"Vishera" End Of The Line for AMD FX CPUs: Roadmap

[techtard]

It would be nice if they released something that is more efficient on AM3+, my 8320 is a power hog. I have to plug the hot air ducting from my furnace or my computer room becomes stupid hot, even in the winter.

 

[ensabrenoir]

....all this intel this and amd that. If amd did most of the improvements most of their users want...... the chips would probually cost as much as an intel chip. Hence why they won't. There is a shift from computers to "devices" happening which suits amd better. They are following the right path though.

 

[cyneater]

The last round AMD won was the Athlon 64 great chip was a Pentium 4 killer. Ever since then they have dropped the ball over and over. Although the 1060-T wasn't too bad. The current line of FX chips suck though.

Although saying this if AMD used there ARM license and made an ARM CPU and motherboard with 4 or more sata ports many people would start using them. Hint hint ... low power high performance and loads of sata ports would make a great nas. Since mine and many other peoples server / nas doesn't run windows.

 

[techtard]

They didn't drop the ball so much as get locked out of the market while they had a better product by Intel via illegal business practices.
The billion dollar fine they were hit with was a slap on the wrist for basically crippling their competition.

ARM might be interesting, but I suspect that it will take forever for developers to switch over from x86. It could be a good thing if it happens though, a clean break for the next gen of computing.

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

The last round AMD won was the Athlon 64 great chip was a Pentium 4 killer. Ever since then they have dropped the ball over and over. Although the 1060-T wasn't too bad. The current line of FX chips suck though.

Although saying this if AMD used there ARM license and made an ARM CPU and motherboard with 4 or more sata ports many people would start using them. Hint hint ... low power high performance and loads of sata ports would make a great nas. Since mine and many other peoples server / nas doesn't run windows.

what kind of an idiot calls the FX line a failure due to not beating intels best HEDT cpu then pulls arm chips out the back pocket as an example of win an intel fanboi, Amd's cpu's are not defective just less powerfull in some applications, most inc me do 2-200 things all at the same time on a pc and i can tell you FX's manage fine yeh i may not get quite the Fps as some but ive just been out on the beer with the money i saved so happy days.

 

[HumanSmoke]

They didn't drop the ball so much as get locked out of the market while they had a better product by Intel via illegal business practices.
The billion dollar fine they were hit with was a slap on the wrist for basically crippling their competition.

Too simplistic to say that it was all Intel's fault. AMD are as much an architect of their present position as Intel.
Even before Intel bribed Dell et al AMD had issues with fabrication capacity. Under the cross lease agreement, AMD could outsource up to ~20% of their production to other foundries. Even with markets denied AMD, they could not satisfy the demands of the customers that they had. It wasn't until the situation became acute that AMD approached Chartered Semi, and even then did not utilize the full 20% outsource allocation available ( ~7% IIRC). Why the reluctance in using non-AMD foundries at the expense of market share ? Answer: W. Jerry "real men have fabs" Sanders. It is no coincidence that AMD only explored the use of third-party foundries to add capacity when Sanders stepped down.
That is likely the primary reason that Intel settled with AMD for a relatively paltry $1bn (remember that Nvidia's settlement was $1.25bn, and the EU antitrust fine was $1.45bn by way of comparison). The secondary reason was just as likely AMD's desperate need to pay for debt servicing (see below) which is why the low-ball $1bn was accepted.

So, Intel is cause #1, Sanders hubris is cause #2, And of course, AMD own lack of strategic planning is cause #3....What other company overpays by 100% for an acquisition ( $5.4bn total paid for ATI - $1.7bn in cash from AMD, $2.5bn borrowed from lending institutions, $1.2bn in AMD shares) only to write down $1.77bn less than a year later, and another $880 million six months after that? Note that the money borrowed for the ATI buyout (and has served as a millstone around AMD's neck ever since) is actually less than the write down associated with the AMD's initial overvaluation of ATI. Also note that AMD was the only company interested in buying ATI in 2006.

ARM might be interesting, but I suspect that it will take forever for developers to switch over from x86. It could be a good thing if it happens though, a clean break for the next gen of computing.

That is why AMD acquired SeaMicro. Investing in a company that has an existing knowledge base of ARM and it's implementation is easier and less resource hungry than bootstrapping AMD into the ARM environment

 

[Melvis]

It would be nice if they released something that is more efficient on AM3+, my 8320 is a power hog. I have to plug the hot air ducting from my furnace or my computer room becomes stupid hot, even in the winter.

But your 8320 is running at 5GHz, isnt that sorta expected? :S

A stock speed 8320 runs quite cool, like 50c cool.

@HumanSmoke Also note that AMD approached Nvidia first to buy them out before they turned to ATi, which would of cost at the time another 6billlion dollars.

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

I have my fx going between an un fluctuating 5ghz down to 1.5 eco style with most eco features on yet I can obv force perm max clock so its possible to use 5ghz cheaply many dont but some do.

 

[HumanSmoke]

@HumanSmoke Also note that AMD approached Nvidia first to buy them out before they turned to ATi, which would of cost at the time another 6billlion dollars.

One has little, if anything to do with the other. Nvidia was (and is) worth substantially more than ATI. If the AMD/Nvidia deal had gone ahead, Jen Hsun Huang would have been CEO of the new company. Do you think a combined AMD/Nvidia under JHH would have made a company weaker than what we got from AMD/ATI under Hector Ruiz ?

A failed buyout/merger attempt does not mitigate the fact that AMD overpaid for ATI, and that overpayment resulted in the company pouring income into debt servicing rather than R&D and maintaining its foundry business. Nor does it mitigate that fact that AMD were slow to realize that the market for x86 was increasing substantially faster than their own estimates.
AMD have always been a reactive company that has allowed the current state of the market to dictate their product lines, rather than think strategically and actually shape or create the market. Hardly surprising when you consider that AMD was formed by salesmen as opposed to Intel and Nvidia being formed by engineers.

 

[Melvis]

One has little, if anything to do with the other. Nvidia was (and is) worth substantially more than ATI. If the AMD/Nvidia deal had gone ahead, Jen Hsun Huang would have been CEO of the new company. Do you think a combined AMD/Nvidia under JHH would have made a company weaker than what we got from AMD/ATI under Hector Ruiz ?

A failed buyout/merger attempt does not mitigate the fact that AMD overpaid for ATI, and that overpayment resulted in the company pouring income into debt servicing rather than R&D and maintaining its foundry business. Nor does it mitigate that fact that AMD were slow to realize that the market for x86 was increasing substantially faster than their own estimates.
AMD have always been a reactive company that has allowed the current state of the market to dictate their product lines, rather than think strategically and actually shape or create the market. Hardly surprising when you consider that AMD was formed by salesmen as opposed to Intel and Nvidia being formed by engineers.

Thats right as I said 6billion more, ATi was 5.x Billion to buy compared to nvidia of 11billion. And the reason it didnt go through was because of the CEO of Nvidia wanted to be the CEO of both company's which was a pipe dream for him, as if the CEO of AMD would step aside? AMD at the time was worth between 25-30billion. I wish it would of gone through back then, as I liked Nivida alot more then ATi but the CEO was a idiot. To answer your question, YES I think it would of made the company weaker if JHH took over a CEO, what the hell does he know about CPU's? Nvidia has been going down hill ever since and ATi/AMD have been growing ever since, nvidias lose I say. I don't think they over paid for ATI, as they where less then half the cost of Nvidia, and that saving most likely has helped alot in recent yrs with there struggles as it is, just imagine if they spent that extra 6billion? :S Well I think thats untrue as AMD has said for yrs now that the future is fusion and lets face it, they have been right, there APU line up has been selling like hot cakes. Anyway im hungry, lunch!!

 

[HumanSmoke]

Thats right as I said 6billion more, ATi was 5.x Billion to buy compared to nvidia of 11billion. And the reason it didnt go through was because of the CEO of Nvidia wanted to be the CEO of both company's which was a pipe dream for him, as if the CEO of AMD would step aside? AMD at the time was worth between 25-30billion.

Well firstly, as I pointed out, this has nothing to do with AMD's current state of affairs, since y'know, the deal never happened.
Secondly, if you're gonna pull facts out of your arse:
On July 21st 2006 the market evaluated NVIDA as worth $6.2 billion, on the day AMD announced they were going to buy ATI NVIDIA market cap increased to $6.9 billion.....and AMD sat at around $10.5 billion
Given that AMD (over)paid twice ATI's effective value, I could see how you'd also think that Hector would also overpay for Nvidia

Nvidia has been going down hill ever since and ATi/AMD have been growing ever since, nvidias lose I say.

Why am I not surprised. AMD's market cap is a quarter of its FY 2006 value, and they've lost market share in x86 and GPU (discrete and overall) since the ATI acquisition. Are you Hector Ruin's biographer by any chance?

 

[Melvis]

Well firstly, as I pointed out, this has nothing to do with AMD's current state of affairs, since y'know, the deal never happened.
Secondly, if you're gonna pull facts out of your arse:
On July 21st 2006 the market evaluated NVIDA as worth $6.2 billion, on the day AMD announced they were going to buy ATI NVIDIA market cap increased to $6.9 billion.....and AMD sat at around $10.5 billion
Given that AMD (over)paid twice ATI's effective value, I could see how you'd also think that Hector would also overpay for Nvidia

Why am I not surprised. AMD's market cap is a quarter of its FY 2006 value, and they've lost market share in x86 and GPU (discrete and overall) since the ATI acquisition. Are you Hector Ruin's biographer by any chance?

Firstly I didnt say it was, but if it did happen then yes it would of been very much so.
Secondly im not pulling anything out my arse, I remember very clearly reading all about it back then on this very forum about the whole AMD might buy Nvidia but didn't and bought ATi bla bla bla only part i did get wrong was what AMD was worth, I got it confused with Market share at the time.

Here are three articals that also show what nvidia was worth at the time AMD was thinking about buying. If these are wrong then dont blame the reader blame the site for posting false information.

http://www.tomsguide.com/us/amd-nvidia-merger,review-1061-4.html

http://www.forbes.com/sites/brianca...nvidia-about-acquisition-before-grabbing-ati/

http://www.neowin.net/news/rumor-amd-tried-to-buy-nvidia-before-buying-ati

Not from what I read on this forum once again seeing that AMD is now closer to 40-50% market share, yes it has lost in its CPU division but no way have they lost in the GPU division, if any body thinks that there totally mad. And how can they lose market share in GPU since 2006? that's impossible as they never owned any GPU division till after they bought ATI? :S Nope Im not, what gives you that stupid idea?

 

[HammerON]

Alright folks. Stay on the topic at hand: "Vishera" End Of The Line for AMD FX CPUs: Roadmap

 

[qubit]

This outcome is hardly surprising. Since the brutal disappointment a couple of years ago that was Bulldozer the writing was on the wall.

Now we all play Intel's monopoly tune on CPU upgrades. What fucking joy.

 

[eidairaman1]

i still refuse to get Intel personally,

 

[TRWOV]

Would it be possible to get AMD to specify if they're going to re-relase Vishera at 28nm? Kabini (Jaguar) and Kaveri (Steamroller) are going 28nm, would be interesting if Vishera was going to as well. An FX8550 5Ghz @ 125w would be a good swan song for AM3+ IMO.

 

[xkche]

If you know spanish:

http://www.chw.net/2013/12/amd-alista-futuros-cpus-fx-series-con-controlador-de-memoria-ddr4/

 

[itsakjt]

If you know spanish:

http://www.chw.net/2013/12/amd-alista-futuros-cpus-fx-series-con-controlador-de-memoria-ddr4/

We have this

 

[MxPhenom 216]

Good news I think. Intel is kind of in a league of its own with their enthusiast chips that cost an arm an a leg(Sandy Bridge E and Ivy Bridge E). What I want to see since Intel's APUs are pretty much Sandy/Ivy/Haswell, Id like too really tight competition between AMD and Intel APUs. AMD has some work on the CPU part of things, where as Intel has a lot of work to do on the GPU side. If that could get evened out, we could, as the consumer, get some pretty good chips at competitive prices. Things could get interesting in the future.

 

[newtekie1]

This outcome is hardly surprising. Since the brutal disappointment a couple of years ago that was Bulldozer the writing was on the wall.

Now we all play Intel's monopoly tune on CPU upgrades. What fucking joy.

The only thing that really made Bulldozer a disappointment was AMD's hype. I believe if they hadn't hyped the crap out of Bulldozer and touted it as the next CPU God that was going to wipe the floor with Intel, and instead just said the truth and said "It's going to close enough to Intel on single threaded apps, and matching or bettering Intel at multi-threaded apps, and cheaper than Intel, with more features" it wouldn't have been such a huge disappointment.

i still refuse to get Intel personally,

While I don't refuse to buy Intel, AMD has been receiving my money mostly lately. The only Intel I've bought was my recent laptop purchase and that simply came down to the Intel laptop being on sale for less than the AMD. The week before I bought when I was looking the AMD was cheaper so I would have bought AMD.

However, in terms of value for the money in the class of machines I've been building, AMD has been the winner. Especially since I don't have to spend $250+ just to get a processor I can overclock. I like that I can still buy a cheap processor and get a few more horsepower out of it by overclocking with and AMD.

Would it be possible to get AMD to specify if they're going to re-relase Vishera at 28nm? Kabini (Jaguar) and Kaveri (Steamroller) are going 28nm, would be interesting if Vishera was going to as well. An FX8550 5Ghz @ 125w would be a good swan song for AM3+ IMO.

In the official slide released in the other thread on this topic, they confirmed that the AM3+ socket processors would stay on 32nm through at least 2014. I was kind of hoping for a 28/22nm refresh too, but it doesn't look hopeful.

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

What,, so ,so AMD are still going to make FX chips AND possibly still evolve them short term on AM3+ until DDR4 is in the wild and PCIEX3 really matters before we see AM4, never

 

[qubit]

The only thing that really made Bulldozer a disappointment was AMD's hype. I believe if they hadn't hyped the crap out of Bulldozer and touted it as the next CPU God that was going to wipe the floor with Intel, and instead just said the truth and said "It's going to close enough to Intel on single threaded apps, and matching or bettering Intel at multi-threaded apps, and cheaper than Intel, with more features" it wouldn't have been such a huge disappointment.

Agreed. Even the name implies something that's gonna smash the competition wide open. Give that name to something that clearly can't and then hype it up, that makes AMD a laughing stock worthy of the stinging user criticism and string of disappointed reviews that they got. I hope someone high up in marketing was fired for pulling this stunt.

AMD eventually went the value route with their CPUs and do give you a lot of CPU for your money, but it looks like this isn't profitable enough for them as they need to invest the money back into R&D and these things aren't cheap to make.

I think there's no getting around the fact that each generation of products from one manufacturer should generally always leapfrog the performance of the competition in order to stay in business by keeping your market fresh and vibrant and your customers dissatisfied with their current systems and hence want to upgrade. Clearly that's not been happening.

With all this so-called "good enough" performance, it becomes a race to the bottom on prices that can't be sustained forever. The fact we're also approaching the end of "moore's law" really isn't helping, either.

If clock speeds had continued to scale past the Pentium 4's clock speeds of 3GHz+ back in 2003, to say around 20GHz+ now, along with architectural improvements, I reckon our PCs would be capable of many more fancy and importantly, useful, functions that we're not seeing today.

 

[HumanSmoke]

If clock speeds had continued to scale past the Pentium 4's clock speeds of 3GHz+ back in 2003, to say around 20GHz+ now, along with architectural improvements, I reckon our PCs would be capable of many more fancy and importantly, useful, functions that we're not seeing today.

Wouldn't happen. Couldn't happen.
Raw clockspeed = branch misprediction increases, increased heat and power.
More numerous shorter pipelines forsaking absolute speed for an actual increase in throughput in a lower power envelope has proven to be the way to go. If NetBurst taught anyone anything, it's that straight line speed from a deep pipeline has limited growth potential.
There doesn't seem to be a paradigm shift in material usage in the offing in the short term that made the "Gigahertz race" a spectator sport. Moving from aluminium to copper interconnects was a huge leap. Moving to more esoteric materials (Indium/Gallium compounds) doesn't look like it will net the same revolutionary jump.

 

[qubit]

Wouldn't happen. Couldn't happen.
Raw clockspeed = branch misprediction increases, increased heat and power.
More numerous shorter pipelines forsaking absolute speed for an actual increase in throughput in a lower power envelope has proven to be the way to go. If NetBurst taught anyone anything, it's that straight line speed from a deep pipeline has limited growth potential.
There doesn't seem to be a paradigm shift in material usage in the offing in the short term that made the "Gigahertz race" a spectator sport. Moving from aluminium to copper interconnects was a huge leap. Moving to more esoteric materials (Indium/Gallium compounds) doesn't look like it will net the same revolutionary jump.

I think you've missed my point. I know they can't make CPUs run at 20GHz. I'm talking about what could have been. Mix product competition, architectural efficiency improvements along with a blistering clock speed and performance would have been waay better than we see now.

This would have quite likely enabled new functions and features that we can't even think of now, because we're effectively in a "box" that we can't see out of. Raw speed has enabled many things we take for granted today, so revving it right up would have likely given us many more things like this than we have now. Better artificial intelligence would have probably been one of them.

 

[TRWOV]

What,, so ,so AMD are still going to make FX chips AND possibly still evolve them short term on AM3+ until DDR4 is in the wild and PCIEX3 really matters before we see AM4, never

As newtekie mentioned, based on the official AMD slide it's unlikely that Vishera is going to be improved. I was hoping for a 28nm Vishera but it seems that it will remain 32nm until AM3+ is retired. Of course, plans change and we could be talking about the 28nm FX-8550 in a few months *crosses fingers*