Monday, June 3rd 2013

AMD Centurion is FX-9000, Scrapes 5.00 GHz

Mid-April, we learned that AMD was working on its next "TWKR" chip for overclockers, based on the existing "Vishera" silicon. It turns out it is, and scrapes 5.00 GHz frequency at some unreal TDP levels for a client processor. SweClockers reports that AMD is working on at least two new socket AM3+ FX-series processors to make it competitive against Intel's 4th generation Core series. Among these are the FX-9000, and the FX-8770. The FX-9000 leads the pack with 4.80 GHz out of the box clock speed, and a TurboCore frequency of 5.00 GHz. Clock speeds of the FX-8770, on the other hand, haven't been disclosed. A catch here is the TDP of these chips. Two hundred and twenty Watts! The jump from 3.80 GHz to 4.80 nearly doubled TDP from 125W to 220W. Prices of the two remain under the wraps. AMD plans to unveil the two at E3, sometime between 11th and 13th June.
Source: SweClockers
Add your own comment

61 Comments on AMD Centurion is FX-9000, Scrapes 5.00 GHz

#28
JDG1980
jigar2speed
Funny how you don't complain when your Graphic cards eat 200+ Watts for breakfast but you cry out load if the same thing is happening at the CPU end.
Obviously it would be preferable if graphics cards used less power. And the trend has been towards more efficient GPUs: for example, the Radeon 7750 is nearly as powerful as the 5770 of two generations before, but where the 5770 displaced 108 watts, the 7750 reduced TDP to just 55W, low enough to easily be cooled with a passive heatsink. But the state of the art in graphics cards is that you need 200W+ for a top-tier card. That is true for both AMD and NVIDIA. Still, for most users, a 100-175W card will be more than sufficient at this time. Only a handful of hardcore gamers (or HPC enthusiasts) really need more than that.

The problem with the proposed "Centurion" is that it's a step in the wrong direction. Far worse TDP without even providing competitive performance. It's a regression to the NetBurst space-heater era. Sandy Bridge at 4 GHz would blow away Vishera at 5 GHz on single-threaded and lightly-threaded applications, while using far less power. If AMD actually provided something worthwhile in exchange for this TDP, it wouldn't be nearly as objectionable. If Centurion was a 32-core Steamroller-based monster that had IPC equivalent to Sandy Bridge and totally blew away everything else on most benchmarks, you could justify the TDP on the basis of that performance. If the proposed chip was an APU with GDDR5 support and graphics performance on par with a 7850, then it could easily be justified since the 7850 alone is 130W (and is considered a fairly efficient chip at that). But for a factory-overclocked Vishera? No way.
Posted on Reply
#29
Vinska
JDG1980
If Centurion was a 32-core Steamroller-based monster that had IPC equivalent to Sandy Bridge
I just came a little.
Posted on Reply
#30
de.das.dude
Pro Indian Modder
JDG1980
Obviously it would be preferable if graphics cards used less power. And the trend has been towards more efficient GPUs: for example, the Radeon 7750 is nearly as powerful as the 5770 of two generations before, but where the 5770 displaced 108 watts, the 7750 reduced TDP to just 55W, low enough to easily be cooled with a passive heatsink. But the state of the art in graphics cards is that you need 200W+ for a top-tier card. That is true for both AMD and NVIDIA. Still, for most users, a 100-175W card will be more than sufficient at this time. Only a handful of hardcore gamers (or HPC enthusiasts) really need more than that.

The problem with the proposed "Centurion" is that it's a step in the wrong direction. Far worse TDP without even providing competitive performance. It's a regression to the NetBurst space-heater era. Sandy Bridge at 4 GHz would blow away Vishera at 5 GHz on single-threaded and lightly-threaded applications, while using far less power. If AMD actually provided something worthwhile in exchange for this TDP, it wouldn't be nearly as objectionable. If Centurion was a 32-core Steamroller-based monster that had IPC equivalent to Sandy Bridge and totally blew away everything else on most benchmarks, you could justify the TDP on the basis of that performance. If the proposed chip was an APU with GDDR5 support and graphics performance on par with a 7850, then it could easily be justified since the 7850 alone is 130W (and is considered a fairly efficient chip at that). But for a factory-overclocked Vishera? No way.
you do realis\ze this isnt a mainstream chip? this will be made available in very limited quantities to limited people? people seem to have lost their common sense these days. :shadedshu
Posted on Reply
#31
Naito
Impressive? Yeah. Genius? Hardly...
Posted on Reply
#32
Norton
What would be impressive is if these chips were in the 65-95w range while clocked to the standard FX-8350 specs. :cool:

If that's the case, Then I have an AM3+ socket open for you :D
Posted on Reply
#33
Jorge
For those who have not heard... the new AMD Richland Desktop APUs are available as of 6-4-13 from many e-tailers. It's all good. :)

Computer Hardware, CPUs / Processors, Richland

BTW, you aren't going to get 8-core FX processors on 32nm that only draw 65w-95w with 4.0 GHz. clockspeed. AMD is good but they ain't God, ferchrissakes. ;)
Posted on Reply
#34
jihadjoe
cdawall
Only time will tell if the FX series really is a one trick pony (P4 was awesome at encoding ironically enough) or if those technologies are utilized in better and better revisions.
FX is pretty good at encoding too! It really is AMD's P4.
Posted on Reply
#35
YautjaLord
Vinska
"Who cares!? Just hurry up and release muh steamroller, dangit!" -Me
Yup, same line of thought. And yup - 220W TDP is insane. How much will they'll (AMD) charge for it? Grand?
Posted on Reply
#36
suraswami
DinaAngel
my 3930k draws 310 watts atm :rockout: -33 degrees celsius on load :p
valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=2728858

Edit: it might be using more tho, powerdraw is peaking on whole system 1,057 watts during full load
Yup you made the Grandma living next door happy :laugh:

Your PC blew the fuse on her house so she is happy not to pay her electricity bills :roll:
Posted on Reply
#37
DinaAngel
suraswami
Yup you made the Grandma living next door happy :laugh:

Your PC blew the fuse on her house so she is happy not to pay her electricity bills :roll:
XDDDDD you cracked me up soo badly!! Epic said! :roll:
Posted on Reply
#38
theoneandonlymrk
suraswami
Yup you made the Grandma living next door happy :laugh:

Your PC blew the fuse on her house so she is happy not to pay her electricity bills :roll:
And people say I don't make sense 《 same to Op
Posted on Reply
#39
shovenose
Wow, that is ridiculous. This CPU better be 2x fast as an FX-8350!
Posted on Reply
#40
cdawall
where the hell are my stars
shovenose
Wow, that is ridiculous. This CPU better be 2x fast as an FX-8350!
I imagine it will be roughly 20% faster with the 20% clock speed increase.
Posted on Reply
#41
Ravenas
The 8350s being sold now are getting 5.0GHz with a water cooler. I would have rather have seen size reduction.
Posted on Reply
#42
jigar2speed
JDG1980
But the state of the art in graphics cards is that you need 200W+ for a top-tier card. That is true for both AMD and NVIDIA. Still, for most users, a 100-175W card will be more than sufficient at this time. Only a handful of hardcore gamers (or HPC enthusiasts) really need more than that.
Can you please tell me if CENTURION is a mainstream processor or a ENTHUSIAST processor ? ;)
Posted on Reply
#43
suraswami
Ravenas
The 8350s being sold now are getting 5.0GHz with a water cooler. I would have rather have seen size reduction.
Sorry 9000 is on viagara!
Posted on Reply
#44
d1nky
suraswami
Sorry 9000 is on viagara!
and steroids.... and amphetamines!
Posted on Reply
#45
Prima.Vera
de.das.dude
one thing i dont understand is people s hared towards power. cooling is relatively cheap. electricity is cheap (?????).
Electricity is cheap?? LOL. You should go more often to Europe or Asia...:banghead:
Posted on Reply
#46
theoneandonlymrk
Ravenas
The 8350s being sold now are getting 5.0GHz with a water cooler. I would have rather have seen size reduction.
No , not all and in fact not many do 5 and not many do 5 at less than 220-300 watts ie none ive seen.
Posted on Reply
#47
de.das.dude
Pro Indian Modder
Prima.Vera
Electricity is cheap?? LOL. You should go more often to Europe or Asia...:banghead:
i dont know where the hell i am right now. but last i checked i was still in my room in india.
Posted on Reply
#48
d1nky
de.das.dude
i dont know where the hell i am right now. but last i checked i was still in my room in india.
LOL!

well here in the UK i pay about or up to £20 week for electric. one bed flat!
Posted on Reply
#49
tigger
I'm the only one
This should come with a duct, so you can keep your feet warm when it's cold.
Posted on Reply
#50
Vinska
Meanwhile, my electricity bill eats up 33% of my income. How's that for "cheap"?
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment