Interesting read about Intel compilers and the FMA Instruction Sets.

Wow, AMD pays Intel for instruction sets and then Intel scraps them so software developers won't use them. I will never buy Intel again. Even the $5 rummage sale towers.

BvanofferenWow, AMD pays Intel for instruction sets and then Intel scraps them so software developers won't use them. I will never buy Intel again. Even the $5 rummage sale towers.

That's sensationalizing the facts. AMD released an Instruction Set--SSE5--then Intel released a better more efficient version that does the same thing and then some--AVX--and AMD was basically forced to use that since Intel drives the market. When AMD finally implemented it Intel had just released a revision of it that was once again more efficient and flexible, and AMD was kind of boned. This kind of thing happens. Did you stop buying AMD CPU's when Intel released CPU's with a functional x64 Instruction Set, just to have AMD release CPU's that support x86-64 and forced Intel to adapt? Yea, I didn't think so.

Intel has only paid for another Instruction Set once, x86-64, and in every other situation has improved on designs developed by other companies. AMD releases 3DNow, Intel makes a better version called SSE. Sure it's not an ideal solution, but both companies are in it to make money, and if that requires them to reinvent each others wheels, so be it.

Intel shouldn't be allowed to optimize software from other companies and keep AMD from utilizing the optimization written in the software code.... That is a monopoly! Is there really an AMD anti-trust suit against Intel for this?

Also only four chipsets on 1155 mobo will support Ivy bridge? That is Terrible Intel! Don't ever change AMD!

Looks like the 3770k will be it for 1155 and that's if you have the right chipset. If AMD keeps steamroller and/or excavator compatible on AM3+, 990FX rig's will be happy for many years!

BvanofferenAlso only four chipsets on 1155 mobo will support Ivy bridge? That is Terrible Intel!

to be fair to them their product progressions are made available with more time then ever ie, prior to 1155 we knew how long 1155 was going to last , a tick and a tock, thats it add nausium from here on in id guess

Intel has been known to use unfair compiler sabotage of non genuine intel cpus for a while.

Cant' wait to read any news on Piledriver. Won't be buying one though. I just updated to sandy bridge.
I play several CPU-limited games, and my Phenom II 940 @ 3.6 was struggling. Bulldozer just didn't make sense vs a similarly Intel chip this gen.

Which chip did you opt for?

BvanofferenIntel shouldn't be allowed to optimize software from other companies and keep AMD from utilizing the optimization written in the software code.... That is a monopoly! Is there really an AMD anti-trust suit against Intel for this?

Also only four chipsets on 1155 mobo will support Ivy bridge? That is Terrible Intel! Don't ever change AMD!

Looks like the 3770k will be it for 1155 and that's if you have the right chipset. If AMD keeps steamroller and/or excavator compatible on AM3+, 990FX rig's will be happy for many years!

Intel doesn't prevent AMD from utilizing these Instruction Sets, it just requires AMD to purchase a license for said Instruction Sets and takes advantage of revisions to Instruction Sets more easily than AMD because they release new CPU's more often. If AMD wanted to take advantage of better Instruction Sets they would have to do better than a new revision every 2 years. Like I said, all this is a problem with the system, not Intel. Intel has definitely done some shady stuff (giving discounts to OEM's that purchase Intel CPU's for example) but that happens anywhere there are large corporations.

As for the 1155 Chipset issue, you're omitting massive amounts of information. Intel said 2 years ago--before SB launched--that all UEFI equipped Motherboards would be able to recieve an updated BIOS\UEFI. The Chipsets they said would definitely be compatible were P67, Z68, and any of the chipsets released with IB (Z75, Z77, H77, etc.). The only one that's up in the air is H61 and H67, and some motherboard manufacturers are pushing out updates allowing these chipsets support. It all comes down to the motherboard companies, Intel gave them all the tools, and certain companies have already pushed out the update, but others are taking their sweet ass time. It's no worse than AMD swearing AM3 sockets would support FX CPU's then randomly revealing it was only the black socket AM3 motherboards that would actually support them. There was no mystery, Intel made it quite clear from the beginning if you bought a P67 or Z68 motherboard, you would have to get a BIOS update to run IB CPU's.

I'm growing quite weary of people making it sound like with Intel you're forced to buy a new Motherboard and CPU every time one is released. Lets take 2 situations. Say you bought a P67 Motherboard and i7-2600K at launch, it would run you like $500 for those two items, but you are at the top of the food chain for quite some time until SB-E comes out etc. Now say you bought a 990FX Motherboard and a Phenom II X4 at the same time, you spendt about $250, but you're not nearly at the same level of performance. So a year goes by and you want an upgrade, and go for an FX-8150, so you drop nearly $300 on one, and you're almost at the level of the i7-2600K you could have bought. Over the same amount of time, you actually spent $50 more than the i7 setup, for noticably less performance at any given time. Remind me how that is a smarter buy?

ya in product cycle though 1150 is already going to replace it.

xenocideIntel doesn't prevent AMD from utilizing these Instruction Sets, it just requires AMD to purchase a license for said Instruction Sets and takes advantage of revisions to Instruction Sets more easily than AMD because they release new CPU's more often. If AMD wanted to take advantage of better Instruction Sets they would have to do better than a new revision every 2 years. Like I said, all this is a problem with the system, not Intel. Intel has definitely done some shady stuff (giving discounts to OEM's that purchase Intel CPU's for example) but that happens anywhere there are large corporations.

As for the 1155 Chipset issue, you're omitting massive amounts of information. Intel said 2 years ago--before SB launched--that all UEFI equipped Motherboards would be able to recieve an updated BIOS\UEFI. The Chipsets they said would definitely be compatible were P67, Z68, and any of the chipsets released with IB (Z75, Z77, H77, etc.). The only one that's up in the air is H61 and H67, and some motherboard manufacturers are pushing out updates allowing these chipsets support. It all comes down to the motherboard companies, Intel gave them all the tools, and certain companies have already pushed out the update, but others are taking their sweet ass time. It's no worse than AMD swearing AM3 sockets would support FX CPU's then randomly revealing it was only the black socket AM3 motherboards that would actually support them. There was no mystery, Intel made it quite clear from the beginning if you bought a P67 or Z68 motherboard, you would have to get a BIOS update to run IB CPU's.

I'm growing quite weary of people making it sound like with Intel you're forced to buy a new Motherboard and CPU every time one is released. Lets take 2 situations. Say you bought a P67 Motherboard and i7-2600K at launch, it would run you like $500 for those two items, but you are at the top of the food chain for quite some time until SB-E comes out etc. Now say you bought a 990FX Motherboard and a Phenom II X4 at the same time, you spendt about $250, but you're not nearly at the same level of performance. So a year goes by and you want an upgrade, and go for an FX-8150, so you drop nearly $300 on one, and you're almost at the level of the i7-2600K you could have bought. Over the same amount of time, you actually spent $50 more than the i7 setup, for noticably less performance at any given time. Remind me how that is a smarter buy?

Certainly, If you bought a 2600k your done upgrading that rigs cpu. Unless you want to spend $300 for 5% stock performance and 0% overclock performance. If you bought a AM3+ board and a phenom x 4 upgrading now would be premature. Piledriver looks to be a reasonable upgrade depending on what you use the phenom for and what PD initial price is. And you won't have to buy a new mobo and software when the phenom upgrade is worth it. When upgrading just a cpu timing is everything and current am3+ systems should stick with whatever they have sitting in it. CPU upgrades that are drop in compatible RARELY require new software purchases with it. Not only windows, but games, video editing software ect USUALLY have to be repurchased when upgrading a motherboard and a cpu together, along with a complete reinstall of all software.

A 2600k purchase is just that. It would be better to buy a whole new rig then upgrade a 2600k cpu. If a phenom am3+ rig absolutely needs more performance already, an 8120 is only $189 and at say 4.5ghz gives plenty of upgrade sense over a phenom. Then we know PD will available and steamroller has a solid chance of working on am3+ as well.

So my point is that am3+ drop in cpu upgrades 1-2 years from now should outperform sandybridge drastically on the 9xx am3+ mobo and not require any other investment. This is based on AMD's socket advancement since AM2. If you need 2600k performance now buy it and leave it stand or get close with the FX-8150 and have the option to upgrade to a much better cpu (Piledriver) and probably steamroller later without any other necessary hardware or software.

BvanofferenSo my point is that am3+ drop in cpu upgrades 1-2 years from now should outperform sandybridge drastically on the 9xx am3+ mobo and not require any other investment. This is based on AMD's socket advancement since AM2. If you need 2600k performance now buy it and leave it stand or get close with the FX-8150 and have the option to upgrade to a much better cpu (Piledriver) and probably steamroller later without any other necessary hardware or software.

So AMD CPU's should outperform SB in 2 years... and that's the problem. With Intel you get soilid performance every time you upgrade, and it carries you 2-4 years, with AMD it seems you spend the same amount over a similar cycle, but you go through 2-3 CPU's, and never even have equal performance. I remember back in the Athlon XP/64/X2 days that wasn't the case. You're also assuming AMD's CPU's 2 years from now will use the same socket, which I'm starting to highly doubt. I think after PD AMD is probably going to consolidate their Sockets and get their APU's and CPU's in the same socket (FM3?).

Your stretching things. The 8150 is competitive on the 2600k and costs less. Intel is still the way to go for maximum performance but you have to spend more money. $200 AMD chips are the way to go performance wise. If you can spend over $300 on a cpu and a few bucks more on a mobo then go with Intel 2011. The only issue is 2011 high end chips will probably stay expensive like the 1366 990X. Would anyone out there buy a 990X based PC right now? Not so much. They would upgrade to one for the drop in performance but have to still pay $1000 for a $300 performance cpu.

And now you can pick up an fx-8150 for $205! AMD dropped prices for piledriver Trinity launch

www.cpu-world.com//news_2012/2012042701_AMD_cuts_prices_on_A-Series_APUs_and_FX_CPUs.html

www.hardwaresecrets.com/article/Core-i7-3770K-vs-AMD-FX-8150-and-Core-i7-2600K-CPU-Review/1537/1

This is a great review. An equal testbed for all three cpu's. The only issue is they just used an AMD video card. If they had swapped in a 570 the review would have confirmed Cpu performance a bit more.

So the 3770 up to 35% gain on a couple cpu benchmarks over FX. BUT the 8150 was right on par or slightly better on gaming tests. Still want to pay a hundred bucks more for a finished 1155 cpu?

Bvanofferenwww.hardwaresecrets.com/article/Core-i7-3770K-vs-AMD-FX-8150-and-Core-i7-2600K-CPU-Review/1537/1

This is a great review. An equal testbed for all three cpu's. The only issue is they just used an AMD video card. If they had swapped in a 570 the review would have confirmed Cpu performance a bit more.

So the 3770 up to 35% gain on a couple cpu benchmarks over FX. BUT the 8150 was right on par or slightly better on gaming tests. Still want to pay a hundred bucks more for a finished 1155 cpu?

Interesting. Although having used mediaespresso 6.5 telling it not to use AVX/Quicksync, is not the same thing as not using it. The fact that IB and SB scored identically is a dead giveaway that AVX was in fact being used.

The 3820 does plenty well for me. at 315 USD, it's placed pretty well considering its performance is somewhere between the 2600k and the 3770k plus you get the offerings of the X79 chipset. It was either SB-E or BD when I was choosing because I wanted the PCI-E lanes and I didn't want a mainstream platform. The 3820 struggles on nothing. The 8150 almost got my money, but I felt that SB-E had more to offer, even if you had to pay more for the platform itself. Also the 3820 does an impressive 4.75ghz on air, which I have no complaints about.

Yeah the 3820 rocks! Today and tomorrow your rig will have what it take for anything. Well maybe in 10 years you'll need an upgrade.

BvanofferenYour stretching things. The 8150 is competitive on the 2600k and costs less. Intel is still the way to go for maximum performance but you have to spend more money. $200 AMD chips are the way to go performance wise. If you can spend over $300 on a cpu and a few bucks more on a mobo then go with Intel 2011. The only issue is 2011 high end chips will probably stay expensive like the 1366 990X.

And now you can pick up an fx-8150 for $205! AMD dropped prices for piledriver Trinity launch

www.cpu-world.com//news_2012/2012042701_AMD_cuts_prices_on_A-Series_APUs_and_FX_CPUs.html

You have a funny definition of "competitive"; www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/434?vs=287

The FX-8150 falls between the 2500(K) and 2600(K) in terms of performance, but eats tons more power in the process. The only benchmarks the 8150 seems to be better in are 7ZIP and Sysmark E-Learning. For gaming, even in heavily threaded and\or CPU-bound games, the i7 (and usually ven the i5's) are substantially better. I think the FX-8120 is a solid buy if you can get one around $150-175, but I would never suggest an FX-8150, even after the price drop. As for Socket 2011, the reason the prices are so high is because they are intended for enthusiasts and workstations, in other words, people who make a living with computers, and will see definite benefits in buying a $600-700 CPU over a $300 one. There's also the fact that they offer unmatched performance, so a premium is to be expected, when AMD had FX series CPU's on socket 939, they went for $1000 each as well.

AMD vs Intel What really matters

Again a bad review based on ram.... they paired it with 1600mhz ram and FX needs 1866. Check your reviews before knocking FX. Look at the review I listed. The gaming benchmarks are very competitive when the right hardware is plugged in.

Your missing my point. The 2600k is a better chip if you need it for say, an eyefinity setup with more then three screens. But people are much better off for the future with am3+ or 2011. If an 8150 for $205 can fulfill your needs, like two 7970's, going 2600k now is sabotoging yourself. This wasn't the case when the 2600k was released. People got a good 16 months of top performance from sandybridge.

Because of the reason for this thread...... Piledriver improvements

If you need all that the 2600k has to offer right now... better off with the 3820, same price/performance but upgradeability with 2011.

Or wait a few months and really do yourself a favor..... Check PD's (Vishera) properly configured benchmarks and decide then... Based on the info in this entire thread the FX-8350 is looking to outperform 1155 all around. Power usage looks lower on Ivy Bridge. But really when I spend money I want to see real world results and price. Yet the PD info we have screams WAIT UNTIL I'M HERE!!!

Another issue, If your a "core" intel guy ready to upgrade mobo/ cpu /ram the FX platform is now worth it for $200 cpu's or less, But I would still wait for FX PD chips to hit the egg shelf.

Want to see the difference between DDR3-1333 and DDR-1866?



Which is what I've been saying all along. The memory--as with any non-Llano setup--is not and issue. I really do hope PD is an improvment, but saying the FX-8150 is already on par for even Sandy Bridge CPU's is spreading misinformation. Sure, you won't have a massive performance upgrade available on 1155, but you won't need one for 3+ years anyway. Intel CPU's allow you to retain a single higher cost CPU for substantially longer than AMD CPU's have in recent years. Buying into 1155 is hardly suicide since both 1155/2011 offer the best performance you can get right now, and will probably still be pretty damn close to the top after PD arrives.

I expect a 5% gain with PD Cores, but it will probably seem like a lot more since Stock Clocks will be noticably higher. The biggest issue I see is the Power Consumption on BD Chips, getting that under control for PD would be a huge step in the right direction. But better manufacturing and RCM seem to be a good fix for that.

this is all speculation, we dont know what to expect from PD cores

eidairaman1this is all speculation, we dont know what to expect from PD cores

yes true, i dont expect more than 30% improvement per core, but thats being too optimistic as it will get it closer to sb in single thread and totaly ahead of it in multi-thread, then people can truly argue whether they wanna go multi-thread biased of single thread, because right now bulldozer multithread is on par with i7 or a bit lower, and single thread is way behind, hopefully in the next gen PD will dominate multithread, but probably will be a bit behind in single thread, but that makes things interesting and more competitive
ivy bridge being just a minor upgrade is the best chance for amd to close some of the gap

xenocideWant to see the difference between DDR3-1333 and DDR-1866?

images.hardwarecanucks.com/image/mac/reviews/AMD/Bulldozer/AMD_FX-8150-23.jpg

Which is what I've been saying all along. The memory--as with any non-Llano setup--is not and issue. I really do hope PD is an improvment, but saying the FX-8150 is already on par for even Sandy Bridge CPU's is spreading misinformation. Sure, you won't have a massive performance upgrade available on 1155, but you won't need one for 3+ years anyway. Intel CPU's allow you to retain a single higher cost CPU for substantially longer than AMD CPU's have in recent years. Buying into 1155 is hardly suicide since both 1155/2011 offer the best performance you can get right now, and will probably still be pretty damn close to the top after PD arrives.

I expect a 5% gain with PD Cores, but it will probably seem like a lot more since Stock Clocks will be noticably higher. The biggest issue I see is the Power Consumption on BD Chips, getting that under control for PD would be a huge step in the right direction. But better manufacturing and RCM seem to be a good fix for that.

Your digging a deeper hole man. 1333 with a 7-7-7 timings is real aggressive while 1866 9-11-9 is standard/loose. 1866 8-9-8 against 1333 8-8-8 would have been more fair. Show me that test and talk about which benchmarks are more RAM dependent and less. I know when I change memory speed and timings, I change benchmark scores for 3dmark11 since it uses dedicated ram for video. It seems your saying everyone should use 1333 or why not 1066 for good cpu performance come on!

I'm also optimistic for Piledrivers overclocking potential. AM3+ overclock mobo's are set with high voltage capability's. With RCM voltage settings on PD should run cooler compared to bulldozer. Since transistor charges are used more than once instead of being dissipated as heat, It stands to reason that PD will be capable of higher voltage settings especially on air . I'm no electrical engineer, so feedback on this idea by someone who knows what they are talking about would be nice.

Pile driver will be quite an improvement for amd however I suspect a 30% over expectation by amd loyalist and 85% of time whipping by intel:roll:

If amd had release these chips a couple of years earlier.......
With intel tick tock things are hard pressed to change. Amd should be quite thank ful that some one over at intel just dont take graphics seriously......yet. The times are changing and the blue man group have something up their sleave.....just need tweaking.

From Vishera, I'm expecting 15-20% per thread increase from both IPC and clock increases. Then I'm expecting the new instruction sets to add to that for the apps that can utilize them. I'm also expecting a TDP reduction. Price wise FX-8350 about $279. I believe this will out perform 1155.... but use more power then Ivy Bridge. Are they behind? Considering FX is arguably the biggest architectural over haul since vacuum tubes, I don't think so.

Should AMD always have just as powerful of a high end chip as Intel? This seems to be the issue.

Believe it or not I have more Intel chips then AMD.... I am a price/perf guy and like the option to upgrade and interchange. I like big price reductions as well. So since lga775 died, AMD all the way.

sergionographyyes true, i dont expect more than 30% improvement per core, but thats being too optimistic as it will get it closer to sb in single thread and totaly ahead of it in multi-thread, then people can truly argue whether they wanna go multi-thread biased of single thread, because right now bulldozer multithread is on par with i7 or a bit lower, and single thread is way behind, hopefully in the next gen PD will dominate multithread, but probably will be a bit behind in single thread, but that makes things interesting and more competitive
ivy bridge being just a minor upgrade is the best chance for amd to close some of the gap

30% per core , seriously?
That would mean 240% faster then the current FX BD , not going to happen...

I expect 30% total (3.75% per core) & that will only be in a very few benchs but i think in daily use we will most likely see a 10-20% at best

IMO i don't believe AMD PD will do much more than what BD is doing right now they are becoming real morons as far as CPU is concerned

Sorry! for the little rant , lost all faith in AMD CPU performance
To damn bad that Intel is still more expensive than AMD (Mobo + CPU)
I am "stuck" with them but then again i don't really need more "power" but it would be nice to have it...:ohwell: