AMD Readies A10-7890K, A8-7690K and Athlon X4 880K Socket FM2+ Chips

[Batou1986]

This is just as dumb as the "new" AM3+ cpu's that where just clocked to what you could achieve by upping the multi on the old ones.
For example my 8320 can easily do 9370 clocks I just dont run it there because my cooler is not good enough.

 

[tabascosauz]

When 1 refresh is not enough...give it another one!

When the 7870K came out, it was hardly even a bump over the 7850K. I doubt that AMD has paid any attention to the problems that the 7850K had, namely the throttling of the CPU to 3GHz when the iGPU was under load. Seeing as this is just a 2nd refresh of the same hardware, AMD probably hasn't even given a shit about that issue, let alone fixed it.

The 880K could be interesting, however, because the 860K was clearly a good CPU held back by lack of popularity and a low clockspeed. The 760K burned, while the 860K is cool at load, even on stock cooler. It clearly is capable of going past 3.7GHz, so it's nice to see that the 880K could make up for the deliberate handicap that AMD gave the 860K.

 

[GhostRyder]

When 1 refresh is not enough...give it another one!

When the 7870K came out, it was hardly even a bump over the 7850K. I doubt that AMD has paid any attention to the problems that the 7850K had, namely the throttling of the CPU to 3GHz when the iGPU was under load. Seeing as this is just a 2nd refresh of the same hardware, AMD probably hasn't even given a shit about that issue, let alone fixed it.

The 880K could be interesting, however, because the 860K was clearly a good CPU held back by lack of popularity and a low clockspeed. The 760K burned, while the 860K is cool at load, even on stock cooler. It clearly is capable of going past 3.7GHz, so it's nice to see that the 880K could make up for the deliberate handicap that AMD gave the 860K.

What are you talking about??? I have seen multiple A10-7850K's and they didn't throttle when both the iGPU and CPU were under load. Are you referencing stock cooler issues or something else? Most of the 7850K's I have seen were overclocked and had a minimum of a Hyper 212 on them so if were talking stock cooler then that's just because those coolers are cheap and really not meant for the top end. They should really just throw them away or give the AM3+ one with those chips instead.

 

[tabascosauz]

What are you talking about??? I have seen multiple A10-7850K's and they didn't throttle when both the iGPU and CPU were under load. Are you referencing stock cooler issues or something else? Most of the 7850K's I have seen were overclocked and had a minimum of a Hyper 212 on them so if were talking stock cooler then that's just because those coolers are cheap and really not meant for the top end. They should really just throw them away or give the AM3+ one with those chips instead.

http://www.overclock.net/t/1460028/amd-kaveri-a10-7850k-overclock-guide/210

 

[GhostRyder]

http://www.overclock.net/t/1460028/amd-kaveri-a10-7850k-overclock-guide/210

Hmm, had not heard about that but none of the 2 I have built had that problem. One was using the iGPU for light gaming and had the CPU clocked to 4.5ghz with the iGPU at over 1000mhz and it ran fine testing with benchmarks and games no throttling. Must be something related to different revisions of the boards and the bios.

 

[arbiter]

Alrighty then Heres a few links......

http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core-i3-4370-vs-AMD-FX-8350

http://www.cpu-world.com/Compare/364/AMD_FX-Series_FX-8350_vs_Intel_Core_i3_i3-4370.html

http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i3-4370-vs-AMD-FX-8350/2817vs1489

http://www.cpu-monkey.com/en/compare_cpu-intel_core_i3_4370-424-vs-amd_fx_8350-7

i3's are actually great gaming CPUs. there are a few caveats of course.

::EDIT::

Here are a few videos of an i3-3220 gaming...

Farcry 4:

At 2:33 you can see he has everything set on ultra

BF3:

at 0:04 - you can see in the settings that he has it set to ultra for a i3 & HD7770, it looks pretty sweet. performance is decent.

Obviously when it comes to game like TotalWar and such, the CPU WILL die because it hasnt got that multi-threaded ability.

Really the sad is compaing a top of line cpu for 1 company vs one that is pretty much low end. But hey AMD loves to do that don't they?

 

[Casecutter]

Given a 860K is like $70 and a nice FM2+ mobo's $40, the price for a entry gaming machine was its strong point. Add a R7 265 at $110 and you see proficient 1080p. Today working R9 270X is the top I'd be willing to invest in such a build, moving to 960/285 seems like a new level of build altogether; i3/FX6300 minimum.

The other for entry gaming, the Pentium G3258 ($65) and a Z87 for say $75 which then a novice that wants to try their hand with OC can do with it but needs something more than a stock cooler ($25). All that (3 parts) will have you see a few Fps jump, but that's 45% more cost.

If this 880K is out of the box a little faster, and AMD can hold the line on the price, it should continue to be good part for building entry gaming machines. Not like what there doing with the R7 370's crazy pricing of being >$150.

 

[Dent1]

Really the sad is compaing a top of line cpu for 1 company vs one that is pretty much low end. But hey AMD loves to do that don't they?

So the FX 3850 can't keep up with some Extreme Edition i7s? Really sad your entire put down focuses on solely gaming. But Intel fanboys love to do that don't they?

 

[Toothless]

Eyyy.. More CPU choices for those who need a superduper budget rig that can play a decent amount of games at low-med 1080p blah blah. I actually like these APUs since It's an overall cheaper build.

 

[arbiter]

So the FX 3850 can't keep up with some Extreme Edition i7s? Really sad your entire put down focuses on solely gaming. But Intel fanboys love to do that don't they?

Its sad how only way you can compare them is when you use lowest end of other side. Def AMD kinda thinking, work for them?

 

[BrainCruser]

I would agree with you in the past but not today. The multiaadapter feature of DirectX 12 will make these integrated GPUs important, even if you do own a discrete GPU. Probably that's one of the reasons Intel is trying to improve it's iGPUs even when 99.9% of those who buy hi end Intel CPUs don't care about those iGPUs. In a way they hate them because they think that if Intel wasn't fooling around with the iGPU there would have been models with more cores in the market or better IPC.

That is not the reason intel goes for iGPU. The reason they improve the GPU is for 4K and retina displays in laptops. The integrated GPU is aimed for laptops mostly.

 

[FreedomEclipse]

Really the sad is compaing a top of line cpu for 1 company vs one that is pretty much low end. But hey AMD loves to do that don't they?

I cannot even begin to understand what it is that youre typing

The whole focus was a top tier i3 vs 880k - Im also partially going by AMDs off the cuff remark about 'real' or 'true' cores

the price of the 880k should fall around the same as the i3 i reckon so why not compare the performance?

As for i3 vs FX-8350, Im just showcasing how 'inefficient' AMDs top of the range CPU is compared to an i3. But i did post positives and negatives so it wasnt just a complete onesided fanboy rant. If you want to send me motherboards and CPUs for me to benchmark and come up with some solid results for you then i welcome your patronage.


At the end of the day Its all about how much one has to spend and how to get the best for your budget. I dont think a top tier i3 bottlenecks a 970 or 980 that much if anything at all.

 

[Apocalypsee]

Why AMD doesn't release Carrizo on desktop? Just why? They could possibly just disable the southbridge integrated on it and increase the clockspeed on desktop. I would interested to buy it if they at least do this. More annoyingly the laptop that use Carrizo chip is like always a low end model, which I don't believe is set at 35W TDP but instead just 15W TDP hampering it's performance.

 

[xorbe]

I cannot even begin to understand what it is that youre typing

Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?

 

[TheGuruStud]

Alrighty then Heres a few links......

http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core-i3-4370-vs-AMD-FX-8350

http://www.cpu-world.com/Compare/364/AMD_FX-Series_FX-8350_vs_Intel_Core_i3_i3-4370.html

http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i3-4370-vs-AMD-FX-8350/2817vs1489

http://www.cpu-monkey.com/en/compare_cpu-intel_core_i3_4370-424-vs-amd_fx_8350-7

i3's are actually great gaming CPUs. there are a few caveats of course.

::EDIT::

Here are a few videos of an i3-3220 gaming...

Farcry 4:

At 2:33 you can see he has everything set on ultra

BF3:

at 0:04 - you can see in the settings that he has it set to ultra for a i3 & HD7770, it looks pretty sweet. performance is decent.

Obviously when it comes to game like TotalWar and such, the CPU WILL die because it hasnt got that multi-threaded ability.

So the i3 is useless after all when gaming. That's a lot easier to say.

 

[geon2k2]

the price of the 880k should fall around the same as the i3 i reckon so why not compare the performance?

hardly possible, here, the highest fm2 athlon x4 is about 2 times cheaper than i3 41* and 3 times cheaper than i3 43*. The new one will be more or less in the same range.

 

[FreedomEclipse]

hardly possible, here, the highest fm2 athlon x4 is about 2 times cheaper than i3 41* and 3 times cheaper than i3 43*. The new one will be more or less in the same range.

If its within £20-30 difference, I class that as more or less the same range a 4370 is about £115 at the moment. AMD might try to sell the 880K for more because of overclocking compared to the i3. the 'But its a quad core' argument is kinda invalid at this stage where AMD has 8core CPUs that perform worse than intels 4 core CPUs and some are even on par with i3's

 

[Tatty_Two]

If its within £20-30 difference, I class that as more or less the same range a 4370 is about £115 at the moment. AMD might try to sell the 880K for more because of overclocking compared to the i3. the 'But its a quad core' argument is kinda invalid at this stage where AMD has 8core CPUs that perform worse than intels 4 core CPUs and some are even on par with i3's

The 860 stands at £55 currently, I would guess when the 880K is available it will possibly only be around £70, of course that remains to be seen but if about right a £45 saving is considerable in the more budget orientated market, especially when you think the i3 is locked and there is considerable OC potential in the 880K but I acknowledge there needs to be if it is to truly compete.

 

[john_]

8X0K shouldn't be compared with a i3. Totally different price category. It can only be compared to the Pentiums and especially the G3258 that is unlocked. This is the only competition 880K will have and there are many reasons to prefer one over the other. While 880K should offer a more smooth desktop thanks to the four cores, Pentium will offer from slightly better performance in games, applications and benchmarks at stock speeds, to much higher performance in everything that doesn't use more than two cores, especially when overclocked.

 

[Casecutter]

If you want to be on an i3 then a comparative build might be the i3-4160 3.60 GHz for ~$120; then a very pedestrian H81 mobo for $30-40. That's still 40% more cost than working a 860K/FM2+. While I'd maintain stock to stock and gaming the variance in FpS is trifling, while you could still OC the 860K. Better yet the $45 dollars saved can be put to better use with 270X, that would easily erode any FpS improvement the 3.60 GHz i3 might provide.

I could see this new 880K MSRP >$90, while by the time they push the 860K form the channel I'm sure the 880K would resume the ~$75 price point.

 

[GhostRyder]

8X0K shouldn't be compared with a i3. Totally different price category. It can only be compared to the Pentiums and especially the G3258 that is unlocked. This is the only competition 880K will have and there are many reasons to prefer one over the other. While 880K should offer a more smooth desktop thanks to the four cores, Pentium will offer from slightly better performance in games, applications and benchmarks at stock speeds, to much higher performance in everything that doesn't use more than two cores, especially when overclocked.

Pentium G3258 is an awesome chip, its only has two weaknesses that I have witnessed.
1: The binning process in non-existent, which I have experienced first hand as they all overclock all over the place ranging from pitiful to amazing.
2: Its only a dual core (No HT)

Really, that is why I went back to liking the 860k a bit more on budget platforms. The price and having the extra cores with more consistent overclocking (Least in my experience) has been quite nice.

The 860 stands at £55 currently, I would guess when the 880K is available it will possibly only be around £70, of course that remains to be seen but if about right a £45 saving is considerable in the more budget orientated market, especially when you think the i3 is locked and there is considerable OC potential in the 880K but I acknowledge there needs to be if it is to truly compete.

Indeed, but you have to take into account the need for a better cooler to hit those clock speeds. Though when you throw something like a Hyper 212 into the mix, it still pretty cheap and will hit the max the chip can offer anyways. I tested an 860k with an H100i (for fun) and it got to the same areas I was able to achieve on a Hyper 212 just with slightly lower temps.

 

[Tatty_Two]

Yeah, I had 2 G3258's, the first at the time they were launched could only do 4.2gig and I tried every setting imaginable, I fleabayed it and got another and on first startup just with everything on auto she ran at 4.5gig with no tweaks, pushed her to 4.7gig but at that point my H80i was the deciding factor.

 

[GhostRyder]

Yeah, I had 2 G3258's, the first at the time they were launched could only do 4.2gig and I tried every setting imaginable, I fleabayed it and got another and on first startup just with everything on auto she ran at 4.5gig with no tweaks, pushed her to 4.7gig but at that point my H80i was the deciding factor.

Likewise, I have played with 4 total now with varying results. The first one I had went to 4.2ghz, but to go any higher the voltage required skipped to a level I was uncomfortable with (It was well beyond 1.3 I believe just to hit 4.3, maybe more cannot remember now). The second did 4.7ghz with easy on a Hyper212 at around 1.275. The third would not exceed 4.2 at all no matter what voltage or settings I tried. My last one which was recent could hit 4.8 at the same settings as the second (Err right around there) and I was wanting to push it to 5.0ghz. One person I know at the LAN parties I go to up here bought one for a portable rig and his would not go beyond 3.8ghz on any board regardless of voltage so he sold it and bought another that hit 4.5ghz. So to me they are a little unsafe of a bet if your counting on overclocking it to extreme levels but still an awesome chip none the less.

 

[john_]

I was expecting to read that it wouldn't be a problem to OC those CPUs over 4.2GHz and go at 4.5GHz with minimum effort.

 

[Dent1]

Its sad how only way you can compare them is when you use lowest end of other side. Def AMD kinda thinking, work for them?

Since when was the i7 Extreme Edition a low end part. Explain.