AMD: "FX is Not EOL" & Why What We Need in a CPU is Changing

Quote:

---

We recently posted about an alleged slide leak from AMD that, if real, seemed to suggest the end of the line for FX-series CPUs and the AM3+ socket. The slide stirred a great deal of concern throughout major social networks and enthusiast websites, and so I attempted to bring things back down to earth in our original analysis. I reached out to AMD for comment prior to publication, but we weren't able to speak with the company until yesterday.

AMD Manager of APU/CPU Product Reviews James Prior was quick to negate the slide's legitimacy: "I've never seen that slide before, I don't know where that came from," he told me in our call, and quickly followed-up by stating that "it's not real. FX is not end-of-life." Prior pointed-out that it's rare to ever see more than a year into the future with roadmaps, and that the real AMD roadmap looks like this:

---

http://www.gamersnexus.net/news/1240...pus-fx-not-eol

The new roadmap doesn't inspire any more confidence. It just says that AM3+ and Vishera will stick around throughout 2014, maybe with another sku or two at some point. After that, it's anyone's guess...

5ghz fx cpu @ 140watts would be nice :D

AM3+ is EOL Q1 2015. That is a fact and in AMD internal slides. There will not be any Steamroller or better core FX AM3+ processors delivered. AMD will continue to sell Piledriver based FX processors until the end of '14.

The goal is to switch everyone to FM2+ by '15.

So basically no Steamroller FX in 2014? AMD must really not want money.

"What we need in a CPU is changing"

No, CPUs are CPUs and what we need in them are CPUs.

All that wasted die space for iGPU, depressing. Instead of giving us more Cores/Cache etc :(

An apu will never be as good as a gpu unless you actually replace your gpu's with apu's...
However I see nothing wrong with say the fm2s for oem's and the like.
And switching to a pcie bus I my mind is step in the right direction, it's more traditional like (like pci and backplane was back in the day).

I think the fx is essentially eol.
...

I too expect a improvement in the cpu it's self, as I don't really care about a tiny gpu in my cpu right now.
That's what I buy gpu's for, to use gpu stuff...
It's not like I buy intel and run with there integrated vga... (though they are not as bad as they used to be)

Though I would prefer a nv tegra mobile chip on my phone but whatever for now, at least the cpu is essentially the same on that platform (amd would be alright too if they did arm + gpu).
It seems kinda weird being stuck with one of those old school brand of gpu's on your phone(not talking about amd/nv), reminds me of the dreamcast or something.

if enthusiast segment is still live after maybe is the chance new 20nm GF for new FX line (2015?). For Vishera - its good CPU but now is "older" (2012) and they need new revision for better power consumption at least for 2014.

this slide is not fake, here is original, unedited one, this AMD guy is liar or idiot, maybe both of this possibilities :)

http://abload.de/thumb/amd_roadmap4rs38.png

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xVeinx

The new roadmap doesn't inspire any more confidence. It just says that AM3+ and Vishera will stick around throughout 2014, maybe with another sku or two at some point. After that, it's anyone's guess...

---

Read more from the same OP article:

Quote:

---

AM3+ Stays For Now: The Time Isn't Right for a Refresh

All these discussion topics aside, we know that FX and AM3+ are here to stay for now. Even with criticism that AM3+ doesn't natively support PCI-e Gen3 interfaces (though the Gen2 x16 slots are often not fully saturated), it doesn't make sense to undergo a platform or chipset revamp right now.

DDR4 looms on the horizon. If AMD were to release a new platform implementing modern interfaces (and with it, a new line of boards), users upgrading would be caught in a "DDR trap." It makes more sense for AMD -- a company that has built a reputation around being the long-term support solution -- to wait until DDR4 has arrived, rather than do a small step-up before then for PCI-e & USB3.

---

As usual, AMD's communication is catastrophic, they have to stop acting like amateur.

I think you're right, they should use some professional like you.

there is maybe many presentation with roadmaps (hsa, apu, channel, etc) and this is confusion for amd people :) Based at spekulation is not effective SR FX at 28nm. So they waiitng for 20nm and 2015 year or they must to know something more about APU+HSA performance in next year.

What consumers needed and what AMD failed to recognize is the adoption of mobile computing in general.

AMD's strength when they were making competitive chips has always been its desktop processors. Their mobile chips for the longest time have been from a step behind during their Turion days, to the gulf that exists today.

Some of their netbook stuff is pretty good, better than intel's actually but the netbook era was shortlived and replaced by the tablet era.

What people crave nowadays is laptops more than desktops. They want all day battery life and high performance. People are more than willing to pay the Intel difference which is 100-200 dollars if it nets them an extra few hours of battery life and double the performance. Particularly since the platform is far less upgradable and is often used in a work setting.

What AMD needs is for GF to get their processes in order and for them to start focusing on mobile chips above all else at this point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BeepBeep2

"What we need in a CPU is changing"

No, CPUs are CPUs and what we need in them are CPUs.

---

Well they can't very well go out and say that their higher end products are a waste of space can they? Although the honesty would be refreshing.

What surprises me is that nobody has done an x86/64 dual cpu laptop yet, as in one that runs a very low power cpu for general use, and one for high power... or something like tegra3.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Heinz68

Read more from the same OP article:

---

I read the article. DDR4 will be released early next year. Intel already added it to their roadmaps, with support built into Haswell-EP in Q4 of 2014. They could have an updated platform out next year if they wanted. So, we have two options: AM3+ is being kept around until they can replace it with something else, or they are keeping it around as long as contractually necessary and then killing it off. If they're replacing AM3+ with FM2+, then it isn't really even any different. AMD seems to be returning to it's older approach of putting the money and time into the products they can excel at (HSA is what they are banking most everything on, that and modular processors they can customize more readily), so it isn't unreasonable to think that they are going to pull the FX line and stick with FM2+. They can return to the FX line at some point later if they wish.

It would be nice to have a new FX chip (based on a new core) on FM2+ or later, but I wouldn't hold my breath much. Market conditions, competitive positioning and other factors are playing a big role in this. I doubt we will see such a chip even in 2015 :/.

you know, for it to be on the product listing for that much longer maybe they would do at most 2 updates to am3+ based cores. even with 15% improvement ipc/single threaded wise( at best ) it will be a nice cpu in it's final stages. so it's like tom brady coming back in the 4th against the broncos for the win. but the improvements might be moot because in 1yr intell will still be faster than any am3+ socket based cpu.

tl;dr

am3+ cpu's might seem not so good now, but by the time it's on the way out it will be improved a bit more. but is it enough improvement to keep amd "current" as far as processing power is concerned.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by STEvil

What surprises me is that nobody has done an x86/64 dual cpu laptop yet, as in one that runs a very low power cpu for general use, and one for high power... or something like tegra3.

---

That's actually not a bad idea. If you know any marketing people personally, you may want to bring that up (and ask for a portion of the profits, of course :p: )

If their cpu's are so modular, why don't they make a 8 core Excavator (20nm?) FM2+ APU, instead of a AM3+ cpu. Problem solved? Hence even call it a FX - apu...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeathReborn

So basically no Steamroller FX in 2014? AMD must really not want money.

---

CORRECT! No Steamroller or better core AM3+ ever.

The take rate on a Steamroller AM3+ FX CPU in numerous online polls here and in other enthusiasts forums showed a 92%-95% take rate based on a +15% performance boost over Vishera.

AMD is pushing HSA and thus APUs. If your archive program, spreadsheets, web broweser, etc... all made transparant use of your gpu then you probably wouldn' t mind having an APU over a traditional CPU. That's the dream, the reality may be different, but they're pushing for the dream. Couple that with limited resources and a lost cpu war with intel and it makes a lot of sense to ELO AM3+.

I was just looking at socket g34 on newegg, looks alright but dated.
Boards obviously not that great...

Has anyone seen any slides or info on upcoming server platforms for amd?
What I'm thinking is, if people can't find a upgrade solution in mainstream, why not go opty ^^ ?
(And yeah the g34 chips are outrageously priced..., but lets pretend a moment they're priced $500 and lower lol)

A 12-16 core opty, clocked at 4ghz, 150w tdp... (yeah right), that I'm game for lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by STEvil

What surprises me is that nobody has done an x86/64 dual cpu laptop yet, as in one that runs a very low power cpu for general use, and one for high power... or something like tegra3.

---

Not a bad idea at all. But I think the problem is this idea would fit Intel more than AMD.

From the AMD laptops I have used which include recent ones, they all felt sluggish, particularly when they are removed from the outlet and are running on battery.

I think a problem AMD has with using your concept is the burden of windows 8. Windows 8 I feel is too taxing on AMD processors and I would never use an low power one AMD processor with it. Even for day to day tasks and running office stuff, they just seem too slow, particularly if your running in battery mode.

The speed I get from something like an Intel ultrabook, is just about the minimum I want from a laptop as far as performance goes. And this is why your idea is better for intel processors, Intel ulv processors in their ultrabook perform better than AMD best and biggest in everyday usage(maybe not video editing).

This allows intel processor ULV processors to fit the form factor of an ultrabooks, but have the power of an AMD desktop replacement chip.

Put them in a similar platform with an SSD and AMD solution just feel too slow when you compare them(( samsung ativ 9 vs ativ 9 lite)) and you will see what I am talking about.

For me Intel ULV performance with the option of a high performance mode just a step behind a Intel desktop processors on the same chip seems like an attractive idea.

An AMD processor running netbook performance in low power mode and running Intel ULV processor in performance mode isn't a very attractive option for me. I would rather pay that extra 100-200 dollars and get the performance of high performance all the time(high performance for AMD standards being an INTEL ULV processor performance) while maintaining the 6 to 8 hour battery life. Then have to pick slow and longer battery life mode or AMD high performance mode and 2 hour battery life. Plus the larger form factor that goes along with desktop replacement CPU's.

AMD needs to get their ULV processors to run 2 to 3 times faster to catch up to Intel ULV and thus why they need to start focusing on making their mobile processors better.

Below is some benchmarks for laptops.

http://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-A-S...r.92900.0.html

This is AMD current top of the line processor meant for bigger laptops and is a 35w chip.

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-C...r.93563.0.html

Above is the most common ULV processor from Intel the i5 u4200 which is a 15w chip.

The intel beats it in every category and often by huge differences.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tajoh111

From the AMD laptops I have used which include recent ones, they all felt sluggish, particularly when they are removed from the outlet and are running on battery.

---

I have never had such an experience with Trinity or Llano powered laptop. It was really nice and smooth experience in both battery and plugged-in mode.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tajoh111

What consumers needed and what AMD failed to recognize is the adoption of mobile computing in general.

AMD's strength when they were making competitive chips has always been its desktop processors. Their mobile chips for the longest time have been from a step behind during their Turion days, to the gulf that exists today.

Some of their netbook stuff is pretty good, better than intel's actually but the netbook era was shortlived and replaced by the tablet era.

What people crave nowadays is laptops more than desktops. They want all day battery life and high performance. People are more than willing to pay the Intel difference which is 100-200 dollars if it nets them an extra few hours of battery life and double the performance. Particularly since the platform is far less upgradable and is often used in a work setting.

What AMD needs is for GF to get their processes in order and for them to start focusing on mobile chips above all else at this point.

---

The APU seems to work pretty darn well in the laptop area. My laptop has an A10 and I can get 6 hours of battery life when I want, or I can turn around and play Battlefield (not maxed out obviously). All in a 14" laptop. Not sluggish at all in day to day stuff. Then I put an SSD in there and it really flies now, 10 second boot times :D I've run Windows 7 on it and currently have Windows 8.1 on it.

Intel doesn't offer "double" the performance CPU-wise, and their video behind.

I think AMD does need to continue to improve it, but their APU now is better than the Turion of yesteryear. Not sure where this "gulf" comes from that you speak of.

Use an Intel laptop and use a AMD laptop and you won't want to go back. Particularly when you take into account performance, weight of the laptop itself and all day battery life.

Look at the benchmark list from the links I just posted and you will see that is indeed double and often more.

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-...st.2436.0.html
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7111/a...ing-notebook/3 (look at the CPU benchmarks)

When Intel processors can perform consistently 2x more or better at the same power envelope. That's a huge gulf.

When something like a vaio pro with a with a 2.35 pound weight performs the same or better, gets better battery life compared to the biggest and baddest AMD platforms, that is a gulf.

Their turions of yester-years when compared with their Intel contemporary were much closer.

If you want to game, discrete is still the best way to go. But Iris pro is a really big improvement(but costly as hell) for integrated and inline with AMD's best integrated chips if not better.

I have. I set up Intel laptops for people a lot actually. I'm keeping my AMD thank you very much ;) The intel video sucks. Yes, discrete video is better for games, but the price point is higher, and the battery life is also worse. The APU hits a nice happy medium on almost everything.

I guess if you need screaming i5 power to type emails more power to ya :p:

A SSD is going to make far more of a difference in general daily computing than an AMD vs intel CPU.

Not sure why you brought up Iris Pro. If it is so horribly costly but only "in line" with AMD's integrated... what's the point?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sparky

I have. I set up Intel laptops for people a lot actually. I'm keeping my AMD thank you very much ;) The intel video sucks. Yes, discrete video is better for games, but the price point is higher, and the battery life is also worse. The APU hits a nice happy medium on almost everything.

I guess if you need screaming i5 power to type emails more power to ya :p:

A SSD is going to make far more of a difference in general daily computing than an AMD vs intel CPU.

Not sure why you brought up Iris Pro. If it is so horribly costly but only "in line" with AMD's integrated... what's the point?

---

I don't need and won't ever want a desktop replacement. What I do like is smaller form factors, light weight, acceptable performance and long battery life. The form factor difference is something you can immediately notice between AMD and intel processors.

To get the performance simply of an Intel ultra low voltage i5 processor which is by no means a high performance processor, you need a top of the line a10 series. And with these type of laptop, you gain a couple extra pounds of weight, half the battery life at best and generally worse performance.

Considering the software we put on our computers, particularly our work ones which costs hundreds if not thousands of dollars, 100-200 dollars more on the hardware of the laptop is nothing.

Running Intel plus discrete may cost more, but if your computer is used for professional purposes, its easily justified. Running discrete on top of an Intel processor does cost even more, but your getting atleast twice the performance for gaming. It's simply a wise investment to get more performance from the get go with a laptop due to the less than upgradeable nature of the whole thing.

http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.c...d=1839&page=11

Heres a turion versus centrino M review. Turion was a good processors. Much better vs the competition than how it is doing today. It could be competitive and even beat Intel.

doesn't AMD have to full fill big wafer orders at GF?

so it would probably benefit them to run a few batches of am3+ steamroller FX chips

:-) am i right AMD ;) id buy one


but yah AMD needs to focus on getting their chips in more laptops and tablets/hybrids.

1 or 2 design wins isn't gonna cut it lol... temash is like worse than tegra 4 lol in terms of design wins. i guess it sucks to much.

i cant run a 290x on a A10 Kaveri man im gonna need some L3 caches! do it amd!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tbone8ty

doesn't AMD have to full fill big wafer orders at GF?

so it would probably benefit them to run a few batches of am3+ steamroller FX chips
:-)

---

NOT going to happen. They can however run 32nm Piledriver CPUs to meet contract requirements or just pay the cost for too few CPUs purchased.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tbone8ty

doesn't AMD have to full fill big wafer orders at GF?

so it would probably benefit them to run a few batches of am3+ steamroller FX chips

:-)

---

If only ordering "a few batches" of chips were like shopping online at Amazon...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tbone8ty

doesn't AMD have to full fill big wafer orders at GF?

so it would probably benefit them to run a few batches of am3+ steamroller FX chips

:-) am i right AMD ;) id buy one


but yah AMD needs to focus on getting their chips in more laptops and tablets/hybrids.

1 or 2 design wins isn't gonna cut it lol... temash is like worse than tegra 4 lol in terms of design wins. i guess it sucks to much.

i cant run a 290x on a A10 Kaveri man im gonna need some L3 caches! do it amd!

---

I think it would be better if AMD could use GF to make a whole crap load of hawaii and tahiti chips derivatives to satisfy the current mining crazy going on. AMD making more piledriver chips is just going to build inventory that isn't going to sell and steam roller isn't ready yet. From what I have seen, chips used for mining hold their value a long time. Plus they are more profitable on average considering their higher selling price. But then again, how long is this mining thing going to last.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tajoh111

I don't need and won't ever want a desktop replacement. What I do like is smaller form factors, light weight, acceptable performance and long battery life. The form factor difference is something you can immediately notice between AMD and intel processors.

---

And there lies the differences between you and me (sort of, i don't want a desktop replacement either, but still wanted some video power). You want a lot more CPU performance and a thinner unit. I wanted more CPU power than I had (2 GHz Core 2 in my old laptop) but mostly wanted more gfx performance and more battery life. My desktop is the CPU powerhouse (notice I am running an intel CPU there). The weight wasn't a big deal, yeah it is a little heavier but it doesn't bother me. And 6 hours of battery is more than enough for me.

BTW, HP made this laptop series the same thickness and weight for both the AMD and Intel models. I think they could have made them thinner if they wanted but whatever.

i thought for sure by now Vishera would have a better stepping out...

i guess were gonna have to wait till a smaller node like 20nm for an new FX line-up

a 14nm 10-core excavator FX chip would be nice

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tbone8ty

i thought for sure by now Vishera would have a better stepping out...

i guess were gonna have to wait till a smaller node like 20nm for an new FX line-up

a 14nm 10-core excavator FX chip would be nice

---

A lot of that has to do with AMD's sale of the fabs. While they may get a reasonable price, it also means they no longer have full control over when the processing equipment gets upgraded

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sparky

And there lies the differences between you and me (sort of, i don't want a desktop replacement either, but still wanted some video power). You want a lot more CPU performance and a thinner unit. I wanted more CPU power than I had (2 GHz Core 2 in my old laptop) but mostly wanted more gfx performance and more battery life. My desktop is the CPU powerhouse (notice I am running an intel CPU there). The weight wasn't a big deal, yeah it is a little heavier but it doesn't bother me. And 6 hours of battery is more than enough for me.

BTW, HP made this laptop series the same thickness and weight for both the AMD and Intel models. I think they could have made them thinner if they wanted but whatever.

---

What laptop is this by the way? From what I have seen, AMD laptops with 6 hour battery life tend to have underwhelming performance.

I think APU in general accelerated AMD downfall in CPU and profits. Currently, beside the MSI gx60, you can only find AMD chips in bargain laptops for the most part. The problem with this is AMD is selling a GPU and a CPU for as much as they were charging for a processor before(and they are removing the potential sale of an AMD discrete GPU in many cases). Possibly even less. The margins on their products can't sustain longterm R and D efforts and if this happen, they could turn into Cyrix which would be bad for everyone.

If AMD wants to make money again, they need to be able to sell a processor for slightly more than they were selling a CPU for before. As is, manufacturing an GPU along with a CPU on the same die and charging less than they did when it was CPU only is just a recipe for them cutting the cord on CPU's in general. To charge more, they need to get CPU performance up substantially. Without good CPU performance they will never make it into something like Macbooks. Most people who own laptops are not gamers and business users care about CPU power above all else and battery life.

@tajoh111

Do you realize AMD has a large processor portfolio for anything from a SOC, to a tablet, to a large desktop replacement. Problem is they have no design wins. If OEMs don't use the chips, the products cease to exist. The PC market in general is getting slammed at the moment. People ain't buying PCs, and the ones that do are buying market leading products like macs. Windows just isn't sexy these days.

Also, in general, average consumers only recognize Intel, and every salesman pushes only Intel almost exclusively. Ever hear of Intel Retail Edge? AMD needs a real marketing Department like 10 years ago. They only do shoddy web marketing with a limited enthusiast audience that probably owns a Intel rig. AMD has ZERO brand recognition in retail, which is sad. If average consumers knew what to buy, that met their needs, AMD would sell a lot more. I personally rather have a better multimedia experience with a laptop and have proper HDMI out drivers to work with my tv, to me AMD is a better choice no?

HP ProBook 6475b (intel version is the 6470b)

Mine is the one that has the A10 2.3GHz quad core with the 7660G graphics and the 1600x900 resolution screen (this was the biggest thing for me, no crap 1366x768!). Yeah the i5 etc is faster but this one isn't any slouch either. Only uses a 65W power brick too.

Most people don't need near the CPU power you think. They don't need an i5. Give them a decently fast CPU (A-series, i3) and throw an SSD in there. Far more noticeable overall performance increase for the average user doing that.

For those who missed, our friend Oliverda published this one week ago :

http://tof.canardpc.com/preview2/d00...f853506897.jpg

http://www.overclock.net/t/1404574/s...#post_21296951

And I trust more Oliverda than this AMD PR who seems lost.

This whole article seems absurd.

AMD-We are not killing AM3+ and FX!, and heres why you dont need them anymore...
Also they are essentially confirming this reportedly "fake" roadmap.What a load of croc.

AMD, nobody wants this apus in any serious desktop, or even serious mobile for that matter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vario

This whole article seems absurd.

AMD-We are not killing AM3+ and FX!, and heres why you dont need them anymore...
Also they are essentially confirming this reportedly "fake" roadmap.What a load of croc.

AMD, nobody wants this apus in any serious desktop, or even serious mobile for that matter.

---

It's a bit like the "AMD is a Gaming Company" line which goes better with a Core i5/7 than a APU. I can't help but feel like most people won't go back to FX in 2015 (if they bring it back) but move to Intel instead.

Still, at least AMD won't be needing any more shoes.

Way i see it is this.
You have single GPU gamers. Using i5 and i7 quad cores.

With mantle, the APU gpu replaces all physics, cpu overhead drops.

Intel's edge was HT ,(more cpu for physics) and more fpu per thread then amd 8 cores.

Both this these are out of the picture with next APU. which has pci-e sata first and now onboard pci-e 3.0 which also was an edge to intel.

If they made a new 8 core now. instead of waiting for ddr4 and letting this new APU be amd's i5. they loose that mainstream single gpu market and how much better apu physx with mantle is for the gpu performance.

since like a solid strategy which puts amd back in the lead. as the leading perforance compiler for software. giving 100% to the developer. instead of intel compiler after 939 , ss2 to 3 etc, which never got turned on on amd until confronted, 4 - 5 years later.

"AMD will focus on the areas of growth including support for the desktop PC enthusiast leveraging AMD's world-class processor design IP, including heterogeneous compute"

So AMD is pretty much saying that they'll have FX branded APUs not that they won't go APU only. Funny how they reject our way of interpreting the "FX is EOL" headline and denie it while confirming it.
Ofc it's not 100% clear what they are saying here but it's not looking good.

Well there's a anadntech benchmark of a trinity having over 100% improvement on a gpu accelerated app with gpu+cpu vs cpu only. I just don't see enough gpu accelerated application around so that AMD can rely so much on APU's already. We will see how huma+hsa+mantle+opencl plays out.

Fact is, in the perfect situation and APU will always be faster than a traditional CPU.

you can always change your applications to get the 100% increase in performance to do the tasks you want to get done faster.
obviously waiting for a hardware change to do so. isn't as fast.

wonder what happens when mantle applications come about. since that was just a gpu acceleration instead of full huma with mantle program. which i noticed in the mantle videos. was being hinted at an awful lot.

i am intererest myself. in if they can make like a mantle version of MPC or VLC that loads the videos completely in video memory or atleast 1/2 depending on quality. so that its completly on the gpu and can do even further processing to the video to improve image quality with no performance penilty. plus a reduced power consumption vs just gpu accelerated.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FlanK3r

if enthusiast segment is still live after

---

Afaik, enthusiast and DIY grew in 2013.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greg83

you can always change your applications to get the 100% increase in performance to do the tasks you want to get done faster.

---

I wish.

I was reading about 2 new apu's coming out in january, and only just realized that use something called a-link to communicate with the chipset :brick:.

Here's my opinion:

They should move some more things onto the cpu from the chipset, make the chipset run on pcie and put it on a card...(or just scrap the chipset all together and use other peoples chips...)
The chipset taking care of stuff like usb, sata, networking, audio and so on.
And then getting mp support working on pcie as well(some sort of cfx/mp hybrid, numa/huma whatever), even if it means more lanes (the industry needs to upgrade to more eventually anyways...)
And then scrapping the vga line for a apu line...
Making the apu's on cards or on boards(consoles...) there choice whatever lol.

Anyways with that aside :), I think when they get the 65w excavator chips out in 2015 or whenever they'll be ok.
They can't be worth the same amount they were before athlon or even 3dnow(which turned out useless), I mean they gotta be worth more then that.
So they should be fine, I don't really pay attention to stocks though.

:cool:
Psssst

The current A-Link is four PCIe Gen2 lanes ...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AbortRetryFail?

:cool:
Psssst

The current A-Link is four PCIe Gen2 lanes ...

---

Oh my bad then for not looking up how it worked :D.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NEOAethyr

I was just looking at socket g34 on newegg, looks alright but dated.
Boards obviously not that great...

Has anyone seen any slides or info on upcoming server platforms for amd?
What I'm thinking is, if people can't find a upgrade solution in mainstream, why not go opty ^^ ?
(And yeah the g34 chips are outrageously priced..., but lets pretend a moment they're priced $500 and lower lol)

A 12-16 core opty, clocked at 4ghz, 150w tdp... (yeah right), that I'm game for lol.

---

Was wondering the same thing.

Not an AMD man but ran across this re: the slides...figured I'd post it up.

"Last week an alleged slide leak purporting to show AMD’s desktop roadmap appeared and it was quickly picked up by most tech sites. Not us of course, since we knew it was rubbish and we’ve got a couple of inboxes littered with similar fakes....'

http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/33...g-off-fx-parts

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zaxx

Not an AMD man but ran across this re: the slides...figured I'd post it up.

"Last week an alleged slide leak purporting to show AMD?s desktop roadmap appeared and it was quickly picked up by most tech sites. Not us of course, since we knew it was rubbish and we?ve got a couple of inboxes littered with similar fakes....'

http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/33...g-off-fx-parts

---

Hilarious.AMD essentially pulled the plug a year ago.Theyre still making the old ones but no new products in the foreseeable future means that line for now is dead, they may do something in the distant future but its dead now.
People have to learn to speak marketing, they will never ever tell anything that puts them in bad light unless they absolutely have to.And of course there are long term roadmaps, they are of course subject to change but everyone ,intel, nvidia and amd have them.Even the marketer from amd didnt say that roadmap was fake, he only said he hasnt seen it, because that COULD be true, even tho it probably isnt, but these kind of lies are acceptable with this kinds of people.A pretty solid proof that no new big core desktops are coming is lack of server ones also, all the talk about server chips from AMD for last year is ARM and HSA.
And they even claim they released new cpus this year ,and "highest performing ones yet", again, technically true, but reality is they re-released the same exact die, even not a new revision, just overclocked.
As for fudzilla, last year they claimed that they have spoken with AMD representatives and steamroller AM3+ was definitely coming :-) .In reality i feel sorry for AMD spindoctors because they have to spin really hard and its not their fault :-/.HSA may be the future, but its still a distant one, for now AMD surrendered which is a pity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zaxx

Not an AMD man but ran across this re: the slides...figured I'd post it up.

"Last week an alleged slide leak purporting to show AMD?s desktop roadmap appeared and it was quickly picked up by most tech sites. Not us of course, since we knew it was rubbish and we?ve got a couple of inboxes littered with similar fakes....'

http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/33...g-off-fx-parts

---

Some folks are confusing things...

Socket AM3+ is EOL Q1 2015. AMD will NOT produce any newer core than Piledriver FX processors for socket AM3+. Piledriver based FX CPUs will be available for socket AM3+ until EOL in Q1, 2015.

The FX name may be retained for other products being released in '15 but they will not be socket AM3+ products.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AMDforME

Some folks are confusing things...

Socket AM3+ is EOL Q1 2015.

---

Just curious, but where did you see that info? Did AMD officials state it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MattiasNYC

Just curious, but where did you see that info? Did AMD officials state it?

---

Yes - to some folks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AMDforME

Yes - to some folks.

---

Oh. I didn't see that. Where did you see that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MattiasNYC

Oh. I didn't see that. Where did you see that?

---

In behind closed door discussions with industry partners.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AMDforME

Some folks are confusing things...

Socket AM3+ is EOL Q1 2015. AMD will NOT produce any newer core than Piledriver FX processors for socket AM3+. Piledriver based FX CPUs will be available for socket AM3+ until EOL in Q1, 2015.

The FX name may be retained for other products being released in '15 but they will not be socket AM3+ products.

---

That's disappointing. An 8-core Steamroller/Excavator would be no slouch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jvc

That's disappointing. An 8-core Steamroller/Excavator would be no slouch.

---

Steamroller FX models were planned all along up till the end of '12 when they vanished from the road maps. Excavator will be on a different socket but Steamroller on AM3+ would have been a money-maker for AMD as their AM3+ installed base numbers millions and the take rate is an incredible 90+ % in numerous PC polls.

Seriously I'm lost as to why they wouldn't release an 8core steamroller FX chip.

Sad.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tbone8ty

Seriously I'm lost as to why they wouldn't release an 8core steamroller FX chip.

Sad.

---

Well there are reasons for that decision. And they will be clear once Kaveri launches and is benchmarked... It's better this way than to launch something that will be worse or at best not better than Vishera we have today.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by informal

Well there are reasons for that decision. And they will be clear once Kaveri launches and is benchmarked... It's better this way than to launch something that will be worse or at best not better than Vishera we have today.

---

Wow thats a change of pace for you ;-) .First time i see you being more pessimistic than my own thoughts on this.Everything points to SR being a nice bump, unless power consumption got even worse.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AMDforME

In behind closed door discussions with industry partners.

---

I didn't know you were "behind closed doors". Seriously. Nice to be able to get inside information like that.

So what is the highend platform coming after the AM3+/FX series and when is it coming? (assuming there is one)

@vario
It's nice to be optimistic and all but I'd rather just wait for the reviews if I were you :).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AMDforME

Steamroller FX models were planned all along up till the end of '12 when they vanished from the road maps. Excavator will be on a different socket but Steamroller on AM3+ would have been a money-maker for AMD as their AM3+ installed base numbers millions and the take rate is an incredible 90+ % in numerous PC polls.

---

this is a nice piece of information.
I really hope Excavator for a new socket is competitive....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by informal

Well there are reasons for that decision. And they will be clear once Kaveri launches and is benchmarked... It's better this way than to launch something that will be worse or at best not better than Vishera we have today.

---

The world just ended. The sky is falling.
The colors of the universe just became inverse.

FX is not EOL.
That's a true statement ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Stilt

FX is not EOL.
That's a true statement ;)

---

Yes theyre still going to make and sell the ones we have already in production :P,or theyre going to make some 4 core APU with FX brand.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by informal

Well there are reasons for that decision. And they will be clear once Kaveri launches and is benchmarked... It's better this way than to launch something that will be worse or at best not better than Vishera we have today.

---

huh, you expect SR cores to perform lower than PD cores?

Sad news :( I was getting high hopes for kaveri.. guess i'll just pick up CH-V Z and keep messing with the 8350. Very sad :(
Perhaps another refresh on vishera's for lowering power consumption.. oh maan..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Stilt

FX is not EOL.
That's a true statement ;)

---

yes, we already know it here, we have before us many :banana::banana::banana::banana:ty Vishera FX for next year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PedantOne

yes, we already know it here, we have before us many :banana::banana::banana::banana:ty Vishera FX for next year.

---

Vishera / AM3r2 were your words, not mine ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PedantOne

yes, we already know it here, we have before us many :banana::banana::banana::banana:ty Vishera FX for next year.

---

Dudes, you obviously know whats up.So, can we even expect a new revision of vishera ?
Damn i would even go for a new rev ...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vario

Damn i would even go for a new rev ...

---

:shakes: I don't know what you're expecting from such a thing...
What are you gonna use an extra 100mhz for ? :shrug:

Eh maybe they'll improve there nb clocking...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NEOAethyr

:shakes: I don't know what you're expecting from such a thing...
What are you gonna use an extra 100mhz for ? :shrug:

Eh maybe they'll improve there nb clocking...

---

Well it depends, revision changes can be about 100mhz higher clocks, can be about getting power in control (which in case of a FX would give you more realistic mhz wise).
Tbred-A vs Tbred-B was ASTOUNDING difference, my A clocked BARELY 1900mhz, and B was clockin 2400Mhz without much sweat,and i was doing almost 3ghz on 2500+M with winter cooling, 2.5ghz air no sweat.
Then theres My phenom 910 vs Thubans ,+2cores and +600Mhz ...

However, my sample of PD is weak already so even a modest revision bump could yield me 500Mhz , thats of course theory.Day to day i run this 8320 at 4.0, because higher than that power gets out of control.And yea, NB clocks with maximum stability beyond 2400mhz are tricky also.

I know its pretty pathetic, however if i COULD buy such a thing, i WOULD.And thats that.

From a budget perspective, FM2 CPUs just don't make sense (And I resent them calling their CPUs APUs)... A budget 1150 board goes for the same price as an FM2 board, and Ivy Bridge/Haswell Pentiums are superior or equivalent to their FM2 counterparts... Up until recently, AMD had no unified driver for FMx platforms (And even now they warn that their unified drivers might not work for all boards) necessitating downloading often outdated drivers from motherboard manufacturers websites. Conversely, Intel chipset drivers have always been unified and clearly labeled (Whereas with AMD, you never knew what exactly you were downloadign and what it was for) and of superb quality.

For the enthusiast market... AMD has slain the goose that laid golden eggs for them so many times already that they will never regain that market... AMD has contracts with both Microsoft and Sony... As soon as Sony discontinues producing gaming consoles (Xbox 720 is clearly far superior to the PS4), Microsoft will dump AMD in order to destroy them, then salvage their assets to increase their monopoly... Whatever they don't need will be sold off, and whatever remains of AMD will be equivalent to semi-defunct companies like VIA who sell inexpensive ICs to the tune of a thousand for a dollar.

In summary, AMD is a lousy company that eats its own... So far, they've been able to get away with it only because of the incompetencies of their competition (Intel with Pentium 4 and nVidia with bumpgate). But their competition has learned from their mistakes and are out for blood... nVidia now has gSync and I haven't heard of AMD planning to offer any competing technology...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mockingbird

As soon as Sony discontinues producing gaming consoles (Xbox 720 is clearly far superior to the PS4), Microsoft will dump AMD in order to destroy them, then salvage their assets to increase their monopoly... Whatever they don't need will be sold off, and whatever remains of AMD will be equivalent to semi-defunct companies like VIA who sell inexpensive ICs to the tune of a thousand for a dollar.

---

You completely lost me at that point...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mockingbird

<snip>

---

Did somebody have a lousy Christmas or something? Geez where did you come up with all this...this... heck I don't even know what to call it :wth:

:slap:

Did someone mix-up XMAS with April Fool's? Cause April first is about 127 days away.

I think someone's pet has been run over by one of AMD's employee car recently :yepp:, that has to be the logical explanation for that kinda outburst, lol. :ROTF:

The Xbox "One" ,not 720, from a technical standpoint is nowhere near superior to the playstation 4. Maybe you Typo'd and mean to say that the playstation 4 is superior to the Xbox one when it comes to hardware considering its GPU is 50% more powerful. I guess none of that will matter later on when they really start figuring out how to utilize the architechture better... oh wait thats when it will matter the most. Interesting to suggest that sony will discontinue their console effort considering the PS4 launch was the largest console launch in history smashing threw christmas outselling the Xbox one almost 2-1
http://mobile.extremetech.com/gaming...-almost-2-to-1

Im not even going to get started on how simlarly priced 1155/1150 processors fair against their FM2 counterparts in graphics performance.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ace123

The Xbox "One" ,not 720, from a technical standpoint is nowhere near superior to the playstation 4.

---

I find it inconvenient to call it Xbox One since that could be confused with the original Xbox. I think therefore that it is an extremely stupid name and the fool who came up with it should be fired.

Quote:

---

Maybe you Typo'd and mean to say that the playstation 4 is superior to the Xbox one when it comes to hardware considering its GPU is 50% more powerful. I guess none of that will matter later on when they really start figuring out how to utilize the architechture better... oh wait thats when it will matter the most. Interesting to suggest that sony will discontinue their console effort considering the PS4 launch was the largest console launch in history smashing threw christmas outselling the Xbox one almost 2-1
http://mobile.extremetech.com/gaming...-almost-2-to-1

---

Since the Microsoft GPU is custom, you don't actually know that it only has half the shaders of the PS4's Jaguar chip.

Quote:

---

Im not even going to get started on how simlarly priced 1155/1150 processors fair against their FM2 counterparts in graphics performance.....

---

Irelevant to those who are purchasing a budget system in the first place... If for some reason low-end Haswell graphics isn't enough for them (And it most certainly is still very powerful), they can spend a relatively small amount on an inexpensive videocard that would crush both Haswell _and_ integrated HD6xxx/HD7xxx.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mockingbird

I find it inconvenient to call it Xbox One since that could be confused with the original Xbox. I think therefore that it is an extremely stupid name and the fool who came up with it should be fired.

Since the Microsoft GPU is custom, you don't actually know that it only has half the shaders of the PS4's Jaguar chip.

Irelevant to those who are purchasing a budget system in the first place... If for some reason low-end Haswell graphics isn't enough for them (And it most certainly is still very powerful), they can spend a relatively small amount on an inexpensive videocard that would crush both Haswell _and_ integrated HD6xxx/HD7xxx.

---

So,youre one of those people.That even when theyre wrong, still go at it.
Both chips are custom dude, that doesnt mean we dont know the specs.We do.Both parties released the data.PS4 has more shaders and has faster memory(much faster).Xbox one (and yea its called that ,even if you dont acknowledge that fact) has a specialized cache.All in all developers are pretty much saying PS4 is more powerfull GFX wise.
The FACT is you for some unknown reason wanted to spill some hate, all pretty much based on your emotions and delusions.
FACTS:
1)PS4 has a more powerful GPU
2)Xbox one is called ONE not 720
3)AMD APU`s or CPU`s whatever you want to call them, have more powerful GPU`s

And yea, buying fast intel with dedicated GFX will be faster than an APU or Intel igpu.DUH.But it isnt always feasible fo cost reasons, for platform reasons, size etc.

Both your posts show some impressive ignorance and arrogance at the same time!You are the whole package :) .

http://www.theverge.com/2013/11/22/5...wii-u-compared

Quote:

---

That all seems to be giving Sony's console the graphical edge for now. In real world terms, that's mainly boiling down to a matter of resolution: one of the consoles' biggest launch titles, Call of Duty: Ghosts, is running at 1080p on the PS4, but only 720p on the Xbox One. I

---

Not only that.PS4 sells more units:
http://www.vg247.com/2013/12/09/ps4-...month-pachter/

Im no console lover, TBH i hate both because of the way they both treat customers.HOWEVER, sony treats them somewhat better and was the main reason MS HAD TO drop theyre own draconian DRM systems (to some degree).

So yea.Sony is losing ,AMD is losing on this (they only landed all 3 major consoles...) .And all is well.

good lord people... really? LONG LIVE AM3+

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vario

So,youre one of those people.That even when theyre wrong, still go at it.
Both chips are custom dude, that doesnt mean we dont know the specs.We do.Both parties released the data.PS4 has more shaders and has faster memory(much faster).Xbox one (and yea its called that ,even if you dont acknowledge that fact) has a specialized cache.All in all developers are pretty much saying PS4 is more powerfull GFX wise.

---

Since when are software developers privy to the internals of hardware architectures... We still don't even have pinouts for CPUs released several years ago. What makes you think Microsoft is going to spill the beans on their hardware, especially since they build their consoles by themselves and you can bet that any outside parties involved in the process has NDAs up the wazoo. Let's face it, Microsoft is not so stupid as to build a console with half the speed of Sony's. Think about it for a minute.

Quote:

---

The FACT is you for some unknown reason wanted to spill some hate, all pretty much based on your emotions and delusions.
FACTS:
1)PS4 has a more powerful GPU
2)Xbox one is called ONE not 720
3)AMD APU`s or CPU`s whatever you want to call them, have more powerful GPU`s

---

1) You don't really know that
2) With all due respect, I'll call it what I choose.
3) Yes, exponentially. But is it a wise business decision to assume that average people are going to sacrifice on-chip cache for something they don't need? Equivalently priced Ivy Bridge/Haswell Pentiums have more cache. So, in a business environment, is it worth it to sacrifice necessary cache for speedier graphics? I think not.

Quote:

---

Im no console lover, TBH i hate both because of the way they both treat customers.HOWEVER, sony treats them somewhat better and was the main reason MS HAD TO drop theyre own draconian DRM systems (to some degree).

---

You're forgetting one thing: Xbox 360 was (and still is) easily hackable to allow bootlegs to be played, and to be played online. This isn't by accident. Anyone who thinks Microsoft is opposed to it is uninformed. In reality, Microsoft is a far wealthier corporation than Sony and that's why they run a business model where paying users effectively subsidize the bootleggers. And even the bootleggers have to pay for Live service. Sony is a Japanese corporation. They have a lot less capital than Microsoft and can't afford to subsidize parasites. PS3 still hasn't been hacked until this day for this reason. And if you doubt this hypothesis, consider that it is now being revealed that satellite providers also 'allowed' their systems to be hacked so-to-speak in orther so that they could gain subscribers. Just like satellite television, Microsoft will allow this to continue, perhaps even with their present-day console, and then effect brutal copy-protection mechanisms to thwart the bootleggers.

Quote:

---

So yea.Sony is losing ,AMD is losing on this (they only landed all 3 major consoles...) .And all is well.

---

He who remembers the past understands the future. AMD has always had poor foresight. They've fallen behind and have been forced to enter niche markets to feed their corporate bloat. This is only an intermmediate stage in a long attrition. They will fall.

http://fc08.deviantart.net/fs71/f/20...ek-d39x6sq.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mockingbird

.....................
3) Yes, exponentially. But is it a wise business decision to assume that average people are going to sacrifice on-chip cache for something they don't need? Equivalently priced Ivy Bridge/Haswell Pentiums have more cache. So, in a business environment, is it worth it to sacrifice necessary cache for speedier graphics? I think not.

..................

---

From all the better reasons to get Intel low end offerings compared to AMD ones (such as power characteristic, battery life, better resale value, higher single thread performance, etc), you have to pick on chip cache amount ? CACHE ?? Are you serious ? :shocked: ...... :ROTF:

please guys ignore and do not reply to people's rant. Read up what ever is written and let us assume that the writer had a bad day or is smoking some weird stuff while posting. He won the aguement by pulling in replies to the post, which is his sole aim and I have to give the poster some credits for the fit he pulled off.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spursindonesia

From all the better reasons to get Intel low end offerings compared to AMD ones (such as power characteristic, battery life, better resale value, higher single thread performance, etc), you have to pick on chip cache amount ? CACHE ?? Are you serious ? :shocked: ...... :ROTF:

---

Not to mention cache amount comparisons on totally different architectures is quite useless :p:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shocker003

please guys ignore and do not reply to people's rant. Read up what ever is written and let us assume that the writer had a bad day or is smoking some weird stuff while posting. He won the aguement by pulling in replies to the post, which is his sole aim and I have to give the poster some credits for the fit he pulled off.

---

Good point.

FX excavator chips in Q4 of 2014... all new socket/chipset/ddr4 and 14nm finfet


:-) i can dream cant I

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tbone8ty

FX excavator chips in Q4 of 2014... all new socket/chipset/ddr4 and 14nm finfet


:-) i can dream cant I

---

14nm tech process is impossible. DDR4 support is highly unlikely (and makes no sense if you think about it).

AMD themselves said that they were abandoning high-end sector, you just have to accept this.

Do you know why I love AMD?
A less fortunate friend of mine was running a lower-end HP machine (250w Bestec PSU, Athlon 64 X2, 2GB DDR2-533, low end 700-series chipset)...

Was able to drop in an FX-4130, AM3+ (880G) motherboard, 4 GB DDR3-1333, HD 5550 for all of $140, and without having to change another thing in the system, no need for OS reinstall. :)

AMD does not seem to have the resources to take care of the AMx socket platform...
Also with the new hUMA memory controller, AMD would probably be unwise to work on two radically different designs.

okay so make an 8 core APU

done

1 platform

maybe x86 is dead? Seems pretty inefficient to me, that requires huge amount of transistors and power for a lot of discrete instructions, most of them already obsolete and barely used.

FM2+ Surely will receive an 8 core w/out APU Steamroller cores or something like that.

Maybe a retro compatible FM3 socket could bring quad Channel DDR3 for us. 256-bit Ram bandwidth will be great for 8-cores Steamroller and APUs purpose also.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Barr3l Rid3r

maybe x86 is dead? Seems pretty inefficient to me, that requires huge amount of transistors and power for a lot of discrete instructions, most of them already obsolete and barely used.

FM2+ Surely will receive an 8 core w/out APU Steamroller cores or something like that.

Maybe a retro compatible FM3 socket could bring quad Channel DDR3 for us. 256-bit Ram bandwidth will be great for 8-cores Steamroller and APUs purpose also.

---

I don't think it's that simple to just overhaul the basic architecture though. Either you'd need to have some sort of translation system for the new architecture to work with the machine code in today's software, or you'd have to literally recompile everything to make it work. Same way Microsoft is taking baby steps with ARM (and it took a very long time at that), you'd basically have to have all the major hardware and software companies get together and develop a new standard for the whole industry to be used well into the future