AMD FX "Vishera" reviews info (again, after mod mistake)

So you expect Broadwell to launch next year and displace Haswell completely? Brodwell will just be a die shrink with power optimizations and Haswell is not looking too impressive as of now(maybe that will change). So no, no dire straits just they(AMD) are cache constrained.

BTW FX4300 series are MORE than competitive with lowly i3s ;). Unlocked and performing good or better in modern games and modern (threaded) software is more than enough reasons for a choice over i3.

edit:
I would love to see SR based FX this year and what not,that's not debatable ;). I'm just trying to tell you that performance desktop segment is not nearly as important as it seems to us enthusiasts.

Quote:

---

If you like to overclock, Haswell is worth it (can't tell you why but read the Haswell Anandtech preview very carefully for buried treasure). On-die graphics is improving quite a bit as well. If you're into energy efficiency or even more graphics, Broadwell. I think the tech community will be very pleasantly surprised with Broadwell. But I'm biased, so we'll just going to have to prove it the hard way.

---

http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comment...el_ama/c7mp6n2

This Intel's guy said that the graphics part will be improved too with Broadwell.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alex-Ro

No they won't they are just lagging too much,by the time steamroller arrives it will face broadwell on a 14 nm node with obviously much lower power consumption.Also,i agree that fx do not count as much in sales,but they need to show that they are competitive,for example if amd would launch tommorow fx 8400 with similar performance to ivy bridge whole lineup would get a boost in sales,because A LOT of people will compare what's best from the 2 sides and make their choise based on that,no matter if they won;t buy the top of the line and just an i3/fx 4300 for example...

---

the question is if gf or something will be able to make fx "8400"? i dont mean girlfriend who bakes cakes.

to design is no problems, but manufacturing puts you back to reality :)

yah im seeing steamroller being pushed to 20nm/14nm whatever is next. its gonna be to late... at least for desktop (am4/am3+ socket)

though u have to believe amd is catching up to intel if by slow baby steps and eventually will catch them on the node side.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maxforces

No Nvidia sucks w cpu optimization in drivers.
7970 do not plays nicely with both, depending on the game and the place
Arma 2 isn't smooth on the FX8320@4.7ghz + 7970

---

Nvidia likes to use ICC and to optimize for Intel for some reason. I have found a few big Nvidia promoted titles (like Borderlands 2) that were compiled with ICC with a hex editor and that icc_patch program.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sdlvx

Nvidia likes to use ICC and to optimize for Intel for some reason. I have found a few big Nvidia promoted titles (like Borderlands 2) that were compiled with ICC with a hex editor and that icc_patch program.

---

I have been aware of this for some time myself, but have you noticed any performance improvements by patching these executables to remove the VendorID string?

Well , I don't know what's the price for Core i3 vs FX-4300 in US/Europe
but at least in my home town (Hong Kong)
FX-6300 sell just a tad more than Core i3-3220 and it offer much better multi-thread performance IMHO :D

AMD 4-Core FX-4300 3.8GHz/12M CPU [AM3+] FD4300WMHKBOX [Black Edition] HK$ 927
AMD 6-Core FX-6300 3.5GHz/14M CPU [AM3+] FD6300WMHKBOX [Black Edition] HK$ 1013
Intel Core i3-3220 Ivy Bridge (3.3GHz, 3M Cache, LGA 1155) CPU BOX HK$ 954

FX-6300 and 4300 in my hands...Now only have to time for benchmarking :)...

Looking forward to your findings with the 6300 Flanker.

Ive been putting off piledriver for some time b/c my 4100 has been ample but I'm getting the itch!

i hate posting stuff from him but hes seems to always have the goods

http://wccftech.com/amd-apu-performa...i-apus-leaked/

hopefully better stepping for FX chips

The result looks good for Kabiny chips (jaguar), but A10-5800k/6800K, I think, tehy or he used only 1333 or 1600 MHz DRAM. I have with stock and 1866 MHz higher score with A10-5800K (near the A10-6800K result from graph)

again Crysis 3, again FX-8350 is winner

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...EL-left-behind

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FlanK3r

again Crysis 3, again FX-8350 is winner

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...EL-left-behind

---

true but only when there are no enemies
http://i288.photobucket.com/albums/l...orces/f1-3.jpg
as well as PCGH, no action just walking, the same test location. We have winner
but if you have enemies and action
http://i288.photobucket.com/albums/l...orces/f2-3.jpg
http://i288.photobucket.com/albums/l...orces/f3-2.jpg
is no longer a winner performance falls with the action and opponents

and where is diff resolution? I know, 1024 is about CPU, but noone use 1024 resolution today. U can set example 1280x1024 or 1680x1050 with low details and it is still CPU based....
Second little issue is with GX cards and AMD CPUs. I dont know why, but there is some "bug" against AMD card at AMD CPU. AMD cards with AMD CPU scaling a bit better than with nVidia based cards. But this is only small note :)

You see that it worked out the same as the PCGH.
OK 1080P to convince you
This is the same location and test method from PCGH (gpu test nothing happens)
http://i288.photobucket.com/albums/l...rces/a1-14.jpg

enemies and action
http://i288.photobucket.com/albums/l...rces/a2-12.jpg
http://i288.photobucket.com/albums/l...orces/a3-9.jpg

Now you know why PCGH made 1280x1024

19x12,a massive 1-3fps advantage for intel parts. Shocking difference :)

Nvidia/Intel, = big hole in your wallet.
Amd/Ati just as good, not so big a hole in wallet. lol!!!

So, result is, for the ebst gaming Crysis 3 you need core i5 or better and AMD FX-8xxx (i think with FX-6xxx will be OK too). Core i3 is average, but Pentium G is not for comfortable gaming of Crysis 3.

6300 only after OC 4.5-4.7 stock :down:
http://i288.photobucket.com/albums/l..._evil_1920.png
http://i288.photobucket.com/albums/l...human_1920.png

http://i288.photobucket.com/albums/l...ungle_1920.png
http://i288.photobucket.com/albums/l..._evil_1920.png

http://i288.photobucket.com/albums/l...human_1920.png
http://i288.photobucket.com/albums/l...ungle_1920.png

The differences between top OCed intel and AMD CPUs are rather trivial. 1-3 fps is just miniscule to be felt.

depends on location
let's see
27.2 vs 23.5
min fps
26 vs 22
I can see differences why don't you. Let's say 90% of game is quite smoothly without differences.

TR needs to do a frametime study with crysis 3

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maxforces

depends on location
let's see
27.2 vs 23.5
min fps
26 vs 22
I can see differences why don't you. Let's say 90% of game is quite smoothly without differences.

---

27.2 is rather small framerate for first person shooter,it cannot be enjoyable.I'd rather lower some settings and give myself additional ~5-8 fps to cross the 30-35fps mark than torture myself playing at such a low fps level,no matter what CPU I have.