Information

Did you know you could become an X-bit labs fan on Facebook or follow us on Twitter?



Discussion

Discussion on Article:
AMD Sets the FX "Vishera" Launch Date.

Started by: Martian | Date 09/22/12 06:52:37 AM
Comments: 91 | Last Comment:  10/18/12 02:20:57 PM

Expand all threads | Collapse all threads

[1-12]

1. 
"The new AMD FX chips are compatible with AM3+ infrastructure as well as Scorpius platform featuring AMD 990FX core-logic sets."

Really? Is it surprising? Hypertransport? Capishe?
0 2 [Posted by: Martian  | Date: 09/22/12 06:52:37 AM]
Reply
2. 
Exactly as advertised. Should be a nice performance bump for those looking for more speed and a better value.
11 9 [Posted by: beenthere  | Date: 09/22/12 08:21:31 AM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
who does not look for speed and value for the $ spent? the problem with the current FX APU is the lack of performance for BIG features: 8 cores at 3.6ghz yet it perform below an i5 at much lower speed. just hope this new 8 cores live up to it´s name and features of 8 cores and 4ghz. i´l get one if it perform as expected.
4 4 [Posted by: idonotknow  | Date: 09/22/12 09:49:09 AM]
Reply
 
How is AMD processors better value? Intel is hitting all over the place. Intel's Pentiums is good for price conscious and they compete better than Athlon II processors. The Bulldozer has a hard time competing against Intel's i3 processors. Also about power consumption, Intel has AMD beat again. Since the Phenom days, AMD has not been a better value. During the time of K7 and K8 days, AMD was the better value and the reason why I bought AMD processors back in those days. These days, sad to say Intel is the better value even when Piledriver comes out.
2 4 [Posted by: tecknurd  | Date: 09/23/12 12:00:10 AM]
Reply
 
True, for the most part except that Intel Atom absolutely sucks, and AMD does a much better job, and when AMD releases jaguar (4 c0re) well it will be the best processor they made ever since Intel took reign.
0 2 [Posted by: ericore  | Date: 09/24/12 05:03:23 PM]
Reply
 
AMD was a better value, for example, with the Phenom II X2 550BE chip. I am still using it, and for $115 back in 2009, I was able to unlock it to a quad core Phenom II at 3.7GHz. My Gigabyte 790x motherboard was $135, and it took first my 2008 Phenom 9850BE chip, and then this Phenom II quad core in 2009 without having to upgrade either the ram or the motherboard. If I had bought the Intel equivalent, I would have been stuck with a socket 775 board and Q6600 chip with no upgrade path. By going AMD, I saved about $150 on the Phenom II and another $150 or so on a new motherboard. That's $300 over the same time frame as an Intel path, and my crossfire-capable board/3.7GHz quad core Phenom II is still perfectly fast enough to drive my AMD Radeon 7950 card in every game I play at eyefinity resolutions. I will either upgrade to a Vishera chip (if the benchmarks warrant it), or wait until Steamroller (if the benchmarks warrant it). Screw Intel and nVidia - two companies that have proven they would just as soon rob you as look at you.
0 0 [Posted by: anubis44  | Date: 10/10/12 08:42:10 AM]
Reply
3. 
Lest you forget that Intel's Ivy Bridge went from 32nm to 22nm node with tri-gate and got a whopping ~5% increase over Sandy Bridge. This means AMD's progress with Vishera is 200%-300% better than Intel's IB and AMD did this without a node change.

Steamroller will bring another ~15% over Piledriver so AMD is moving forward just fine, thank you. Hating don't change that.

Before release the technically clueless tried to claim that Trinity laptop APUs only gained performance from "increased clockspeed" and they were proven to be complete idiots talking thru their arses once again. How's that crow tasting these days?

Folks, hating don't change reality nor the performance increase that Vishera brings to the table. You need to get in touch with reality.
14 10 [Posted by: beenthere  | Date: 09/22/12 10:21:45 AM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
show the post
6 14 [Posted by: AvonX  | Date: 09/22/12 11:34:19 AM]
Reply
 
Your lack of knowledge is mind boggling. Bulldozer does not suck. It's pure out of the box innovation. The problem with the 1st Gen Bulldozer is the lack of proper funded R&D. AMD's past management is to blame for killing and cheating out on the Bulldozer Design.

Piledriver is the 1st step with a 10% to 15% Clock 4 Clock performance improvement, with Steamroller gaining another there 45% Boost in performance.
3 4 [Posted by: nt300  | Date: 09/23/12 08:38:12 PM]
Reply
 
show the post
6 12 [Posted by: AvonX  | Date: 09/22/12 02:33:00 PM]
Reply
 
AvonX, Trinity has the "incomplete" version of the Piledriver cores, let's call Piledriver v1, Vishera has the full-featured Piledriver cores (v2) with a well sized 8MB L3 cache and without the memory bandwidth hungry IGP.
Keep in mind not to talk about things you know nothing about...
10 6 [Posted by: Martian  | Date: 09/22/12 03:10:26 PM]
Reply
 
show the post
6 14 [Posted by: AvonX  | Date: 09/22/12 03:16:22 PM]
Reply
 
Are you refering to the prerelease, usually fake tests that are more often inaccurate than accurate?
8 7 [Posted by: Martian  | Date: 09/22/12 03:22:12 PM]
Reply
 
show the post
7 10 [Posted by: AvonX  | Date: 09/22/12 03:31:23 PM]
Reply
 
All the people who release information before NDA deserve what they get, they knew exactly what they risk.
You can wait till offical tests before you start trolling as well, won't hurt.
6 8 [Posted by: Martian  | Date: 09/22/12 03:48:23 PM]
Reply
 
That 'guy who released early information about bulldozer' was found to be lying. His 'tests' are mere speculations, he opens up a spreadsheet application, types some numbers in, and makes some charts, then releases it onto the Internet. It is fanboys like you, and people who like your comments, are the kind of people who 'jump in and support this stuff'. None of this person's bulldozer charts were even remotely similar to actual test results when it released. Similarly, you can prove without a doubt that he did the same this time.
2 1 [Posted by: mmstick  | Date: 09/28/12 04:39:02 PM]
Reply
 
show the post
0 3 [Posted by: AvonX  | Date: 10/04/12 04:43:28 PM]
Reply
 
Well beenthere, sure Intel's Ivy Bridge only increases the performance by 5% compared to Sandy Bridge, but Intel did improve graphics.

Your numbers are wrong that Vishera will be 200% to 300% better than Ivy Bridge. If this is true, they will be in the game again competing against Intel. Again this is not true. What might be true is Vishera or Piledriver will be close to performance of Sandy Bridge in the i5 series and low-end i7 series. Right now the Bulldozer has a problem competing against Intel's i3 series.

When Steamroller comes out, a 10% to 15% more performance compared to previous versions will not be enough when Intel's Haswell comes out. Haswell will be 20% better in performance and better in graphics compared to previous microarchitectures. Say what you want to say, but AMD's arrogance is eating AMD to pieces and AMD can not catch up to Intel. AMD should really shut down their 80x86 business and concentrate on graphics. I have AMD products and it is sad that AMD is taking the arrogance route.
2 3 [Posted by: tecknurd  | Date: 09/22/12 09:49:51 PM]
Reply
 
AMD's arrogance? You have got to be kidding me. Poor management and over zealous marketing team, yes.

Firstly he DID NOT say 200-300% faster than intel's. He said the improvement from BD>PD is 2 to 3 times greater than the improvement yielded from Sandy Bridge to Ivy Bridge. A process change (10nm reduction), and architecture optimizations and that's all they yield? Which if anyone here had half a brain would realize that Intel are intentionally holding back performance to milk money out of their "loyal customers". Don't even get me started on there anti-trust suits. Including bribing software developers and releasing SDK's that unoptimized software for AMD's....

My main point is if most of you looking at this are gamers... you are truly ignorant. When playing at 1080p+ resolutions the performance is vastly dependent on graphics. Eg. BF3 Ultra 1080p All the bulldozers and i7's (including the X series which are $600+) score within .5fps of one another. With the same video card. So you are simply wasting your money. Hardware is far more advanced than what developers can throw at it now-a-days compared to 8 years ago.

In regards to video editing etc yes I could understand a need for an i7... having said that the software that can support 8+ threads run very well on the 8 core bulldozers under heavy multitasking even though it's IPC's can't compare to Intel.

When it comes out of it BANG FOR BUCK AMD's are better value, for the everyday users and gamers. Don't forget all you Intel Cult followers... if there is no viable competition to Intel? Your i3's will be costing you $400. and i7's? You will need a loan... They will also have no incentive to put money into R&D so you will be stuck with snail speed improvements for mega bucks.
1 0 [Posted by: slytactix  | Date: 10/04/12 11:58:10 AM]
Reply
 
10%-15% IPC over Bulldozer more or less puts them back where they were when Phenom II was around, just sayin.
0 0 [Posted by: jihadjoe  | Date: 09/24/12 03:34:33 AM]
Reply
 
show the post
1 7 [Posted by: AvonX  | Date: 09/24/12 08:40:05 AM]
Reply
 
trinity already showed us that.
4 2 [Posted by: Countess  | Date: 09/26/12 04:05:11 PM]
Reply
 
LOL keep dreaming. Its not even close to that in IPC. Whatever IPC gains vishera has, most of it comes from the clock boost. And its only 2-3 % IPC gains from bulldozer.
0 2 [Posted by: AvonX  | Date: 10/04/12 04:48:15 PM]
Reply
4. 
10-15% improvement each year on a straight line? Why don't they just hang up a sign that says they have no clue what they're doing and are just making crap up?

I'll wait for Haswell. Sandy Bridge is probably still better than Piledriver so it's a no-brainer which company to buy so long as you aren't poor.
5 5 [Posted by: AnonymousGuy  | Date: 09/22/12 11:38:38 PM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
show the post
1 9 [Posted by: AvonX  | Date: 09/23/12 04:04:01 AM]
Reply
 
Really? you have no clue do you? what did ivy gain from sandy? yup- 3%/5% average LOL

AMD`s 10%/15% in ONE Gen is far superior than what Intel gained in TWO generations.
2 3 [Posted by: keysplayer  | Date: 09/23/12 09:25:59 AM]
Reply
 
show the post
1 7 [Posted by: AvonX  | Date: 09/23/12 12:19:32 PM]
Reply
5. 
Yes, Intel will always beat AMD at speed. But today in the fall of 2012 you have to ask yourself "what software am I needing a computer for?". AMD is more than ok for 90%+ of the software most people use on a daily basis. Since AMD can't compete on the speed front they have only one choice, keep prices low. A few years ago being able to buy a quad-core cpu running 3.5 to 4.2 GHz For under $100 was just a dream, today it is the norm. So Piledriver forces AMD to lower Bulldozer prices even more to sell because of slower speed. Great for all but Romney well offs who can always afford the best. Of course, there are tons of apps that need floating point math speed where only an Intel cpu will do, but for many an AMD cpu is more than good enough to get the job done.
2 3 [Posted by: gurumarkb  | Date: 09/23/12 05:04:04 AM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
show the post
3 7 [Posted by: AvonX  | Date: 09/23/12 05:29:02 AM]
Reply
 
And you sicken me with your AMD hate (Fanboy), which is clearly visible in your BS posts. Nvidia are well known to have shills, propaganda tools for a free crappy GPU every gen (I don’t think you even qualify for that lol). you talk about no PCIE 3.0 support, and yet fail to mention silly NVidia don’t have it either on their kepler 6 series and why it never stopped you from buying one (Fanboy). Think we already established pcie-3 & quad channel make no difference in gaming. What I find most funny is you mentioning Tegra in the Performance bracket LOL. Now that QUALCOMM and others have enough chips, Tegra`s lucky little streak is over (Tegra 4 will be same + 28nm-LTE).

Nvidia doesn’t have a free shot at the HPC market anymore; Intel and AMD are also gunning for NVidia market share. Once Nvidia loses this market, all bets are off for Nvidia and its old dinosaur Tegra LOL
3 4 [Posted by: keysplayer  | Date: 09/23/12 09:18:44 AM]
Reply
 
show the post
2 6 [Posted by: AvonX  | Date: 09/23/12 10:40:20 AM]
Reply
6. 
fx-8350 will be faster in x264 encoding than i7-3770k
3 5 [Posted by: minda76  | Date: 09/23/12 08:21:02 AM]
Reply
7. 
Seriously, I feel sad for what AMD has become. Their new chips are terrible for one reason .. power consumption. AMD 125w chips vs. intel 77w IB chips and they are not even comparable, performance wise.
5 3 [Posted by: texasti  | Date: 09/23/12 03:06:54 PM]
Reply
8. 
This reminds me of mindless conversations between car lovers
"Is a Chev better than a Ford?"
Both are loosing out in world sales and the same thing is happening in the chip industry. While the fanbois rant and rave the main game has moved on.
This is my observation I am an old wrinkley as my 40 year old son reminds me and retired and out of the game for 10 years. X86 only account for +/- 44% of cpu sales and are falling. Intel is trying to play catch up with graphic and AMD has left the high end hobbiest market, both have their good and bad points.
3 3 [Posted by: tedstoy  | Date: 09/25/12 04:51:38 AM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
show the post
1 6 [Posted by: AvonX  | Date: 09/25/12 11:09:52 AM]
Reply
 
What happened to GM
2 2 [Posted by: tedstoy  | Date: 09/25/12 03:49:53 PM]
Reply
 
show the post
1 5 [Posted by: AvonX  | Date: 09/25/12 08:36:48 PM]
Reply
9. 
Xbitlabs needs to start banning people for spewing excessive hatred and delusions in comments... I'm talking about you, AvonX.
5 2 [Posted by: mmstick  | Date: 09/28/12 04:42:19 PM]
Reply
10. 
@ AvonX. Ignorance. Firstly, AMD are obviously not NOTHING as of 2 months ago they retain a 19.7% market share... That is far from "non-existent".

AMD's arrogance? No. Poor management and over zealous marketing team, yes.

@tecknurd Firstly he DID NOT say 200-300% faster than Intel's. He said the improvement from BD>PD is 2 to 3 times greater than the improvement yielded from Sandy Bridge to Ivy Bridge. A process change (10nm reduction), and architecture optimizations and that's all they yield? Everyone should realize that Intel are intentionally holding back performance to milk money out of their "loyal customers". Don't even get me started on there anti-trust issue. Including bribing software developers and releasing SDK's that unoptimized software for AMD's....

My main point is if most of you looking at this are gamers... you are truly ignorant. When playing at 1080p+ resolutions the performance is vastly dependent on graphics. Eg. BF3 Ultra 1080p All the bulldozers and i7's (including the X series which are $600+) score within .5fps of one another. With the same video card. So you are simply wasting your money. Hardware is far more advanced than what developers can throw at it now-a-days compared to 8 years ago.

In regards to video editing etc yes I could understand a need for an i7... having said that the software that can support 8+ threads run very well on the 8 core bulldozers under heavy multitasking even though it's IPC's can't compare to Intel.

When it comes out of it BANG FOR BUCK AMD's are better value, for the everyday users and gamers. Don't forget all you Intel Cult followers... if there is no viable competition to Intel? Your i3's will be costing you $400. and i7's? You will need a loan... They will also have no incentive to put money into R&D so you will be stuck with snail speed improvements for mega bucks.

Also AvonX I will not respond to any of your replies, as it will be your typical garbage. My post is pure fact and logic. I have an IQ of 148 and have been clinically diagnosed with a personality disorder where I see little emotion and pure unbiased logic... I wish I was joking. I also have worked in the industry for 8 years.
1 1 [Posted by: slytactix  | Date: 10/04/12 12:22:14 PM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
show the post
0 3 [Posted by: AvonX  | Date: 10/04/12 05:06:37 PM]
Reply
11. 
Most of you must realize that if AMD were to go out of business it would be catastrophic for Intel as they would hold the monopoly on the x86 and x64 CPU architecture.

That is the LAST thin Intel wants because if that occurred then the Government would intervene and break up Intel into something none of us would recognize.

Also in the interim the X86/64 would be prohibitively expensive as it was during the 8086/8087 days $500 for an 8086 CPU and another $400 for the 8087 coprocessor.

It is Intel's interest to keep AMD alive but always behind.
0 1 [Posted by: fdunn  | Date: 10/10/12 06:04:03 PM]
Reply
12. 
OCT 23 is just 7 days from now so there isn´t much time to w8 for the benchmark result of FX-8350 with 8 cores and 4 ghmz. those are bigger number than INTEL CPU but we will see how the thing will perform x86 function. the fx-8150 already get a bad name for it´s 8 cores 3.6 ghz.it is now time AMD show some capable APU and not just GPU.
0 0 [Posted by: idonotknow  | Date: 10/16/12 10:56:24 AM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
You are going to be sorely mistaken.
0 1 [Posted by: AvonX  | Date: 10/18/12 02:20:57 PM]
Reply

[1-12]

Back to the Article

Add your Comment


Our Sponsors

Crucial.com Western Digital G.Skill