AMD FX Making a Comeback, to Challenge Intel Core i7 Extreme Edition

[Zubasa]

Really Intel 4 cores still pwn AMD 6 cores. MATH?

He said AMDX6 is ahead in some areas, READ?

Huh ignored my comment (Truth hurt ?)

Making a comment does not make it a fact.

 

[RejZoR]

I can only hope that it will be better than Sandy. It's time for AMD to retake the crown for a while.

Last time the AMD was holding the crown, Intel delivered Conroe core and the performance ba was significantly raised. Nehalem was cool but the increase of performance wasn't all that high.
It was similar with graphic cards. If one was holding the crown for too long, the performance was stagnating. But if each was on top for a while we've seen larger leaps in performance.

 

[Bjorn_Of_Iceland]

newtekie is right, $1k procs again. Also means that AMD marketing thinks its time to bring back the ill-fated FX moniker, because the bulldozer performs like an i7 Nehalem Exreme Edition, which is... err the OLD performance model.

Much like how Deneb was on par to Yorkfields in terms of performance. Heck even Kentsfield

 

[Neo4]

newtekie is right, $1k procs again. Also means that AMD marketing thinks its time to bring back the ill-fated FX moniker, because the bulldozer performs like an i7 Nehalem Exreme Edition, which is... err the OLD performance model.

i am almost sure that AMD marketing has a giant poster of baghdad bob in their offices. these are the same guys that drumbeat the first phenom line out the door.

This is not the same AMD that marketed the Phenom. The company has been through some seriously tough times, laid off thousands of employees and they rolled up their sleeves and fought hard to survive and get to where they are today. Major difference!

Yes, I think it does looks like ATI kept AMD's head above the water. I just hate they killed the ATI name.

Ati didn't keep AMD's head above water, Abu Dhabi oil cash investments/spin off of their fabs, anti-competitve fines levied against Intel for their attempts to destroy AMD and a whole lot of heart to survive is what kept AMD going.

Well if $600 max for a super fast Bulldozer based FX CPU . then why not buy Intel high end CPU

AMD won't charge $600 for a high end CPU and Intel's cost over a grand for years now.

If they put out a chip that performs comparably to my i7 920, I'm going to change platforms. Intel's decision to put out a single chipset in association with this socket doesn't do much to foster any sort of faith that they'll maintain another. You could argue that USB 3.0 and Sata 6GB/s were sort of a rarified thing, and that socket 2011 is there to provide a platform capable of handling those newer standards (remember, PCIe 3.0 is not far away) But the idea that socket 1366 has no more life, and that newer platforms couldn't be created for that socket strikes me a load of $*&)#.

Yeah, Intel doesn't care about it's own customers in it's arrogance and AMD has done a masterful job of keeping their hardware backwards compatible while still increasing performance. I look forward to buying an AM3+ mobo knowing that I can still use my X6 CPU with it until I scrape together enough cash to get a Bulldozer chip.

 

[[H]@RD5TUFF]

They did, just no one new about it, poor marketing ether on AMD or BS marketing by Intel, ether way no one new they had great performing CPU's at that time let alone new what AMD even was. The fact is they was but that all ended when conroe came in, and hasn't realy changed since. O and the price of a AMD CPU back then was still cheaper then Intel even though intel's was slower, so nothing has realy changed has it?



That would be nice i must admit.

You need to take personal preference out of the equation, you can't blame Intel for everything.confused:

 

[Melvis]

You need to take personal preference out of the equation, you can't blame Intel for everything.confused:

Huh??? You lost me...

I haven't put any personal preference into it, just stating a fact.

 

[HalfAHertz]

Count me interested

 

[TAViX]

Finally!!!!!!!! Intel 6 core crap needs a challenger immediately, its ridiculous overpriced....

 

[qubit]

Nice surprise with the 6950 unlocking. 6970? Taking the hype around the card before it's launch in consideration, it is a fail. The 6900 were meant by AMD to go straight to the top, but somehow they failed to predict that Nvidia can refine Fermi so fast.
Any product meant for the No. 1 position that ends somewhere else, even if it is on the podium, it is a FAIL.
Even it sells good, has nice reviews, is energy efficient, the world will remember the 6970 as the card that tried, and it will be forever associated with that "meh" attitude.

Yep, I have to agree there, toyo. I remember that feeling of shock and disappointment when I read W1zzard's review. It was merely "almost as fast" as the GTX 480 and priced "competitevely". Oh wow.

I then read a few other sites to check that I wasn't dreaming and of course they came out the same.

No wonder it's so much cheaper than the GTX 580.

 

[Mussels]

Yep, I have to agree there, toyo. I remember that feeling of shock and disappointment when I read W1zzard's review. It was merely "almost as fast" as the GTX 480 and priced "competitevely". Oh wow.

I then read a few other sites to check that I wasn't dreaming and of course they came out the same.

No wonder it's so much cheaper than the GTX 580.

who said it ever aimed for #1?

 

[entropy13]

Nice surprise with the 6950 unlocking. 6970? Taking the hype around the card before it's launch in consideration, it is a fail. The 6900 were meant by AMD to go straight to the top, but somehow they failed to predict that Nvidia can refine Fermi so fast.
Any product meant for the No. 1 position that ends somewhere else, even if it is on the podium, it is a FAIL.
Even it sells good, has nice reviews, is energy efficient, the world will remember the 6970 as the card that tried, and it will be forever associated with that "meh" attitude.

What's the 6990 for then? #0.5?

 

[qubit]

who said it ever aimed for #1?

That's what I and lots of others understood from the prelaunch hype. Just check out the comments after W1zz's review and you'll see what I mean. Disappointing as hell.

Can you imagine how things would be if the performance would have leapfrogged the GTX 580? Performance leapfrogging is what should happen, not almost as good as the competition's previous generation.

Without leapfrogging, graphics advancements are happening at a glacial pace and prices stay high. All this is bad for us, the knowledgeable customers.

 

[CDdude55]

That's what I and lots of others understood from the prelaunch hype. Just check out the comments after W1zz's review and you'll see what I mean. Disappointing as hell.

Can you imagine how things would be if the performance would have leapfrogged the GTX 580? Performance leapfrogging is what should happen, not almost as good as the competition's previous generation.

Without leapfrogging, graphics advancements are happening at a glacial pace and prices stay high. All this is bad for us, the knowledgeable customers.

I agree.

Personally i thought a nice performance boost was going to be inevitable with the 6900's, but apparently not, they disappointed many. Even with the quick arrival of the 570 and 580, it's still based on the same design just focused on improved efficiency and only about a 12% push in performance over the previous design, besides still being on 40nm Cayman is a top down design, it's not slightly tweaking the same architecture and i personally expected a lot more, to me the 6900's were a step back instead of a solid leap forward for AMD in the GPU realm.

 

[Super XP]

Really Intel 4 cores still pwn AMD 6 cores. MATH?

Huh ignored my comment (Truth hurt ?)

Both those processors are no longer made, and Canadian prices are always inflated!

No didn't ignore your comment, I even thanked you for your post. Perhaps I missed your point, though I thought I picked up on it and added a little more.

Also Intel is playing with new arcitecture where as AMD is still playing with the same old with a few mods here and there. Intel wipes the floor clean when it comes to clock vs. clock. That's been fact for a long time now despite the fact in games, there's not too much of a major difference in performance. GPU's are a different story...

I agree.

Personally i thought a nice performance boost was going to be inevitable with the 6900's, but apparently not, they disappointed many. Even with the quick arrival of the 570 and 580, it's still based on the same design just focused on improved efficiency and only about a 12% push in performance over the previous design, besides still being on 40nm Cayman is a top down design, it's not slightly tweaking the same architecture and i personally expected a lot more, to me the 6900's were a step back instead of a solid leap forward for AMD in the GPU realm.

My sentiments exactly though I think the HD 6900 series disappoint only individuals that bought into ATI’s Evergreen series, and good on them, that was a killer series.
I’ve held onto my HD 4870 512MB for about 2 years now and when the HD 5870 was released, I just picked up another HD 4870 and Crossfire them to keep up in performance. So for me that never touched Evergreen, I am very satisfied with my new Sapphire Radeon HD 6970 2GB GDDR5 card. I am probably going to do the same thing when the HD 7900's get released, just buy a cheaper HD 6970 for Crossfire or if the price is right I will buy one sooner.

Don’t know what AMD/ATI did for this round of graphics, just looking at the benchmarks, they’ve really fixed the CrossfireX scaling. Performance is so much better. It is that impressive and a lot better than any other generation they’ve released so far IMO.

 

[ensabrenoir]

value over performance?

But will the $1,000 dollar price tag return as well ?

I don't think the world is quite ready for AMD to go boutique, as AMD has worked hard for 3-4 years now to cultivate an image of value over performance.

If these are 800-1000 dollars like the original FX's they will fail.

value over performance? I hope not! They are the performance FOR a value company I love their vid cards and while nvidia did a Mike Tyson in his prime on them the competition is great for OUR wallets and rigs. Forces everyone to step their game up! That 6 core I7 is a monster! But intel would b a fool to believe they cant be beat... for less. Amd will go all out with their next (6990?) vid card because the 460/470 were sleepers and the 5 series aint no joke. Amd vid cards and the boutique builders use to go hand and hand now its all Nvidia. The battle has begun!

 

[cdawall]

Well first off this isn't a video card debate or a amd's current cpus don't handle intel's who cares? A new platform is on its way and they are bringing back fx chips which back in the day handed intels ee p4s and pds there ass on a platter maybe amd is onto something maybe they aren't all I can say is I can't wait to see the next fx series chip.

 

[Fourstaff]

aaaaaannd, we are fighting again

Personally, I think more competition in the top end chips will filter down to the middle and bottom, but if AMD takes the clear lead, then we will have stupidly expensive AMD chips again

 

[AddSub]

Hopefully, it will at least be able to match i7 platform 80% clock-for-clock, albeit three years after i7 hit the street. I don't think AMD has the resources and the cash to pull a C2D/C2Q type of technological innovation like Intel did back in 2006. This upcoming architecture will still have it's roots in the K8 architecture which is almost a decade old at this point. They need to undertake a Manhattan project type of thing if they really want to surpass i7 and whatever Intel has coming to replace it, not just match it, barely, years after the fact.

 

[OneCool]

I think alot of the people here miss a big point that AMD dont care what nvidia does.

When they say something is going to be faster than some other video card their almost always referring to THEIR previous generation card not the competition.

 

[(FIH) The Don]

as if amd even can make a cpu that IS as fast as the 980x

i almost fell of the chair laughing

i mean come on, goals are nice to have, but unrealistic ones? geez

so the 8core will be as good as what? a 980x? i doubt it, 920/50 yes, but again, those chips are OVER!!!! 2 yrs old , AMD really need to do something insanely extreme to make a 2 yrs+ jump in time to keep up.

stay with what you do now AMD, and let Intel do the madness with 1000$ consumer chips,

and yes, bash me if you want, but its the truth

 

[cdawall]

as if amd even can make a cpu that IS as fast as the 980x

i almost fell of the chair laughing

i mean come on, goals are nice to have, but unrealistic ones? geez

so the 8core will be as good as what? a 980x? i doubt it, 920/50 yes, but again, those chips are OVER!!!! 2 yrs old , AMD really need to do something insanely extreme to make a 2 yrs+ jump in time to keep up.

stay with what you do now AMD, and let Intel do the madness with 1000$ consumer chips,

and yes, bash me if you want, but its the truth

You know its great that its not like amd ever did it before and intel took two years to produce a chip faster than amd. Oh wait k8 vs netburst damn well its a good thing intels fab is so much better. Oh wait intel admitted they couldn't do what amd did with phenom on 65nm.

Hopefully, it will at least be able to match i7 platform 80% clock-for-clock, albeit three years after i7 hit the street. I don't think AMD has the resources and the cash to pull a C2D/C2Q type of technological innovation like Intel did back in 2006. This upcoming architecture will still have it's roots in the K8 architecture which is almost a decade old at this point. They need to undertake a Manhattan project type of thing if they really want to surpass i7 and whatever Intel has coming to replace it, not just match it, barely, years after the fact.

And i7 founds its roots with p3 and p4m's that innovation was done a long time ago unless my memory is fading p3 is older than k8

 

[GSquadron]

Maybe we should open a thread to support AMD FX

 

[cdawall]

Maybe we should open a thread to support AMD FX

why cause this thread is titled bash AMD because intels better right?

"AMD FX Making a Comeback, to Challenge Intel Core i7 Extreme Edition"

 

[A Cheese Danish]

Looks like it will be a good year after all

 

[cadaveca]

why cause this thread is titled bash AMD because intels better right?

"AMD FX Making a Comeback, to Challenge Intel Core i7 Extreme Edition"

Fact of the matter is that Intel IS better than AMD, performance-wise. I don't caer about cost, power consumption, etc...just real performance. I wish INtel's chips were cheaper, and AMD faster, but I'm not one to deny the obvious.


But at the same time...I've spent extensive time with both. The actual performance difference in daily tasks is near zero.


Now, because this news comes so late, and SandbyBridge boards and cpus are floating around, this clearly indicates to me that AMD thinks it can compete with Intel in the high-end segment.

But...is it the 2600K they are fighting? Or the 980X?

Also, donanim haber lists no source, and the details are vague(Turkish site, BTW). So while I think that this may indicate Bulldozer is really good, I cannot say for sure without any real sources for the story...as far as I am concerned, this isn't even news, because there is NO SOURCE!!!



Just keep in mind the 69--series hype, and the letdown there. Don't fall victim to misplaced hype again.


Now, if AND wants to send me some parts, and prove otherwise...My testbench is waiting. Would be nice to have a couple of newer platforms to play with from either side....

C'mon, JF-AMD. Hook a brotha up. I'm only waiting for you, now...