AMD FX-8350 4.0 GHz - "Piledriver" for AMD Socket AM3+

[Garage1217]

Even though many call the 8150 garbage, since owning one and pushing it, I love the chip (Currently at 4.8ghz stable) Loved it enough and pleased enough with the new reviews that I ordered an 8350 and am quite excited to see what I can do with her! Not a fanboy, I own several intel based computers. Just loved flogging on my AMD gear as it takes it and smiles

[Super XP]

Originally Posted by LTUGamer

Much better than Bulldozer but far away from Core i5 3470
9.0 is too much

Absolutely not. 9 out of 10 hits the spot quite nice.
You can build around a AM3+ platform for super cheap and still get respectable gaming, multimedia etc. Performance without breaking the bank. These new Piledriver cores are the best bang for your dollar right now.

[_Zod_]

Now if we could just get developers to stop using compilers that are optimized for Intel at AMDs expense, AMD might start looking a bit more appealing.

[Garage1217]

Whoa thought that was the 8350 at first 8320 price is $179.99

Also newegg is cheaper. Micro Center wants $5.99 shipping / Newegg is free

[Super XP]

Originally Posted by Garage1217

Whoa thought that was the 8350 at first 8320 price is $179.99

Also newegg is cheaper. Micro Center wants $5.99 shipping / Newegg is free

No, Newegg wants $6.99 S&H if you ship it to Canada.

ATInsider • 8 hours ago • parent −
AMD took a huge risk by developing this unique modular architectural style of design that can highly be expanded by a lot. They've once again pushed innovation to its limits. This is in fact a huge win for AMD and for the PC industry.

AMD now has the ability to plaster cores upon cores as each process node gets smaller. They've taken out the guess work and have a working product. All they now need to do is continue to refine the design. Piledriver is a testament that this CPU can and will eventually have the balls to equal and surpass Intel in the high end.

This is a huge positive, because this will only force Intel to also innovate. You see INTEL is "VERY" arrogant, they will never allow AMD CPU's to outperform them. No problem, so long as AMD stays competitive.

Once again Good Job on Piledriver, a great improvement, and Steamroller 2013 should add another 50% Clock 4 Clock performance improvement over Piledriver. That CPU tech will be the game changer.
AMD Insider........

http://news.softpedia.com/news/AMD-s...l-289980.shtml

[ChristTheGreat]

Originally Posted by cadaveca

Better yet, a pic:

In that power bar is PC in kill-a-watt clone, lamp, monitor, and stereo. That bar plugs into it's own circuit @ 15a/120V, as well.

http://img.techpowerup.org/121023/001.jpg


What I report is the average reported over an 1-hour period of a customized CPU-based load.

what's really amazing is that this system, does draw no more than 400W gaming, with dual 7950s!!!

Okay nice!

Thanks for sharing this mate

[cadaveca]

Originally Posted by ChristTheGreat

Okay nice!

Thanks for sharing this mate

I also use a Zalman 8-pin meter for the 8-pin numbers:

http://www.zalman.com/eng/product/Pr...ad.php?Idx=417


I calibrated this unit with a Fluke-brand clamp meter.

[os2wiz]

Originally Posted by Super XP

No, Newegg wants $6.99 S&H if you ship it to Canada.

http://news.softpedia.com/news/AMD-s...l-289980.shtml

Well it would be a great stride forward, but let's not bet the house on it yet. 45% improvement over pile driver is asking a lot. 45% against bulldozer would mean almost a 30% increase over pile driver. That is quite rare in the cpu world from one generation to the next. I'll be happy with a 20-25% improvement over Pile driver.

[EarthDog]

what's really amazing is that this system, does draw no more than 400W gaming, with dual 7950s!!!

People dramatically over estimate power reqs too... is that 400W rating at the wall? If so, you have to take in to account the PSU efficiency as well. If its a 90% platinum unit, that is really around a 360W load.

I pull 400W(wall) with 2 7850's overclocked (1.25v @ 1150/1350) and a 3770k at 4.8Ghz.

[Thefumigator]

Does anyone knows how low these clock on windows' power saver mode?

my phenom clocks 1Ghz on power saver, as far as I know every other AMD processor remained the same, except llano where they clock even lower to 600Mhz or something like that.

[cadaveca]

Originally Posted by EarthDog

People dramatically over estimate power reqs too... is that 400W rating at the wall? If so, you have to take in to account the PSU efficiency as well. If its a 90% platinum unit, that is really around a 360W load.

I pull 400W(wall) with 2 7850's overclocked (1.25v @ 1150/1350) and a 3770k at 4.8Ghz.

I did post a pic of what I use to test that......last page

[fwix]

nice review even if u did not includes some M.T games (bf3/moh multi empty fixed scene - crysis 2 - gta 4 but the Principe infos are here

Originally Posted by EarthDog

with 2 7850's overclocked

well an oc 7850 v1.25 use more power than any 7950 :d
also i would say a gaming pc "amd platform"(gpu-proc ) this days are really good if we speak price/performance

i have an 1100t @4.1cpu 3cpu nb 2.6 ht - gtx 590 (oc at 580 default) i really can't see the difference between an 2500k @ 4.80 ( my friend have one ) in the majority of games perhaps skyrim -crysis 2 feel more stable with intel but u can increase the difference by reducing the lod ratio/view distance
so it's not really a big deal to own a ivy ore sandy if u wanna play games with the best price/performance (i know that not every gamers oc the cpu to play but the majority do :d )
also i would say this days we are not cpu limited more than we are gpu limited ,test any game have a good engine like unreal engine - frostbite - cry engine etc u can't be cpu limited with any quad core at "60 74hrz vsync on" (even i tested a core i3 2120 with a 580-7850 in the modern game the gpu is all the time 90-99% vsync off ) so for those who are wondering about performance in games just oc any quad core u have to +4 ghz u can't really see the difference "only" if u play games at 120fps well an oc intel is the best choice for that

[ChristTheGreat]

Originally Posted by EarthDog

People dramatically over estimate power reqs too... is that 400W rating at the wall? If so, you have to take in to account the PSU efficiency as well. If its a 90% platinum unit, that is really around a 360W load.

I pull 400W(wall) with 2 7850's overclocked (1.25v @ 1150/1350) and a 3770k at 4.8Ghz.

those 7850 has low power consumption. My rig, full CPU + GPU 100% (Prime95 + furmark), draw about 340-380w at the wall

[johnspack]

I'm still munching popcorn... I did amd from the amd286 to the athlon64 x2... I really want a reason to come back!

[Absolution]

Could performance be better with Windows 8?

I think it the AMD 8350 is a good choice:

+ More cores
+ Close to if not better performance than the Intel counterpart (Gaming)
+ Supporting AMD (because competition is better)

But still cant get over these :/

- Memory rates slow
- Power consumption when overclocked kinda high
- No idea how long will the AM3+ socket last, perhaps this gen of CPUs will be the last. So another -ve for Intel / AM2 users

[cdawall]

Originally Posted by Absolution

But still cant get over these :/

- Memory rates slow
- Power consumption when overclocked kinda high
- No idea how long will the AM3 socket last, perhaps this gen of CPUs will be the last. So another -ve for Intel / AM2 users

-BIOS issue as much as a CPU issue. Check how the other boards perform before calling this one. Trust me on that one. 1600CL6 is over 1000MB/s different between my M4A78T-E and CHIII.

-It is a performance PC if you want low power consumption by a 45w chip and leave it stock

-It is a better bet than going with 1155. Seeing how Haswell and Broadwell are slated for LGA1150.

[geon]

brilliant cpu

For a developer, to be able to test how your code stretches on 8 threads is pretty sweet.

BTW all benches are done by running 4 threads for i5, 8 threads for BD, try running 8 threads for i5 also if you want to have fun. In most applications performance will degrade, and that's why BD architecture is great for servers.

Video compression on BD is great as long as other tech don't really work as they produce either low quality or don't have good support.

I'm pretty sure games work very nice as regular users don't have 1000$ video cards so if the GPU limits performance, it will limit in the same way both the AMD and Intel.

I don't see single core performance as an issue. More and more applications are optimized for multi-core, and few single core applications which people still use are limited by other factors which benchmarks never take into account. (Like optical drive speed in case of Lame or Itunes. If that will be factored, both i5 and BD will encode on the fly)

Power is indeed an issue, however once AMD will move to a lower node we should see a good improvement. Also electricity is pretty cheap right now and I doubt anybody will notice the CPU consumption on the bill. Also you can be green by turning off your PC when you don't need it.

I think there is hope for AMD, although I've read some amazing stuff about the next gen intels.

[HumanSmoke]

Originally Posted by cdawall

--It is a better bet than going with 1155. Seeing how Haswell and Broadwell are slated for LGA1150.

Can't see how you arrive at that.
Even if Haswell arrives Q2 2013, that doesn't make Ivy Bridge (or Sandy Bridge for that matter) redundant overnight, so come Q2 2013 the situation is still pretty much the same as it is now.
Steamroller is either going to backwards compatible with existing AM3+ (great if you want to upgrade the board but not the CPU, not so great if it means that a better memory subsystem, an integrated PCH etc. fall by the wayside)

The way I see it, going into Q2-3, 2013, the buyer now will be sitting on the present tech

AMD: Cheaper overall*, ~2-4 more SATA 6GB ports, higher power consumption, no SSD caching, no native USB3.0, no PCI-E 3.0**, (and no SAS if comparing to X79 or selected Z77), ECC memory support, native tri/quad single-GPU support.

Intel: More expensive in comparison to 8320,6 and 4 core AMD (* 3570K + Z75 isn't far away from 8350 + 990X/FX in pricing), fewer native SATA 6GB ports, iGP (handy for troubleshooting or placeholder between "proper" GPU's unless you have a 1440p/1600p screen)

Unless you're in the market for a better IGP I'd venture that an IB system is still going to be pretty competitive in 2013 versus Haswell...there's also no guarantee that AMD's Steamroller timetable incurs no slippage...not as if AMD don't have prior form.

** Thinking ahead, while PCI-E 3.0 might be a non-event ATM, it would still likley be a selling point iin the resell market if you were looking at upgrading, and of course a higher bandwidth intensive card of the next gen allied with a CPU physics game might make the difference more than academic.

[os2wiz]

Originally Posted by HumanSmoke

Can't see how you arrive at that.
Even if Haswell arrives Q2 2013, that doesn't make Ivy Bridge (or Sandy Bridge for that matter) redundant overnight, so come Q2 2013 the situation is still pretty much the same as it is now.
Steamroller is either going to backwards compatible with existing AM3+ (great if you want to upgrade the board but not the CPU, not so great if it means that a better memory subsystem, an integrated PCH etc. fall by the wayside)

The way I see it, going into Q2-3, 2013, the buyer now will be sitting on the present tech

AMD: Cheaper overall*, ~2-4 more SATA 6GB ports, higher power consumption, no SSD caching, no native USB3.0, no PCI-E 3.0**, (and no SAS if comparing to X79 or selected Z77), ECC memory support, native tri/quad single-GPU support.

Intel: More expensive in comparison to 8320,6 and 4 core AMD (* 3570K + Z75 isn't far away from 8350 + 990X/FX in pricing), fewer native SATA 6GB ports, iGP (handy for troubleshooting or placeholder between "proper" GPU's unless you have a 1440p/1600p screen)

Unless you're in the market for a better IGP I'd venture that an IB system is still going to be pretty competitive in 2013 versus Haswell...there's also no guarantee that AMD's Steamroller timetable incurs no slippage...not as if AMD don't have prior form.

** Thinking ahead, while PCI-E 3.0 might be a non-event ATM, it would still likley be a selling point iin the resell market if you were looking at upgrading, and of course a higher bandwidth intensive card of the next gen allied with a CPU physics game might make the difference more than academic.

I do see the memory bandwidth as well as a serious wall limiting performance on AM3±. Why not have 2 choices for Steamroller, one AM3+ the other AM4 at the same availability date?
Is it possible. Obviously the AM4 would give better memory bandwidth with DD4 and an improved memory controller. It would cost more. The AM3+ version would be less of a change, cheaper to produce, and give lower performance improvement. Hyper Transport should be replaced on AM4. It is not an efficient technology
at this point.

[eidairaman1]

Originally Posted by os2wiz

I do see the memory bandwidth as well as a serious wall limiting performance on AM3±. Why not have 2 choices for Steamroller, one AM3+ the other AM4 at the same availability date?
Is it possible. Obviously the AM4 would give better memory bandwidth with DD4 and an improved memory controller. It would cost more. The AM3+ version would be less of a change, cheaper to produce, and give lower performance improvement. Hyper Transport should be replaced on AM4. It is not an efficient technology
at this point.

Rest assured when SR comes about DDR4 will be in Play and SR will be DDR3/4 Compatible, so it would be AM4; meaning Stars, BD, PD wont be able to support it but AM3+ users will have another gen of chips to play with.

[HumanSmoke]

Originally Posted by os2wiz

I do see the memory bandwidth as well as a serious wall limiting performance on AM3±. Why not have 2 choices for Steamroller, one AM3+ the other AM4 at the same availability date?

In theory it sounds fine- market segmentation hasn't hurt Intel.
In practice, it sounds like attempting to keep a foot in both camps- which again is fine, it lessens risk with new tech. It also seems to be a diluting of R&D to keep one avenue linked to backwards compatibility. Seems like a retrograde step to me for a company with a mandate to balance the books.

AMD's continued survival (without a new investor) is likely linked to OEM's. The DIY crowd don't rate highly enough to warrant that kind of investment. I'd also argue that AMD aren't above jettisoning backwards compatibility when circumstances allow ( FM1's lifespan for example), so if OEM's are the key to increased revenue then it follows that AMD will need to pander to their requirements- which basically boils down to feature checkboxes...and I'm not convinced that a slightly tweaked 1090FX/X falls into that category- especially if Intel end up integrating WiFi and god knows what other acronyms into the Shark Bay platform.

[os2wiz]

Originally Posted by HumanSmoke

In theory it sounds fine- market segmentation hasn't hurt Intel.
In practice, it sounds like attempting to keep a foot in both camps- which again is fine, it lessens risk with new tech. It also seems to be a diluting of R&D to keep one avenue linked to backwards compatibility. Seems like a retrograde step to me for a company with a mandate to balance the books.

AMD's continued survival (without a new investor) is likely linked to OEM's. The DIY crowd don't rate highly enough to warrant that kind of investment. I'd also argue that AMD aren't above jettisoning backwards compatibility when circumstances allow ( FM1's lifespan for example), so if OEM's are the key to increased revenue then it follows that AMD will need to pander to their requirements- which basically boils down to feature checkboxes...and I'm not convinced that a slightly tweaked 1090FX/X falls into that category- especially if Intel end up integrating WiFi and god knows what other acronyms into the Shark Bay platform.

It is only to give one last cycle for AM3+ motherboard users before obsolescence, not a parallel development
option.

[nt300]

I think Piledriver will be the last AM3+ CPU support. And the Steamroller may be on a new socket with DDR4. But we talk in mid to late 2013.

[EarthDog]

Memory bandwidth is not an issue on any platform dual channel and up. Increasing memory speed shows very little gains in 99% of applications outside of benchmarking. I liken it to a fire hose and garden hose... If you have 1GPM flow(data) in a garden hose(bandwidth value), and simply change to a fire hose(larger bandwidth value say DDR4 or quad channel) that doesnt mean your static 1GPM flow magically increases. Bandwidth is just the pipe, the CPU isnt saturating ram's bandwidth these days at dual channel 1600Mhz.

[os2wiz]

Originally Posted by EarthDog

Memory bandwidth is not an issue on any platform dual channel and up. Increasing memory speed shows very little gains in 99% of applications outside of benchmarking. I liken it to a fire hose and garden hose... If you have 1GPM flow(data) in a garden hose(bandwidth value), and simply change to a fire hose(larger bandwidth value say DDR4 or quad channel) that doesnt mean your static 1GPM flow magically increases. Bandwidth is just the pipe, the CPU isnt saturating ram's bandwidth these days at dual channel 1600Mhz.

But we are talking at 1866 Mhz and 2133 Mhz which I use. I was told on the ROG web site by an Asus technical staffer that at 2133 even with loosened timings it would be near-impossible to get my HT link speed up to 2600. He was right. Even raising cpu-nb voltage and NB voltage couldn't get a stable run at 2400 or 2600. So it sits at 2200. So memory speed definitely impacts HT speed. I should lower it to 1600 and I bet the HT link speed could be raised to 2600 .