# Amd Blog Update: Steamroller



## Nordic (May 24, 2013)

> AMD Steamroller FX 9650 - 4.5 Ghz / 4.8 Ghz Turbo Benchmarks!
> 
> AMD Back in the High End
> 1090FX Entusiast
> ...


http://amdfx.blogspot.ca/2013/05/amd-steamroller-fx-9650-45-ghz-48-ghz.html

I found this interesting to read. Take what you read with a grain of salt. Figured I would post this here for discussion.


----------



## Mathragh (May 24, 2013)

This seems to be just a random person taking an article from 2012 (The "source") and making up some numbers based on very rough estimates.

Sure, it sounds awesome, and I wish it were true, but there is nothing that suggests this is anything more than just someones fantasy at this moment.


----------



## erocker (May 24, 2013)

Mathragh said:


> This seems to be just a random person taking an article from 2012 (The "source") and making up some numbers based on very rough estimates.



Seems to be exactly what it is.


----------



## RejZoR (May 24, 2013)

I'm a bit concerned about their very high clocks. When Intel was going that way, they were using NetBurst which was rubbish. With not much room around or over 4GHz mark, they'll have to do something, because they won't be able to keep on doing this forever...


----------



## Mathragh (May 24, 2013)

RejZoR said:


> I'm a bit concerned about their very high clocks. When Intel was going that way, they were using NetBurst which was rubbish. With not much room around or over 4GHz mark, they'll have to do something, because they won't be able to keep on doing this forever...



Do note though, that those high clocks were AMD's goal all along. Also, compared to netburst, AMD has a lot of advantages, such as a better process, resonant clock mesh, and arguably just a better design(compare the IPC of netburst with bulldozer).

Furthermore, high frequency designs aren't bad by default. There have been a lot of "speed demons" which have been very succesfull, but just not in the x86 world(where netburst actually was the only attempt).

EDIT: the link at the bottom of the linked article does sound interesting though, and is quite an interesting read

Some interesting points: most of them aimed the current bottlenecks(orly, but still), and lower latencies(not the cache latency everyone keeps going on about, but stuff that matters for instruction throughput) 
-A shortening of the FP pipeline(from 4 to 3 stages)(should matter a lot for the currently weakest point of BD)
-A lot of caches and queues get increased in size
-Doubling of decoding stage(that was fairly know iirc)


----------



## Nordic (May 24, 2013)

Funny little thing to note. I voted for the intel haswell on the little pole at the top. Pole says 4 votes all for steamroller. I vote again. 4 votes for steam roller.


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (May 24, 2013)

james888 said:


> Funny little thing to note. I voted for the intel haswell on the little pole at the top. Pole says 4 votes all for steamroller. I vote again. 4 votes for steam roller.



I just voted too, still says 0 votes for Haswell


----------



## Mathragh (May 24, 2013)

Its the same the other way around, voted for steamroller, no increase
Seems like the poll isn't updating/registering


----------



## Nordic (May 24, 2013)

Might as well post this here as it is along the same lines.


----------



## silkstone (May 24, 2013)

I always used to buy AMD, then went a few years without a computer before coming back. I decided to go with a C2D, then SB.

I really do hope that they start competing more at the enthusiast level. Having only 2 chip manufacturers is bad enough, having one will not be good for consumers.
(I think i had a Cyrix back in the days of 486's)


----------



## Novulux (May 25, 2013)

Who says this is from AMD? It's just a blogspot page that refers to AMD as a separate entity in other posts...could've been made by anyone.


----------



## Nordic (May 25, 2013)

Novulux said:


> Who says this is from AMD? It's just a blogspot page that refers to AMD as a separate entity in other posts...could've been made by anyone.



I said out of ignorance. Still though, should be taken with a grain of salt.


----------



## Frick (May 25, 2013)

silkstone said:


> I really do hope that they start competing more at the enthusiast level. Having only 2 chip manufacturers is bad enough, having one will not be good for consumers.
> (I think i had a Cyrix back in the days of 486's)



I'be been thinking about this. How big is the enthusiast market anyway? People don't need enthusiast parts, and it feels like less and less people are enthusiast these days anyway.. I think competing there will become less and less important. If that is the case, AMD is ahead.


----------



## Nordic (May 25, 2013)

Frick said:


> If that is the case, AMD is ahead.



With the exception of apu's, how are they? Are you thinking price/performance?


----------



## jihadjoe (May 25, 2013)

So this guy extrapolates numbers, arbitrarily assuming a fixed 45% performance increase over Bulldozer, and claims they are "benchmark results."

lol


----------



## Frick (May 25, 2013)

james888 said:


> With the exception of apu's, how are they? Are you thinking price/performance?



Considering most of their lineup are APU's... I'd say they are ahead. CPU power isn't that important nowadays (for avarage users) and while they could do with lower power consumtion they are doing good there.


----------



## eidairaman1 (May 25, 2013)

james888 said:


> With the exception of apu's, how are they? Are you thinking price/performance?



ya they ahead in the APU dept. Pretty good product actually, have a llano based unit here for the GP. And the way TDP is measured is different between Intel and AMD, so its a really moot point


----------



## Nordic (May 25, 2013)

I thought intel across the board had better power efficiency compared to amd because of better sleep states and a smaller process node (I believe the term is called).


----------



## Frick (May 25, 2013)

eidairaman1 said:


> And the way TDP is measured is different between Intel and AMD, so its a really moot point



Just look at what they actually use. The low ends are nice (Kabini is doing very nice), but the higher end is a bit high. That is obviously because they have decent GPU's in them, but still. It can only go forward.


----------



## eidairaman1 (May 25, 2013)

Frick said:


> Just look at what they actually use. The low ends are nice (Kabini is doing very nice), but the higher end is a bit high. That is obviously because they have decent GPU's in them, but still. It can only go forward.



so Kabini is the BGA/ System on a board, because I recall Richland being soon to launch


----------



## Ravenas (May 25, 2013)

What socket is steamroller?


----------



## de.das.dude (May 25, 2013)

i hope it wont be a new socket. just got a new motherboard.....


----------



## erocker (May 25, 2013)

Yep.


----------



## Frick (May 25, 2013)

Ravenas said:


> What socket is steamroller?



I think I've seen at least rumours that it's AM3+. Don't remember at all where I have seen it, but I think that is a possibility at least.


----------



## Mathragh (May 26, 2013)

Ravenas said:


> What socket is steamroller?



99% certain its AM3+. Dont remember the source, but i remember reading about amd saying SR being AM3+. It'll prolly be the last cpu for that socket though


----------



## seronx (Jun 22, 2013)

So, these chips are obviously Piledriver now.

http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Bulldozer/AMD-FX-Series FX-9370.html
http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Bulldozer/AMD-FX-Series FX-9590.html


----------



## Nordic (Jun 22, 2013)

seronx said:


> So, these chips are obviously Piledriver now.
> 
> http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Bulldozer/AMD-FX-Series FX-9370.html
> http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Bulldozer/AMD-FX-Series FX-9590.html



I thought they always were obviously piledriver.


----------



## seronx (Jun 23, 2013)

I'll post it here:
http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3695/9106327470_f3570699c9_o.png
Piledriver(Blue)/Steamroller(Red)


----------



## Nordic (Jun 23, 2013)

seronx said:


> I'll post it here:
> http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3695/9106327470_f3570699c9_o.png
> Piledriver(Blue)/Steamroller(Red)



Ahh man. I am not educated enough to see anything but pretty colors :shadedshu.

How big is the resolution on that. Took awhile for it to load.


----------



## seronx (Jun 23, 2013)

james888 said:


> How big is the resolution on that. Took awhile for it to load.


5,714px × 3,058px / 26.3 MB

It is better than the other image comparisons going around.

http://i.imgur.com/LHYXIFM.jpg
Bulldozer -> Steamroller -> Bulldozer.  My image is the only one that actually shows Piledriver.

http://i.imgur.com/v5gPpBg.jpg
^-- my old compare, Steamroller vs Bulldozer.


----------

