AMD "Piledriver" refresh of Zambezi - info, speculations, test, fans

**BeepBeep2** · 10-15-2012, 12:42 AM

Originally Posted by FlanK3r

Again, this is not so simply (black or white). In some reviews (I dont know, if half of reviews or less or more) was 8150 power consumption lower than 1100T at stock. Of course, theris big difference in OC load. 8150 after is near SB-E CPUs. If u saw graphs voltage/power consumption, every chip is horrible in power consumption from some point, depens at voltages. Man must find some compromise between OC and voltage. IB has great power cons., but from some voltage is worse than SB with high voltage.

+1
I wasn't saying it was black or white at stock, but at load it is...
I agree completely with that observation

**vario** · 10-15-2012, 01:52 AM

PS I'm tired of ignorant people ,I just don't say it flat out

Thanks man, youre the sane one with whola lotta objectivity and you were always right.

Thuban heavily OCed (4+Ghz) draw A LOT of power.

Thats true, nobodys debating that,but BD draws EVEN MORE.

Also I doubt that highly OCed Thuban ,even with OCed NB, could be faster overall chip than PD @ 5Ghz.

Well from what you said earlier you should KNOW not "doubt".
Also 5ghz figure is with water cooling setup,so you should know its probably lower for air.
And finishing ,NOBODY said phenom was OVERALL better,but IN SOME NOT SOME RARE CASES.So youre answering a question nobody asked.
Then you showed us a bunch of stock picked benchmarks.Great,again not the question i was asking...But i hope you do feel fulfilled

.

then

I don't want to link the gaming results since FX8150 is at least on par with 1100T or faster in every game they tested.

Thats just not true, i gave you a link,here they come again.

Again, thats Witcher 2 med details, HD res,X6 is overclocked lightly,no NB clocking.In this test BD consumes 50W more.
And yes, thats a nitpicked benchmark.However there are those out there.When someone competent overclock X6 its mostly tieing and being better than FX
So FX for such a person is a weak upgrade in best.
Thats impossibru ?
Ok, another site, another weakly oced thuban vs pretty much MAX air BD

Thats the OMG part that PD needs to fix, and it looks like it might not.

Even stock

An excerpt from the review "

The "tail" of the curve for the AMD processors is telling. Although the FX chips keep pace with the Phenom II X6 1100T in the first 95% or so of frames rendered, their frame times spike upward to meet the slower A8-3850 budget APU and Phenom II X4 850 in the last ~5% of frames. In the most crucial function of gaming performance, latency avoidance, the more expensive FX processors essentially perform like low-end CPUs. "

But no.FX are no worse than phenom.Never.In real scenarios.
If someone has a link to 8150 vs 1100T both overclocked to they best.I would be grateful.

**BeepBeep2** · 10-15-2012, 02:00 AM

Originally Posted by informal

Don't worry,Beep saw the "light",now he is here to teach us a few things

. It doesn't matter that I don't even use intel for comparison and that I already said it cannot compete with intel.
Beep,why don't you just take your 2500K/2600K and play with it and leave this section to "deluded fanboys" .

Why would I do that? I'm too busy with AMD hardware atm.
Currently playing with FX-8150...got some Phenom II to OC too for the team...

Fresh from facebook through phone:

Click image for larger version.

Name: 249519_479277895426414_479545460_n.jpg
Views: 1703
Size: 72.3 KB
ID: 130631

**Manicdan** · 10-15-2012, 07:29 AM

FACT:
people who care about efficiency of their cpu should NOT push it to the MAX.
all chips have a great middle point where they can do so much with so little power

IB was able to do 4.0ghz or a little more at 1.1v
thuban can do ~3.7ghz on all cores at like 1.2v
SB can do ~4.4ghz at 1.25v

past those points the scaling starts to require ALOT of voltage and thus efficiency goes down the drain. BD i didnt play with or watch too closely so i cant tell you its sweet spot. to do a test, simply lock in the voltage, and OC as high it will go, and track its perf and its wattage, then increase volts a step and repeat. it will become clear that to reach +5ghz probably need nearly twice the power as 4.5ghz

**sdlvx** · 10-15-2012, 07:59 AM

What chips do you guys think are going to be better binned? The slower 95w FX 8320 or the faster 125w FX 8350?

**demonkevy666** · 10-15-2012, 08:11 AM

Originally Posted by sdlvx

What chips do you guys think are going to be better binned? The slower 95w FX 8320 or the faster 125w FX 8350?

From what I've read, most chips are binned by the slowest core.

seeing as the later is high clock speed I would go for the 8350 over the 8320.

I've seen plenty of FX 8150 out clock most FX 8120.

TDP can't really tell you what will clock higher, TDP is really about the amount of heat out power.

**Barr3l Rid3r** · 10-15-2012, 08:12 AM

Originally Posted by sdlvx

What chips do you guys think are going to be better binned? The slower 95w FX 8320 or the faster 125w FX 8350?

it should depends of what kind of cooler you will use..I guess 95w for air and WC and maybe 125W it's better for ln2

**vario** · 10-15-2012, 09:25 AM

@Manicdan

Thats half true.You just have to know performance/voltage points of your cpu.
There are times when i need max performance i can get, there are times when i need no more than 3ghz/1.1v (i have 1055T)
Idling i set 2ghz with 0.9v .I just manage my own P states.All i needed is a day for testing.
And from MAX tests you can more or less extrapolate the less demanding tests power wise.
Although yea ,i would gladly see a new type of tests normalized to some power consumption number.

**Manicdan** · 10-15-2012, 10:30 AM

thats what i do too.
with my x6 i had .85v for 800mhz, and 1.45v for 4.2ghz

**FlanK3r** · 10-15-2012, 02:04 PM

FX-8150 1.45V over 4800 MHz :-)...Not bad too.

**haylui** · 10-15-2012, 03:53 PM

overclocking - is it like you're getting a v12 engine and hope it has efficiency of hybrid car?

**BeepBeep2** · 10-15-2012, 04:59 PM

Originally Posted by haylui

overclocking - is it like you're getting a v12 engine and hope it has efficiency of hybrid car?

If it is a 2L V12, quite possibly. But the comparison wouldn't be against a hybrid car, more a V6...

**Yeroon** · 10-15-2012, 07:49 PM

Originally Posted by haylui

overclocking - is it like you're getting a v12 engine and hope it has efficiency of hybrid car?

But thing is, for the most part, high hp/displacement is typically a result of a very efficient engine. So while the ferrari's total fuel consumption isn't stellar, its brake specific fuel consumption is phenomenal. Basically, performance/watt in engine speak. A hybrid cheats, but if you live where your electricity comes from coal, theres a good chance you're doing worse then a modern car burning gas.

**TheBlueChanell** · 10-15-2012, 11:33 PM

I'm really hoping, at the very least, that PD can resolve all of BD's issues outside of the IPC deficit compared to SNB/Ivy/Thuban. I've already accepted the fact that there's no way that's going to happen. 5800K performance on average seems to only be about 5% higher and even with the FX variants added cache I don't see it getting much better. It absolutely needs to offer better power consumption at idle and especially load. I realize that they are still on 32nm but BD's power consumption was absolutely terrible and made it hard to even recommend to those who could actually put it to use for its strengths.

If the FX-8350 can improve on BD's OC capability, increase single-thread IPC a tad and provide much improved power figures at a decent price they could have a good product on their hands. If it's just as power hungry and/or doesn't oc as well it's basically going to be dead in the water. It saddens me that BD turned out the way it did, and it'll sadden me even further if PD is a dud after having time to tweak and improve things. In my opinion the FX-8150 never even competed with the 2500/2600K. I would feel guilty recommending them to people, even if they could run @ 5ghz.

When the battle was Phenom 2 X4/X6 vs. Core i5/i7 I had no problems recommending AMD to people as long as they were willing to overclock. Once you started pushing your CPU to the 3.8-4.2ghz range + 2.8/3.0ghz CPU-NB and optimized your RAM they became pretty competitive when it came to gaming and general system performance. When I moved from 1090T @ 4.2ghz/3.0ghz CPU-NB to a 2500K I was actually underwhelmed by it's performance considering all the positive buzz SNB was generating. It wasn't until I moved to a 2600K that I actually felt I upgraded. In my opinion the 2500K/1090T are interchangeable depending on what you need to use your system for.

**FlanK3r** · 10-16-2012, 01:12 AM

idle power consumption is at FX good, no problem with this. SOmetimes dpends at testing board. You can not compare example i7-2600k+P8Z77-V LX and FX-8150+Crosshair V Formula-Z (example), because this highend boards has +20W more than lowend boards (special chips at board, added chips for sata,etc etc).

Ussualy is FX-8150 still average 15-18% up to x6 1100T in performance and ussually average chip has at stock lower power consumption than 1100T. Of course, after high OC is different story.

**Olivon** · 10-17-2012, 11:15 AM

Pointed out that according to our news, FX-8350 price will be less than $ 200, about $ 199; FX-8320 is about $ 175; FX-6300 is about $ 135; FX-4300 is about $ 125.

http://chinese.vr-zone.com/38117/amd...9-us-10172012/