Tuesday, June 7th 2011

AMD Reintroduces FX Brand for High-End Processors and Platforms at E3

AMD today reintroduced the FX brand for PC processors and platforms at the Electronic Entertainment Expo (E3). FX-branded products will be geared toward enthusiast PCs and HD entertainment aficionados. AMD also announced new members for its "Gaming Evolved" program, driving the PC gaming experience forward with native HD3D support in Eidos Montreal's "Deus Ex: Human Revolution," and new collaborations with Bioware, Creative Assembly and Codemasters.

The FX brand is associated with AMD's fastest processors and most powerful platforms -- those designed for unrestrained PC performance for the ultimate gaming and HD entertainment experiences. In addition, these processors and platforms drive rich visuals for graphics-intensive applications and high-resolution AMD Eyefinity multi-monitor configurations. The first platform to earn the FX title, the "Scorpius" platform, will feature the now-available AMD 9-series chipset motherboards and AMD Radeon HD 6000 Series graphics cards, plus the upcoming "Zambezi" unlocked, native eight-core processor.

"AMD's FX brand will enable an over-the-top experience for PC enthusiasts," said Leslie Sobon, vice president of Worldwide Product Marketing, AMD. "By combining an unlocked, native eight-core processor, the latest in chipset technology, and AMD's latest graphics cards, FX customers will enjoy an unrivalled feature set and amazing control over their PC's performance."

AMD Adds New Members, Titles to Gaming Evolved
Furthering its commitment to PC gaming innovation and promoting an open and advanced experience for gamers, AMD continues to add members and grow relationships in the second year of the Gaming Evolved program. True to its previously announced commitment to PC gamers, AMD remains focused on working with the best software developers to maximize the user experience. Gaming Evolved combines AMD's expanded support for Microsoft DirectX® 11 games (which use the latest graphics technology from Microsoft), along with AMD Eyefinity multiple-monitor configurations, AMD Dual Graphics (which enable multiple graphics processors in one computer), and native AMD HD3D support to enable standards-based stereo 3D display capabilities for a truly immersive 3D visual experience.(2)

"Since the launch of AMD's open stereo 3D initiative last year, developers have been embracing native 3D support that will work with a range of 3D glasses and monitors from different vendors," said Neal Robison, director of ISV Relations, AMD. "This excitement by developers is starting to pay off with the announcement by Eidos-Montreal that 'Deus Ex: Human Revolution,' will enable native stereo 3D support."

With AMD HD3D, gamers can experience amazing stereoscopic 3D gaming image quality for a more realistic experience. AMD HD3D technology supports more than 400 titles through AMD's technology partners, and AMD's open 3D ecosystem approach encourages the broadest selection of 3D solutions, available at the most affordable cost.

"We are thrilled to be working with AMD, an innovative leader in PC hardware and software, incorporating their technology into Deus Ex: Human Revolution for PC," said Stephane D'Astous, general manager of Eidos-Montreal, a Square Enix studio. "It's also exciting that Deus Ex: Human Revolution is the first video game title optimized to natively utilize AMD HD3D-capable hardware. Coupled with AMD Eyefinity functionality, PC gamers will be even more immersed in the action-rich gameplay and compelling storyline."

In addition to Eidos, AMD's new partners include major developers of critically acclaimed titles, including Bioware's "Dragon Age II," Creative Assembly's "SHOGUN 2: Total War" and Codemasters' "DiRT 3," which will include native support for DirectX 11, AMD Eyefinity and AMD Dual Graphics technologies.

AMD at E3 2011
E3 attendees can experience these stunning technologies with their own eyes at the AMD booth (#823 South Hall), which will feature demos of AMD technologies and upcoming game titles including "Orcs Must Die!" from Robot Entertainment and DirectX 11-enabled "Blacklight: Retribution" from Perfect World.
Add your own comment

34 Comments on AMD Reintroduces FX Brand for High-End Processors and Platforms at E3

#1
Wile E
Power User
Good to hear AMD getting more involved with the game devs. They have been seriously lacking in that arena.

And dammit AMD, I want performance numbers, not crappy press releases.
Posted on Reply
#2
FreedomEclipse
Crazy Dogmatic Bullsh!t!
The FX brand is associated with AMD's fastest processors and most powerful platforms
Hmmm, well f**k me sideways.

they didnt hesitate to put the can on the FX line after the skt 939. there was a small selection of FX chips made after the 939 era but they were mainly only for server/industry applications all back in 2006. I even remember reading the press release when they announced that they were dropping the 'FX' name.
Posted on Reply
#3
Yellow&Nerdy?
Give us a release date and some concrete performance numbers, god dammit.
Posted on Reply
#4
FordGT90Concept
"I go fast!1!11!1!"
The last time FX was used, AMD was bitch slapping Intel. Maybe the same holds true today and that's why they resurrected the name? If so, expect FX chips to have the same price tag they did then too--$500+ a pop. That sucks for overclockers though because you gotta spend big bucks to get unlocked multipliers again.
Posted on Reply
#5
b82rez
by: FordGT90Concept
The last time FX was used, AMD was bitch slapping Intel. Maybe the same holds true today and that's why they resurrected the name? If so, expect FX chips to have the same price tag they did then too--$500+ a pop. That sucks for overclockers though because you gotta spend big bucks to get unlocked multipliers again.
Prices have already been leaked afaik and the dearest CPU is like 320 dollars... I'm a big fan of AMD but highly doubt this can go toe to toe with Ivy, let alone Sandy! :ohwell:
Posted on Reply
#6
FordGT90Concept
"I go fast!1!11!1!"
by: b82rez
Prices have already been leaked afaik and the dearest CPU is like 320 dollars... I'm a big fan of AMD but highly doubt this can go toe to toe with Ivy, let alone Sandy! :ohwell:
Damn. :(

One can always hope.
Posted on Reply
#7
seronx
by: b82rez
Prices have already been leaked afaik and the dearest CPU is like 320 dollars... I'm a big fan of AMD but highly doubt this can go toe to toe with Ivy, let alone Sandy! :ohwell:
Gips performance out of the FX series is about 2x-4x that of SB/IB supposedly

:toast:
Posted on Reply
#8
wolf
Performance Enthusiast
core for core clock for clock is what I want to know. gamers dont need more than a quad core at the moment. 8 cores will be nye on useless unless they have seriously beefed the performance clock for clock.
Posted on Reply
#9
seronx
by: wolf
core for core clock for clock is what I want to know. gamers dont need more than a quad core at the moment. 8 cores will be nye on useless unless they have seriously beefed the performance clock for clock.
Battlefield 3 and BC2 can use more than 8 cores

:slap:

Get with the times we need more cores more than ever

:nutkick:
Posted on Reply
#10
slyfox2151
by: b82rez
Prices have already been leaked afaik and the dearest CPU is like 320 dollars... I'm a big fan of AMD but highly doubt this can go toe to toe with Sandy, let alone Ivy! :ohwell:
Fixed.
Posted on Reply
#11
DanTheMan
AMD
Fuc*ing
eXtreme

Time to pull the rabbit out of the hat!
Posted on Reply
#12
b82rez
by: slyfox2151
Fixed.
Don't see how you fixed it. I was implying that the Bulldozer is coming out at around the same time as Ivy and I doubt it can compete with it OR compete with Intel's latest offering.
Posted on Reply
#13
seronx
by: b82rez
Don't see how you fixed it. I was implying that the Bulldozer is coming out at around the same time as Ivy and I doubt it can compete with it OR compete with Intel's latest offering.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUIO7pLCCbE

Just wait till you see what it is powered by

:roll:

Bulldozer is out right now but it isn't going to be sold till OEMs/Partners start buying
Posted on Reply
#14
b82rez
by: seronx
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUIO7pLCCbE

Just wait till you see what it is powered by

:roll:
Haha, yeah. I'm not doubting these chips will be awesome, just saying Intel will still have the upper hand...

I'm actually an AMD fan, Have had AMD systems for the past five-six years.

Also my overclocked X6 and 5850 smashes out Dirt 3 just fine! ;)
Posted on Reply
#15
seronx
by: b82rez
Haha, yeah. I'm not doubting these chips will be awesome, just saying Intel will still have the upper hand...

I'm actually an AMD fan, Have had AMD systems for the past five-six years.

Also my overclocked X6 and 5850 smashes out Dirt 3 just fine! ;)
If they can just release the FX cpus this year they will have a 2 year lead in performance till Haswell and even then it might not be able to handle 22nm BD NG

Hate how the OEMs chose Llano to be the first to release
Posted on Reply
#16
Melvis
by: FordGT90Concept
The last time FX was used, AMD was bitch slapping Intel. Maybe the same holds true today and that's why they resurrected the name? If so, expect FX chips to have the same price tag they did then too--$500+ a pop. That sucks for overclockers though because you gotta spend big bucks to get unlocked multipliers again.
Yea i agree, i cant see AMD bringing back the FX branding if these are slower then Sandy Bridge, just wouldn't make sense to me and it would make AMD look stupid. When i look at benchmarks of the 2600k and AMD's top CPU there isnt that much difference in performance realy(Granted Sandy wins all), but most are close, and a few the 2600k flies in but realy its not to far out of reach that i think these new Bulldozer CPU's will indeed perform better then Sandy, if not then ill be surprised TBH.

But not long now till we know the answer :toast:
Posted on Reply
#17
wolf
Performance Enthusiast
by: seronx
Battlefield 3 and BC2 can use more than 8 cores

:slap:

Get with the times we need more cores more than ever

:nutkick:
thats 2 games man, hardly worth a nutkick, not to mention BC2 flies on a quad core. also check some benchmarks and you'll see that the game runs faster on a 2500K than it does a X6 1100T. (4 cores vs 6 cores both at 3.3ghz)

http://techreport.com/articles.x/20188/7
...the lowly Core i5-2400 is outdoing much more expensive siblings such as the Core i7-875K...the very fastest Phenom II X6 isn't any faster than the Core i3-2100—and the i3-2100 has a higher minimum FPS.
clock for clock matters a hec of a lot man.

im not saying more cores is a bad thing, but at present I'd much prefer a CPU that has better per core performance, this generally equates to a smoother experience. 4 cores is plenty for another year at least IMO.
Posted on Reply
#18
seronx
by: wolf
thats 2 games man, hardly worth a nutkick, not to mention BC2 flies on a quad core. also check some benchmarks and you'll see that the game runs faster on a 2500K than it does a X6 1100T. (4 cores vs 6 cores both at 3.3ghz)

http://techreport.com/articles.x/20188/7



clock for clock matters a hec of a lot man.

im not saying more cores is a bad thing, but at present I'd much prefer a CPU that has better per core performance, this generally equates to a smoother experience. 4 cores is plenty for another year at least IMO.
I can sum it pretty up quickly

2008(core i7,i5,i3, 2nd gen) vs 2003(k8-k10.5)

We can only wait till we see

2008(i7) vs 2009(BD)
Posted on Reply
#19
wolf
Performance Enthusiast
by: seronx
I can some it pretty up quickly

2008(core i7,i5,i3, 2nd gen) vs 2003(k8-k10.5)

We can only wait till we see

2008(i7) vs 2009(BD)
I'm not sure what you are arguing against... I love more cores as much as the next man... but the point I want to make is that I sincerely hope performance per core is up by a lot (lets say 25%+) compared to current PII's.
Posted on Reply
#20
JATownes
by: seronx
Bulldozer is out right now but it isn't going to be sold till OEMs/Partners start buying
by: seronx


Hate how the OEMs chose Llano to be the first to release
What are you talking about? :confused: The Zambezi processor, what most of us refer to as the true Bulldozer has NOT been released, hell we can't even get official benchmark numbers yet. And what makes you think the OEM chose to have Llano out first? I am pretty sure that was an in house AMD decision because Zambezi wasn't quite ready yet. Hell, there are rumors of delays in the Zambezi launch now...
Posted on Reply
#21
seronx
by: wolf
I'm not sure what you are arguing against... I love more cores as much as the next man... but the point I want to make is that I sincerely hope performance per core is up by a lot (lets say 25%+) compared to current PII's.
well saying phenom II x4 does 75 gips

and then saying FX-4K does 200-400 gips isn't enough for you?

by: JATownes
What are you talking about? :confused: The Zambezi processor, what most of us refer to as the true Bulldozer has NOT been released, hell we can't even get official benchmark numbers yet. And what makes you think the OEM chose to have Llano out first? I am pretty sure that was an in house AMD decision because Zambezi wasn't quite ready yet. Hell, there are rumors of delays in the Zambezi launch now...
Official benchmarks are NDA till the consumer launch date and that launch date is the launch date

Zambezi is ready and has been since March-April, if there was any delays it would have affected Llano as well but it seems Llano is going to release early and because of Llanos unexpected performance the launch of Zambezi is getting pushed back so they can maximize profits from Llano
Posted on Reply
#22
TheMailMan78
Banstick Dummy
Looking forward to benches. Until then everything anyone says is BS.
Posted on Reply
#23
Yellow&Nerdy?
Adding cores doesn't benefit the most of us. Quad-cores will do just fine there. What I wish is that Bulldozer increases the "clock to clock" performance. E.g. a quad-core Bulldozer at 3.2 GHz would beat a Phenom II quad-core at 3.2 GHz by 30%.
Posted on Reply
#24
wolf
Performance Enthusiast
by: seronx
well saying phenom II x4 does 75 gips

and then saying FX-4K does 200-400 gips isn't enough for you?
heresay for the time being, not to mention if that doesnt equate to gaming performance then it matters little to me anyway.

by: TheMailMan78
Looking forward to benches. Until then everything anyone says is BS.
this. show me the benchmarks, then I'll believe what they say.
Posted on Reply
#25
seronx
by: Yellow&Nerdy?
Adding cores doesn't benefit the most of us. Quad-cores will do just fine there. What I wish is that Bulldozer increases the "clock to clock" performance. E.g. a quad-core Bulldozer at 3.2 GHz would beat a Phenom II quad-core at 3.2 GHz by 30%.
All new Gaming Evolved titles will support hexa-octos from AMD(they are optimized for it)

:pimp:

Cray XK6 - Accountable Flops with 500K "Interlagos" BD Cores: 50 PFlops
X2090 GPU - 20.47PFlops
Opetron 6200 - ????PFlops

Made it simple math

The answer you come up with

x1000000 (times)

/500000 (divide)

You then have GFlops per core

GFlops is 1:1 with Gips

It takes 2 modules from interlagos to perform as 1 zambezi module

http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/desktop-cpu-charts-2010/Gaming-Left-4-Dead-2,2433.html

http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/desktop-cpu-charts-2010/ALU-Performance-SiSoftware-Sandra-2010-Pro-ALU,2408.html

http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/desktop-cpu-charts-2010/Raw-Performance-SiSoftware-Sandra-2010-Pro-GFLOPS,2409.html

Left 4 dead 2 is a bad example since it does everything by 2s

2 cores-4 cores-8 cores

http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/desktop-cpu-charts-2010/Cinebench-11.5-Multi-threaded,2407.html

I'll put cinebench in since it is a multi-threaded app that can do any number of threads
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment