1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

AMD FX "Vishera" Processor Pricing Revealed

Discussion in 'News' started by btarunr, Sep 24, 2012.

  1. btarunr

    btarunr Editor & Senior Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2007
    Messages:
    28,436 (11.28/day)
    Thanks Received:
    13,620
    Location:
    Hyderabad, India
    AMD's upcoming second-generation FX "Vishera" multi-core CPUs are likely to appeal to a variety of budget-conscious buyers, if a price-list leaked from US retailer BLT is accurate. The list includes pricing of the first four models AMD will launch some time in October, including the flagship FX-8350. The FX-8350 leads the pack with eight cores, 4.00 GHz clock speed, and 16 MB of total cache. It is priced at US $253.06. The FX-8350 is followed by another eight-core chip, the FX-8320, clocked at 3.50 GHz, and priced at $242.05.

    Trailing the two eight-core chips is the FX-6300, carrying six cores, 3.50 GHz clock speed, 14 MB total cache, and a price-tag of $175.77. The most affordable chip of the lot, the FX-4350 packs four cores, 4.00 GHz clock speed, and 8 MB of total cache (likely by halving even the L3 cache). The FX-4350 is expected to go for $131.42. In all, the new lineup draws several parallels with the first-generation FX lineup, with FX-8150, FX-8120, FX-6100, and FX-4150.

    [​IMG]

    Source: HotHardware
    itsakjt, hellrazor, Daimus and 3 others say thanks.
  2. micropage7

    micropage7

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2010
    Messages:
    5,732 (3.54/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,316
    Location:
    Jakarta, Indonesia
    and im waiting for better performance/watt ratio, many cores doesnt mean it would be better on processing
    but i guess we need some benchmark then
  3. Hustler New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2010
    Messages:
    100 (0.07/day)
    Thanks Received:
    39
    Lol..they're still going to market these as 8,6,4 core CPU's...

    4,3,2 is more accurate.
  4. badtaylorx

    badtaylorx

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2011
    Messages:
    473 (0.43/day)
    Thanks Received:
    152
    IF,,, and i stress IF, AMD learned any lessons with bulldozer, this pricing would seem to suggest performance on par with an Ivy i5....

    who knows tho..........
  5. _JP_

    _JP_

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2010
    Messages:
    2,681 (1.68/day)
    Thanks Received:
    734
    Location:
    Portugal
    Cores =/= Modules.
  6. EpicShweetness

    EpicShweetness

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2011
    Messages:
    307 (0.31/day)
    Thanks Received:
    30
    Location:
    Ft Gordon
    Early trinity benchmark's and the fact that clock speed has gone up suggest otherwise, which is unfortunate. Mostly unfortunate that I have almost no expectation's despite me owning a GPU of there's.
  7. Yellow&Nerdy?

    Yellow&Nerdy?

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2009
    Messages:
    370 (0.21/day)
    Thanks Received:
    48
    I don't think this will make much difference... Hopefully AMD has at least fixed the horridly large power consumption, and maybe closed the performance gap in a bit. Honestly my expectations are pretty low considering how much of a big fat fail Bulldozer was...
  8. DaJMasta

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2005
    Messages:
    479 (0.15/day)
    Thanks Received:
    38
    Location:
    Silver Spring, MD
    It'll be an incremental improvement over bulldozer, so it probably won't compete clock for clock, core for core with ivy bridge.

    The thing that really caught my eye is... why would anyone buy an 8320? It's $11 cheaper and runs half a GHz slower. That doesn't sound right...
  9. faramir New Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2011
    Messages:
    203 (0.17/day)
    Thanks Received:
    27
    Um, Trinity benchmarks suggest 10-15 improvement in IPC. L3 cache performance might increase as well (Bulldozer was pretty bad in this regard) but since Trinity doesn't contain any, we cannot tell how much of an impact (if any) this is going to have. Add the ~10% frequency increase on top of that and the improvement should be around 25% at same power consumption, which isn't all that bad ...

    Nowhere near Sandy Bridge (let alone Ivy Bridge) when it comes to performance per watt but at least it looks more competitive as Intel hasn't been able to make such a big step from Sandy to Ivy Bridge.
  10. swaaye

    Joined:
    May 31, 2005
    Messages:
    231 (0.07/day)
    Thanks Received:
    16
    Outside of the corner cases where Bulldozer was decent too, I think at best it will be competitive with the Nehalem-based CPUs in more common usage scenarios.
  11. nt300

    nt300

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2010
    Messages:
    868 (0.51/day)
    Thanks Received:
    159
    Location:
    Toronto, ON. Canada
    AMD won't make mistake twice in a row. This FX series is going to perform beyond our expectations of 15%. The interesting thing about this enhanced Bulldozer is for instance benchmark FX-8150 at 3.6GHz versus FX-8350 at 3.6GHz and you may find the Piledriver to gain a little, maybe about 1% to 5%. But bench a higher clock say at 4.6GHz for each and the Piledriver pulls ahead by as much 15% to 20%.

    Why is it that the Piledriver runs better than Bulldozer clock for clock but with higher clocks :confused:
    Last edited: Sep 24, 2012
  12. Covert_Death

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2011
    Messages:
    308 (0.28/day)
    Thanks Received:
    82
    well if your asking why i think its because none of those comparisons have been done yet and your making things up lol....
  13. cdawall where the hell are my stars

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2006
    Messages:
    20,673 (6.98/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,981
    Location:
    some AF base
    As long as the 8350 can clock for clock beat thuban overall I will be happy. Seeing how it is clocked at 4ghz I doubt it will beat it IPC, but I can hope.
  14. erocker

    erocker Super Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    Messages:
    39,613 (13.35/day)
    Thanks Received:
    14,001
    Quite possibly.

    I hope not. Prices just don't line up if it doesn't even match Sandy Bridge.
  15. cdawall where the hell are my stars

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2006
    Messages:
    20,673 (6.98/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,981
    Location:
    some AF base
    From the Chinese rumors I have heard they still can't beat Phenom II in single core, but multicore has gained some percents similar to Phenom I vs Phenom II. Biggest gain being clockspeed. I have heard 5ghz on air, but cannot confirm.
  16. Konceptz

    Konceptz

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2008
    Messages:
    151 (0.07/day)
    Thanks Received:
    20
    Location:
    Richmond,VA
    $253??? that 8350 better perform otherwise for that price you might as well go intel :mad:
  17. ironwolf

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2011
    Messages:
    266 (0.21/day)
    Thanks Received:
    31
    Location:
    Pensacola, FL, USA, Earth
    The actual info on the hothardware site has been updated with correct model # info on at least one CPU, can the OP maybe update it?
  18. erocker

    erocker Super Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    Messages:
    39,613 (13.35/day)
    Thanks Received:
    14,001
    If that's true, bummer. I heard 5ghz on air before Bulldozer was released too. Sounds like the same thing all over again.
  19. theoneandonlymrk

    theoneandonlymrk

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2010
    Messages:
    3,377 (2.06/day)
    Thanks Received:
    563
    Location:
    Manchester uk
    I have to agree , deffinately waiting on reviews as i could probably just stick with this cpu and get some new gfx's instead, i hope they(Amd) twist my arm on this matter.:)
  20. NC37

    NC37

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2008
    Messages:
    1,184 (0.56/day)
    Thanks Received:
    264
    Little disappointed in the price. But I'm sure these will sell like BD did. Amazing how well that went after how heavily downed it was in reviews. Guess people only saw that FX name and went nuts.
  21. Steevo

    Steevo

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2005
    Messages:
    8,233 (2.55/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,152
    I think people were expecting a miracle driver, or a patch or something. But that never happened, and it still won't, and it is still a mediocre performance part at mediocre performance part pricing, not that it is bad, but it isn't great.


    I still plan on using one for a server just so I can play around with it.
    10 Million points folded for TPU
  22. Super XP

    Super XP

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Messages:
    2,754 (0.80/day)
    Thanks Received:
    538
    Location:
    Ancient Greece, Acropolis
    I read about this too, but they compared a supposing FX 8350 engineering sample (OC'ed Bulldozer IMO) that seemed to have done a lot better at higher frequencies. Remember your not only OC'ing the CPU, you are also OC'ing the HT and IMC unless you manually set them via bios. Anyhow this is all speculation, give me legitimate benchmarks then I will deside whether I will replace my FX 8120 w/ FX 8320 or for a few dollars more the FX 8350 :D
  23. brian111

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2012
    Messages:
    40 (0.04/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3
    I suspect these prices will start to decline after it's been out a few weeks. I wish it were that way with Intel, but there in a position where they don't have to. Even the previous generation has only come down slightly.
  24. xBruce88x

    xBruce88x

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2009
    Messages:
    2,382 (1.35/day)
    Thanks Received:
    559
    Indeed, and welcome to TPU!
  25. slybunda New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2012
    Messages:
    18 (0.02/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1
    fail all over again

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page