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

AMD Unleashes First-Ever 5 GHz Processor

Discussion in 'News' started by Cristian_25H, Jun 11, 2013.

  1. MLScrow New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2013
    Messages:
    10 (0.03/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    In terms of missing points...you do know that the general purpose of forum threads is to for people to hold conversations and discussion, which, if you weren't already aware, include personal views, right? :roll:

    You also fail to realize your hypocrisy in that your belief that it "will" add revenue and that AMD is not making a mistake is also a personal one.

    All I can say is that we should agree to disagree and since Steamroller is around the corner already, once the FX version is out and AMD posts their dismal sales numbers for 9000 series FX chips, I may or may not make fun of you. Only time will tell.
  2. drdeathx

    drdeathx

    Joined:
    May 14, 2009
    Messages:
    2,132 (1.13/day)
    Thanks Received:
    479
    Location:
    Chicago burbs

    I did not mean to offend you, just spelling out the facts. Overclocking a FX-8350 to 5GHz also gives a 20-25% performance increase and some will pay the premium to have a default CPU at 5GHz.

    Steam Roller will be lucky to hit the shelves by 2014. You will make fun of me??? I have done many AMD processor reviews and AMD always pushes back their releases. So steamroller is not around the corner but in the meantime, they have marketed the first 5GHz CPU.


    My so called Hypocrosy is not that rather turned around to yourself. Obviously you know what retails and what doesn't. These processors are for OEM manufacturers to start and if they did not have a commitment from them, I am sure captain AMD would not produce them.

    The cost of manufacturing these chips does not change from FX-8350's thus capturing higher margins for AMD. Remember, these are not specialize CPU's rather higher binned chips. (I hope you realize this)
    Last edited: Jun 12, 2013
  3. Fourstaff

    Fourstaff Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2009
    Messages:
    9,154 (5.42/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,959
    Location:
    Home
    Chill guys, this is starting to get personal. Continue poking at each other and I will need to hand out "presents" :)
  4. drdeathx

    drdeathx

    Joined:
    May 14, 2009
    Messages:
    2,132 (1.13/day)
    Thanks Received:
    479
    Location:
    Chicago burbs
    Just debating, Not intended to start anything personal.....:toast:
  5. cdawall where the hell are my stars

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2006
    Messages:
    20,648 (7.09/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,971
    Location:
    some AF base
    Look up marketing ploy. That is all this is. They could sell one of these and it will still make the point of being the first 5ghz CPU to hit the market. Intel did the exact same thing over exaggerating P4's clockspeed when AMD K8 based chips performed substantially better (not this 5-10% BS). Uneducated people buy big numbers. This CPU is a big number the highest number as a matter of fact. It is already proven at that speed that they perform quite well, as good if not better across the board than a 3770K at stock. Since not everyone overclocks this will be one of the highest performing CPU's on the market.
  6. mandis New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2007
    Messages:
    95 (0.04/day)
    Thanks Received:
    7
    Have a look at this: AMD FX 8350 vs i7 (1155 & 2011)

    I suppose it all comes down to what you use your pc for and how much you're willing to spend on it. So as per the video link above, I too don't think all of intel's offerings are really "intelligent" purchaces... ;)
  7. Vinska

    Vinska

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2011
    Messages:
    1,381 (1.27/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,188
    Location:
    Kaunas, Lithuania
    "But... but... muh games!"

    (not directed at the post above. I don't have time to watch that video right now, so I can't respond to it :) )
    Crunching for Team TPU
  8. cdawall where the hell are my stars

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2006
    Messages:
    20,648 (7.09/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,971
    Location:
    some AF base
    I really hope they give me a free game with these new processors too.
  9. Super XP

    Super XP

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Messages:
    2,741 (0.81/day)
    Thanks Received:
    538
    Location:
    Ancient Greece, Acropolis
    Can you imagine a 5GHz Steamroller based CPU :eek:
    The only issue I have with these new Piledriver CPUs is the naming scheme. I don't like it, they should have kept Piledriver in the FX-8000 series and move Steamroller to either FX-9000 and/or FX-10000.
    What are they going to name the Steamroller cores then? FX-1050 and FX-1070 or something :confused:
  10. xorbe

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2012
    Messages:
    372 (0.42/day)
    Thanks Received:
    55
    Probably FX-8550?
  11. MLScrow New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2013
    Messages:
    10 (0.03/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    The fact that it's a marketing ploy is obvious, it's written on the wall. They want to boast the 5GHz number and sure, go ahead, but I disagree that people will mindlessly see 5GHz and flock to AMD. People who were burnt with that the first time with Bulldozer learned their lesson. They will know to research ahead of time. The Bulldozer debacle also created enough of a stir in the community that just about everyone knows that the Bulldozer arch isn't as good, even with higher clocks than Intel and in a lot of cases, even not as good as their old Stars architecture. I believe that most people who are looking to purchase FX chips are enthusiasts and know exactly what they are buying. 5GHz, although a high clock and a first for a stock part isn't all that great once you know that it's AMD's architecture.

    Now, to say that it will beat a 3770K at stock across the board is plainly and simply wrong.

    Feel free, like I did, to go ahead and calculate the performance, adding 20% (and that's being generous as performance doesn't scale linearly with clock speed) to any of the AMD FX8350 benchmarks and you will find that most of the time (note that I did not say all), even with the additional 20%, the FX8350 still performs worse than the 3770K, although it is close, with the FX8350 winning in some of the more multithread focused benchmarks.

    The problem is simply with the architecture. IPC has been AMD's biggest problem since they decided to go modular. It wasn't even as good as their old architecture. They made some improvements with the Piledriver update, but it just wasn't enough.

    Steamroller with it's providing each core with it's own instruction decoder instead of having to share one, with both of these decoders being able to operate in parallel instead of having to alternate every other cycle, will finally create IPC greater than Stars cores and something that will finally compete with Intel. That is what I will be upgrading to when it comes out.

    People like me are not going to waste their money on Piledriver cores when we could just go and get a 2600K, 3770K, or 4770K, or wait for Steamroller and finally have a better performing rig.

    Here, I took a slide from Anand and added a Steamroller column for comparison. You can see why Steamroller will finally be the change everyone will want.

    [​IMG]
    Last edited: Jun 14, 2013
  12. cdawall where the hell are my stars

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2006
    Messages:
    20,648 (7.09/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,971
    Location:
    some AF base
    There are plenty of people who own and still use bulldozer chips without any issues.

    Pretty much across the board it will win. The 8350 already encodes faster and runs well coded multithreaded apps better, the extra clock will speed up the single threaded IPC issues in applications that had an issue so I fail to see were my statement was wrong.

    in?

    I love how people bring up IPC and have no idea what it is. There is no given number to IPC it depends entirely on application.



    So you just posted to troll AMD's attempt to make more money out of a product they already have. You do understand without the money from bulldozer and piledriver AMD doesn't exist. They have the processors and need to sell them to make profits to fund new product developement.

    Better performing in WHAT. People like you are past frustrating. If you want to go play futuremark then go do it on intel. It is well known even when AMD was better performing that still fell to intel same for many many benchmarks. I personally prefer something that works and for what I do the FX9590 would be a drop in performance upgrade that will cost substantially less than ANY intel option. Smart guys like me purchased an upgrade path and have chosen to make incremental upgrades.

    When the benchmarks roll out I will care until then pictures on a screen mean nothing. AMD and intel have proven time after time things change.
    eidairaman1, Norton and Vinska say thanks.
  13. MLScrow New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2013
    Messages:
    10 (0.03/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    Uh, where did I say anything about anyone with Bulldozer chips having issues? :confused:

    No, not "pretty much across the board". Again, go and calculate the performance. Take every single benchmark done by any and every single review site and make the calculations. I promise you that you will see the 3770K still win most of the time.

    I'm well aware of what IPC is, and sorry, but there actually is an actual value to peak IPC and I'm well aware that different applications will utilize more or less of a chips potential IPC. Cinebench does a decent job, but that's not a very important benchmark for me.

    Uh...where am I trolling and what am I trolling? Do you understand what a troll is, because I believe you are using the word incorrectly. I have no idea why you are trying to explain that AMD needs money to function as a business. That's elementary. I'm sorry, but you seem to be defending points that have nothing at all to do with anything I've said.

    I already told you, if you read, but once again go and check all of them. Intel is better performing in most situations, in most benchmarks, even with an additional 20% performance increase to Piledriver. And to say that incremental upgrades make you a smart person...are you trying to make me laugh? Because that's a pretty hilarious statement. "I like to spend money more frequently, to get smaller upgrades, more often, which makes me smarter" :roll:

    If you don't want to care about a factual piece of information, that's your choice, but if you are going to make a comment about something, please make sure that your comment has something to do with the subject at hand. AMD and Intel proving time after time things change? What does that even mean? How does that have anything to do with my image? All my image is showing is how and why front end IPC will finally be great with Steamroller and how it has been poor with Bulldozer and Piledriver in comparison to the older Stars cores, Intel, and the up and coming Steamroller.

    And people like me are frustrating? :wtf:
    Last edited: Jun 14, 2013
  14. Vinska

    Vinska

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2011
    Messages:
    1,381 (1.27/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,188
    Location:
    Kaunas, Lithuania
    No, It's only showing each CPU's instruction decoder capabilities. And the image doesn't imply anything at all.
    Crunching for Team TPU
  15. MLScrow New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2013
    Messages:
    10 (0.03/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    Yes, and the instruction decoder capabilities are measured in IPC. I am not saying this is total IPC for the entire architecture, but IPC for the front end, which will, however, end up having a major impact in overall IPC. I've edited my post to save confusion, but the image should be self explanatory. And you must be joking. The image implies a lot actually. The front end change is the single biggest performance increasing change to the entire architecture, ever.
  16. Vinska

    Vinska

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2011
    Messages:
    1,381 (1.27/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,188
    Location:
    Kaunas, Lithuania
    Still, the image itself doesn't imply anything at all.
    But yes, I agree that this change will increase performance.
    Now, You keep on saying "single biggest performance increasing change to the entire architecture, ever.". Do You have any, any idea how much of an increase this will give, eh? (note: I myself know it fairly well.)
    Crunching for Team TPU
  17. cdawall where the hell are my stars

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2006
    Messages:
    20,648 (7.09/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,971
    Location:
    some AF base
    You claimed they performed poorly. They perform fine for the money.


    Plenty of reviews would say you are wrong (on non-biased sites), but believe what you want.


    No no there is not. There is a general idea of how it performs in specific tasks IPC-wise.

    This is a thread about the first ever 5ghz retail chip not about how the Intel wxyz or steamroller performs.

    No I purchased a platform were I have the ability to buy parts as I go. Ie want a new motherboard I don't have to replace the CPU like with most intel setups, same way with the CPU and this is across generations...



    You keep using "factual" as a reason and have zero support, so lets think guy been here since 06 owns many AMD rigs and has some WR's or new guy?
  18. Tatty_One

    Tatty_One Senior Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2006
    Messages:
    16,383 (5.29/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,321
    Location:
    Worcestershire, UK
    Personally i don't see what everybody's fuss is, so AMD is bringing out more models in it's Piledriver lineup with higher clock speeds, thats got to be good, more choice, more performance, intel does the same.... whats the problem? If the problem is that the Intel equivilent remains faster in many things... well thats not actually a problem is it? I can't speak for anywhere but the UK but the 3770K is around £100 more than the 8350,. lets say that roughly 20% more performance gained from the higher clockspeeds AMD charge 20% more, so that would make the Piledriver chip around £65 less than the 3770K this equates to around 25% of the 3770K's price, will the 3770K remain at least 25% faster than the 5Ghz piledriver? if the answer to that is yes then the more budget conscious of PC users (read majority) possibly would not consider straying from an existing and modern Intel build (assuming they could afford it in the first place), if the answer is no then perhaps some will.

    If what some have said is true, and that budget AM3+ boards would struggle with the additional power draw, that is a bad thing in my opinion as that actually restricts choice.
  19. DigitalUK

    DigitalUK New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2009
    Messages:
    503 (0.29/day)
    Thanks Received:
    68
    Location:
    UK South
    i think someone just brought a 3770K (maybe first puter)

    @Tatty there are deffo some 990fx boards that will struggle for sure as ive had afew of them.
    Tatty_One says thanks.
  20. Super XP

    Super XP

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Messages:
    2,741 (0.81/day)
    Thanks Received:
    538
    Location:
    Ancient Greece, Acropolis
    Your logic is somewhat flawed. I purchased the Bulldozer among many more and none of us got burnt by it. The price was right on the money for the Bulldozer chips. Obviously they weren’t as fast as the rumors have stated, but still when I owned one it performed admirably.
  21. Vinska

    Vinska

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2011
    Messages:
    1,381 (1.27/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,188
    Location:
    Kaunas, Lithuania
    I bought a bulldozer and a piledriver and I am very happy with both.
    I bought them after hearing all those opinions of them being horribly slow. And thus, to my surprise, they were much faster than I anticipated when buying.
    When used in the right way, those chips are smokin' fast. :)
    Super XP and [Ion] say thanks.
    Crunching for Team TPU
  22. drdeathx

    drdeathx

    Joined:
    May 14, 2009
    Messages:
    2,132 (1.13/day)
    Thanks Received:
    479
    Location:
    Chicago burbs
    You make a good read but do you realize less than 2% of users are enthusiasts and all of this this means nothing. All people will see is 5GHz and BTW, the 5GHz processors will give 20% more performance than FX-8350. So that said, it is good marketing.
  23. Deadlyraver

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2011
    Messages:
    265 (0.27/day)
    Thanks Received:
    23
    I just admire the fact that AMD is bringing more value for the common build. Obviously, not the best performance but certainly not the worst.
  24. MLScrow New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2013
    Messages:
    10 (0.03/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    My logic is not flawed simply because you happen to like your BD. Unlike you, many people purchased BD, because they thought it was going to be the best CPU ever and they put faith into all of AMD's marketing, which we all know was horrible, which in turn is the reason why they were all, for the most part, fired. Those people who expected their CPU to outperform Intel and perform up to AMD's forecasts ended up disappointed. To me, being disappointed by a product, because of shady advertising, is what I consider "being burned".

    There is no need to try and insult or claim faulty logic, just state that you didn't feel burned and are an exception to my view, there will always be exceptions.

    Thank you for the compliment, I appreciate it. I understand the architecture (and even with +20% to FX8350 performance, it still does not beat the competition in most cases), I understand the business decision, I also understand that most users are not enthusiasts and will not even be looking to get an FX chip. All I'm saying is that I think it's more of the same crappy AMD marketing that got them into trouble the first time around and I dont like it. Boasting about 5Ghz when it can't even beat a 4GHz product from a competitor is embarrassing, at least it is for me to watch AMD do. I wish that they waited for FX Steamroller before they decided to put their top of the line product under the spotlight, because at least then it would beat it's competitor soundly, which is what really deserves the spotlight. Intel won't be at 5Ghz by then that time, they still haven't broken 4Ghz on a stock part, there's no need to rush. Again, just my .02.

    For anyone who wishes to discuss, I'm more than open for it, but please keep the insults at bay, there is no need to insult simply because you might disagree. You can make your counterpoints without having to be rude or offensive. It would be much appreciated.
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 15, 2013
  25. Vinska

    Vinska

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2011
    Messages:
    1,381 (1.27/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,188
    Location:
    Kaunas, Lithuania
    What point are You trying to make MLScrow-san?
    You write all these things about bulldozer being bad, how this new chip would underperform and so on. But what's Your goal? What are You trying to achieve by all this?

    (doubleposts are frowned upon, you know?)
    Crunching for Team TPU

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

Share This Page