Discussion in 'News' started by Over_Lord, Jul 7, 2013.
Welcome to the space heater era!
In some cases the TDP has been underestimated such that in real applications (typically strenuous, such as video encoding or games) the CPU has exceeded the TDP. In this case, the CPU will either cause a system failure (a "therm-trip") or throttle its speed down.*Most modern CPUs will only cause a therm-trip on a catastrophic cooling failure such as a stuck fan or a loose
Taken from wiki
QUOTE=jihadjoe;2937232]Welcome to the space heater era! [/QUOTE]
Indeed but given they are ment for overclocking that shouldn't matter
I think some have misunderstood why the tdp is high
On a 125watt tdp part from amd they have designed in a hard bios theoretical limit via tdp that is thermally monitored and can throttle or shutdown the cpu.
By setting a 220 tdp top end they have opened up that limit meaning not that more heat can be delt with before the processor calls time out just the processor isn't holding itself back when hitting a safety limit it has hard coded in.
End result hopefully some crazey world records and some good pr but given intel fanboys tend to be too thick to actually know thermal dynamics or power principles and jump on the 220 watt tdp as negative instead of a MASSIVE help to oc teams ah well ,,,,, still all Pr is good isn't it .
Its a bad chip. 5 GHz on 220W TDP is pretty bad when 2nd gen Core i7s at 95W TDP perform better than that at stock. And moreover a core i7 easily gets to 5 GHz within 220W TDP. That being said I think it will be a super flop. And I don't care about any architectural and instruction set differences. AMD FX series have all the instruction sets that the Intels have and even more like the XOP and FMA. So talking about optimizations, it is not possible.
....actually I think AMD has been under valueng itself for quite a while. The bottom line is that they are a business and thy're in business to make a profit. Their strategy so far of selling cheap chips in mass quantity hasnt yeilded their desired returns so a change is in order. And we all.... 95% of us know what the true purpose of this chip is for. The kicker is that if Intel charges you a grand for something.... it RULES. Amd is justified to do the same....as long as it takes the performance crown.....so sub zero overclocking better be beyound awesome on this chip. Only some one doing extreme overclocking would value this thing.
If what you're saying is correct than it's pretty good TDP wise, considering the i7 is only a quad core. AMD have packed 4 extra cores into it's octocore and has maintained the same TDP as the i7 @ 5GHz according to you.
Was you really expecting a 8 core to output less energy than 4 core?
The good 8+2 phase boards support the chip just fine. Asus CHVF(-z), GB 990FX-UD5/7 and Asrock Fatality/extreme 9 are the ones I can think of off the top of my head. MSI may release a BIOS for their boards, but I hardly trust them with a 140w chip.
Intel extreme chips smack the snot out of AMD. Why the thread? 15Mb L3 Cache and Intel beats AMD in singlethreaded apps easily. All I have to say is WTF! Hahahahaha
Extreme chips are not 4 core and ever hear of Hypethreading? AMD 's chips are not TRUE cores... But none the less, I do like AMD's new architecture.
Missing poll option.
Never spending more than $300 on a CPU.
Overclock a 8350 to 5GHz and save $800
Best plan for most of us
You should try and figure in the process node advantage intel have , amd are pushing boundaries on 32nm now well soon 28nm and not so far away 20 nm there also pushing max clocks and an excellent feature set unrestricted across the whole fx line with new tech , instructions sets and open standards all over the show ,,,
Name another company that rolls like that plus they sometimes make freak shows for the rich and frosty few.
Read my above reply. This AMD CPU is all hype. Intel Exreme processors kick the snot out of AMD.
I don't see how being the first to sell a 5ghz processor being all hype.. nor do i consider winning in a synthetic benchmark kicking the snot out of AMD. Real world performance there's not a big difference. Plus, this is still cheaper than an Extreme chip.
It is when IBM actually have had a 5GHz processor in production for the last five years ( Power 595 - Power6 series). As for desktop, you think that Intel couldn't have binned a few 2600K/2700K with 50X multipliers if the PR need arose? It's a PR stunt pure and simple.
But ~ 60% more expensive than a 3930K
Intel chips run too hot to do this. Most users would be forced to use water.....
Wow trolls trollin trolls now ,, crak on
Umm, not trolling, stating a fact. read TOS pal. Crank off
Yes the same fact s add naseum
I7 smash it move along we've heard
Ah, OK. Must be why I'm on water at 4.8...and here I was foolishly thinking my chip was an anomaly
Considering Intel already supply an Asetek rebrand AIO, you'd think that even a bog standard 570LX wouldn't run too much added cost to the final package. EDIT: Oh shit, that wouldn't work- there's no way someone buying an expensive binned chip would have a chassis capable of mounting a 240mm rad - WTF was I thinking!!
Then again, they could have offered the CPU as OEM/tray with a basic one year warranty, though you're probably right in thinking that people who buy high binned chips would also covet the stock HSF- awesome piece of kit that it is.
I am not disagreeing with the Asetek add on but 2600K and 2700K are dead plus AMD did not do that 2 years ago........ Haswell does not have the lid soldered... Ohh shit and Intel uses cheap TIM. Sorry Asetek would probably not work on Haswell plus most have not achieved 5GHz on current retail 4770K's....... so we have not seen too many binned chips out there as of yet... Do we need to go futher?
Another side bar, charge a premium for an Intel chip and add another $200 for cooling puts the price up there over a 3930K so what's the point?
Which was why I said:
So, if 5GHz was some all-important must-have bullet point, Intel had ample opportunity to capitalize two years ago. They didn't.
Are you proposing that Intel's marketing department didn't think of it (and out-thought by AMD marketing), or that Intel was unable to bin SB chips for 5GHz operation?
Personally, I think that if Intel felt the need to push the PR in that direction they would have offered a limited run of binned chips to OEMs like Puget and drip-fed chips to wholesale as tray only processors. They didn't likely because they 1. Didn't need to (SB wasn't exactly a slow seller), 2. Why offer another reason not to buy Gulftown, and 3. Binning cost/ platform (mobo) validation costs.
I don't understand why you compare a power6 (RISC) processor with AMD's or Intel's offerings.
I don't have to they didn't, because it would cannibalize sales on there Extreme chips. If it was up to Intel we would still be using 933mhz PIII's.. If it wasn't for Thunderbird that's where we would be...
I suggest you stop "trolling/Flaming", and add to the tread or move along. Intel does not need your PR, and definitely not in this AMD thread.
about time someone threw him against the wall
I think the word bitch slap may be in order?
Then go buy a power6 chip. No one cares what other anti-amd pro-intel banter you have to say.
its quite sad tbh.
Separate names with a comma.