What world records ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ace123
The only WR where it stands true is CPU-z Frequency... because in SuperPi, PiFast, wPrime, 3D Marks, PC Marks, AquaMark 3, etc it has no chance at all.
Printable View
What world records ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ace123
The only WR where it stands true is CPU-z Frequency... because in SuperPi, PiFast, wPrime, 3D Marks, PC Marks, AquaMark 3, etc it has no chance at all.
So? If you are going for those world records it sounds like this CPU isn't for you. Back in the day I purchased several 2500+ Barton processors just to be the first overclocker to hit 500mhz fsb. That's what seperates the xtreme from the people who just post on a forum named that.... Ill probably buy one of these for the same reason I bought my 3770k, 4770k and 3 3930k
So it is true, AMD themselves confirmed a 5Ghz CPU. Impressive, though we all know that clock speeds don't necessary make a CPU faster. But will it go on par with Intel's high end offerings? Because that $800 price tag does sound nasty and won't be worth it if it fails to keep up with Intel's current i7 range.
You are forgetting a very, very, VERY important fact: If you can purchase several Processors with the sole purpose of binning them yourself to get the best one, the first thing that you have there is Xtremely Deep Pockets. Some of you seems to forget that on real world, money is a limiting factor, so even if I wanted to, I could't be "xtreme" because my budget simply doesn't allows me to do something as ridiculous as purchase several times the same component to bin it just for the sole purpose of breaking some stupid score of non-tangible real world performance in the order of... 2%? 5% at much?. For some of us price performance rules supreme, as most of the "xtreme" stuff is pretty much designed to burn cash with little real world application. Its a mere hobby, one where I'm not going to do an act of brand loyalty like purchasing an inferior product that doesn't deserve my money.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ace123
9ghz barrier broken yet?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ace123
That's why they named it 9590 ;)
And crushing 4770k at stock clocks ;) lol
Not if the thing isn't available at retail. :(Quote:
Originally Posted by Ace123
So nobody got a cpuz screenshot at E3?
I think it is you who is forgetting one important fact, you are complaining about a product which has been pre binned for the enthusiast market. This product wasn't released for the main stream market, and if you are the main stream market, that means you. its TDP and its performance against a Main Stream product is a moot point. Its a publicity stunt threw and threw. There isnt a person on this forum who thinks this will take on intels latest and greatest. Its a Hot rod, thats it. It drinks gas, spits fire, and makes noise. Thats the point. Its an exhibition show during halftime at the lakers game. Its specifically for the guys who want to break some stupid non-tangible world record in the order of 2-5%.Quote:
Originally Posted by zir_blazer
You said it yourself, this processor is for the hobby and you wont find it in the mainstream computer.
This Processor is not even for the enthusiast market, is for the OEM market.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ace123
In the same way that you said that if you don't bin several Processors yourself you're not xtreme, I don't think that a guy that purchases an alienware system is an enthusiast. I don't care if such a product exist so Joe Average can have a bigger ePenis, but it worries me the direction that the enthusiast market took during the last few years if a product like this, a factory overclocked Processor with Pentium D Smithfield-class power consumption, gets any sort of acceptation.Quote:
The new AMD FX CPUs will be available from system integrators globally beginning this summer. Two models will be available:
FX-9590: Eight ?Piledriver? cores, 5 GHz Max Turbo
FX-9370: Eight ?Piledriver? cores, 4.7 GHz Max Turbo
Besides, enthusiast != xtreme, they are two very different things, and I hate when people mix them together. Enthusiast are people that simply likes to tinker with their Hardware, can adapt it to their needs and are always checking for more data and news. They're NOT someone that lets nowaday manufacturers to milk his wallet by purchasing products with monikers like "OVERCLOCK", "GAMER", XTREME", with fancy LEDs and hefty price tags, just because the manufacturer says that they are mean for enthusiasts - these actually fits the consumist "xtreme" trend. Even more, enthusiasts doesn't even have to be gamers or overclockers at all. You also have guys like Movieman that are used to run Dual Processors. When was the last time that you saw that in the typical "enthusiast" machine?
At the time where you were binning Athlons XP, the enthusiast market was pretty limited, and most parts were aftermarket heatsinks, some exotic cooling, high end Motherboards for overclocking like DFI ones, and maybe RAM, when it mattered a bit more. Funny thing is that most parts that enthusiasts purchased, weren't even branded as enthusiast-class. Remember Mobile Athlons XP? Remember Socket 939 Opterons 1xx? Remember Celerons 300A? Heck, most times what people purchased was the slowest part of a given die or with some feature (Pentium 4 2.4 GHz Northwood C, Athlons XP Bartons 2500+), because they overclocked nearly as good as the high end ones but were much cheaper. Enthusiasts choosed parts from ANY market segment and overclocked them to get high end performance with fairly less budget, they didn't purchased brain damaged parts just because they were "mean for them".
During the last years seems that manufacturers have figured out that the enthusiast market is a cash cow because you can always release something aimed there with the three silly monikers I said earlier, and can sell it, no matter if the product is ridiculous from the technical or usefulness standpoint (Reason why RAM kits like these exist, I suppose). What before was a limitation that the enthusiast should learn to overcome by himself to get the most out of his Hardware, is now something that works out-of-the-box, because, after all, now you're forced to pay more for it - and quite a bit more for it. I can't pick a cheap Intel Processor and overclock it to get more performance out of a low end part like in the old days, now I need to jump to a much more expensive K series Processor.
And that is not the worst of it. The worst is that now the enthusiast segment besides hefty prices is now victim of market segmentization, losing useful features that other lines gets, like Intel does by removing VT-d and TSX from the K series Processors. And they still sell them. Looks like the nowadays "enthusiast" priotize overclocking above everything else, like price, features, power consumption and fan noise. So basically, what you call "enthusiast market", is where spoiled rich child looks for new benching toys, because that is all what these things are, as old school enthusiasts purchased parts from Desktop budget or mainstream, Mobile or Server, for as long as it did what they needed or wanted.
My next build is going to be a Server, that's for sure.
What a lousy product launch, "look at our new CPU! Oh by the way you're not allowed to buy one."
Since when do OEMs even care about AMD desktop chips?
"The new AMD FX-9590 and FX-9370 processors will begin showing up in prebuilt systems from the summer, before going on sale as chip-only to DIY PC builders. No word on pricing at this stage."
"press release says these new CPUs will ?be available initially in PCs through system integrators"
"AMD took the wraps off its latest enthusiast CPU, the FX-9590. Clocked at 5 GHz, the FX-9590 is the new flagship CPU for AMD, and it will hit retailers at some point next month."
I mean realistically if we want to see how this will perform, someone overclock their 8350 to 5ghz and benchmark it...
http://benchmarkreviews.com/index.ph...&limitstart=12,
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...at-hard-on-air
http://semiaccurate.com/2012/11/20/o...-amds-fx-8350/
http://www.eteknix.com/amd-showcase-...5ghz-near-idf/
"Moving to the only gaming benchmark that we ran, we’ve include a stock Core i7-3770K for comparison. This is admittedly a rather cluttered comparison, but the take way here is that at 5Ghz the FX-8350 is neck and neck with the i7-3770k in-terms of gaming performance."
Shrug
Although, Theres some talk inside that this is some weird commemorative of being the first to hit 1ghz...
Obviously, FX-8350@5GHz is going to perform better than stock FX-9590Quote:
Originally Posted by Ace123
5GHz is just the max turbo clock for FX-9590
So people with $800 to spend can get this chip, or a 3770, a high end motherboard, a good case, and a good power supply and have the same performance in the end?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ace123
And the cry went out, "Moar GHz!".
I don't think these will be $800 for long unless the supply is so limited they just don't care if they sell one. OTOH, if they were $320 like 3770s, they'd be an OK deal for the people who don't care about power draw.
5Ghz vs 4.2Ghz in ST/poorly threaded workloads is ~20% jump. So here we will have straight performance scaling from 8350.
In well threaded workloads we will have 4.7Ghz vs 4Ghz - this is ~17.5% jump so here we will have somewhat lower than 20% performance jump Vs ST case.
Any clock step in between 4.7Ghz and 5Ghz for new FX9590 will be similar perf. jump vs 4.1Ghz ("in-between" clock for 8350). There we will have 17-19% performance increase.
So it's 17-20% better performance than stock 8350. Just about enough to get on the level of stock 4770K (a chip that usually runs close to 4Ghz@ "stock", even in threaded workloads ;) ). Since 4770K OCs on average to ~4.3-4.4Ghz on good air/WC it might get somewhat ahead of FX9590, depending on the application. When i7 is OCed, the power draw difference will roughly be ~100-120W vs "stock" FX9590. Still the FX might have another 5% or so in the tank so performance might even out with power draw being considerably higher on FX. Good thing is that enthusiasts don't care much about power draw ;).
Don't be shocked if we learn that these are not just binned 8350 cores but piledriver 2.0 cores like Richland....v
I'm pretty sure they are not
Not unless the difference is really massive, like in this case.Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
See TheTechReport: AMD reveals base clock, power rating for 5GHz CPU
I am sure both 3770K and 4770K hover around 100W overclocked with iGPU shut off.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheTechReport
there is maybe answer on your question...Its not 100% stress, but stress under Cinebench test
http://pctuning.tyden.cz/ilustrace3/...ling_sandy.png
around 1.4V is +90W at CPU, with higher voltage after is crazy...
These are for full system power consumption numbers...
Here's info from Bit-tech (full credit goes to them):
http://i301.photobucket.com/albums/n...psa302d443.png
You can remove ~10% to stop relying on PSU efficiency and then extra ~70W to remove the influence of other components.
With my math, their FX-8350 is consuming 230W overclocked. Ivy consumes 110W overclocked.
Look at AMD FX and then at 3770K. See the difference? Now that's crazy.
And it's not just power from the wall, but also heat that will cook you in the summer. Such massive difference is not good at all.
And two more notes on this... 1.4V is nuts on IVB, it is not recommended for 24/7 operation.Quote:
Originally Posted by FlanK3r
Also, without delidding, due to such high temperatures, you should understand that power consumption is going to be higher. Cool it down and it will consume considerably less.
http://tpucdn.com/reviews/Zotac/GeFo...owervstemp.gif
(Remember this? Credit goes to TPU)
If it was delidded, temps would go down from 100C to 70C and so would power consumption.
Bit-tech's graph looks accurate to me. But it will obviously vary from sample to sample, as one might need 1.25V, and another might need 1.5V...
AMD is really far behind when it comes to manufacturing process. Still 32nm? Intel is on the second iteration of 22nm, and they are also using more complicated 3D transistor approach. Piledriver would look a lot better on 22nm.
If you pick a Ivy Bridge and overclock it to near that Vishera Frequencies, you're consuming around half the power AND have much more performance. Add in that these poor dies should have nearly no overclocking headroom at all, like any other factory overclocked part. Suddently, such a part doesn't makes sense. Its a totally uncompetitive part, and a mere marketing stunt.Quote:
Originally Posted by zalbard
I have electricity nearly for free and I would still not even try to run a 220W TDP beast like that one. Why? Because its a ridiculous amount of stress that can make your other components (Mainly Motherboard) to have a premature death, and because the heat has to go somewhere. With air cooling, the heat generated will go directly to your room, let alone the noise a Fan for it will make. I still recall histories about how much warmer a room where a Prescott was felt, that even thinking about what this bad boy will do makes me chill - or worse, sweat.
See, you're doing it wrong!Quote:
Originally Posted by zir_blazer
you need to leave the computer in place, instead spin the room around it. That's how you effectively cool a computer, With lots of Sandias (and maybe Melones too) - all spananiards from this forum cool their systems this way anyways.
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...=sandia+cooler
So there are other types of cooling that don't dissipate the heat into your room?Quote:
Originally Posted by zir_blazer
Yep. AMD should adapt it a external ventilation, like kitchen boilers uses, preferabily of the forced types that uses a big Fan. An xtreme Processor doesn't deserve anything less than exotic cooling. Or even better, they could include a water cooling kit with it that connects to your water pipes so you can provide warm water to the rest of your house without the need of the boiler.Quote:
Originally Posted by LordEC911
so does anybody have solid proof that this chip exists?
I think its funny everyone is blowing the TDP out of poportion. I run my 3930k every day at 5.1ghz at 1.525V. I get that the cpu just doesnt perform as fast as the intel, but lets be honest about what the complaint is. My Cpu isnt "cooking" my room.
Complain about the performance by all means, but quit making it seem like the cpu is going to create a small star in your room. These are also TDP envelopes at wide open throttle with all the cores loaded. Realistically, how much power is the cpu going to pull while you are surfing your email and playing BF3. I dont know about your guys, but I dont prime95 all day every day on my gaming rig
Its the TDP, price, availability and likely after it comes out its performance thats getting people to questions AMD judgement. AMD is the underdog, has worse performance and worse branding in the marketplace. Releasing such a low availability party at an 800 dollar price point is simply an arrogant move on their part.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ace123
AMD branding is significantly worse than Intels so they have to play the value angle.
E.g fx 8350 trades blows with 3570k from Intel, but is priced below it. If similar pricing were to follow, AMD should price the 9590 at the very most similar to the 4770k which it likely trades blows with because of AMD market position, performance and if anything pay less for it because of the power consumption and branding.
AMD needs a 4770k fighter more than anything else right now. If this chip is priced at 800 dollars and made available to only builders right now, it is simply a :banana::banana::banana::banana:y move on AMD part. They are not in a position to price their product as such as very little people are going to pay a premium on an AMD processor right now. This chip for the most part is priced for Fan boys only as most overclocking enthusiasts probably realize when both CPU's are overclocked, the 4770k likely wins while being drastically cheaper.
There is the 1 in 1, 000, 000 that wants to put this under LN2 and get high clocks but this market doesn't matter.
AMD already should of learned its lesson when it priced its 7970 above the gtx 580 last generation. It sold poorly and allowed Nvidia to capitalize easily. But atleast in that case the pricing could be justified as it was the highest performing chip at the time and there isn't as huge a branding discrepancy. The Fx 9590 likely is binned silicon of fx 8350. Charging 600 dollars more over a fx 8350 is too much.
zalbard: Im talking about hard OC, Im not as 90% users, push to the limits. After is Ivy very hungry with high voltages. Of course we can have two situation:
1) 1.3V 4600 MHz Ivy
2)1.45V 4750 MHz Ivy (+150 MHz, + around next 50W)
The example of 1 is more efective, ideal for 90% users
the example of 2 is for enthusiast, who doesnt care much for long product life (1, max 2 years will be OK for him) and for power consumption
So...FX-9xxx is OC edition of Vishera at stock. In limited production for hard enthusiast. And from my point of view is not bad, Il be happy for theoretical 500W CPU with 10% higher performance than 3970x i7@ 4.5 GHz. Because this could be wow efffect for me. Power consumption in this case is the last one. Btw. 500W CPU is really unreal for cooling and most PWMs :-D
1.45V is the road to degradation on IVB. Very, very few people use that 24/7. And you don't need nearly as much voltage for 4.8GHz.Quote:
Originally Posted by FlanK3r
I am sure if you feed really excessive voltage to Vishera the power requirements will explode just as fast. They are no different in this aspect.
Pre-overclocked CPUs are hardly targets of enthusiasts. They are likely to be targeting prebuilts the likes of Alienware.Quote:
Originally Posted by FlanK3r
I can't imagine anyone buying one of these at $800..
It's a binned $200 chip with a $100 cooler that provides the performance of $300 chips currently on the market. Where's the extra $500 of value?
At $350 it would be competitive, and still profitable to AMD.
Listening to the pcper podcast... they mention that this new FX chip will have turbo core 3.0 like the new richland parts.
Dont you see the conflict here?Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
I hate the 9xxx naming but other than that amd is doing just right moves with this product to improve their brand. If some people dont get the fine little nuances in this bit different product launch, they propably dont get it even if someone explained them why (or they simply dont want to understand).
You do that with a truly new product that is truly different than your old line and has the performance(better than the competition) to back it up.Quote:
Originally Posted by ilkkahy
A 4.7ghz- 5.0 ghz piledriver product thats killed in reviews because of its pricing isn't going to help AMD branding. A new steamroller processor that beats intel 4770k by atleast 40 percent is what it would take to justify a 2.3x price increase.
Pricing this chip as such if anything makes Intels product stack look better than it is.
E.g Compared to ivy bridge, the 4770k isn't that good compared to 3770k.
However now lets take 4770k and compare it to this fx - 9590 which is 800 dollars. The 4770k offers similar performance at stock, better overclocking potentially, half the power consumption and less than half the price. The value of the 4770k looks supreme now compared to the competition. If these fx 9590 chips get to reviewers, all them will be laughing at the pricing of fx9590. Any one willing to buy this chip at 800 dollars is simply a ridiculous AMD fanboy, as it is a silly product that loses on most accounts compared to the competition while being a whole heck of a lot more expensive. There is simply no rational explanation to buying it. In the end this isn't going to help AMD branding, its going to help Intels as the fx 9590 will not be taken seriously and the 4770k looks like a monstrous value compared to the competition.
Ultimately, if AMD is going to launch a 800 dollar flagship processor, it better have the performance to back it up while being a new chip altogether.
E.g Hyundai didn't take the elantra and put a turbo in it to increase the brand appeal. It released the genesis line which was often superior to the competition at a similar or lower price point.
If Hyundai just rebadged one of their regular models with a bigger turbo and priced it at 2.3x its competitors, no one would take that model seriously and people would be laughing behind their backs.
Having chips with similar performance, at a similar price point would already bolster the AMD brand if it had such products. It would take aways sales from Intel and it would gather more market-share which is key to improving branding. AMD getting stupid with its pricing with inferior products would lead to a bankrupt as AMD products wouldn't move stock. Hence when core 2 duo came out, AMD slashed the prices of their chips to stay a float. If AMD was prideful and never changed prices, AMD would certainly not be around anymore.
The problem with what you are saying is to use a new name and a much higher price to establish yourself as a premium brand, you HAVE to deliver the goods on some aspect of the product people are willing to pay extra for.Quote:
Originally Posted by ilkkahy
Performance: No, there are other cpus that cost $300, as good for gaming. (and probably better if you take multi GPU into account)
Power/heat/noise: No, any way you cut it, the super high TDP of this product is less desirable.
Luxury packaging: Tough to do on a CPU. Probably comes with closed loop, but we've all bought those for $50-$100..
So there really isn't any way for AMD to do what you want them to do with this product.
On top of this, there is time for high pricing and right now isn't that time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rollo
Look at the 7xxx launch at the beginning of last year. AMD increased pricing of their whole line to perhaps remove some of the value associate with the brand(in retrospect AMD really should have only increased the price if the performance delta was greater than 15-25% at launch compared to the gtx 580) . They paid the price as hardly any cards were sold and Nvidia's cards which had the branding value to begin with looked like tremendous value cards when their cards came out. Potentially fence sitters that may have brought a 7xxx but didn't because of the high pricing jumped on Nvidia. AMD lost a whole lot of market share and potentially revenue dollars during this time. It wasn't until AMD brought the value angle(price drop + free games up the wazoo) that it stopped the bleeding.
The problem with AMD increasing the pricing during this time was most people knew Nvidia cards were coming out soon and were likely to bring more performance percentage wise over the last generation. Hence people waited until Nvidias cards came out, rather than take the gamble with buying a 7xxx series early.
This is OEM only part for now. Nobody cares about pricing since it won't sell in retail channel. The only thing that matters is whole system price. People who want a high performing AMD based system now have this option without messing with OCing themselves. If the pre-built systems are priced "ok" this could actually be a good marketing move for AMD.
It was as example, because the voltage can not be the main problem what ussually killing chip in 24/7 use, but if chip is too hot. After is the problem degradation too. I kill only one chip from example 15-20 pieces of CPU. And it was mistake...1.9V, box cooler :) (i forgot at CMOS reset :-) )Quote:
Originally Posted by zalbard
Here is another news source talking about turbo core 3.0, like I said don't be surprised if this is some piledriver 2.0
http://m.hexus.net/tech/news/cpu/566...d-fx-9590-cpu/
http://blog.gsmarena.com/amd-fx-9590...o-frequencies/
http://www.afterdawn.com/news/articl...re_fx-9590_cpu
its only binned old Vishera chips, not Piledriver 2.0 like in Richland
No comment :)
http://translate.google.com/translat...lar%2F&act=url
Anyone actually thinking of paying $920 for one of these 220W TDP Piledrivers should look hard at the difference the minimum frame rate of a Piledriver 8350 at 4.8GHz and a 95W TDP, $200 intel 2500K.Quote:
Originally Posted by cx-ray
I have to recant my prediction this part would compete, even at 5GHz the gaming performance is too low.
Rollo, please stop the rant!
First make clear what market segment the cpu is made for. Obviously it is not for ordinary Joe with normal budget as you like to make comparisons in your last 100 posts.
That cpu wont make any difference in the big picture. Mostly show off and those who buy Alienware, dont give FYVK for price difference and would like to pick another brand than Intel.
Everything doesnt has to be done in logical, pragmatic way.
Even if my Cpu and GPU is slower than yours, I still dont give FVCK!! I dont suffer of self affirmation having the best, latest.
The CPU doesn't makes a difference in the big picture?Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomasis
These are gonna be sold only to OEM initially with companies like Alienware. And people who buy alienware systems are mostly gamers.
Considering the person is likely going to get a multi GPU systems, getting this chip is going to cause a massive difference in what you get out of a multigpu system.
http://vr-zone.com/articles/amd-fx-8...e/17494.html/2
This chip even at 4.8ghz is going to get hammered like bull dozer, even at 4.7-5.0 ghz.
This chip shows overwhelming ignorance on AMD's part. And hypocrisy from AMD fans and Nvidia and Intel criticizers alike.
Nvidia and Intel have often been bagged on because there chips are too expensive. However at the very least, they were market leaders and each time they did it, they bought a chip that was different than their regular product line silicon wise.
Titan particularly was harshed out on its 1000 dollar pricing(which pretty much everyone, even rollo criticized the pricing), but atleast it brought a 30+% lead over the competition and this lead held up or grew when the cards(including its competition) were overclocked. It also contained a new chip which was more expensive than anything else to make, finally brought uncapped dual precision, double the memory configuration and had absolutely no competition.
Yet everyone hammered on it.
Now lets look at this chip. Likely ties a $340 4770k, shares the same silicon as a 150 dollar processor and when its competition all shows up at max clocks this thing will almost lost every single benchmarks, plus it gets destroyed in multigpu performance.
Don't you think max performance at max overclocks and multi GPU performance are among the most important aspect when it comes to an enthusiast system. When it loses out on both of those and doesn't bring any value because of its bad pricing, its simply a bad product.
If your going to charge this much bring the performance to match it up.
Otherwise your simply making a product for the very ignorant. Basically for the customer that doesn't do any research before hand and buy looking purely at clock speed.
One more consequence of such moves from AMD is it allows Intel to price their cards higher. Depending on if this makes it to retail, Intel finally has a valid excuse to raise the price of their extreme edition processors. That being, the only competition they had before was themselves and they had to price everything basicaly against there own prices, the extreme editions were poor value. Now, they have these 9590s that are 920 dollars. Now its easy for them to raise the price because the extreme editions look like good values next to that processor.
The same thing happened to nvidia and the gtx 6xx and gtx 7xx series.
PCGH.de tested 8350 @ the specs of the new top FX. Measured 75W more at full load vs stock 8350 . Not bad at all- they used rather high 1.45V for stable 4.8-5Ghz operation. Performance increase is rather dramatic vs 8350. We have one benchmark vs intel parts where it's among top performers (10% faster than 4770K @ stock; 4770K can OC ~10-15% so even OCed with increased power draw it can roughly only match new FX in this benchmark). Other (gaming) numbers are Vs stock 8350 where it's 16-20% faster- as expected.
note for gaming tests:
Quote:
Please note that we map due to the completely different test system in games not benchmarks. PCGH usually tested with a titanium GTX @ 900 MHz, with the unscheduled Centurion simulation is an HD 7970 @ 1,2 GHz. The values were not comparable 1:1, which is why we do without it. However, the x264 benchmark can be found brand new values, the large residual in the PCGH 07/2013 in Haswell-scale testing.
(FX 8350 @ ~4,1 GHz ~1,35 Volt): ~245 Watt
(FX 8350 @ ~4,8 GHz ~1,45 Volt): ~320 Watt
(FX 8350 @ ~5,0 GHz ~1,51 Volt): ~360 Watt
:shocked:
First, my apologies. I had meant to put this link in the post:Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomasis
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/201...k-cpu-review/6
It's pretty widely known AMD CPUs can't feed multi GPU configs, but I meant to post that to go along with my assertion the $200 2500K had much higher minimums.
I don't care if my hardware is "better" than any one else's, or if AMD wins or loses beyond I hope they win because competition benefits me as a consumer.
I've even suggested on this forum I think AMD needs to release this part, because it's what they have to sell currently and they need something to generate buzz in the face of yet another successful intel launch.
HOWEVER; at $920 this chip is basically an attempt to steal from those who don't know any better. There isn't $920 of performance here. There isn't $520 of performance here. (for a gamer anyway, and that's who it's being pointed at)
I said that as 8350s sell at a profit for $200, and a good closed loop is $100, a binned 8350 at $350 is a good move for AMD.
This is just a plot to dupe high end buyers into giving AMD money for nothing, and people on boards like this should be shouting that from the rooftops, not hiding it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A_sY2rjxq6MQuote:
Originally Posted by behrouz
Burn the mutha down!
Bbbbbut... AMD is smoother!
One again , AMD Said :Quote:
Originally Posted by Rollo
reference : TechreportQuote:
AMD's original announcement said the FX-9590 and FX-9370 would become "available from system integrators globally beginning this summer." We asked whether these processors will also be available at retail. The company's response: "AMD is considering all options, but their initial plan is [system integrators]." In other words, you may not find these chips outside of pre-built PCs.
it means that there is no Gamer or people that care for money or Performance.you posted all about Performance and money.Man , Just Back off , It was not for The World that you life there, It was for the World Exactly Like "Car Warrior".
Cpuz screens yet?
It's odd there is still no info from reviewers yet, so NDA must be still in effect. Some retail channels have the SKUs, which adds to confusion. Parts are relatively competitive, depending on what one will be doing. Price range is off though, lower end model should be ~350$ tops, higher end one ~550$ tops. With these prices they could actually sell good deal of them and generate some positive vibes in enthusiast community.
i7-3960X extreme- 130W= 1000$
AMS FX-9590-220W=920$
http://www.pcsuperstore.com/search.p...HHKWOF&x=0&y=0
AMD......Are you :banana::banana::banana::banana:ING kidding me :mad:
Excuse me guys but this is.....bull:banana::banana::banana::banana::shakes :
They have some well clocking cpus that require good power supply, cooling and they want high price for them. They will get them all sold anyway (after while the price will drop though) and at the same time they improve their brand a little. So what? Amd has huge amounts of debt and they need money.
From my experiences in working life the companies that make well profitable business are much better to work within than those that are barely above water. In the long run: low profit = bad thing for everybody.
I dont whine if intel has 5x more expensive cpu on the market that is only 50% faster. I also dont whine if amd has 5x more expensive cpu that is just 15% faster. I can buy fx8350 and overclock it to 5ghz or get i3770k if i want. The freedom of choise is mine and i think its good that there are also faster more expensive models to choose from.
Can't wait to see how these clock!
What do you think stock volts will be?
8350 is 1.4v? Stock?
Back at the time when I started to be interesed in computer Hardware, we used to call absurd things like this one "Emergency Edition". Looks like AMD wants to steal the thunder from Ivy Bridge-E this time.
They may well generate excitement for Ivy Bridge E with this.Quote:
Originally Posted by zir_blazer
I don't think I've ever seen anything this crazy before- super high price, high heat, high power, low performance.
People will be begging intel to take their $1000..
I truly think we are at the edge of the new standards of pricing due to the fall of AMD/ATi.
Sooooo when will certain people get tired of cluttering up threads with AMD doomsday crap? :rolleyes:
or maybe intel will realize they can charge more for the 3770k/4770k!!! ever thought about that?
"waaaaaah" says the intel fanboy hahaha :rofl:
AMD thinks april fools day is in June. Sad very sad.:(
:shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by Sparky
What do you think of AMD launching a $900+ part for gamers that gets outperformed in every gaming metric by $300 competing parts?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LcxYwwIL5zQ
yet I bet Rollo here was a fan of these chips http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Pentiu...7PH3730F).html
funny thing is, the p4ee was far slower then amd parts it was competing against, far more so then the FX line chips vs intels similarly priced options....
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2003/...4#.Ub-xHdvMD2k
http://techreport.com/review/9262/pe...lon-64-fx-60/5
we get it Rollo you hate AMD, AMD suck, AMD dosnt make a single product worth anybody owning.
we get that your very proud of your 990x and titan, what I and I am guessing others dont get is why you feel the need to try and make others feel bad about their systems and preferences?
I mean, if the only way you can make your epeen hard is by crapping on all things AMD......thats pretty sad.....and you would fit in very well over at TPU.....
yes they are over priced, but so is intels 2011 platform, if people are willing to buy it, and it makes the company money, who are you to say its bad/wrong/evil?
Would I buy one at those prices.....F NO, but, I do know people who would and wouldnt even think twice, kinda like I know people like you(Rollo) who think nothing of plunking down thousands on videcard and cpu, I could say I feel spending that kinda money on a cpu and videocard is fing retarded, but, thats your choice, and its your money.....
I do bet you feel a bit stupid buying a titan then seeing the 780 come out far cheaper with very comparable perf.....if you dont.....well good for you.....
anyway, I will keep my 8 cores, 32gb ram, 7870 crossfire, because, despite what people like yourself would like, I am not weak minded or weak willed enough to let your doom and gloom make me want to rush out and dump what works great for me so i can build a dead end system using intels latest geatest parts, just so i can gain a few% in benchmarks I DONT GIVE A FLYING :banana::banana::banana::banana: ABOUT.
95% of the people i know dont give a damn about benchmarking, all they really care about is being able to do what they want to do when they want to do it at a decent speed....I have yet to see a case where that wasnt possible on amd...for cheaper then intel.
i would totally buy this chip if it was priced around $300-$350
but not worth more than that, when my fx-8350 is clocked at 4.6ghz
this depends on the game, crysis3 and bf3 scale very well with cf for amd and intel users, (infact bfbc2 scales very well also), since EA is pushing the use of the new frostbyte engine to as many of their dev houses as they can, this should mean these games will all perform far better with multi core systems then current gen games have been.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rollo
yes, and bench for :banana::banana::banana::banana: on alot of todays titles, but, I never see them being unplayable even when I crank the settings and add stuff like smaa, the rare times i see micro stutter, using radeonpro's frame limiter fixes it easily.
oh btw Rollo....guess you havent seen this
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...ck,3407-3.html
interesting....amd cant drive multi gpu configs......:rofl: :ROTF: :clap:
EDIT: http://www.overclock.net/t/1333027/a...-crossfire-gpu
more of the same kind of results, seems fx8350 can push multi gpu configs.....
I don't think anyone would call this anything but a nice part at $350.. intel parts would still be a smarter buy, but $350 is justifiable.Quote:
Originally Posted by tbone8ty
When I bought the 990X for $1000, I knew I was paying the $400 "current best" tax.
When I bought my Titan for $1000, I knew I was paying a $400 "current best" tax.
For that matter, I think I paid $1000 for an AMD FX-60 back in the day and knew I was paying a $400 "current best" tax.
I get paying the "current best" tax, I get buying banging for buck. Have done both many times over the years.
If I want to give $600 to charity, I'll pick a more worthy cause than "the guys hoping no one will notice they're trying to rob noobs". :shakes:
Thanks for the link proving my point AzureSky.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...ck,3407-5.html
Those Skyrim and F1 2012 results are good examples of AMD CPU inferiority in gaming. Do you have links to other articles showing the AMD CPUs getting stomped flat?
Buyers would surely appreciate your help.
if u have a am3+ socket mobo its a good buy and a smarter buy than switching yo cartel...i mean intel
because the only games on the market are skyrim and f1.....ooook......sorry but not all games are as poorly optimized and coded as skyrim an f1....Quote:
Originally Posted by Rollo
lets try some other games shal we.
http://media.bestofmicro.com/W/Q/369...leneck2013.png
http://media.bestofmicro.com/W/U/369...leneck2013.png
http://media.bestofmicro.com/W/L/369...leneck2013.png
http://media.bestofmicro.com/W/M/369...leneck2013.png
http://media.bestofmicro.com/W/Y/369...leneck2013.png
http://media.bestofmicro.com/W/Z/369...leneck2013.png
and then we have the summery stuff
in short your assertion that amd cards cant drive multi gpu setups is bull:banana::banana::banana::banana: flat out, they can, just not on games running antiquated poorly threaded engines.
skyrim's engine is based on gamebryo, f1 well, I dont know a single person who actually plays that game....and i havent bothered to look into it but, i have read that its engine is far from modern...
now we head over to http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Crysis...hmark-1056578/
http://www.pcgameshardware.de/screen...Us-VH-720p.png
not multi gpu, but, shows that the 8350 even at stock isnt worthless for games using modern engines.
ahh heres a good one
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6934/c...gpu-at-1440p/5
http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph6934/54504.png
so, your saying a 3.49fps delta between a 3770k and 8350 means amd cant drive multi gpu?
how about SLI
http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph6934/54509.png
humm so 0.32 fps means an 8350 cant drive multi gpu.....huh....thought that was within margin of error...
on to dirt 3
http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph6934/54511.png
here the delta is 15.72fps, but in this case, the fps are well above 120fps, so.....how is the 8350 not able to drive multi gpu again?
http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph6934/54515.png
an fps delta of 2.66fps.....wow amd cant drive dual 580's at 1440p can it....
http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph6934/54518.png
in civ v the fps on amd never drop below 66.63 AFIK thats still quite playable.
http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph6934/54523.png
a whopping 0.45fps delta between intels top chip that retails for 570usd vs an 8350 that retails for 200usd.....yeah amd cant game, and they cant multi gpu game at all..
http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph6934/54527.png
huh....0.3fps....must be a new definition of "cant drive multi gpu"...
so, if Civ V is your game of choice and you want more then 66.6fps, go intel, if not.....the diffrance over all is pretty minimal if you test at what many of us are starting to consider the new hardcore gamer resolution(i run many games at 2560x1600 via downsampling, on my old monitors it was 2560x1440)Quote:
A CPU for Dual GPU Gaming: i5-2500K or FX-8350
Looking back through the results, moving to a dual GPU setup obviously has some issues. Various AMD platforms are not certified for dual NVIDIA cards for example, meaning while they may excel for AMD, you cannot recommend them for Team Green. There is also the dilemma that while in certain games you can be fairly GPU limited (Metro 2033, Sleeping Dogs), there are others were having the CPU horsepower can double the frame rate (Civilization V).
After the overview, my recommendation for dual GPU gaming comes in at the feet of the i5-2500K. This recommendation may seem odd ? these chips are not the latest from Intel, but chances are that pre-owned they will be hitting a nice price point, especially if/when people move over to Haswell. If you were buying new, the obvious answer would be looking at an i5-3570K on Ivy Bridge rather than the 2500K, so consider this suggestion a minimum CPU recommendation.
On the AMD side, the FX-8350 puts up a good show across most of the benchmarks, but falls spectacularly in Civilization V. If this is not the game you are aiming for and want to invest AMD, then the FX-8350 is a good choice for dual GPU gaming
but yeah your right, amd just cant game at all, and cant push multi gpu setups at all can they....
The most important things are missing from the above charts ( minimum fps! frametimes )
How arrogant must people be to claim that a certain game is "poorly optimized or coded"? Especially when looking at other results that are GPU bottlenecked...oh my.
If the games weren't "poorly optimized", the reviewers would have been "paid off by intel", or "NVIDIA has sabotaged that game". You've been around long enough to recognize this for what it is.Quote:
Originally Posted by boxleitnerb
Nonetheless, his links have showed us when running multi gpu, AMDs flagship CPU is inferior at F1 2012, Skyrim, and Civilization V and that is helpful.
And of course there are the VRZone benches where AMD gets p3wned in every benchmark:
http://vr-zone.com/articles/amd-fx-8...nce/17494.html
Where I'm sure the answer is again, "B-b-but those framerates are good enuff!".
Why would anyone who spends $800 on a couple video cards buy a $200 CPU that all the reviews agree cripple them?
Especially when there are $200 CPUs like the 2500K that don't cripple them?
"People don't play those games anyway"?
Huh? If the AMD CPU cripples performance in those games, which others fail on AMD?
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu...0_6.html#sect0
Looks like Borderlands 2 is another game AMD fails at, never heard of anyone playing that.
(prepares for wall of text wherein we'll learn it's crazy and un-American to buy parts that cost the same but perform better, use less power, and give off less heat)
Can't wait for reviews of this $920 chip.
Power is the ennemy of the gamer, so ...
this is really strange that AMD get out these products.
the actual FX8350 is enough to get 60 fps on all modern engines.
i think this is a bad move.
Rollo i watched the video you posted. I think this guy is smoking crack. it' amazing how movie can change being seen 30 years after be captured.
I think its a great move by AMD. 5ghz chip! So Awesome!
Take my money! !!
my oh my...
This thread is funny to read :)
Is it some kind of religious ecstasy?Quote:
Originally Posted by tbone8ty
I can't tell if people are being actually serious here.....Remember this: Nobody is forcing you to buy anything.
They keep forgetting that it seems.Quote:
Originally Posted by repman
and how do we know those "processor prices" are even processor prices if amd hasn't decided to release it retail.
how do we know those are not MRSP system prices, a recoomended system price for those making them with like a 7790
Boy you can really tell who the true enthusiast is here and who isn't.
This thread is the perfect example of how the market can sometimes be a huge dis-service to itself. If we want better/faster intel CPUs or any for that matter, we NEED Amd. Regardless if we even dispise Amd as a company and all of their products, that will never change the fact that the market requires their presence. There is no other company around right now who even has sliver of a hope of impacting the CPU market. That being said, in the past we can see a direct correlation to times amd isn't doing so well, and market stagnantation. There has to be some level of healthy competition in the market place to drive innovation and performance.
The enthusiast market has shot itself in the foot with a speeding intel bullet, and we are bleeding out. We have literally turned our back on the only chance we have of forcing intel to drive performance and deliver the product we ask for, not the next marginally better product that comes forth like... Well haswell.
It doesn't take an economist or a rocket scientist to realize a company cannot innovate without the necessary funds to put into r&d. Those funds come directly from the market.... You. If less and less people purchase their product, Amd's ability to innovate gets slower and slower.
That being said, even if you hate amd, if you dispise amd, if you want to crush amd with your I7, for your sake as an enthusiast I suggest you make a conscious effort to support Amd. Build a computer for your mom, sister, grandma.
I have 3 3930k, 1 4770k, 2 3770k, 1 3220, 1 2125, and 1 2100.
My wife and all my family members every Christmas get whatever Best chip amd has out right now I can afford.
I don't get the "Sssshhh! Let's turn a blind eye to AMD trying to fleece noobs because they need the money!" attitude in this thread.
I also don't get "Hey I'll buy substandard parts because maybe some day AMD will do something that will get intel to take them seriously and innovate." position. Work hard for my cash, I don't buy my wife a Kia car because the Big Three might stop building decent ones if Kia goes belly up.
If there was ever a situation where kias demise were to vastly effect the quality of products for the entire market and the market made a conscious decision to ignore that, who's fault will it be once that event has occurred? Especially if the other options were only marginally better in some cases?
You are the perfect example of how the market picks winners and losers, which is how it should be. The only exception is when you are down to two players, which is not present in the auto industry, we are blessed with a wide variety of options there.
We don't owe anything to either company. If Via suddenly came back with a competitive product, so be it, and we would all buy that and the market would have even more competition and thus would be better for the consumer. The market owes it to Itself to ensure the future for that market, much like a 401k takes from your pocket now, but delivers in the future once you retire. If you selfishly decide to pocket that money, it's going to be your fault when only social security is keeping you alive later on.
I'm not saying buy this processor, or that, I'm just pointing out the ramifications of each action. I understand this ramifications and make a conscious effort to ensure the next generation of product I'm going to purchase is as good as I can influence myself.
I know, I know.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rollo
It must be a plot behind U.S. Government conspiracy to lure people with help of NDA, FBI, CIA guys.
Like I mentioned in my earlier post that everything is not possible to understand with pragmatic mind like yours. I imagine that your heart bleed when one Joe buy an overpriced Alineware system with under performing parts. I still think Alienware is overpriced even with Intel and Nvidia products. There is always meaningless products anywhere in the world.
Ferrari cars must be quite Catastrophe when Nissan GTR does 60mph faster 0,2 sec. It must make World shattering difference that EVERYBODY rushes to buy ONLY nissans and Ferrari company files for chapter 11.
:D
yes the cpu will not make difference.Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
How many procents of market are Alienware buyers?
0,001%.
Joe guys, girls dont even OC. System builders do OC for them.
First benchmarks revealed
http://www.pcgameshardware.de/FX-959...-Test-1073781/
Some interesting things to note, the chips will feature native ddr3 2400 and turbo core 3.0
Edit: closer inspection reveals these are "simulated" benchmarks
Thats an overclocked fx-8350..isnt it?
so the of all the games on the market only f1 2012, skyrim and civ v matter, those are the most popular games and the only ones anybody plays?Quote:
Originally Posted by Rollo
interesting...since i know nobody who plays f1, i only know a few people who play CivV(and the amd users still say they get smooth fps...so whats it matter?), and skyrim, sorry but even most people who have reviewed the games perf on intel admit it should run better then it does, the fact they didnt optimize it for more cores because they where lazy and where more worried about console porting then anything else.....yeah its poorly optimized, the same has been said in more then 1 review of f1 where they didnt even use amd chips....
wont get into why i dont even look at vrzone anymore and havent for many years......long story short i have no respect for their staff anymore.Quote:
And of course there are the VRZone benches where AMD gets p3wned in every benchmark:
http://vr-zone.com/articles/amd-fx-8...nce/17494.html
um, most people have 60hz monitors, so anything over 60fps isnt going to matter....so yes, even in civ5 pretty much any game system you builds gonna be "good enough", if all you play is f1, skyrim, civ5 and just have to have over 60fps, then yes you need to get yourself intel/nvidia, other then that.....sorry but most people dont spend this kinda money on videocards or processors.....most popular cpu's are under 200bucks in my exp, the most popular videocards are around the same price each(for true gamer buyers that is)Quote:
Where I'm sure the answer is again, "B-b-but those framerates are good enuff!".
how about they guy who already hasQuote:
Why would anyone who spends $800 on a couple video cards buy a $200 CPU that all the reviews agree cripple them?
1. an AMD system with 1 7870/7950/7970 and just wants a boost in gfx perf?
2. has an AMD am3+ system and want a newer cpu and videocard?
Oh wait they should spend more, and replace everything so they can go intel/nvidia......:rolleyes:
sorry but I see alot of the above and I cant justify them replacing their board(even if its not high end) just so they can get an dead end intel platform...
I personally have see at most 5 people buy dual 7900 cards, I have seen far more buy a 7870 then later grab a 2nd OR a 7770 and grab a 2nd, or a 650/660 series and grab a 2nd....this makes more sense, and it gives a nice perf boost be it amd or intel platforms......despite your bull:banana::banana::banana::banana: assertion that amd cant drive multi gpu configs(soundly prove false above..)
so 60+fps in non shooter games is crippling them? must be a new definition of crippling im no familiar with....Quote:
Especially when there are $200 CPUs like the 2500K that don't cripple them?
some do , and if thats the only games they play and they need over 66fps, its probably a good idea to go with intel.Quote:
"People don't play those games anyway"?
again, cripples, if you look at the charts I posted, and reviews I have seen, I have yet to see a case where AMD wasnt able to produce 60+fps in a modern game.....and since very few gamers have 120hz or higher monitors, it really dosnt matter if the system dosnt produce 160-200-300-500-1000 fps, since only 60 can be displayed by the vast majority of computer monitors.Quote:
Huh? If the AMD CPU cripples performance in those games, which others fail on AMD?
thanks for proving my point
lets start with the fact nobody cares about 1280x800, so lets focus on 1920x1080
http://www.xbitlabs.com/images/cpu/f...300/batman.png
a delta of 3 fps(intel is 3 whopping fps faster!!!) in Batman Arkham City....amazing, guess 70 is unplayable and 73 is smooth as silk..... mind you thats between the $200 8350 and the $320 3770k....
http://www.xbitlabs.com/images/cpu/f...rderlands2.png
lets move on to Borderlands 2
a delta of 9.2fps between the $200 8350 and the $320 3770k....
so 60.3fps is totally unplayable and crippled and 69.5fps is smooth as silk...interesting.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/images/cpu/f...00/crysis2.png
but lets move on to crysis2
with a delta of 0.9fps between the $200 8350 and the $320 3770k....
so 61.3 is unplable and crippling, but 62.2 is smooth as silk....ok......
http://www.xbitlabs.com/images/cpu/f...-4300/dirt.png
how about dirt showdown....
with a delta of 3.2fps between the $200 8350 and the $320 3770k...
so,58.8 is unplayable and crippling but 62 is smooth as silk...
http://www.xbitlabs.com/images/cpu/f...00/farcry2.png
next is Far Cry 2
with a delta of 19.6 fps between the $200 8350 and the $320 3770k....
it may seem amd?s being destroied, but, to put this in perspective thats
113.9fps for the 8350 and 133.5 fps for the 3770k, is 19.6fps worth 120usd?
http://www.xbitlabs.com/images/cpu/f...4300/metro.png
on to Metro 2033
with a delta of 1.4fps between the $200 8350 and the $320 3770k....
so, 28.8fps is unplayable but 29.4 is smooth as silk?
it amazes me what you Intel/nVidia fanboi's will call crippling and unplayable.....
a delta of 9.2fps between the $200 8350 and the $320 3770k....Quote:
Looks like Borderlands 2 is another game AMD fails at, never heard of anyone playing that.
so 60.3fps is totally unplayable and crippled and 69.5fps is smooth as silk...interesting.
amazes me what you fanboi's will call total failure and unplable and crippling.....it really does...your own numbers show a whole 9.2fps slower where both are over 60fps....and thats "fail" :rolleyes::rofl::up:
funny, last I checked, ivybridge runs hotter then my FX line stock cooler for stock cooler, hell, i could run at 4.4 on my stock cooler and get better temps then a 3770k at stock on its stock cooler.....perhaps if your lovely intel hadnt cheaped out and used shoddy TIM under the IHS temps would be better.....Quote:
(prepares for wall of text wherein we'll learn it's crazy and un-American to buy parts that cost the same but perform better, use less power, and give off less heat)
yes im sure, you cant wait to troll those threads like you do every other AMD thread you can find....Quote:
Can't wait for reviews of this $920 chip.
what you fail to understand is, this simply isnt a chip for noobs, just like your 990x isnt a chip for noobs, its a niche market product for people who have to much money and to little brains, it will sell if it goes retail, just as the X series chips sell, and just as the EE chips and first gen FX chips sold(athlon64 fx chips that is)
these arent there to "rippoff noobs" they are there because theres a niche market that will buy them.....same as the X series from intel, Just like the Titan was/is a niche market product made for people with to much money and to little brains to see that if they had waited they could have got over 90% of the perf at just over half the price or as anand saysLinkQuote:
The end result is that with the GTX 780 delivering an average of 90% of Titan?s gaming performance for 65% of the price
guess titan was nvidia ripping off stupid noobs with a $1000 videocard that isnt as fast as their 690(thats cheaper) or even as fast as 2 of their 660ti's.....
http://www.techspot.com/review/644-n...tan/page4.html
wow man, you should be PISSED at nVidia for ripping you off, they could have sold you 2*660ti's or a dual 660 card and given you better perf for alot less money.
its amazing how you defend the titan and even 990x, despite the fact you got ripped off and could have bought a far cheaper product and gotten the same performance!!!!
The electrical and thermal requirements of the FH-infrastructure (220W TDP) parts are quite interesting.
Eventhou I was wrong about the "Centurion" itself, I got most of the specifications right even I had no inside information in my disposal ;)
The base frequency is within the range I expected it to be.
4.6-4.7GHz is the "critical frequency" of Visheras. Up to that point the scaling is quite linear and it can be done with reasonable power consumption. The 5.0GHz boost frequency in the other hand I did not expect as it make no sense to me.
AMD had their reasons for it, however it is not something that I would have personally ever done or advised to be done.
The 220W TDP envelope is simply ridiculous.
It is VERY unlikely that these parts will ever reach anything over 200W even in the worst case scenario.
I would assume the real power consumption is around <170W at the base frequency and up to 190W during the highest boost frequency.
Anything higher than that will result temperatures which are outside the optimal temperature range of a high clocked Vishera part.
The "critical" temperature for a high clocked (<4.8GHz), full configuration (4CU) Vishera is around 60 celsius.
Also the cooling requirements are where I expected them to be.
The requirements (Rth C/W) cannot be achieved with any heatsink.
According to Asetek their 570LX (e.g. Antec 1220) can meet the required Rth on an "unspecified" amount of load.
At the advertised TDP of 220W these Rth values are certainly not going to be met as the system runs out of capacity at around 150W.
The flow, amount of liquid in the loop and the general structure (radiator, block) are simply insufficient for this kind of amount of load.
These are just my personal opinions of course.
Fixed.Quote:
Originally Posted by AzureSky
well my aegir with dual 120x38mm panaflo's can deal with 4.7 just fine, havent tried for a 5+ turbo....i should....
but i agree the small astek wouldnt do the trick i dont think, but perhaps the newer thicker models would?
or the x40?
Is there a difference?Quote:
Originally Posted by tbone8ty
Rollo you are treading dangerously close to trolling territory
When the specifications are made, they cannot be made for the best or even for a 'good case' of scenarios.Quote:
Originally Posted by AzureSky
The specifications are made for the worst case of scenario as the parts must remain fully functional for extended periods of time, even if the tAmbient raises above the normal because of hot weather for example. There are tons of different aspects that must be counted in.
Do you still remember what happened with the first Pentium 3 1GHz CPUs?
people with that kind of money don't buy a car. they usually buy a statement, and Nissan is def not a statement of status or class compared to Ferrari.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomasis
plain simple.
Bro...... Nissan GTR..... That's a statement if you ask me
I can not understand why some people so angry About The views of other people that think FX-9590 processor as a useless processor
These people who are angry They wants to convince all people that FX-9590 processor is an excellent processor Although it consumes 220W + And costs $900!!
Jesus guys:shakes:
Let each person express his opinion without intolerance
Comparing this to a nissan GTR is an insult to Nissan. The Nissan GTR is a totally different product compared to the rest of the nissan line. It has a totally different body and engine compared to anything else in the lineup. Basically it is the correct way to bring up your brand with a new product. You compete with the big boys with a superior price and a superior product.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomasis
Acura did the same thing with the Acura NSX too. New car with a lot of features not found in the rest of their lineup. Lexus did it with the LFA, again a new car entirely with superior characteristics.
This is more akin to audi taking an audi A4 with 1.8T turbo engine(not replacing the engine). Pushing that stock turbo to the max to even an unreliable point(this CPU needs water cooling) and tripling the price. Why this is a more true comparison is that anyone can take a fx-8350 and overclock it and have more or less the same product. They just need the cooling in place to handle the overclock similar to what this CPU needs.
Its basically just an undesirable product for anyone that does research and completely inferior to true products that have that price point.
What AMD needed to do to create this price point is make a new product entirely that not part of there 200 dollar product stack. Nvidia did it with their $650 and up line up and Intel has done it with there E series processor. These products don't share the same Silicone as the rest of their cheaper lineup.
One consequence of AMD releasing a $920 dollar product that performs this mediocre is it opens up doors for new pricing for Intel if this ever becomes available for retail. Intel has already killed overclocking this generation with Haswell with all but their K series processors.
Intel can now do one of two things if enough ignorant consumers buy these things.
Option 1.
Kill off the socket 20xx platform consumer space, and basically turn the 4770k series into the new extreme edition. As we know the performance ceiling of Haswell is greater than Vishera.
Option 2.
Raise the price of the socket 20xx lineup and raise the prices of the 4770k series to reflect that it looks fantastic value compared to the fx-9590 series.
If you don't believe me, look at what happened with Nvidia and AMD last generation.
E.g What was normally a gtx x60 series as gx104 is got bumped up into a gtx x80 series and the pricing to match. Similarly, the gtx x80 series or gx110, got elevated into a new pricing scheme of $650+ where it was $499 and under before.
The high pricing of $550 for the 7970 and mediocre increase over last generation made it easy for Nvidia to turn their small gk104 chip into a 500 dollar product instead of a $399-250 dollar product it should have been. It looks like a great value but only because AMD screwed up with performance for the pricing.
The same thing could happen to 9590. And the effect of this CPU on AMD could parallel what happened with that GPU launch.
That being it doesn't help AMD make any more money really(AMD is still making very little money from their GPU division and is probably less profitable now compared to last generation(they still have the same prices of last last generation but now have to give free games). And it increased the pricing of the competition who enjoy making even more money now then they did before because people now pay much more for video-cards from Nvidia.
The fact that Vishera is more of a dog of a product compared to the 79xx series, makes it far easier for Intel to capitalize. At least the 79xx series was a new chip and was the top product when it was released. This thing isn't a new chip and it won't be the best performing chip on release.
can everyone try to keep their rant to a single screen. i try to read the thread all of it. But it gets really difficult with these multi page texts.
back on topic. 220W TDP means these new boards made for this load. should have 2 8 pins? 4+8pin? i am trying to figure out how i can't get higher speeds on my 8120 , no matter what i do . Cause when i get the voltage stable. the VRM's high 90celicius then underclock the cpu to 1800Mhz until below.
So i am assuming from this new boards. that the only thing preventing 5GHz from our 8350's already was, the VRM area not able to hand the load? or not enough power?
One more thing I would like to add is AMD with its current CPU high end desktop product stack simply cannot be profitable. Their name has too much stigma associated with it to command a price higher than Intels(they can not pull a pentium 4) and the performance and power characteristics of their desktop processors are not that good. No amount of marketing or clocking(bound by laws of physics) is going to change this. They need a new architecture and for Intel to screw up(which they have partially done with haswells).
Until that times comes when they have a new architecture, they can do one of three things.
1. Price their products competitively to stay afloat and hopefully break even.
2. Raise all their prices, not sell any products and go bankrupt. Unless of course the competition raises prices and your again the value lineup(this is hard to do on the current generation but you can do it the next generation though).
3. Or do a combination of the first and second option. This 3rd option only works when you have one of your products better than your competition other wise those products with increased prices don't sell which is likely what will happen with the 9590.
Only option 1 helps us the consumer. People who buy AMD processors pay a lower price and People who buy Intel processors pay a lower price.
Options 2 and 3 are options where basically every one pays more and unless AMD has the products to back it up, they don't generate any more income because those products that are not value priced simply don't sell.
AMD cannot pump out a new architecture at a whim nor can any company. The only thing they can control at the moment is how much value their processors are to sell a product. No amount of marketing is going to turn Vishera into desirable products for most consumers where they are willing to pay a premium over Intel. The Intel brand is too strong and bringing back the FX moniker did nothing to sell bulldozer.
Pricing there product higher isn't going to increase the branding of their products. New products better than the competition will.
i dont see anybody saying the chip is a good value, What i do see people saying is, that Rollo is full of crap and talkin smack(trolling) with his posts saying AMD cant game, and that AMD cant drive multi gpu systems, and that AMD products arent the worthless trash he constantly says they are.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tha Last Meal
if this chip moves units, then its not a failure, simply how the market works, even if its massivly overpriced.
just as the first FX line chips, and EE chips where massivly overpriced...as are the curren X edition chips....and this chip would fit that market, people with to much money and to little brains....
first, "single screen" is not a size or resolution..... some of us have 2560x1440(or 1440x2560) screens, others have 1600x1200, or any of a few dozen other resolutions...Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg83
try Opera and zoom see if that helps you get more stuff on a "screen"
put a fan on your fets, the only board i have seen with what i have found to be excellent fet cooling outside the chv line is the asrock 990fx exteme4, and that little fan makes a huge difference.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ace123
close? i think he skipped past close a few threads ago....
Gentlemen, can we please stay on topic here and stop the trolling.