bit-tech.net

AMD FX-8350 review

Comments 26 to 50 of 58

Reply
GuilleAcoustic 6th November 2012, 17:00 Quote
sometimes changes seams to be no significant, but maybe this architecture change will require 2 / 3 gen to "shine". I have hope in upcoming gen.
Harlequin 6th November 2012, 17:01 Quote
yeah because AMD chips power the worlds fastest super computer ;)
Shirty 6th November 2012, 17:10 Quote
They'll shift a lot of these in PC World pre-built gaming machines.
Snips 6th November 2012, 17:37 Quote
I refer my right honourable gentlemen to my previous documented statement :p
tonyd223 6th November 2012, 17:43 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuilleAcoustic
sometimes changes seams to be no significant, but maybe this architecture change will require 2 / 3 gen to "shine". I have hope in upcoming gen.

Whaaaaa?

I have hope that we'll find life on Mars... and that Barack will ride again
GuilleAcoustic 6th November 2012, 17:45 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snips
I refer my right honourable gentlemen to my previous documented statement :p

lol Snips .... you're late, I was expecting you between post #1 and post #1 with a "I TOLD YOU" in all its glory :D
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonyd223
Whaaaaa?

I have hope that we'll find life on Mars... and that Barack will ride again

Lemme dream a lil' ... :D. And "Life on Mars" will always refear to the song to me (and more recently, the serie from the BBC UK).
Somer_Himpson 6th November 2012, 18:09 Quote
AMd are and have been pointless for years, LEARN FROM YOUR MISTAKES YOU DUMMIES AND CHANGE!
bulldogjeff 6th November 2012, 18:34 Quote
Hang on a minute boys. Before we all go AMD bashing. Lets look at the facts here, AMD wins the idle power consumption race by quite a margin..

So basically if you want to build a PC that spends 90% of it's time doing fu*k all, then Pile driver is then way to go.

On a serious note now, when I built my last rig it was built with Bulldozer in mind and we all know how that turned out, so I waited for pile driver hoping for some thing half decent.
But as it stands I have no reason to move away from my 1100T.

As much as I like AMD stuff, I can't break it, where as I have trashed a few of Intels finest, I think the next big upgrade for me will have to be a return to Intel again.
Votick 6th November 2012, 19:29 Quote
Just like to say I have one of these arrived today and it's performing well.

Tomorrow I shall see how far I can push it. But for now BF3 benchies :)
Votick 6th November 2012, 20:06 Quote
Why you core parking Windows 8? :/
Baz 6th November 2012, 23:53 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Votick
Just like to say I have one of these arrived today and it's performing well.

Tomorrow I shall see how far I can push it. But for now BF3 benchies :)

BF3 is GPU limited; We found no diff from a 4GHz quad core down to a 2GHz dual core. Run shogun 2 instead :)
.//TuNdRa 7th November 2012, 00:26 Quote
Much like Metro 2033 then. I'm not all that surprised TBH.

I'm still convinced that the backwards compatability is hurting them. THey can't change anything too radically because then the Northbridge will need changing to suit, which means a whole new line of motherboards, at least.

I'd be curious to look at frame-render times on an AMD system to an Intel one. You'd think, in theory, that they'd be shorter on the Intel, since the NB is in the processor, so it's handing the PCI-E lanes directly, while AMD have to go round the Northbridge, then CPU, then back again.
Horizon 7th November 2012, 00:43 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by bulldogjeff
Hang on a minute boys. Before we all go AMD bashing. Lets look at the facts here, AMD wins the idle power consumption race by quite a margin..

So basically if you want to build a PC that spends 90% of it's time doing fu*k all, then Pile driver is then way to go.

On a serious note now, when I built my last rig it was built with Bulldozer in mind and we all know how that turned out, so I waited for pile driver hoping for some thing half decent.
But as it stands I have no reason to move away from my 1100T.

As much as I like AMD stuff, I can't break it, where as I have trashed a few of Intels finest, I think the next big upgrade for me will have to be a return to Intel again.

Well, this is AMDs last cpu from here on out they are just going to APU, Server CPUs, and whatever materializes out of the ARM movement. Your choices for CPU grunt is pretty much going to be Intel, Intel, and Intel in the future.
SuicideNeil 7th November 2012, 01:42 Quote
At first I was like 'this looks promising...', but then I was like 'nah, crashed & burned again'; never mind AMD, you'll get it right again, one day...
leexgx 7th November 2012, 05:20 Quote
Bit-tech or reviewers please refine form calling BT type CPUs 8 core when its 4 Module with 8 Integer cores (you could call them core assist)
if it was really an 8core cpu it be beating most of Intels cpus when doing muti-threading tasks, where are currently it has issues beating the AMD X6 cpus
Harlequin 7th November 2012, 08:50 Quote
AMD are calling it 8 core - so please contact them.Thank you.
fluxtatic 7th November 2012, 09:33 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Horizon
Well, this is AMDs last cpu from here on out they are just going to APU, Server CPUs, and whatever materializes out of the ARM movement. Your choices for CPU grunt is pretty much going to be Intel, Intel, and Intel in the future.

If I'm not terribly mistaken, there's at least one more coming: Steamroller.

Assuming my Phenom II doesn't die, I'll likely wait for Steamroller. I'm just a wee bit tempted by the 6-core version of Piledriver, but there are a whole lot of other things I could do with that money, computer-wise, before I'd upgrade. Once Steamroller drops, I'll see at that point whether it's worth the while to upgrade my proc. If my current box seems tired by then, the options will be $150-ish dollar processor upgrade, versus $700-ish for a switch to Intel (both being very rough guesses). It'll be Haswell or maybe Broadwell by then, and I have to admit I'm a little stoked on the idea of 14nm processors. If AMD can get it together, hopefully they'll be on 22nm by then.
littlepuppi 7th November 2012, 10:24 Quote
Apols for brevity, on phone.

Amd over achieved relative to size and scale, they are now performing about right, but we as enthusiasts want them back to their glory days...

This is a move in the right direction. I expect steamroller to be decent but still lag intel.. However is cpu 'grunt' really that important to many people anymore ? What can't a piledriver do really and truely?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
littlepuppi 7th November 2012, 10:27 Quote
Ps i always find bit tech and custom pc take a negative slant on amd, even if its generally negative they are at the extremes so i don't read their amd cpu reviews anymore. This started under lizard imho.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Hustler 7th November 2012, 11:53 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by fluxtatic


If I'm not terribly mistaken, there's at least one more coming: Steamroller.

Yep..Steamroller is due next year sometime, it's where AMD eat a whole load of humble pie and put back in some hardware calculation units they took out for Bulldozer cores, basically moving back to full fat cores rather than this 'module' design, as well as moving to 28nm.

Internal slides seem to suggest that it should/will result in a 20-30% IPC improvement over Piledriver, but who knows.
javaman 7th November 2012, 20:22 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackshark
I am looking at a 4 CPU AMD server with the new 16 core processors at work, to demolish our PostGIS delays. 64 cores running at 2.2GHz. For the same money I can get 16 3.3Ghz cores from Intel or 24 slower.... It we had went with SQL 2012 then that would have been ok because of the licencing costs, but with PostGIS more cores = happy customers. For the server market AMD are providing some compelling solutions. For integrated solutions, netbooks, laptops and the base end of the PC market, AMD is the way to go. But for enthusiasts it is hard to see anything that they can provide.

In terms of CPU design, I assume by now AMD must have taken Intels design apart and understand where the single threaded performance difference is coming from.

And remind me, why have we not had a the same level of die shrinkage with AMD? as intel.

Still waiting on Anandtech's report for that one. While Bulldozer put up a decent fight in the server space, L1 cache as well as other cache related problems means despite the extra cores, performance is below what it should be.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Somer_Himpson
AMd are and have been pointless for years, LEARN FROM YOUR MISTAKES YOU DUMMIES AND CHANGE!

Change can't and won't happen without R&D. It takes time to develop but what is most alarming is AMD seem to be relying on software to fix hardware problems. APU's could be the future but again they will require software solutions. Top it off that Intel will always have something up their sleeve where as AMD has to roll the dice and hope people will buy enough to fund the next step.

Maybe it's time for AMD to look at something other than x86 and try and gamble with a change in computing. Apple could move away from it, Windows has RT which is usable on ARM and Nvidia, Intel are also pushing in that direction maybe roll the dice that that is the next step computing takes.
Andy Mc 8th November 2012, 05:00 Quote
I'm suprised that AMD have not gone for a kind of x86_64 FPGA style CPU based on their APUs. Just have one CPU with a massive bunch of general purpose process cores that can be leveraged in different ways, on the fly in realtime, depending on the required work load/application that is running.
leexgx 8th November 2012, 05:13 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harlequin
AMD are calling it 8 core - so please contact them.Thank you.

its still 4 module cores with extra Integer cores that are very limited use (as tests show)

was all the bit-tech tests done with the 2 MS patches to fix core parking issue and how work got loaded onto the each module and core (so 1 thread did not end up onto 2 modules)
Neogumbercules 8th November 2012, 21:46 Quote
I wonder if AMD is too worried about competing in performance against Intel anymore. They have some kind of APU in the Wii U and they are also reportedly providing CPUs and/or GPUs for the PS4 and next Xbox.

I have a 3670k Llano APU in my HTPC and it works great. They seem to be more interested in expanding their markets rather than trying to beat Intel at their own game.
icemanTM 22nd November 2012, 10:44 Quote
Even though I use 2500k would love to see AMD back on its feet and kick intels monopoly ok so called locked CPU.... they are forcing the lower budget class enthusiast to purchase higher end CPU.... this has to stop...
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums