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

[tajoh111]

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.

[informal]

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.

[Sparky]

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 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.

[tajoh111]

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.

[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

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?

[tajoh111]

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

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.

[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!

[AMDforME]

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.

[xVeinx]

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...

[tajoh111]

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.

[Sparky]

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.

[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

[AliG]

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

[tajoh111]

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.

[To(V)bo Co(V)bo]

@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?

[Sparky]

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.

[Olivon]

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



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

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

[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.

[DeathReborn]

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.

[Greg83]

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.

[jjj]

"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.

[Piledriver]

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.

[Greg83]

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.

[massman]

if enthusiast segment is still live after

Afaik, enthusiast and DIY grew in 2013.

[zalbard]

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.