Bulldozer. 
And lets not create a hype over numbers. 
I only hope steamroller can be an upgrade over my 1090T, that's all that i hope for.
And lets hope they are still in the dedicated desktop CPU market.
That is also another thing to consider.


----------



## Super XP (Sep 12, 2012)

AvonX said:


> By the time we reach to Excavator it will no longer be a Bulldozer.
> And lets not create a hype over numbers.
> I only hope steamroller can be an upgrade over my 1090T, that's all that i hope for.
> And lets hope they are still in the dedicated desktop CPU market.
> That is also another thing to consider.


Agreed, the wost case would be AMD releasing high end APU's to replace the discrete desktop CPU's. But I don't see AMD leaving the discrete anytime soon, there is still a massive market for them. 

But give me a Steamroller APU that has the same speed, OC and perform just as well if not better than a discrete desktop and I am all over Socket FM2/3. That is if AMD chooses that pathway. But I hope not, or they would give Intel the discrete market and that my friend is


----------



## AvonX (Sep 12, 2012)

Super XP said:


> Agreed, the wost case would be AMD releasing high end APU's to replace the discrete desktop CPU's. But I don't see AMD leaving the discrete anytime soon, there is still a massive market for them.
> 
> But give me a Steamroller APU that has the same speed, OC and perform just as well if not better than a discrete desktop and I am all over Socket FM2/3. That is if AMD chooses that pathway. But I hope not, or they would give Intel the discrete market and that my friend is



I hope that is not the case but for data centers is not logical to compete with APU's.
You need a discrete CPU and you need all the power and juice you can get from the CPU.
I am just worried what they in mind for the desktop market.


----------



## Super XP (Sep 12, 2012)

AvonX said:


> I hope that is not the case but for data centers is not logical to compete with APU's.
> You need a discrete CPU and you need all the power and juice you can get from the CPU.
> I am just worried what they in mind for the desktop market.


Well you know as well and I know as well as anybody knows, us crazy gaming enthusiastsare moving to Intel if AMD stops supporting discrete CPU's, which is why I said AMD would have to really be convincing for us to stay with say a high powered APU. 

For the sake of the industry, AMD please keep feeding us Discrete high powered CPU's and Graphics Please


----------



## AvonX (Sep 12, 2012)

Super XP said:


> Well you know as well and I know as well as anybody knows, us crazy gaming enthusiastsare moving to Intel if AMD stops supporting discrete CPU's, which is why I said AMD would have to really be convincing for us to stay with say a high powered APU.
> 
> For the sake of the industry, AMD please keep feeding us Discrete high powered CPU's and Graphics Please



APU's cant hold that much power in them. APU's are good for laptops and mobile devices.
And also the mid desktop market for some lite gaming, but that's about it.


----------



## Super XP (Sep 12, 2012)

AvonX said:


> APU's cant hold that much power in them. APU's are good for laptops and mobile devices.
> And also the mid desktop market for some lite gaming, but that's about it.


In that case, AMD better keep discrete coming or else it will be there competition which will stear us away.
Also Piledriver will have to be at least 15% to 20% faster than the fastest Phenom II x6 for me to upgrade my FX-8120 which is currently running at 4.40GHz with all 8-Cores.  
For me at the time Bulldozer made sense, my current setup blew away my late PII x4 setup .


----------



## AvonX (Sep 12, 2012)

Super XP said:


> Also Piledriver will have to be at least 15% to 20% faster than the fastest Phenom II x6



You must be dreaming. Faster in what?
Where did you get those numbers from?


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 12, 2012)

AvonX said:


> You must be dreaming. Faster in what?
> Where did you get those numbers from?



That's what HE wants?

Interesting to see you posting so much. However, I thought I would mentino that changing ram interfaces to DDR4 or DDR5 would nto benefit AMD at all. The real weakness of Bulldozer is cache perforamnce, and I have been saying this since BEFORE the launch.


Why L2 is so slow, I dunno. Perhaps the problem isn't really the L2, and it's thread maangement that is off...I dunno these things.

BUt what I do know is that cache is where the problem is, for most users needs.


----------



## Super XP (Sep 12, 2012)

cadaveca said:


> That's what HE wants?
> 
> Interesting to see you posting so much. However, I thought I would mentino that changing ram interfaces to DDR4 or DDR5 would nto benefit AMD at all. The real weakness of Bulldozer is cache perforamnce, and I have been saying this since BEFORE the launch.
> 
> ...


Fully agree, AMD always had cache issues. Intel blows them out of the water. If AMD can fix its cache problem, then it would make a big difference on performance whether it be 1MB or 20MB. Right now it's not really benefitting from its cache.


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 12, 2012)

Super XP said:


> Right now it's not really benefitting from its cache.





But let me re-iterate, because I want to see if I'm right about this. It's NOT L3.

It's L2 and lower caches that are the issue.

Perhaps L3 needs be a bit more flexible, but it seems to me that everyone is focused on L1 and L3 caches, and I guess it's possible those two are affecting L2.

What I do know for sure is that INtel uses an L3 Ringbus, so that data can be quickly passed form core to core. I don't think AMD has anything similar..they simply use L3 for core-tocore transfers.

I mean, I dunno...this is more of a question then a statement based on how I have seen performance differences in different workloads.

To me, this all is a very interesting subject, becuase there is much here that I do not understand, but want to.


----------



## Steevo (Sep 12, 2012)

Ringbus, like on a X1xxx series card?

I believe the issues with cache are related to distance to and from, and since they do have a shared scheduler it has to wait for both "cores" to be ready thus creating extra artificial wait states in a lame attempt at keeping both pipelies full without having to dump from dependancies.


----------



## AvonX (Sep 12, 2012)

cadaveca said:


> That's what HE wants?
> 
> Interesting to see you posting so much. However, I thought I would mentino that changing ram interfaces to DDR4 or DDR5 would nto benefit AMD at all. The real weakness of Bulldozer is cache perforamnce, and I have been saying this since BEFORE the launch.
> 
> ...



So if you don't know what is the point talking about L2? 
I don't think that is the only problem in the architecture, there is more to it.
You can also see the changes they have done in Steamroller.
If L2 was the only problem they would not bother with all the rest.
Jim Keller is the most qualified to talk about this subject.
Why don't we invite him here at techpowerup?


----------



## librin.so.1 (Sep 12, 2012)

AvonX said:


> Jim Keller is the most qualified to talk about this subject.
> Why don't we invite him here at techpowerup?



That would be epic. 
You deserve $$$ for even coming up with such an idea!

Now, how do I/We contact him...


----------



## AvonX (Sep 12, 2012)

Vinska said:


> That would be epic.
> You deserve $$$ for even coming up with such an idea!
> 
> Now, how do I/We contact him...



Even if we knew how to contact him AMD does not even let the guy to talk publicly for some reason. 
The guy is a star, i don't get it really.


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 12, 2012)

AvonX said:


> If L2 was the only problem they would not bother with all the rest.



The "rest" are not real performance-affecting issues. They are natural optimizations in transistor design, eliminating extra space used by redundant transistors for yeild, or extra space left so if needed, they could tweak the design.


Bulldozer was jsut about getting the design functional, and at that, and for highly-parralellized workloads, Bulldozer excels. Hence them selling nearly every single chip.


Now, when it comes to home users and gmaers, and the workloads they have, L2 cache does seem to be a limiting factor. As I said, I do not understand why that appears to be the bottleneck specifically, but it most definitely IS one.


Also, there is taking their 64-bit memory controllers and maknig a real 128-bit one, like Intel has. the whole "linked/unlinked" memory control option is BIOS..that's what that does...sets teh controller to be used as dual independant 64-bit controllers on the same bus(unlinked), or a singular 128-bit one, formed by using both gether as a single unit.

DDR4 is not required..that change is possible on DDR3, assuming there are not patenting issues that prevent such.






> Jim Keller is the most qualified to talk about this subject.
> Why don't we invite him here at techpowerup?



I do not know who this guy is. I mean, I'm into hardware...like few others are...I've heard his name before, but it's not something that EVER seemed to be something I should remember.

I could be wrong though...but really, not someone on my radar, at all.

Personally, I'd rather speak to people that no longer work @ AMD in the GPU division, that no longer work there.


----------



## AvonX (Sep 12, 2012)

cadaveca said:


> DDR4 is not required..that change is possible on DDR3, assuming there are not patenting issues that prevent such.



That can be true, in fact i think they are discussing this now.
It could be possible to insert drr4 into ddr3 motherboards.
But even if it is possible they would not do it, they would just roll out new motherboards to make more money. I don't think they will do that.


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 12, 2012)

AvonX said:


> I don't think they will do that.



It's time they did, actually.


AM3+ wasn't supposed to exist. Due to popular demand(ie OEM and big-box server partners), Bulldozer was moved form it's intended socket, with quad-channel DDR3, to it's current desktop model, on the dual-channel AM3+ platform.


It's time for either that move back to quad-channel DDR3, or DDR4, whatever, but tiem for a new socket has long passed.


In fact ,wen I asked AMD staff about BUlldozer, and whether a socket change was required to see the full potential, I was quite explicitly told "YES".


----------



## librin.so.1 (Sep 12, 2012)

AvonX said:


> Even if we knew how to contact him AMD does not even let the guy to talk publicly for some reason.
> The guy is a star, i don't get it really.



And he probably has some fancy NDAs in his contract and such. In "that world", leaking certain information can be disastrous for a company, so it is standard practice to do so, AFAIK.
There are many interesting things both int the HW and SW world that I [and prolly millions] would be very interested in. Things that can only be told by the ones who were working with it. But everything is so closed & guarded, we probably going to get to know these things many years later, if ever. I find that to be a very frustrating thing.


----------



## Super XP (Sep 12, 2012)

AMD's cache issue doesn't just lie with Bulldozer, it's in every CPU they've released. Adding more cache should increase performance, but it does not, or not as much as say Intel's CPU's would gain. If AMD can resolve this problem with Excavator, then more cache would matter for them.


cadaveca said:


> I do not know who this guy is. I mean, I'm into hardware...like few others are...I've heard his name before, but it's not something that EVER seemed to be something I should remember.
> 
> I could be wrong though...but really, not someone on my radar, at all.


He is "Arguably" the best CPU architect on earth. If anybody can turn AMD around, he can. If an insider leaks that Steamroller is going to be 45% clock 4 clock faster than today's Bulldozer, I wouldn't take that with a grain of salt, I would take it as if it came out of the CEO's mouth


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Sep 12, 2012)

I read elsewhere both Amd and intel are going to be adding large L4??(not actually named it) caches via interposers/ chip stacking / Isv soon, intel with their crystalwell/ haswell(alleged) Amd likely to do it with Kaveri/ excavator (a guess as no info) Amd will use this ultra wide on chip cache to boost cpu speed whilst interestingly its alleged intel will use it to speed up and enhance their igpu element, makes for a gap closer eh.

imho steamroller arch is another inbetweener arch like PD in itself a polished tweeked BD, excavator will again be all new(a guess) like BD and will at that point be built for true unit integration with the gpu element'S ,requireing a new socket which might arrive with steamroller but i doubt it.


----------



## Super XP (Sep 12, 2012)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> I read elsewhere both Amd and intel are going to be adding large L4??(not actually named it) caches via interposers/ chip stacking / Isv soon, intel with their crystalwell/ haswell(alleged) Amd likely to do it with Kaveri/ excavator (a guess as no info) Amd will use this ultra wide on chip cache to boost cpu speed whilst interestingly its alleged intel will use it to speed up and enhance their igpu element, makes for a gap closer eh.
> 
> imho steamroller arch is another inbetweener arch like PD in itself a polished tweeked BD, excavator will again be all new(a guess) like BD and will at that point be built for true unit integration with the gpu element'S ,requireing a new socket which might arrive with steamroller but i doubt it.


AMD will only release a new socket if they go DDR4. Of course that is my opinion.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Sep 12, 2012)

Super XP said:


> AMD will only release a new socket if they go DDR4. Of course that is my opinion.



me too , clearly both optimists with 990Fx mobos 

whatever they have in the works if you consider it was also Amd that started the FSB buss speed upping and created hypertransport way before intel had similar, im sure Excavator will also include internal Buss improvements too thats what leads my arch change thoughts.


----------



## AvonX (Sep 12, 2012)

Super XP said:


> He is "Arguably" the best CPU architect on earth. If anybody can turn AMD around, he can. If an insider leaks that Steamroller is going to be 45% clock 4 clock faster than today's Bulldozer, I wouldn't take that with a grain of salt, I would take it as if it came out of the CEO's mouth



Shame he was working for apple and elsewhere for many years.
He has allot of talent. He could be a little rusty now at the beginning, he was working way to long on mobile devices.
And that is why Rory hired him. The focus will be on mobile devices unfortunately.


----------



## Covert_Death (Sep 13, 2012)

AvonX said:


> Shame he was working for apple and elsewhere for many years.
> He has allot of talent. He could be a little rusty now at the beginning, he was working way to long on mobile devices.
> And that is why Rory hired him. The focus will be on mobile devices unfortunately.



i highly doubt that... AMD needs help in high end CPU and server chips... hence they hired the best there is, my speculation makes 100x more sense than yours does lol, sorry.

i don't believe whatsoever AMD would hire the him for focus on something like mobile tech, not for a second.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Sep 13, 2012)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> me too , clearly both optimists with 990Fx mobos
> 
> whatever they have in the works if you consider it was also Amd that started the FSB buss speed upping and created hypertransport way before intel had similar, im sure Excavator will also include internal Buss improvements too thats what leads my arch change thoughts.



you forget 970 users.

Honestly I feel that After Steam Roller AMD should consolidate the Socket to FM2 (no socket change to FM2+ or w/e), it would reduce the amt of sockets engineered,


----------



## Super XP (Sep 13, 2012)

eidairaman1 said:


> you forget 970 users.
> 
> Honestly I feel that After Steam Roller AMD should consolidate the Socket to FM2 (no socket change to FM2+ or w/e), it would reduce the amt of sockets engineered,


So both APU's and CPU's would work on them. Don't you need different chipsets to cater to each of then?


----------



## AvonX (Sep 13, 2012)

Super XP said:


> So both APU's and CPU's would work on them. Don't you need different chipsets to cater to each of then?



Highly doubt that would happen.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Sep 13, 2012)

It is possible since there are non apu units on FM1


----------



## 3870x2 (Sep 13, 2012)

Dent1 said:


> I don't think AMD's CEOs are losing any sleep over you.



I'm kinda in the same boat, and yes they will lose sleep when we represent the group they are trying to sell to.

Lucky for them, I still prefer their CPUs because of their price/performance, my track history with them (which is great) and last but not least, my loyalty.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Sep 13, 2012)

3870x2 said:


> I'm kinda in the same boat, and yes they will lose sleep when we represent the group they are trying to sell to.
> 
> Lucky for them, I still prefer their CPUs because of their price/performance, my track history with them (which is great) and last but not least, my loyalty.



Intels pricing was still high even though AMD was kicking their butt at the time


----------



## Dent1 (Sep 13, 2012)

3870x2 said:


> I'm kinda in the same boat, and yes they will lose sleep when we represent the group they are trying to sell to.



We the "enthusiasts" are not the group they are trying to sell to. If that was the case the company would be in liquidation by now,


----------



## eidairaman1 (Sep 14, 2012)

Dent1 said:


> We the "enthusiasts" are not the group they are trying to sell to. If that was the case the company would be in liquidation by now,



ya we technically are 1% of a Computer market


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Sep 14, 2012)

eidairaman1 said:


> ya we technically are 1% of a Computer market



which interestingly would be easily serviced just out of one binning of an APU, the (binned)ones where the GPU doesnt work and the cores clock well and even better minus the gpu heat, all would equal your enthusiast cpu of the future to me.

afaik prior gen amd chipsets are still compatible with Fx and the FM socket range and on the whole if the busses match up ,and they do, most later amd chipsets should still work and have been attached to Fm1 sockets, its mostly a case of what features the processor socket /cpu can do verses what the featureset of the motherboard will have.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Sep 14, 2012)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> which interestingly would be easily serviced just out of one binning of an APU, the (binned)ones where the GPU doesnt work and the cores clock well and even better minus the gpu heat, all would equal your enthusiast cpu of the future to me.
> 
> afaik prior gen amd chipsets are still compatible with Fx and the FM socket range and on the whole if the busses match up ,and they do, most later amd chipsets should still work and have been attached to Fm1 sockets, its mostly a case of what features the processor socket /cpu can do verses what the featureset of the motherboard will have.



A75 and 970 seem to be equivalent as of PEG configuration and feature set


----------



## erocker (Sep 14, 2012)

So.. I'm sure it's been mentioned, what is going on with AMD's sockets in the near future? I don't see a switch to FM2 as it is less pins than AM3+ and I assume some of those pins are limited to the on chip GPU.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Sep 14, 2012)

erocker said:


> So.. I'm sure it's been mentioned, what is going on with AMD's sockets in the near future? I don't see a switch to FM2 as it is less pins than AM3+ and I assume some of those pins are limited to the on chip GPU.



it would be a suggestion to consolidate the socket designs.

man Skt A was universal...


----------



## erocker (Sep 14, 2012)

Sure, but has there been any info for a new socket?


----------



## eidairaman1 (Sep 14, 2012)

erocker said:


> Sure, but has there been any info for a new socket?



i dont think there has been ill see if there might be any info after AM3+


----------



## cadaveca (Sep 14, 2012)

erocker said:


> Sure, but has there been any info for a new socket?



Not at all. Not ONE SINGLE piece of belly lint.

I think it's not likely.


Is it possible? I think it's VERY possible.

Two reasons. One, that whole question i asked AMD that said Bulldozer needed a new socket for the best perforamcne, and secondly, to perhaps add PCIe 3.0 support.

Of course, PCIe 3.0 could be done without a socket change, i think.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Sep 14, 2012)

cadaveca said:


> Not at all. Not ONE SINGLE piece of belly lint.
> 
> I think it's not likely.
> 
> ...



only issue is they could add more pins for that signalling thus calling for a new cpu and socket anyway...


----------



## Super XP (Sep 14, 2012)

erocker said:


> So.. I'm sure it's been mentioned, what is going on with AMD's sockets in the near future? I don't see a switch to FM2 as it is less pins than AM3+ and I assume some of those pins are limited to the on chip GPU.


In the past I believe it took INTEL approx: 2 years to addopt DDR. At that time they were using Rambus RAM. AMD started using DDR I think in the year 2000 with the Athlon CPU's. So my original point was perhaps AMD will wait for DDR4 prices to fall and continue to use DDR3 or they will develope a IMC that supports both DDR3/4 for Socket AM4?..

Now I really need to stay away from that Irish Whiskey  I'm sticking to Greek Ouzo next time. 

*FIXED!!!*


----------



## erocker (Sep 14, 2012)

Super XP said:


> In the past I believe it took AMD 2 years before they went from DDR to DDR2. Probably overall price played a role in that, and I believe it took AMD 1 year from DDR2 to DDR3.
> 
> What I meant to say is Intel supported DDR2 2 years before AMD did and 1 year DDR3 before AMD did



I think you quoted the wrong person.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Sep 14, 2012)




----------



## AvonX (Sep 14, 2012)

erocker said:


> I think you quoted the wrong person.



Maybe he is high.


----------



## Super XP (Sep 14, 2012)

AvonX said:


> Maybe he is high.


I fixed my post, don't know what I was thinking lol, I got Intel confused with AMD


----------



## librin.so.1 (Sep 14, 2012)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> which interestingly would be easily serviced just out of one binning of an APU, the (binned)ones where the GPU doesnt work and the cores clock well and even better minus the gpu heat, all would equal your enthusiast cpu of the future to me.



Isn't Intel already doing this? There are [either active or disabled] GPUs in every current Intel CPU, AFAIK.
(Of course, I might be mistaken.)


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Sep 14, 2012)

Thats kind of my point Vinska, its allready being done and Amd will do it too, oh and though comercial intel cpu's are as you say, i doubt that xeons and the like have any gpu in them, what with the core count , use etc.


----------



## nt300 (Sep 14, 2012)

Vinska said:


> Isn't Intel already doing this? There are [either active or disabled] GPUs in every current Intel CPU, AFAIK.
> (Of course, I might be mistaken.)


Yes they are doing just that and still they overclock very well. I can see AMD doing the same thing along the whole line of CPUs.


----------



## Super XP (Sep 14, 2012)

Good News, an internal source claims:  (ATInsider) has posted on Fudzilla that the upcoming Piledriver is on average 15% to 20% faster than Bulldozer. He states it will be a combination of both minor tweaks/modifications and clock speeds. He states the clock rate is more effective than Bulldozer's such as if you OC it you will see a gain better performance gain, even with a mild 200MHz to 400MHz. Bulldozer. 
I believe we did not see that much of a performance boost with OC'ing unless we aggressively OC'ed it. For me I took my Bulldozer with all 8-cores to 4.40 GHz with a mild bump in vCore. Now I am interested in Piledriver, who knows, if the price is right, I may bite into it.

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2204765/amd-vishera-chip-running-at-5ghz-is-spotted


----------



## eidairaman1 (Sep 14, 2012)

Super XP said:


> Good News, an internal source claims:  (ATInsider) has posted on Fudzilla that the upcoming Piledriver is on average 15% to 20% faster than Bulldozer. He states it will be a combination of both minor tweaks/modifications and clock speeds. He states the clock rate is more effective than Bulldozer's such as if you OC it you will see a gain better performance gain, even with a mild 200MHz to 400MHz. Bulldozer.
> I believe we did not see that much of a performance boost with OC'ing unless we aggressively OC'ed it. For me I took my Bulldozer with all 8-cores to 4.40 GHz with a mild bump in vCore. Now I am interested in Piledriver, who knows, if the price is right, I may bite into it.
> 
> http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2204765/amd-vishera-chip-running-at-5ghz-is-spotted



internal source from who?


----------



## Super XP (Sep 14, 2012)

eidairaman1 said:


> internal source from who?


I don't know his name is ATInsider, you know insider 
But the article states the obvious anyway.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Sep 14, 2012)

Super XP said:


> I don't know his name is ATInsider, you know insider
> But the article states the obvious anyway.



oh ok, well this to me is still speculation.

Grain of Salt for me till reviewers are given the Green to pull the NDA off.

CPUs have to be fast in todays apps as well as tomorrows.


----------



## Super XP (Sep 14, 2012)

eidairaman1 said:


> oh ok, well this to me is still speculation.
> 
> Grain of Salt for me till reviewers are given the Green to pull the NDA off.
> 
> CPUs have to be fast in todays apps as well as tomorrows.


Yes a big grain of salt. I can't wait for some reviews. 

Wow, you are still on the AMD Athlon XP-M 2500+ very nice, and I am sure it's been serving you very well. Ahh, the good old Athlon XP days.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Sep 14, 2012)

Super XP said:


> Yes a big grain of salt. I can't wait for some reviews.
> 
> Wow, you are still on the AMD Athlon XP-M 2500+ very nice, and I am sure it's been serving you very well. Ahh, the good old Athlon XP days.



Ya true. When things are golden for me ill build something considerably faster. X1950 Pro is held back by the XP machine.


----------



## Super XP (Sep 15, 2012)

eidairaman1 said:


> Ya true. When things are golden for me ill build something considerably faster. X1950 Pro is held back by the XP machine.


WOW,  you still have an original ATI Radeon, very nice indead, what a classic 

Who knows, perhaps Steamroller will be your next upgrade  DDR3 Memory is dirt cheap, you can easily get 16GB to 32GB and even 64GB Dual-Channel, but DDR4 being more expensive when released I believe should offer much more benefits. It all depends on whether Excavator and/or Steamroller will be DDR4 with new socket or DDR3 with the same AM3+. You obviously don't mind waiting


----------



## eidairaman1 (Sep 15, 2012)

Super XP said:


> WOW,  you still have an original ATI Radeon, very nice indead, what a classic
> 
> Who knows, perhaps Steamroller will be your next upgrade  DDR3 Memory is dirt cheap, you can easily get 16GB to 32GB and even 64GB Dual-Channel, but DDR4 being more expensive when released I believe should offer much more benefits. It all depends on whether Excavator and/or Steamroller will be DDR4 with new socket or DDR3 with the same AM3+. You obviously don't mind waiting



i honestly dont care because I built my Bros AM3+ machine with 970 Extreme 4 AsRock and a 6770 (Bulldozer-Which proved to be a sidegrade at best)- I put in a X2 555 BE for that machine and I unlocked it with stock cooling (Runs quiet actually less room temp reaches 80+), 8 GB Ram and its running as fast as it did a year ago but i finally drilled in his head to keep it updated and clean software and hardware wise


----------



## Super XP (Sep 15, 2012)

eidairaman1 said:


> i honestly dont care because I built my Bros AM3+ machine with 970 Extreme 4 AsRock and a 6770 (Bulldozer-Which proved to be a sidegrade at best)- I put in a X2 555 BE for that machine and I unlocked it with stock cooling (Runs quiet actually less room temp reaches 80+), 8 GB Ram and its running as fast as it did a year ago but i finally drilled in his head to keep it updated and clean software and hardware wise


Ah, good stuff and yes you have to keep the PC nice and clean. Dust kills PC components. Anyhow, I am curious as to how Piledriver is going to stack up to it's big brother Bulldozer. The Piledriver cores within Trinity are tuned down versions, so I would expect the Desktop to perform better at 125w.


----------



## Steevo (Sep 15, 2012)

Super XP said:


> Ah, good stuff and yes you have to keep the PC nice and clean. Dust kills PC components. Anyhow, I am curious as to how Piledriver is going to stack up to it's big brother Bulldozer. The Piledriver cores within Trinity are tuned down versions, so I would expect the Desktop to perform better at 125w.



Turned down versions? This isn't a car. 

It may seem like they can get more, but they are bound by the limitations of the die size, and the existing traces in the die.


----------



## Super XP (Sep 15, 2012)

Steevo said:


> Turned down versions? This isn't a car.
> 
> It may seem like they can get more, but they are bound by the limitations of the die size, and the existing traces in the die.


Yes, that is what I meant. I believe AvonX said you can't really push an APU's CPU too much due to those limitations.
Good Night Guys, it's close to midnight here,

Oh and here is that quote from that so called Insider.



> Piledriver 15% to 20% Boost in IPC
> 
> This boost is based a combination of higher clock speed and internal core modifications.
> The major different between Piledriver cores over Bulldozer is every single hike in clock rate will gain you more effective performance versus the Bulldozer. For instance, 200MHz Piledriver would approximately the same speed effect to an 800MHz hike via Bulldozer. This has to do with tweaking the dispatch, tightening the L2 timings, FPU modifications along with be slightly better branch prediction in terms of faster recovery of missed predictions.
> ...


----------



## AvonX (Sep 15, 2012)

Super XP said:


> I don't know his name is ATInsider, you know insider
> But the article states the obvious anyway.



Don't understand why you place high hopes on vishera.
There is nothing really to see from vishera, generally it will be the same as bulldozer.
You already have an fx-8120 and its not worth getting a vishera cpu.
You should wait for steamroller and hope things will be better.
I personally believe that the real improvement will be "excavator" and that is the one that they are really focusing on and there will be major changes.
As i told you before, it needs a complete redesign in order for this architecture to get fixed.


----------



## AvonX (Sep 15, 2012)

The bad news is that the fx-8350 is more power hungry than the fx-8150.
If this is true, i think they will be officially out of the dedicated desktop CPU's market.
Unless they have cancelled it and they are waiting to release steamroller.


----------



## librin.so.1 (Sep 15, 2012)

AvonX said:


> The bad news is that the fx-8350 is more power hungry than the fx-8150.



Sauce please!


----------



## AvonX (Sep 15, 2012)

Vinska said:


> Sauce please!




http://www.obr-hardware.com/2012/09/i-was-right-fx-8350-or-c0-is-piledriver.html


----------



## Goodman (Sep 16, 2012)

AvonX said:


> http://www.obr-hardware.com/2012/09/i-was-right-fx-8350-or-c0-is-piledriver.html



They are now oc higher then 9Ghz...

Anyhow real or not (all we see about it on the internet) i have to agree with AvonX Piledriver/Vishera won't be much improvement over Bulldozer I'll say about 10-15% max & probably not even 5% in some area's & all that because of higher clock speed so in another word probably slower then current Bulldozer at same clock speed...

I don't rally care about it much anymore , anyways as i hardly play games since the past 5 years or so & even less since i got back into slot cars racing , now all i need is a cheap PC to surf the net & watch Movies/TV-Series


----------



## librin.so.1 (Sep 16, 2012)

AvonX said:


> http://www.obr-hardware.com/2012/09/i-was-right-fx-8350-or-c0-is-piledriver.html



Too bad he forgot to 'shop "Vishera" in place of "Zambezi" for the alleged FX-8350 screenshot...


----------



## AvonX (Sep 16, 2012)

Vinska said:


> Too bad he forgot to 'shop "Vishera" in place of "Zambezi" for the alleged FX-8350 screenshot...





The FX-8350 is a "Zambezi" "Tweaked" When its finally released, maybe it will be listed in CPU-Z as "Vishera" but i doubt it.
Why should they lie about it? Its a "Zambezi" and that just shows that AMD does not care about dedicated desktop performance CPU's.
The only thing that we could hope for, is for this to be the FX-8170 which i highly doubt. LOL
Or maybe it really is the FX-8170 and they cancelled everything else for dedicated desktop cpus and they are just going to release it as "FX-8350".

That validation was done at the original CPU-Z website.

http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=2508909


----------



## Super XP (Sep 16, 2012)

AvonX said:


> The FX-8350 is a "Zambezi" "Tweaked" When its finally released, maybe it will be listed in CPU-Z as "Vishera" but i doubt it.
> Why should they lie about it? Its a "Zambezi" and that just shows that AMD does not care about dedicated desktop performance CPU's.
> The only thing that we could hope for, is for this to be the FX-8170 which i highly doubt. LOL
> Or maybe it really is the FX-8170 and they cancelled everything else for dedicated desktop cpus and they are just going to release it as "FX-8350".
> ...


This is nonesense. Even the Engineering samples would state that its a Piledriver and not a Bulldozer.
The Piledriver based CPU's will not be the 1st stepping or the 1st revision, at the very least they will be based on OR-C2 or OR-C3 revision/stepping seeing how Bulldozer was based on OR-B2, because B0 & B1 ran too hot.


----------



## trickson (Sep 16, 2012)

Good lord looks like AMD sure is putting the screws to them CPU's, Man 4.2GHz!!!


----------



## Super XP (Sep 16, 2012)




----------



## AvonX (Sep 16, 2012)

Super XP said:


> This is nonesense. Even the Engineering samples would state that its a Piledriver and not a Bulldozer.
> The Piledriver based CPU's will not be the 1st stepping or the 1st revision, at the very least they will be based on OR-C2 or OR-C3 revision/stepping seeing how Bulldozer was based on OR-B2, because B0 & B1 ran too hot.



Again its just a tweaked bulldozer and its not a fully fledged piledriver as in "trinity".
They just added some features "instructions" from piledriver. "That's it"


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Sep 16, 2012)

AvonX said:


> Again its just a tweaked bulldozer and its not a fully fledged piledriver as in "trinity".
> They just added some features "instructions" from piledriver. "That's it"



your spreading no more then opinion and gossip, it would be nice if you stated so, instead of insissting its all fact and stop double posting, just amend your prior post.

imho your wrong also


----------



## Super XP (Sep 16, 2012)

AvonX said:


> Again its just a tweaked bulldozer and its not a fully fledged piledriver as in "trinity".
> They just added some features "instructions" from piledriver. "That's it"


I know you have common sense because my common sense tells me AMD will do anything to prevent another Bulldozer disaster as some like to call it. Even 6 to 8 months before Bulldozers official launch, AMD was repairing/modifying/tweaking etc. Sections within Piledriver to ensure. Faster performance with less power draw. 

Your link to that so called FX-8350 is either bogus or a very early sample of Piledriver. At this time it's all SPECULATION, NOT FACTS. Talk to me when official benchmarks are released from credible sites, then we can discuss its positives & negatives versus Bulldozer.

October is near


----------



## AvonX (Sep 16, 2012)

Super XP said:


> I know you have common sense because my common sense tells me AMD will do anything to prevent another Bulldozer disaster as some like to call it. Even 6 to 8 months before Bulldozers official launch, AMD was repairing/modifying/tweaking etc. Sections within Piledriver to ensure. Faster performance with less power draw.
> 
> Your link to that so called FX-8350 is either bogus or a very early sample of Piledriver. At this time it's all SPECULATION, NOT FACTS. Talk to me when official benchmarks are released from credible sites, then we can discuss its positives & negatives versus Bulldozer.
> 
> October is near



Yeah its near and you will soon find out that i was correct.
And also before bulldozer released we had the same response as you are doing now.
WE will see.


----------



## Super XP (Sep 16, 2012)

AvonX said:


> Yeah its near and you will soon find out that i was correct.
> And also before bulldozer released we had the same response as you are doing now.
> WE will see.


And if you happen to be wrong? 

In regards to my past posting about Bulldozer being super fast, brand spanking new design, well, I was going by what AMD's marketing department was telling everybody, not to mention their specially picked benchmarks. 
Bulldozer is still a great idea and an idea AMD needs to continue R&D in, but yes it was neither what we were told nor what everybody thought.
Piledriver (2012 – 32nm) should be the 1st step in fine turning the design, with Steamroller (2013 – 28nm) actually getting physically modified, and Excavator (2014 – 22nm) being what AMD should have released with the title called “Bulldozer”. Not much is known about Excavator, but you can easily speculate that it will further be physically modified for greater performance per watt.

Some might claim that AMD should have prolonged the aging Phenom design by releasing Phenom III, just so they could have rectified Bulldozer’s performance issues. Well, unfortunately for AMD that would have killed there stock price. So they went with it and despite it being what it is, Bulldozer has been selling very well.

*AMD Piledriver FX Processors, at Least 20% Faster than Bulldozer*
http://news.softpedia.com/news/AMD-...t-Least-20-Faster-than-Bulldozer-278535.shtml


----------



## AvonX (Sep 16, 2012)

Super XP said:


> Some might claim that AMD should have prolonged the aging Phenom design by releasing Phenom III, just so they could have rectified Bulldozer’s performance issues. Well, unfortunately for AMD that would have killed there stock price. So they went with it and despite it being what it is, Bulldozer has been selling very well.



Intel has been fine tuning core2 duo core2 quad for years and it did not hurt them one single bit. And don't say the same excuse that everyone uses that: "the aging Phenom design by releasing Phenom III" Just finally admit it that they have done a grave mistake.

Edit: You know why Intel is so far ahead? Its not only about money, its because they execute better and they stick to what has been good for them and worked well. They did not come up with silly ideas like bulldozer. If AMD just stuck and continued to what has worked for them well, i can assure the performance would of been much more ahead to what it currently is.


----------



## Steevo (Sep 16, 2012)

No one cares what it is called, but that it works well. AMD doesn't seem to have this concept worked out yet.

There is more speculation about speculation about a idea that someone on another forum typed cause they "know" someone, than is healthy. I believe we need chest waders to stay out of the crap that has been generated in this thread.


----------



## AvonX (Sep 16, 2012)

Super XP said:


> *AMD Piledriver FX Processors, at Least 20% Faster than Bulldozer*
> http://news.softpedia.com/news/AMD-...t-Least-20-Faster-than-Bulldozer-278535.shtml



How many times must i tell you that "FX-8350" is not a "FULL" piledriver as in trinity?


----------



## Super XP (Sep 16, 2012)

AvonX said:


> How many times must i tell you that "FX-8350" is not a "FULL" piledriver as in trinity?


Keep dreaming


----------



## Super XP (Sep 16, 2012)

AvonX said:


> If AMD just stuck and continued to what has worked for them well,


Then AMD would have been out of business by now. Remember, AMD is the innovator because they cannot afford to make a mistake. INTEL is that 800 pound monster that made many poor technology desicions in the past and got padded by there Multi-billions of $$$$.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Sep 16, 2012)

lets keep it professional in here people or does the moderator have to come in and clean out more crap?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodman View Post
They are now oc higher then 9Ghz...

Anyhow real or not (all we see about it on the internet) i have to agree with AvonX Piledriver/Vishera won't be much improvement over Bulldozer I'll say about 10-15% max & probably not even 5% in some area's & all that because of higher clock speed so in another word probably slower then current Bulldozer at same clock speed...

I don't rally care about it much anymore , anyways as i hardly play games since the past 5 years or so & even less since i got back into slot cars racing , now all i need is a cheap PC to surf the net & watch Movies/TV-Series
heck my sig rig is capable of that and at that faster than an Atom CPU lmao.

ive used an atom laptop and it couldnt handle xp let alone 7, even when plugged in.


----------



## AvonX (Sep 16, 2012)

Super XP said:


> Then AMD would have been out of business by now. Remember, AMD is the innovator because they cannot afford to make a mistake. INTEL is that 800 pound monster that made many poor technology desicions in the past and got padded by there Multi-billions of $$$$.



They already are out of business and they already did "huge" mistakes, we will see how long APU's will last cause Intel is pushing very hard for low powered devices.
All the latest news are from Intel: http://www.fudzilla.com/processors


----------



## Dent1 (Sep 16, 2012)

AvonX said:


> They already are out of business



AMD out of business? That funny because I swear they are listed on the New York Stock Exchange.


----------



## erocker (Sep 16, 2012)

AvonX said:


> They already are out of business and they already did "huge" mistakes, we will see how long APU's will last cause Intel is pushing very hard for low powered devices.
> All the latest news are from Intel: http://www.fudzilla.com/processors



Okay, these kind of posts can stop. They serve no use other than flamebaiting. I'm quite sure you have made your point several times in this thread, I see no reason for you to post in this thread any longer.


----------



## Goodman (Sep 16, 2012)

Super XP said:


> I know you have common sense because my common sense tells me AMD will do anything to prevent another Bulldozer disaster as some like to call it.



You're right Piledriver/Vishera will not be as "bad" as the first Bulldozer but it won't be a miracle performance either a little bit improvement here & there for a average 15% performance (all because of a much higher clock speed) & nothing more...



AvonX said:


> Edit: You know why Intel is so far ahead? Its not only about money, its because they execute better and they stick to what has been good for them and worked well. *They (Intel) did not come up with silly ideas like bulldozer*.



Yeah! you're also right Intel waits for AMD to do the hard work & then "legally" copy their design in a lazy way...


----------



## Super XP (Sep 16, 2012)

Goodman said:


> Yeah! you're also right Intel waits for AMD to do the hard work & then "legally" copy their design in a lazy way...


You speak with past proven facts. AMD's been leading the innovation charge ever since the Athlon XP... 
Interesting QUOTE...


> I don't know why everyone keeps saying BD is a failure or that the FMA3/FMA4 debacle was a "big killer". Even with that if you remove the obviously titled benchmarks coded towards intel cpu's meanwhile handicapping non intel chips, BD is still VERY competitive. Anyone who thinks that buying a CPU that beats all others in single threaded apps and uses that as a justification is ignoring how the landscape of computing has changed.


----------



## trickson (Sep 17, 2012)

Super XP said:


> Then AMD would have been out of business by now. Remember, AMD is the innovator because they cannot afford to make a mistake. INTEL is that 800 pound monster that made many poor technology desicions in the past and got padded by there Multi-billions of $$$$.



Really? BD was a Big let Down! and now they are trying to re-brand there crap BD as Pile driver? AMD is struggling to keep up that is plain and simple. It is more evident at there attempts to jack up the core speed rather than do any real work to the cores to make them competitive. Wake up AMD fanboys AMD is for AMD, NOT YOU!


----------



## Super XP (Sep 17, 2012)

Thank you for your opinion  Now how about you go look up Steamroller by AMD, 

Anyhow to Vishera FX. 
One major change I read about w/ Piledriver over Bulldozer is the addition of 2 x MMX pipes to the FP Unit. It's rumoured to have solved most if not all bottlenecks within the FP.


----------



## erocker (Sep 17, 2012)

trickson said:


> now they are trying to re-brand there crap BD as Pile driver?



Don't know where you got that from but it is false.


----------



## trickson (Sep 17, 2012)

erocker said:


> Don't know where you got that from but it is false.



I guess I am not really looking hard. I really do not see much of a remaking and revamping of the core tech so I see this as a BD not a PD.


----------



## erocker (Sep 17, 2012)

Considering all the information that is out there is misinformation/lack of information there's nothing to base your assumptions on. Besides, you're not going to change anyone's mind. So... PD could be better, or it could not. That's what we actually know.


----------



## trickson (Sep 17, 2012)

erocker said:


> Considering all the information that is out there is misinformation/lack of information there's nothing to base your assumptions on. Besides, you're not going to change anyone's mind. So... PD could be better, or it could not. That's what we actually know.



I agree. There is this inherent desire to keep things in the dark. We will all just have to wait to see how well PD really is. All I have seen as of late from AMD is there need to put the MHZ to there CPU line nothing really more than that. This was some thing Intel did with the P4 and it did not work all that well for Intel or the P4. This is what I am seeing at any rate.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Sep 17, 2012)

trickson said:


> All I have seen as of late from AMD is there need to put the MHZ to there CPU line nothing really more than that. This was some thing Intel did with the P4 and it did not work all that well for Intel or the P4.



considering your running your own cpu flat out at 4Ghz im surprised you dont think that a positive but hey ho


----------



## AvonX (Sep 17, 2012)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> considering your running your own cpu flat out at 4Ghz im surprised you dont think that a positive but hey ho



The difference is that his cpu stock clock is 3Ghz. "Intel" did not need to clock it all the way up to 4Ghz because the performance is effective at 3Ghz as well, and it also clocks well.


----------



## AvonX (Sep 17, 2012)

It is rumored that changes made in steamroller was made by the magic hands of "Jim Keller" and all this was made within the first week of being re-hired.
I hope they let him do something extra on steamroller to improve it even more.
Go Jim Keller.


----------



## nt300 (Sep 17, 2012)

AvonX said:


> It is rumored that changes made in steamroller was made by the magic hands of "Jim Keller" and all this was made within the first week of being re-hired.
> I hope they let him do something extra on steamroller to improve it even more.
> Go Jim Keller.


Good point, this Jim Keller person can make a big difference for the AMD. If he limits the sharing among the modules like adding an extra decoder per module for total 2 decoders instead of having 1 decoder that got bottlenecked, this alone can improve performance by a lot.
I also think they need to break up the FPUs into 4 blocks of 64-Bit where they can be combined to either 128-Bit x 2 or 256-Bit x 1 or 64-bit x 4 or 128-Bit x 1 and 64-bit x 2 n so on. Maybe this will work good too, but not sure right now.


----------



## librin.so.1 (Sep 17, 2012)

nt300 said:


> I also think they need to break up the FPUs into 4 blocks of 64-Bit where they can be combined to either 128-Bit x 2 or 256-Bit x 1 or 64-bit x 4 or 128-Bit x 1 and 64-bit x 2 n so on. Maybe this will work good too, but not sure right now.



That might add a little to much complexity for the FPU & might require redesign things. Depending on how the current one is designed, of course.
And, I bet they wouldn't hesitate on doing it if it would give a performance boost that justifies the effort required to do so.


----------



## trickson (Sep 17, 2012)

AvonX said:


> The difference is that his cpu stock clock is 3Ghz. "Intel" did not need to clock it all the way up to 4Ghz because the performance is effective at 3Ghz as well, and it also clocks well.



You got that right!


----------



## Dent1 (Sep 17, 2012)

AvonX said:


> The difference is that his cpu stock clock is 3Ghz. "Intel" did not need to clock it all the way up to 4Ghz because the performance is effective at 3Ghz as well, and it also clocks well.



Yeah right,

The starting clock has little to do with it's affectiveness of performance. It's to do with marketing and it's perception to consumers.

If intel thought they'd get 1% more sales by starting their lower models at 4GHz they would do it too.


----------



## ensabrenoir (Sep 17, 2012)

Dent1 said:


> Yeah right,
> 
> The starting clock has little to do with it's affectiveness of performance. It's to do with marketing and it's perception to consumers.
> 
> If intel thought they'd get 1% more sales by starting their lower models at 4GHz they would do it too.


I
Aaaaaaahhhhhh no.  Amd needs the sales more.  If this were true, everything amd released would be 4.3 & above.  The marketing comes in by mere name recognition and the price follows accordingly.  Want a Benz.....gonna have to pay for a Benz


----------



## trickson (Sep 17, 2012)

Dent1 said:


> Yeah right,
> 
> The starting clock has little to do with it's affectiveness of performance. It's to do with marketing and it's perception to consumers.
> 
> If intel thought they'd get 1% more sales by starting their lower models at 4GHz they would do it too.



Ummmm what?  

This makes no sense at all. 
All AMD is doing is the SAME thing Intel did when the P4 was out. Intel kept jacking up the CPU clock speed and got no were fast. Now I heard this from all the AMD people (Including MYSELF!) But when AMD does the very same thing it is some how marketing? DUDE put the pot pipe down.


----------



## Dent1 (Sep 17, 2012)

ensabrenoir said:


> I
> Aaaaaaahhhhhh no.  Amd needs the sales more.  If this were true, everything amd released would be 4.3 & above.



If AMD and Intel could maintain the advertised TDP at 4.3GHz they would.

And

If AMD and Intel find a way to supply retail boxes with a better cooling system without compromising profit we would see 4.3GHz stock



ensabrenoir said:


> The marketing comes in by mere name recognition and the price follows accordingly.  Want a Benz.....gonna have to pay for a Benz



Marketing is clock speed as well. Because the non-technical gifted i.e. the average joe assumes higher clock equals better performance, thus healthier profit. 




trickson said:


> Ummmm what?
> 
> This makes no sense at all.
> All AMD is doing is the SAME thing Intel did when the P4 was out. Intel kept jacking up the CPU clock speed and got no were fast. Now I heard this from all the AMD people (Including MYSELF!)



But how can you say this with certainty without Piledriver reviews? 

If Piledriver proves to have the same IPC as Bulldozer at stock speeds then your argument makes sense. But right now we have no clue how Piledriver performances so we cant even make an educated guess why they've increase the stock clocks.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Sep 17, 2012)

trickson said:


> DUDE put the pot pipe down.



A few of you should deffinately do this, and trickson runs his at 1Ghz extra so clearly wasnt fully satisfied with it at 3 and once you hit the limits of IPC your faced with higher clocks or more cores to increase performance it is that simple, and on both these points Amd are up and running, P4 just straight up didnt work and had nowhere to go whereas BD ,PD steamroller and excavator are all completely modern rewriten arch to attain better modularism(not sure thats a word) so that Amd can make a 5 Ghz 64 core 8x GPU soc chip before intel does, and easier and they are doing ,these be opinions here.


Avonx please figure out the Edit button you have been here in this thread long enough(chatting the same nonesense) to figure it out by now, yet keep throwing the odd Dp inn:shadedshu 

I personally love high hertz  cpu's, ive ran all mine just below their actual wall all their lives and yes i killed a few of them, but not before three years and that will do for me, so 5Ghz is my next un power efficient target, my webz pages should fly then.



AvonX said:


> e difference is that his cpu stock clock is 3Ghz. "Intel" did not need to clock it all the way up to 4Ghz because the performance is effective at 3Ghz as well, and it also clocks well.



no Dp see

the absolute truth of the matter is that alpha ,beta chips and hard evaluative validation testing decide what speeds intel and AMd sell their chips at, they are binned according to their actual performance into bins that all befit a certain quantity(reqd) and performance and Lifespan criteria so all in they have little choice most of the time and are binned according to market demand often and not performance, thats why were here, after all not all oems are willing to put a 4 Ghz chip in anything unless its still cheap and the difference is good for oems as a price scale, more Ghz = yep more moneys................


----------



## trickson (Sep 17, 2012)

Dent1 said:


> Marketing is clock speed as well. Because the non-technical gifted i.e. the average joe assumes higher clock equals better performance.



Not really, The average "Joe" is only interested in one thing can this computer do what I need it to do. That is really all. Most people do not care if the CPU is Intel or AMD just as long as the computer it's self can do what they need it to do. 
you are assuming that the average "Joe" Knows that the faster the CPU the better. In some cases yes this would be true, But for the web/video/youtube surfer there is only one thing can I get my 4g to work with this computer. 
I believe that AMD is ringing every little bit out of what they have now just to stay competitive with Intel. Too bad they are resorting to cheap tactics to get there. Hey her is an Idea AMD should be rethinking the CPU design altogether and for go the jacking up of the CPU speeds. Some real thought and real innovation is needed. Just like they did with the K10!


----------



## trickson (Sep 17, 2012)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> A few of you should deffinately do this, and trickson runs his at 1Ghz extra so clearly wasnt fully satisfied with it at 3



I run at 4.0GHz because I can. Just how many of then 4.2 and 4.3GHz AMD CPU's do you really think will be overclock-able? It just looks to me like AMD is out of Ideas and has resorted to jacking up core speeds. I wounder just when AMD will have to put liquid coolers in there CPU packages and soon! WOW I wonder just how HOT them things are really going to be.


----------



## Dent1 (Sep 17, 2012)

trickson said:


> Not really, The average "Joe" is only interested in one thing can this computer do what I need it to do. That is really all. Most people do not care if the CPU is Intel or AMD just as long as the computer it's self can do what they need it to do.
> you are assuming that the average "Joe" Knows that the faster the CPU the better. In some cases yes this would be true, But for the web/video/youtube surfer there is only one thing can I get my 4g to work with this computer.





When the average Joe buys a computer they are bombarded with numbers. People learn to count as a toddler and are trained to assume a higher number is better. In essence they are trained to believe that a higher number means it can "do what they need" better. 




trickson said:


> I believe that AMD is ringing every little bit out of what they have now just to stay competitive with Intel.



To stay competitive in performance?  That is their secondary concern.

To stay competitive with Intel financially yes. 





trickson said:


> Some real thought and real innovation is needed. Just like they did with the K10!



Bulldozer was innovative. Innovation and performance have different dictionary meanings.




trickson said:


> . Just how many of then 4.2 and 4.3GHz AMD CPU's do you really think will be overclock-able?



Maybe you should wait for Piledriver and find out how overclockable it is? - Rather than talking shit before the product hits the shelves.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Sep 17, 2012)

trickson said:


> I run at 4.0GHz because I can. Just how many of then 4.2 and 4.3GHz AMD CPU's do you really think will be overclock-able? It just looks to me like AMD is out of Ideas and has resorted to jacking up core speeds. I wounder just when AMD will have to put liquid coolers in there CPU packages and soon! WOW I wonder just how HOT them things are really going to be.




I run mine at 4+ because i can too and because i prefer the snapyness, i wasnt haveing a dig so wind your neck in, fair enough thats your opinion but i agree with this ,



Dent1 said:


> If AMD and Intel could maintain the advertised TDP at 4.3GHz they would.



as for mentioning temps imho sandy and ivybridge dont run that cool nor phenom II so all in its not much of a point, as im an enthusiast anyways and allready have a waterblock for all hot chips, currently 7th month since rebuild and at 100% 24/7 folding cpu 57 gpu's 52-58 mobo 45 and im running 4.175Ghz bring on vishera i say its nearly winter anyways and ill show you how it Oc's.

you dont get extra Trolling points for double posting by the way trickson


----------



## tacosRcool (Sep 17, 2012)

Hopefully this will be good!


----------



## Super XP (Sep 17, 2012)

trickson said:


> I agree. There is this inherent desire to keep things in the dark. We will all just have to wait to see how well PD really is. All I have seen as of late from AMD is there need to put the MHZ to there CPU line nothing really more than that. This was some thing Intel did with the P4 and it did not work all that well for Intel or the P4. This is what I am seeing at any rate.


This was Intel's specific design, where higher clocks is required for performance increases. The only inefficiency in the P4 design was the Net burst Architecture and that lousy FSB nonsense. 

Don't know why AMD went the deeper pipeline route, but Excavator will change this, with Steamroller bringing the first major changes to the Bulldozer Design. 

AMD should be patted on the back for such outside the box innovation, but also get kicked in the nuts for a lousy execution due to upper management. Today's Bulldozer should have been at the very least Steamroller, if not Excavator. AMD no has to backpeddle and repair this, and they will...


----------



## AvonX (Sep 17, 2012)

Here we go again with the nonsense. You guys need to chill out.
If bulldozer was so good they would all remain at their positions and they would not of gotten fired.
We can see that also in the FX-8300 series that they just cranked up the "Ghz" to gain some performance, because most of it came from that and there was not much "innovation" in it.
This is plain and simple, AMD run out of "tallent" and skillful engineers. 
"Hence" why now we have "Jim Keller" at AMD because they were left with no other options.
"Jim Keller" was hired to hopefully fix all this junk. But this will take some time.


----------



## AvonX (Sep 18, 2012)

Difficult times at AMD: http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/17/us-advancedmicrodevices-cfo-idUSBRE88G1DC20120917

I wonder where are those who claimed that AMD products are "still" selling well.


----------



## ensabrenoir (Sep 18, 2012)

AvonX said:


> Difficult times at AMD: http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/17/us-advancedmicrodevices-cfo-idUSBRE88G1DC20120917
> 
> I wonder where are those who claimed that AMD products are "still" selling well.



Ouch...........dont want to.loose my gpu company....:shadedshu..


----------



## Dent1 (Sep 18, 2012)

AvonX said:


> because most of it came from that and there was not much "innovation" in it.



No innovation?

So designing the first processor with a module with a dedicated schedulers and integer units for each thread isn't innovative? 

That is a huge innovation and achievement. AvonX what have you done with your life that is so fantastic?





AvonX said:


> Difficult times at AMD: http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/17/us-advancedmicrodevices-cfo-idUSBRE88G1DC20120917




Difficult times at Intel:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/07/us-intel-outlook-idUSBRE8860BR20120907


----------



## Super XP (Sep 18, 2012)

AvonX said:


> Here we go again with the nonsense. You guys need to chill out.
> If bulldozer was so good they would all remain at their positions and they would not of gotten fired.
> We can see that also in the FX-8300 series that they just cranked up the "Ghz" to gain some performance, because most of it came from that and there was not much "innovation" in it.
> This is plain and simple, AMD run out of "tallent" and skillful engineers.
> ...


You really need to examine what you post before somebody takes it as fact You have absolutely no idea what went on within AMD when Hector Ruiz was CEO. When Dirk Meyer took the job, the company was in a mess. It was like Hector stripped the funds from the CPU R&D budget. Dirk Meyer did OK for a time, but was quickly let go. Bulldozer's research began I believe one year before Hector left. Anyhow, The Board of Directors made bad desicions which led the Bulldozer project to a bad start. 
Rory has a game plan and so far it seems to be working. 

Also your opinion regarding the FX 8300 will be nothing more than an OC'ed Bulldozer is just that a none Facial statement that holds no water. In October when Piledriver is released, you will eat those words


----------



## HTC (Sep 18, 2012)

AvonX said:


> Difficult times at AMD: http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/17/us-advancedmicrodevices-cfo-idUSBRE88G1DC20120917





Dent1 said:


> Difficult times at Intel:
> 
> http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/07/us-intel-outlook-idUSBRE8860BR20120907



Hehe!


----------



## erocker (Sep 18, 2012)

erocker said:


> Okay, these kind of posts can stop. They serve no use other than flamebaiting. I'm quite sure you have made your point several times in this thread, I see no reason for you to post in this thread any longer.



This wasn't a suggestion.


----------



## Covert_Death (Sep 18, 2012)

ummmmmmmmmmm

so vishera is gonna be a little bit better than bulldozer but the real improvements are gonna be steamroller

i would say BD = 100% PD = 110-115% and SR = 135-45%


----------



## Super XP (Sep 18, 2012)

Obviously a lot of this is based on what AMD has revealed to date. They are continuing to keep Steamroller very quiet, with releasing minor details. Piledriver in the other hand is different, AMD is keeping it tight lipped. So October 2012 is going to be Piledriver month 



> *The refined Piledriver x86 architecture from AMD will take over the AM3+ platform very fast.*
> http://news.softpedia.com/news/Eight-AMD-Vishera-CPUs-Take-Over-the-AM3-Platform-289906.shtml





> *Although the company is being very hush about any new desktop processors, the computing architects and engineers in its R&D department
> are hard at work developing the technology behind the architecture code-named Steamroller.*
> http://news.softpedia.com/news/AMD-Reveals-Steamroller-Architectural-Improvements-289225.shtml





> *AMD’s Steamroller to Be Faster Than Intel Haswell*
> http://news.softpedia.com/news/AMD-s-Steamroller-To-Be-Faster-than-Intel-Haswell-289980.shtml
> We’re sure AMD’s Dirk Meyer was envisioning something like Steamroller. He should have made the initial Bulldozer more like today’s Piledriver,
> but at least we know that Bulldozer had some issues that have now been ironed out.
> ...





> *Eleven AMD Zambezi processors EOL in Q4 12*
> http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/28601-eleven-amd-zambezi-processors-eol-in-q4-12


----------



## eidairaman1 (Sep 18, 2012)

Super XP said:


> Obviously a lot of this is based on what AMD has revealed to date. They are continuing to keep Steamroller very quiet, with releasing minor details. Piledriver in the other hand is different, AMD is keeping it tight lipped. So October 2012 is going to be Piledriver month



Ok SuperXP, we Know Piledriver is to replace Bulldozer. Steam Roller to Replace Piledriver.

Piledriver is a stop gap.

I Just want to see gaming, everyday apps, encoding/CAD numbers. From End Users/Testers here/tomshardware/techspot/hardwareanalysis. Not Sources like Fudzilla, theenquier, reuters, ATInsider, or even leaks from AMD itself.  I dont think this machine here will get a upgrade till Steamroller if it even supports this motherboard (970 Extreme 4)


----------



## Super XP (Sep 18, 2012)

eidairaman1 said:


> Ok SuperXP, we Know Piledriver is to replace Bulldozer. Steam Roller to Replace Piledriver.
> 
> Piledriver is a stop gap.
> 
> I Just want to see gaming, everyday apps, encoding/CAD numbers. I dont think this machine here will get a upgrade till Steamroller if it even supports this motherboard (970 Extreme 4)


I am almost done, just one more glass of my Makedonikos Greek Red Wine. Don't mind me, 
Now off to Left 4 Dead 2....


----------



## eidairaman1 (Sep 18, 2012)

Super XP said:


> I am almost done, just one more glass of my Makedonikos Greek Red Wine. Don't mind me,
> Now off to Left 4 Dead 2....



Hell give me some whiskey


----------



## Super XP (Sep 18, 2012)

eidairaman1 said:


> Hell give me some whiskey


Yes, got some Irish stuff, though I prefer Greek Metaxa and Ouzo., Just keep water near by, that Metaxa is smooth, but burns as it goes down


----------



## librin.so.1 (Sep 18, 2012)

Note that I did not threw any speculation on the performance of PD. Why?
Let's say it this way:

When PD comes out, I am going to get one. Then I am going to run variety of benchmarks on both BD and PD running on the same clocks, to see what/if there is a IPC improvement & how well PD scales compared to BD. 
I won't speak about it's performance until I do that, or at the very least, till someone does that for me. Because otherwise it would just be wild guessing.

Why am I saying this? Trying to tell You to stop guessing. Please don't say that PD is going to be crap. And please don't say it is going to be real good. At least hold that till it comes out, 'kay? 

EDIT: I burned my breakfast 'cause of writing this


----------



## eidairaman1 (Sep 18, 2012)

Vinska said:


> Note that I did not threw any speculation on the performance of PD. Why?
> Let's say it this way:
> 
> When PD comes out, I am going to get one. Then I am going to run variety of benchmarks on both BD and PD running on the same clocks, to see what/if there is a IPC improvement & how well PD scales compared to BD.
> ...



there is a 8350 already...


----------



## librin.so.1 (Sep 18, 2012)

eidairaman1 said:


> there is a 8350 already...



Elaborate, please.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Sep 18, 2012)

Vinska said:


> Elaborate, please.



read here

http://www.techpowerup.com/172376/AMD-Shows-Off-A10-5800K-and-FX-8350-Near-IDF.html


----------



## librin.so.1 (Sep 18, 2012)

eidairaman1 said:


> read here
> 
> http://www.techpowerup.com/172376/AMD-Shows-Off-A10-5800K-and-FX-8350-Near-IDF.html



Well yeah, if You put it this way, it is already "available" for months now.
Yet, it is still unreleased & therefore has no retail availability.

Edit: already read that article before writing my two previous posts, btw.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Sep 18, 2012)

Vinska said:


> Well yeah, if You put it this way, it is already "available" for months now.
> Yet, it is still unreleased & therefore has no retail availability.
> 
> Edit: already read that article before writing my two previous posts, btw.



just waiting on NDA and performance numbers comparing the 8150 to the 8350, "Clocked at the same SPEED" Then Compared to Phenom II


----------



## Super XP (Sep 18, 2012)

eidairaman1 said:


> just waiting on NDA and performance numbers comparing the 8150 to the 8350, "Clocked at the same SPEED" Then Compared to Phenom II


Two comparisons, one at identified clocks and one both at stock. For price/performance. 
Like I said before if performance is good over the current BD, then I'm in. Reason, now I think Steamroller may not be on AM3+. But who knows.


----------



## librin.so.1 (Sep 18, 2012)

Super XP said:


> Reason, now I think Steamroller may not be on AM3+. But who knows.



[captain_obvious]AMD employees I bet.[/captain_obvious] 
Idea! Let's kidnap one and extort the information from him/her =d


----------



## nt300 (Sep 19, 2012)

HD 8120 = Bulldozer = 0% (2011) 
HD 8320 = Piledriver = 15% - 20% (2012) 
HD 8520 = Steamroller = 35% - 45% (2013) 
HD 8720 = Excavator = 70% - 85% (2014) 
HD 8920 = Crane = 105% - 120% (2015) 

Speculate your hearts out... 
http://forums.guru3d.com/showthread.php?t=367705


----------



## Super XP (Sep 19, 2012)

nt300 said:


> HD 8120 = Bulldozer = 0% (2011)
> HD 8320 = Piledriver = 15% - 20% (2012)
> HD 8520 = Steamroller = 35% - 45% (2013)
> HD 8720 = Excavator = 70% - 85% (2014)
> ...


I wonder where you got that from


----------



## seronx (Sep 20, 2012)

Super XP said:


> I wonder where you got that from


Steamroller and Excavator will have a different nomenclature.
Bulldozer/Piledriver: 8 total cores per monolithic die (Orochi)
new nomenclature -v
Steamroller/Excavator: 10 total cores per monolithic die (Viperfish)
new nomenclature -v
Etc.: 12 total cores per monolithic die

Bulldozer: 80% - 85%
Piledriver: 100%
Steamroller: 125% - 130%
Excavator: 140% - 145%

Speculate your behind off...


----------



## Super XP (Sep 21, 2012)

erocker said:


> I think you quoted the wrong person.


O.K. here is the post I read from Toms Hardware.



> AMD waits for the new-spec RAM to outperform the older-spec RAM at the same price OR for the newer memory to have the same performance for less money before jumping on the new RAM bandwagon. That's why AMD didn't adopt DDR2 until two years after Intel did and DDR3 until one year after Intel did. AMD also likes to wring out higher speeds of older-spec RAM, such as DDR-500 being supported on E-stepping A64s and DDR2-1066 being supported on AM2+ boards. Intel never went beyond standard-speed DDR-400 and DDR2-800.


----------



## NeoXF (Sep 21, 2012)

Oh man... please don't let Steamroller suck... I hate monopoly, hell, duopoly isn't "great" either (as well as forced "competition"), nothing about the state or shape of society around me is "great", but at least it would be bearable, since technology is one of the few remaining things I'm still passionate about these days...


----------



## trickson (Sep 21, 2012)

Super XP said:


> O.K. here is the post I read from Toms Hardware.



LOL.


----------



## erocker (Sep 21, 2012)

Super XP said:


> O.K. here is the post I read from Toms Hardware.



I really have no idea why you keep quoting me. I was speaking about sockets, not RAM. While RAM can have a factor in a socket it is not what I was referring to.


----------



## Dent1 (Sep 21, 2012)

NeoXF said:


> Oh man... please don't let Steamroller suck... I hate monopoly, hell, duopoly isn't "great" either (as well as forced "competition"), nothing about the state or shape of society around me is "great", but at least it would be bearable, since technology is one of the few remaining things I'm still passionate about these days...



People who think performance alone is going to save AMD are deluded.

Whether Steamroller sucks or not, there will still be a monopoly with a corporation the size of Intel around. The only way we can see a level playing field as far as market share is if AMD drastically gains support via a more lucrative marketing campaign or if they continue to diversify their strangle hold in the mobile & server arena and bully Intel out.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Sep 21, 2012)

Dent1 said:


> People who think performance alone is going to save AMD are deluded.
> 
> Whether Steamroller sucks or not, there will always be a monopoly with a corporation the size of Intel around. The only way we can see a level playing field as far as market share is if AMD drastically gains support via a more lucrative marketing campaign or if they continue to diversify their strangle hold in the marketplace and server arena and bully Intel out.



It was the same way back during A64 and at that time AMD was literally tearing them a new asshole, just that intel had so much control that they were trying to use underhanded techniques with retailers/etailers and OEMs, despite their CPU being a Dog that Even the P3 was beating.


----------



## NHKS (Sep 21, 2012)

anybody seen this pre-order page yet?

http://www.shopblt.com/cgi-bin/s.cgi?order_id=!ORDERID!&s_max=25&t_all=1&s_all=HKBOX







apparently, the FX/Vishera cpu prices start where the trinity A-x end


----------



## librin.so.1 (Sep 21, 2012)

NHKS said:


> anybody seen this pre-order page yet?
> 
> http://www.shopblt.com/cgi-bin/s.cgi?order_id=!ORDERID!&s_max=25&t_all=1&s_all=HKBOX
> 
> ...



aw gee wiz, do I see a 16MB L[undefined] cache there?


----------



## Covert_Death (Sep 21, 2012)

NHKS said:


> anybody seen this pre-order page yet?
> 
> http://www.shopblt.com/cgi-bin/s.cgi?order_id=!ORDERID!&s_max=25&t_all=1&s_all=HKBOX
> 
> ...



isn't this the website who has their shipments delayed by AMD every time because they "leak" prices like this before they are supposed to???


----------



## nt300 (Sep 21, 2012)

Covert_Death said:


> isn't this the website who has their shipments delayed by AMD every time because they "leak" prices like this before they are supposed to???


The 8320 and 8350 are very close in price 
http://www.cpu-world.com/news_2012/2012092001_Pre-order_prices_of_AMD_FX_Piledriver_CPUs.html


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Sep 21, 2012)

nt300 said:


> The 8320 and 8350 are very close in price



Amd probably cant take the price of its highest part too high, no one would buy and the fact most people buy the next one down and Oc it probably has been noticed by Amd so might as well wring what they can eh, prices sound fairley reasonable to me


----------



## largon (Sep 21, 2012)

nt300 said:


> HD 8120 = Bulldozer = 0% (2011)
> HD 8320 = Piledriver = 15% - 20% (2012)
> HD 8520 = Steamroller = 35% - 45% (2013)
> HD 8720 = Excavator = 70% - 85% (2014)
> ...


The percentages must be _"amounts of win"_ (would make sense) cause _no way in hell_ that's going to be integer performance progression.


----------



## Covert_Death (Sep 21, 2012)

largon said:


> The percentages must be _"amounts of win"_ (would make sense) cause _no way in hell_ that's going to be integer performance progression.



whatttt you don't think in 3 years we would have DOUBLED bulldozer performance AND have twice the cores???? lololololol WHYYYYY notttttttttt


----------



## Super XP (Sep 21, 2012)

largon said:


> The percentages must be _"amounts of win"_ (would make sense) cause _no way in hell_ that's going to be integer performance progression.


Why not? Is it because AMD does not begin with an "I" and end with a "L". 
No really there was a reason why AMD is talking about Steamroller right now despite the fact Piledriver is next in line. They've figured out how to take this Bulldozer Design innovation and crank up the performance by far. Rumours of an insider already stated Steamroller is going to be 45% faster clock for clock than Bulldozer. I bet Excavator will add another 45% performance boost over Bulldozer clock for clock. Excavator will be according to AMD a complete Bulldozer re-design.

Let me say, despite the fact Bulldozer did not perform as well as we would have liked, darn, people need to realize AMD's module approach is very risky but "Extremely" rewarding. 

Think about it? 
Today = 1 x Module = 2 x Cores. 
Tomorrow = 1 x Module = 4 x Cores.
Near Future = 1 x Module = 6 x Cores. 

There's mathematics involved, and this will enable AMD to scale performance and increase cores at will with every manufacturing process. How about 1 Module has 8 Cores? It's coming


----------



## ensabrenoir (Sep 21, 2012)

Super XP said:


> Why not? Is it because AMD does not begin with an "I" and end with a "L".
> No really there was a reason why AMD is talking about Steamroller right now despite the fact Piledriver is next in line. They've figured out how to take this Bulldozer Design innovation and crank up the performance by far. Rumours of an insider already stated Steamroller is going to be 45% faster clock for clock than Bulldozer. I bet Excavator will add another 45% performance boost over Bulldozer clock for clock. Excavator will be according to AMD a complete Bulldozer re-design.
> 
> Let me say, despite the fact Bulldozer did not perform as well as we would have liked, darn, people need to realize AMD's module approach is very risky but "Extremely" rewarding.
> ...



Souds great!  Now all we need is everybody at intel to take a vacation for the next 3 to 4 years.   Amd biggest problem is timming.  Given what I m reading about  H Well.... All this sounds like amd is building a delorean

but im getting a head of myself waiting for benches on release day......Honestly  this is all fine and well....just keep putting out awesome sauce covered gpus and all will be well.


----------



## Super XP (Sep 21, 2012)

AMD does have a timing issue, but that could be because of financing or lack of. Intel will always be on time, they do have a dump load more of $$$$$$$$$$$$.


----------



## ensabrenoir (Sep 21, 2012)

Super XP said:


> AMD does have a timing issue, but that could be because of financing or lack of. Intel will always be on time, they do have a dump load more of $$$$$$$$$$$$.



Thats the crazy part.....they are the  best bang for the buck, but this formula requires volume to be viable.  
each, amd and intel have a segment their geared toward.  The low to mid range stuff sells near 5to1 compared to high end.  I see far more toyotas than mercedes. Intel and amd should be neck to neck.


----------



## Super XP (Sep 21, 2012)

I believe they are, I mean AMD sold dump loads of Bulldozer's despite the fact they were selling for a higher price than they should.


----------



## NHKS (Sep 23, 2012)

Vinska said:


> aw gee wiz, do I see a 16MB L[undefined] cache there?



i guess they mean total, 8(L2) + 8(L3).. sometimes retailer method of mentioning specs can be surprising.. 



Covert_Death said:


> isn't this the website who has their shipments delayed by AMD every time because they "leak" prices like this before they are supposed to???



not sure, sorry.. but they do have a record of posting new products for pre-order before launch.. happened with the 660Ti too if i remember right

----------------

Xbitlabs seems to know the launch date for Vishera - Oct 23 



> AMD plans to formally unwrap its long-awaited performance chip code-named Vishera on the 23th of October , according to a source. The launch details are scarce at the moment and we do not exactly know whether the company intends to unlock embargo on product reviews only, or start a massive product launch with high-availability. In previous cases, the company started to sell the product in high volume in the channel the same day as produce reviews hit the Internet.
> 
> It is expected that at least four models of the new FX multi-core chips with Piledriver micro-architecture - FX-8350, FX8320, FX-6300 and FX-4300 - will become available in almost exactly a month time. Official prices are unknown.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Sep 23, 2012)

NHKS said:


> i guess they mean total, 8(L2)   8(L3).. sometimes retailer method of mentioning specs can be surprising..



They did the same with phenomII's ,mines got 8Mb not.

your links a good read, the comments sections a laugh too, Avonx still has somewhere to troll it seems


----------



## Super XP (Sep 24, 2012)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> They did the same with phenomII's ,mines got 8Mb not.
> 
> your links a good read, the comments sections a laugh too, Avonx still has somewhere to troll it seems


This is interesting and it sounds like Piledriver is running a lot better than 1st thought.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Sep 24, 2012)

NHKS said:


> i guess they mean total, 8(L2) + 8(L3).. sometimes retailer method of mentioning specs can be surprising



cough newegg


----------



## Super XP (Sep 24, 2012)

eidairaman1 said:


> cough newegg


Cough, Amazon.


----------



## Inceptor (Sep 24, 2012)

Covert_Death said:


> isn't this the website who has their shipments delayed by AMD every time because they "leak" prices like this before they are supposed to???



They did the same thing with Bulldozer, last year. Yeah.


----------



## nt300 (Sep 24, 2012)

So I hear October 23 is the release and launch date. And looks like AMD is confident with the performance leap over the 1st gen.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20120921231354_AMD_Sets_the_FX_Vishera_Launch_Date.html


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Sep 24, 2012)

NHKS said:


> Xbitlabs seems to know the launch date for Vishera - Oct 23



at least read the same page in a thread before reposting the same news, thanks anyways.


----------



## Super XP (Sep 24, 2012)

http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/showthread.php?t=172705


----------

