Wednesday, September 7th 2011

AMD Delays FX Series Launch to October, Expands First Wave

Even as there are rumors that the launch of Opteron processors based on the Bulldozer architecture is imminent, there is news that AMD has rescheduled the launch of its FX series performance desktop processors to October 2011, sources told X-bit Labs. The reasons for the delay are known, but when the processors do come out, AMD wants to make sure that they target as many performance price-points as possible, and so the first wave of FX processors will include 7 models, that's four 8-core FX-8000 series chips, one 6-core FX-6000 series chip, and two 4-core FX-4000 series chips.

The first wave is going to include the 3.60 GHz FX-8150, the 3.10 GHz FX-8120 that will be available in 95W and 125W variants, and 2.80 GHz FX-8100 eight-core models; 3.30 GHz FX-6100 six-core model; 4.20 GHz FX-4170 and 3.60 GHz FX-4100 quad-core chips. As you can see, AMD does seem to have tweaked the clock speeds of some of the models compared to older clock speed tables by other sources. The next wave of FX series processors is slated for Q1 2012, which includes faster models across the three lines. According to data compiled by X-bit Labs, the FX series can now be tabulated as shown below.

Source: X-bit Labs
Add your own comment

153 Comments on AMD Delays FX Series Launch to October, Expands First Wave

#1
Frick
Fishfaced Nincompoop
Hustler said:
Phenom II's just arent fast enough, clock for clock, for emulation purposes....a Phenom II would need to run at over 6Ghz to match the performance of a 2500k running @4.5Ghz!!!!..

Thats why i want to know if Bulldozer brings core for core, clock for clock performance levels upto to Sandybridge levels..
Ahh, well yeah. Maybe so. I just read your post and thought you wanted to play Battlefield properly. ^^
Posted on Reply
#2
FordGT90Concept
"I go fast!1!11!1!"
pantherx12 said:
I like seeing lots of dynamic graphs in task manager man :laugh:
Don't need Bulldozer for that. :p

Top one is a Core i7 920 and the bottom one is 2 x Xeon 5310. Looks exactly the same as FX-8xxx. ;)
Posted on Reply
#3
TheLaughingMan
The FX-4000's didn't need turbo boost if they are only getting 100 to 300 MHz. It will make little to no difference.

If these are right, I would rather see the FX-4170 be: 3.3 GHz (4.3 GHz turbo) with a 100W TDP. I don't think they are clocked so high because they suck at clock for clock performance. I think they are clocked so high just because they can.

Like someone said earlier, market spin is involved here as the general public things (high the clock the better the performance). And since they are most likely to sick with pre-build systems in the low to mid range from Dell, Acer, etc. the 4 core CPU's they will be getting have the highest default clocks. It is a marketing trick, but not directed at us as we are expected to go for more cores thus the FX-6000 and FX-8000.

Maybe you should consider a Bulldozer server chip for that weather thing.
Posted on Reply
#4
devguy
Hustler said:
Phenom II's just arent fast enough, clock for clock, for emulation purposes....a Phenom II would need to run at over 6Ghz to match the performance of a 2500k running @4.5Ghz!!!!..

Thats why i want to know if Bulldozer brings core for core, clock for clock performance levels upto to Sandybridge levels..
Yeah man, I ran Final Fantasy X through PCSX2 a couple of years ago with a Phenom I X3 @ 3.0ghz and a Radeon HD 3850. I also handled Super Smash Bros: Brawl just fine with an Athlon II X4 @ 3.6ghz and a Radeon 4870. My Phenom II X6 blows those processors away.

Really, above 1080p, my CPU is no bottleneck for games (save for a few I don't play like Far Cry 2). Moving to an FX or SB processor really won't net me any difference in gaming at my eyefinity resolution (except maybe if I was running crossfire). Thus, if the FX series sucks, I'm just going to hang with my Thuban chip (put that saved money towards an HD 7950 :D).
Posted on Reply
#5
BrooksyX
So happy I went 2500k! Come on AMD, you guys are still my favorite though.
Posted on Reply
#6
johnnyfiive
Just go Sandy Bridge if you're waiting on BD. First June, then August, then Sept, now October? That's three months. Does AMD know how long three months+ is in tech time? It's a longgggg time.

I'm an AMD fan but these delays are becoming expected at this rate. Come on...just release the dang thing already. Die hard AMD fans are buying up 990X, literally building up new rigs, but no CPU to support it.... COME ON!
Posted on Reply
#7
Dent1
FordGT90Concept said:
And this is why AMD is struggling to keep their head above water. Seriously, wasting resources on advertising that less than 2% of their clients even care about. AMD needs to observe Intel's and IBM's marketing strategy and learn from it. Better yet, they should fire their entire marketing staff and snipe a few industry experts. Hell, pull an Intel and hire the Blue Man Group to do a dozen ad spots. I don't care what they do but anything is better than a comic and these characters only fanatics can love.

I'm thinking more and more so that AMD deserves what they got coming to them. That corporation has been in an abysmal state since 2006. It seems they'll never learn.
I agree that AMD need a better approach to marketing as their products are generally unknown outside the geek community. But I disagree that resources thus far was wasted on advertising because arguably each cycle of advertising is probably raking in pre-orders in the tens of hundreds/thousands units from OEMs.
Posted on Reply
#8
FordGT90Concept
"I go fast!1!11!1!"
OEMs are perfectly happy selling Intel chips and they sell a lot of them because people ask for them by name. When's the last time you've heard someone that wasn't techy ask for an AMD product? Good advertising pays for itself.
Posted on Reply
#9
Dent1
FordGT90Concept said:

When's the last time you've heard someone that wasn't techy ask for an AMD product? Good advertising pays for itself.
Which is exactly my point. AMD do need to improve their marketing strategy to hit the non techies.

FordGT90Concept said:
OEMs are perfectly happy selling Intel chips and they sell a lot of them because people ask for them by name.
There will always be a favourite, AMD's strategy in this area could do with improving too, but each time these CPUs get delays and there is another relaunch date I wouldn't be surprised if the store merchandise buyers whom are hearing about the Bulldozer CPU for the first time place a small order. Shops like PCWorld will have pre-ordered Bulldozer months ago in huge quantities in every branch already.
Posted on Reply
#10
mdm-adph
de.das.dude said:
they should get one from Apple. Apples marketing group is really talented. they sell so myh crap with so much hype, its almost unbelievable! no im not being sarcastic.
Apple sells consumer products that even your grandmother can hold and use -- AMD sells enthusiast products that only we care about. The same marketing won't work. Intel getting people to care about Intel chips is a fluke.

I'm guessing they were largely successful because no one had really tried to heavily advertise CPU's before, and since they've already done it, it's very hard to go argue on a price perspective, which is the only thing left. Nobody wants to advertise their company as the "budget" solution.
Posted on Reply
#11
jpierce55
In the end we are where we have been sitting for months..... knowing nothing!
Posted on Reply
#12
[H]@RD5TUFF
AMD needs to get it's ducks in a row, now they are just starting to look bad, what would be tragic irony would be of the chips aren't worth the wait performance wise.
Posted on Reply
#13
Assimilator
[H]@RD5TUFF said:
AMD needs to get it's ducks in a row, now they are just starting to look bad, what would be tragic irony would be of the chips aren't worth the wait performance wise.
No "if" about it at this stage; if Bulldozer was any good, AMD would have rushed to get it to consumers ASAP. But just like Phenom it won't be able to compete with Intel chips, so AMD are holding it back to clear out old stock (and hopefully to fix embarassing hardware bugs *before* the chip is launched).

This pretty much puts the final nail in the coffin in regards to my respect for AMD... ever since the Athlon64 I've listened to the same tired claims, watched the same crappy architecture be called "new" multiple times, seen the same chipset rebranded as an updated model when all it has is support for newer CPUs that no-one can even buy yet. They aren't even trying anymore, and to be honest, if you willingly buy a high-end AMD board at this point... you're a sucker.
Posted on Reply
#14
Nozoned
A lot of you guys are worse than a bunch of old women in a beauty shop. I wonder how many free Intel processors Xbit got for doing this.
Posted on Reply
#15
TheMailMan78
Big Member
Assimilator said:
No "if" about it at this stage; if Bulldozer was any good, AMD would have rushed to get it to consumers ASAP. But just like Phenom it won't be able to compete with Intel chips, so AMD are holding it back to clear out old stock (and hopefully to fix embarassing hardware bugs *before* the chip is launched).

This pretty much puts the final nail in the coffin in regards to my respect for AMD... ever since the Athlon64 I've listened to the same tired claims, watched the same crappy architecture be called "new" multiple times, seen the same chipset rebranded as an updated model when all it has is support for newer CPUs that no-one can even buy yet. They aren't even trying anymore, and to be honest, if you willingly buy a high-end AMD board at this point... you're a sucker.
Apparently you have a very short and or biased memory.
Posted on Reply
#16
[H]@RD5TUFF
Nozoned said:
A lot of you guys are worse than a bunch of old women in a beauty shop. I wonder how many free Intel processors Xbit got for doing this.
Wow really mr conspiracy theory. . . . AMD could solve all of this by telling us if it's true or not but instead they stay tight lipped and suffer for it. The more negative speculation they allow the worse they look.


It's kinda sad watching AMD flounder like this.
Posted on Reply
#17
Casecutter
TheMailMan78 said:
Just a delay on a speculated date that AMD never confirmed.
Exactly when I first read the posted by btarunr... X-bit hasn't got a clue their sources haven't either this is ALL just FUD to grab traffic. Nothing here changes… nothing because they (AMD, pundit, posters, and those sending out dis-information) for whatever their reasoning are all caught up in this game or hoping to "mine" some information.

AMD is holding their cards close, for only reasons they know, and considering launches for graphic products have played that ability before, effectively controling any such real leaks to this point means they have good reason to stay-the-course as they see it. This is the biggest launch of the company; it sets the tone for the new CEO Rory Read. If I/he came in and “got up to speed” and saw some issues, I’d be like... nope let’s get all the ducks in a row. This is a VERY important launch for them, such whining will pass and be forgotten. Just look at how bad Nvidia controlled the Fermi debacle, and now it's water under the bridge. AMD may just be making sure their herbicide is thoroughly mixed…
Posted on Reply
#19
jpierce55
DannibusX said:
Valve Time exists. At AMD too.
?
Posted on Reply
#20
Casecutter
[H]@RD5TUFF said:
What would be tragic irony would be of the chips aren't worth the wait performance wise.
Again... That same thing didn't hurt Nvidia all that much when their new Fermi architecture wasn't all that great.
Posted on Reply
#21
DannibusX
jpierce55 said:
?
Per Wikipedia:
“Valve Time” has become an industry term used jokingly with game releases from Valve, used to acknowledge the difference between the promised time for released content stated by Valve and to the actual release time; “Valve Time” includes predominate delays but also includes some content that was released earlier than expected. Valve itself has fully acknowledged the term, including tracking known discrepancies between ideal and actual releases on their public development wiki and using it in announcements about such delays. Valve ascribes their delays to their mentality of team-driven initiatives over corporate deadlines to make sure they provide a high quality product to their customers. The company does try to avoid unintentional delays of their projects, and believes that the earlier occurrences of “Valve Time” delays, primarily from Half-Life development, has helped them improve their release schedules.
Posted on Reply
#22
[H]@RD5TUFF
Casecutter said:
Exactly when I first read the posted by btarunr... X-bit hasn't got a clue their sources haven't either this is ALL just FUD to grab traffic. Nothing here changes… nothing because they (AMD, pundit, posters, and those sending out dis-information) for whatever their reasoning are all caught up in this game or hoping to "mine" some information.

AMD is holding their cards close, for only reasons they know, and considering launches for graphic products have played that ability before, effectively controling any such real leaks to this point means they have good reason to stay-the-course as they see it. This is the biggest launch of the company; it sets the tone for the new CEO Rory Read. If I/he came in and “got up to speed” and saw some issues, I’d be like... nope let’s get all the ducks in a row. This is a VERY important launch for them, such whining will pass and be forgotten. Just look at how bad Nvidia controlled the Fermi debacle, and now it's water under the bridge. AMD may just be making sure their herbicide is thoroughly mixed…
AMD could say somehting and make it all go away in lack of such action silence can just as easily be interperited as confirmation as it can anything else. Instead of screaming fud why not call AMD out on it's shenanigans, they have already delayed twice what one more time. . .:D




jpierce55 said:
?
meaning it launches when it launches



Casecutter said:
Again... That same thing didn't hurt Nvidia all that much when their new Fermi architecture wasn't all that great.
No doubt I am sure these will sell like hot cakes to all the fan boys who can't let hopes go that AMD can come back and compete with intel, that doesn't make it a good thing.
Posted on Reply
#23
TheMailMan78
Big Member
Yeah this is hurting AMD. Not releasing on a speculated date based off of a random websites guess is destroying their reputation.
Posted on Reply
#24
omagic
Sad news... Atleast some neo fanboy trolls make my mooth beeter ;) I bet that all the "intel+nvidia rulez" kids already forgot what nvidia was late like with the crappy gtx400 series.. And what we got? uber overheating gtx480? oh yeah and the intel is great with their 4 sockets per year politics... ppl pls stop being a blind fanboys and let normal customers wait for cometition and choose whats the best at the moment.
Posted on Reply
#25
[H]@RD5TUFF
TheMailMan78 said:
Yeah this is hurting AMD. Not releasing on a speculated date based off of a random websites guess is destroying their reputation.
The truth doesn't matter only what people believe, and if people believe this, fud or not, it's still what people believe. All AMD has to do is speak up, and instead they allow negative specualtion, and as a result there is a lot of negative press.


omagic said:
Sad news... Atleast some neo fanboy trolls make my mooth beeter ;) I bet that all the "intel+nvidia rulez" kids already forgot what nvidia was late like with the crappy gtx400 series.. And what we got? uber overheating gtx480? oh yeah and the intel is great with their 4 sockets per year politics... ppl pls stop being a blind fanboys and let normal customers wait for cometition and choose whats the best at the moment.
obvious troll if obvious
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment