Unluckily it will be a bit CPU is in Texas and I am deployed :/Quote:
Originally Posted by felix_w
Augustish for me.
Printable View
Unluckily it will be a bit CPU is in Texas and I am deployed :/Quote:
Originally Posted by felix_w
Augustish for me.
:(
Well, i hope someone else has it also then...
You can't be serious. AMD gets the benefit of the doubt more than any other company out there on these forums and most in general. A product like Sandybridge E, Ivy bridge E/ivy-bridge or even Haswell were given a lukewarm to negative reception by forum goers. So it shouldn't come to a surprise when people hammer on a up clocked vishera with 4 to 5 times the price and its the same silicon as their cheap processors.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg83
If AMD was judged by the same standards as Intel processors, nothing positive could be said from a technological stand point.
A maxed clocked Nehalem is still faster than a max clocked Vishera. And nehalem was released in 2008.
People just expect a lot from technology nowadays and they are hard to impress.
When AMD was king, everyone liked them. Intel fanboys included. The problem as, particular as a pure CPU part, they haven't released anything exciting for the enthusiast in years(this forum) from a performance standpoint. It also didn't help that JF-AMD lied to people about bulldozer and got people to commit to the platform by buying the motherboard instead of going Intel by hyping up bulldozer.
See it really depends on what you are doing as well. Take your max clocked nahalem and AMD chip toss both of them into a heavily multithreaded enviroment and the nahalem struggles, just like gen 2 i7's. Games are slowly moving that way and with the new consoles being AMD based I would not be surprised if multithreading got substantially better along with a bit more biased.Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
and when the world decides it needs more cores...AMD decides they only need 4 :( (possibly no +4 core steamrollers)Quote:
Originally Posted by cdawall
That was dismissed forever ago and was FUD to begin with.Quote:
Originally Posted by Evantaur
With max clocks, nehalem still takes it more often than not. In a review like anandtech's for example of Vishera vs a 2.66ghz bloomfield is surprising competitive with fx 8350. However, considering the overclocking room, 75% increase for Nehalem(2.66ghz to 4.66ghz) vs 25% increase for Vishera(4ghz to 5ghz), on average the Nehalem with come out on top.Quote:
Originally Posted by cdawall
With Vishera having few huge advantages over Nehalem for example it is 5 years newer, has 60 percent more transistors going for it and is built on a much smaller process, has way more built in instructions added, of course its going to get some victories.
Vishera should be really smoking Nehalem after 5 years. A max clocked sandy bridge vs a max clocked Vishera is nearly a blowout.
In case anyone is curious of the new steppings FA 1317PGS for my 9370.
Unluckily there are still quite a few benchmarks that completely and utterly screw over AMD regardless of performance being better or worse.Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
Show us more pics of that 9370!!!
some power usage test....
http://forums.vr-zone.com/showthread.php?p=13313020
"Looks like the full test rig is already able to run at ~170W on full load off the wall so the official figure of TDP 220W just for the CPU seems simply extreme overkill attention seeking behaviour from AMD! "
Lol this made me laugh
My 990FX system with the FX-9590 installed pulls a ridiculous amount of power. The 220W isn't grandstanding. Rather, it is a maximum value that advises system integrator of what to expect in a "worst case" scenario.
pics or it didnt happen
http://www.kitguru.net/components/cp...990fxa-ud5/26/
Yup, its a power guzzler. First review I think.
http://img824.imageshack.us/img824/407/buhg.png
Basically had the same conclusion I originally had.
"Sure, we could say that fanatical AMD overclockers will love the FX9590, but unless you have money to burn we can think of better ways to spend that ?700. When up against the Core i7 4770k or 3930k/3960x it is seriously outgunned. This is probably why AMD aren’t sampling the part directly to the press, aiming it at system builders. Again, we can’t imagine a system builder will want to cool this monster long term, while offering a warranty. There is only a 1 year warranty on the FX9590 too, so that is worth bearing in mind."
155 watts more than an overclocked 4770k.
These processors are for the hardcore AMD fanbois or the ignorant.
Like all other extreme edition limited edition hardware than :D
its for hardcore AMD enthusiast, thats right....Interesting could be FX-9370, the price is more better.
I think the concept of this Crazy CPU is that AMD want to Put Pressure on MB Industrial to make Mobo that can handle up to 200W.so we will see new APU with much more Power consume ( for example : HD7850 + 1GB GDDR5 + Steamroller Core = Up to 200W ).a New Socket FM4 will be released and expandable up to 200 watts or maybe more.Is it going to happen?
Problem with this idea is too much Gpu power kills the sale of a discrete GPU which tends to be more profitable looking at the average MSRP of AMDs APU processors. In addition, unless we get ddr5 as the ram for these things, A 78xx class gpu in an APU form factor is going to be held back by memory bandwidth. It won't perform close to a 78xx chip with the memory bandwidth provided by ddr3 and even ddr4.Quote:
Originally Posted by behrouz
This processor is simply a bizarre marketing decision and a Ghetto way to bring up AMD's brand somehow.
This processor isn't going to put pressure on any MB manufacture. I am 100 percent certain that this is going to be a very very low volume part. And most Mb manufacturers already have high wattage lines that can handle this processor. And these boards are enthusiast overclocking boards that manufactures like to sell for more money.
I can see the 9370 selling to people who have existing AMD platforms like an fx 8150. But any person who owns an AMD platform is better off getting an fx8320 or 8350. These processors simply don't make much sense when they are based on the same stepping as previous chips and all the chips are unlocked from the beginning.
This might even be moot if these things overclock only as well as fx 8350s.
I would rather see TheStilt review this processor
so only the ignorant people or the fan boys will buy this cpu? speaking of ignorant....Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
ghetto? wtf dude... speaking of moot. speculation time is over the cpu is released. now go to sleep and take your theories to bed with you.Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
How so? There is no solid evidence one way or the other but more evidence that we wont actually see an AM3+ Steamroller with 8 cores. I really hope we do, I would love to be able to just drop one into my current motherboard and be done.Quote:
Originally Posted by cdawall
As for evidence to the contrary:
Steamroller was bumped off the desktop roadmap for AM3+ (at least till the end of 2013), and is no longer on the roadmap for server sockets either in more than 4 core configurations (through 2014)
AMD has been concentrating more and more on APU's instead of high performance CPU only, and you cant fit a full 8 core with L3 cache and a GPU on the AM3+ socket.
AM3+ is old and AMD never said once that we would see a Steamroller core on this socket. The only thing I have seen confirmed is Steamroller on an FM socket, which was originally supposed to be consolidated between FM2 and AM3+ into one socket for all desktop use.
AMD just "maxed out" their model names for the FX line with a Vishera core release, and fullfilled their promise that we would see 1 more CPU release for this socket.
Nothing new has been announced at all, and all leaked rumors have only mentioned an APU or just talked about the module itself. Nothing on 8-core non-GPU variants.
The only evidence we have right now that we will see an 8-core Steamroller variant on AM3+ is: all other cores have been released so it only follows logic that we will see next models release too.
And that is some pretty flimsy evidence. Still, I do really hope AMD brings us an 8 core Steamroller processor for AM3+.
Performance of L3 Cache's BL/Piledriver is still lower than SB or Iv.Pf of Writing L3 Cache is Very poor.
AMD 9590 = 36569 MB/s
Intel 3770 = 131146 MB/s
http://www.techpowerup.com/img/13-07...enchmarks5.jpg
http://www.vmodtech.com/main/wp-cont...-mem-bench.png
Quote:
Originally Posted by behrouz
I thought the caches were designed completely different though and one was exclusive and the other inclusive? Or is that no longer true on this new architecture?
So someone buys a FX-9590 and all of a sudden they're arrogant but someone who buys a 3960X isn't?Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
Interested in seeing how you come to that conclusion.
-PB
Any overclock results?
More interested in the 9370