Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 16 of 43

Thread: News - AMD FX-8350 Piledriver-based CPU to land mid-Q3

  1. #1
    HEXUS.admin
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    28,790
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    1,863 times in 636 posts

    News - AMD FX-8350 Piledriver-based CPU to land mid-Q3

    Along with other members of the Vishera family.
    Read more.

  2. #2
    Super Nerd
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Cambridge
    Posts
    1,785
    Thanks
    22
    Thanked
    105 times in 72 posts

    Re: News - AMD FX-8350 Piledriver-based CPU to land mid-Q3

    Clocked 10% faster, 6% faster at same clock speed - sounds pretty humdrum to me. A 3GHz Piledriver should be equivalent of a 3.4-3.5GHz 'dozer? And still burning 125W on the high end... still doesn't sound competitive without slashing margins pretty thin.

  3. #3
    Not a good person scaryjim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    15,032
    Thanks
    1,193
    Thanked
    2,242 times in 1,844 posts
    • scaryjim's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Dell Inspiron
      • CPU:
      • Core i5 8250U
      • Memory:
      • 1x 8GB DDR4 2400
      • Storage:
      • 128GB M.2 SSD + 1TB HDD
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Radeon R5 230
      • PSU:
      • Battery/Dell brick
      • Case:
      • Dell Inspiron 5570
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10
      • Monitor(s):
      • 15" 1080p laptop panel

    Re: News - AMD FX-8350 Piledriver-based CPU to land mid-Q3

    Quote Originally Posted by kingpotnoodle View Post
    ... A 3GHz Piledriver should be equivalent of a 3.4-3.5GHz 'dozer? And still burning 125W on the high end...
    Erm, no. A 3GHz Piledriver is the equivalent of ~ a 3.2GHz 'dozer.

    The high end Piledriver chips (125W TDP) will be clocked at 4GHz or higher, and be the performance equivalent of a 4.2GHz (or higher) 'dozer (i.e. ~ 14% performance enhancement).

    If you want to consider lower down the scale, the 95W FX-8100 has a 2.8GHz base speed - an equivalent 95W Piledriver will be clocked at 3.1GHz (like the 125W FX-8120) but perform like a 3.3GHz 'dozer, with a 30W lower TDP.

    Besides, within the same power envelopeactual silicon power draw can vary significantly - the TDP is only there as a cooling guide for quick ratification of existing third-party coolers. Trinity seems to have much better power characteristics than Llano, which bodes well for desktop Piledriver...
    Last edited by scaryjim; 02-07-2012 at 10:35 AM. Reason: Getting my facts right!

  4. #4
    Registered+
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    96
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    1 time in 1 post

    Re: News - AMD FX-8350 Piledriver-based CPU to land mid-Q3

    A 10% increase in power is nothing when Intel is beasting AMD in benchmarks by a significant margin. This means the CPU performance gap for AMD will only grow wider.

  5. #5
    Senior Member Brewster0101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,614
    Thanks
    45
    Thanked
    54 times in 44 posts
    • Brewster0101's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus m5a99x evo
      • CPU:
      • AMD FX 8350
      • Memory:
      • 8GB (2x4) Corsair Vengence DDR3 1600mghz
      • Storage:
      • Western Green 3TB + Samsung 850Evo 512MB SSD, + 2TB NAS
      • Graphics card(s):
      • MSI 280X
      • PSU:
      • Corsair AXi760
      • Case:
      • Corsair 650D
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 Pro
      • Monitor(s):
      • LG 27" 27EA63 IPS LED
      • Internet:
      • 120Mb Bt

    Re: News - AMD FX-8350 Piledriver-based CPU to land mid-Q3

    Quote Originally Posted by billybear View Post
    A 10% increase in power is nothing when Intel is beasting AMD in benchmarks by a significant margin. This means the CPU performance gap for AMD will only grow wider.
    Not interested in AMD beating Intel in the performance stakes - and I don't think AMD care either. What we want is a competitive CPU that can do everything fast. The fact Intel CPU's might be faster on benchmarks doesn't mean they are any faster in real world applications.

    100 Frames per second or 150 FPS, who cares....

  6. Received thanks from:

    dfour (02-07-2012)

  7. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    147
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    7 times in 6 posts

    Re: News - AMD FX-8350 Piledriver-based CPU to land mid-Q3

    Quote Originally Posted by Brewster0101 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by billybear View Post
    A 10% increase in power is nothing when Intel is beasting AMD in benchmarks by a significant margin. This means the CPU performance gap for AMD will only grow wider.
    Not interested in AMD beating Intel in the performance stakes - and I don't think AMD care either. What we want is a competitive CPU that can do everything fast. The fact Intel CPU's might be faster on benchmarks doesn't mean they are any faster in real world applications.

    100 Frames per second or 150 FPS, who cares....
    I have to agree, bought an FX-8120, clocked it @ 4Ghz and I have never seen it hit 100% could probably left it stock speeds and still been happy!

  8. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    363
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked
    23 times in 17 posts
    • Bagpuss's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Pro Wi-Fi
      • CPU:
      • Intel i9-9900K
      • Memory:
      • 32GB Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro DDR4 3400
      • Storage:
      • Gigabyte 512GB NVMe SSD, Crucial 1Tb NVMe SSD, 6Tb Seagate 7200
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVGA 2080 Black Edition
      • PSU:
      • Corsair 850 RMx 850 Gold
      • Case:
      • Fractal Meshify C Copper Front Panel
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10
      • Monitor(s):
      • LG UK850 27in 4K HDR Freesync/Gsync
      • Internet:
      • Three Mobile 4G Unlimited Data (35-45Mbit)

    Re: News - AMD FX-8350 Piledriver-based CPU to land mid-Q3

    So Pikeydriver CPU's will be approx 6% faster, clock for clock than Derpdozer..?

    Now, given that Derpdozer CPU's are roughly 10-12% slower than Phenom II's, clock for clock..how is this still anything but a fail from AMD.?

    I mean, an 8350 overclocked to 4.5Ghz which is probably what most of them will top out at, with non exotic cooling, will still only be 5%, maybe 10% if your lucky, faster than a 2yr old Phenom II x6 @4Ghz.

    ..that's just crap really.

  9. #8
    Not a good person scaryjim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    15,032
    Thanks
    1,193
    Thanked
    2,242 times in 1,844 posts
    • scaryjim's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Dell Inspiron
      • CPU:
      • Core i5 8250U
      • Memory:
      • 1x 8GB DDR4 2400
      • Storage:
      • 128GB M.2 SSD + 1TB HDD
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Radeon R5 230
      • PSU:
      • Battery/Dell brick
      • Case:
      • Dell Inspiron 5570
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10
      • Monitor(s):
      • 15" 1080p laptop panel

    Re: News - AMD FX-8350 Piledriver-based CPU to land mid-Q3

    Quote Originally Posted by Bagpuss View Post
    Now, given that Derpdozer CPU's are roughly 10-12% slower than Phenom II's, clock for clock..how is this still anything but a fail from AMD.?
    a) Bulldozer theoretical IPC was actually a shade higher than Phenom II, they just weren't able to make use of the IPC on tap. There's one particular test of theoretical INT throughput where the FX-4100 beats a same-clocked Phenom II X4. Float was a different matter, of course... The question is whether these improvements actually increase IPC, or just help Piledriver use the IPC on tap more effectively...

    b) Because Piledriver can actually hit the clock speeds Bulldozer was intended to run at. Stock clocks for the high end 8-core parts are rumoured to be at or above 4GHz, and lower core-count parts could actually end up well above that. Fitting a 10% clock increase into the same TDP is pretty damn good you know...

  10. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    240
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked
    8 times in 4 posts
    • Jedibeeftrix's system
      • Motherboard:
      • MSI X99 SLI-Plus
      • CPU:
      • i7 5820k
      • Memory:
      • 4x 4GB DDR4 2400
      • Storage:
      • 128GB (SSD) 2TB (7200rpm) 2TB (5900rpm)
      • Graphics card(s):
      • MSI Lightning 7970
      • PSU:
      • Silverstone 750W Gold
      • Case:
      • Silverstone FT05
      • Operating System:
      • Win7 64
      • Monitor(s):
      • 3x Dell 2405FPW

    Re: News - AMD FX-8350 Piledriver-based CPU to land mid-Q3

    i'd like to see a 95W eight-core piledriver.........
    5820k / 16GB DDR4 2400 / MSI X99 SLI Plus / Asus Strix Vega64 / AOC 32"

  11. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    780
    Thanks
    30
    Thanked
    49 times in 38 posts

    Re: News - AMD FX-8350 Piledriver-based CPU to land mid-Q3

    Maybe it's time to remind people that Ivy Bridge was a whole 6% faster than Sandy Bridge?

  12. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    363
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked
    23 times in 17 posts
    • Bagpuss's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Pro Wi-Fi
      • CPU:
      • Intel i9-9900K
      • Memory:
      • 32GB Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro DDR4 3400
      • Storage:
      • Gigabyte 512GB NVMe SSD, Crucial 1Tb NVMe SSD, 6Tb Seagate 7200
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVGA 2080 Black Edition
      • PSU:
      • Corsair 850 RMx 850 Gold
      • Case:
      • Fractal Meshify C Copper Front Panel
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10
      • Monitor(s):
      • LG UK850 27in 4K HDR Freesync/Gsync
      • Internet:
      • Three Mobile 4G Unlimited Data (35-45Mbit)

    Re: News - AMD FX-8350 Piledriver-based CPU to land mid-Q3

    Quote Originally Posted by Jimbo75 View Post
    Maybe it's time to remind people that Ivy Bridge was a whole 6% faster than Sandy Bridge?
    Which was already a whole 40-50% faster than Phenom II clock for clock....

  13. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    780
    Thanks
    30
    Thanked
    49 times in 38 posts

    Re: News - AMD FX-8350 Piledriver-based CPU to land mid-Q3

    Quote Originally Posted by Bagpuss View Post
    Which was already a whole 40-50% faster than Phenom II clock for clock....
    Yes isn't it just amazing what an extra $40 billion a year revenue and a 2 year lead in process technology brings?

    Do you people even realise what it's like for AMD being up against this behemoth who WHEN THEY LOST, BRIBED OEM'S BILLIONS IN ORDER TO AVOID USING AMD CHIPS ANYWAY?

    Honestly wtf is wrong with you? AMD is doing a better job with extremely limited resources and if you can't see that you seriously need to educate yourself to the reality of the industry. Do you enjoy intel's penny pinching? Hot Ivy Bridge cpu's that barely improve on Sandy, but sure help intel to save up even more $billions? "K" series chips, turbo, hyperthreading - all these things on the same bit of silicon but laser cut off so you can't use them unless you pay more $?

    Jesus.

  14. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Kingdom of Fife (Scotland)
    Posts
    4,991
    Thanks
    393
    Thanked
    220 times in 190 posts
    • crossy's system
      • Motherboard:
      • ASUS Sabertooth X99
      • CPU:
      • Intel 5830k / Noctua NH-D15
      • Memory:
      • 32GB Crucial Ballistix DDR4
      • Storage:
      • 500GB Samsung 850Pro NVMe, 1TB Samsung 850EVO SSD, 1TB Seagate SSHD, 2TB WD Green, 8TB Seagate
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Asus Strix GTX970OC
      • PSU:
      • Corsair AX750 (modular)
      • Case:
      • Coolermaster HAF932 (with wheels)
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 Pro 64bit, Ubuntu 16.04LTS
      • Monitor(s):
      • LG Flattron W2361V
      • Internet:
      • VirginMedia 200Mb

    Re: News - AMD FX-8350 Piledriver-based CPU to land mid-Q3

    Quote Originally Posted by Jedibeeftrix View Post
    i'd like to see a 95W eight-core piledriver.........
    Quote Originally Posted by Bagpuss View Post
    Which was already a whole 40-50% faster than Phenom II clock for clock....
    95W octo-core would be on my shopping list too. Actually looking at the current AMD processors and - to my untutored eye at least - they appear pretty uncompetitive v's the 1155 stuff from Intel. In my case particularly the AMD TDP's seem pretty high for the relatively modest performance (if the b'mark's I've looked at are representative).

    So at the moment if/when I decide to move off my current 1090T (which is serving me very well - despite some benchmarks painting it as performing not much better than a good Core2Duo) I think I'll be defecting to Intel for the first time in a long time, (been an AMD user since the days of the Duron).

    Career status: still enjoying my new career in DevOps, but it's keeping me busy...

  15. #14
    Not a good person scaryjim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    15,032
    Thanks
    1,193
    Thanked
    2,242 times in 1,844 posts
    • scaryjim's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Dell Inspiron
      • CPU:
      • Core i5 8250U
      • Memory:
      • 1x 8GB DDR4 2400
      • Storage:
      • 128GB M.2 SSD + 1TB HDD
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Radeon R5 230
      • PSU:
      • Battery/Dell brick
      • Case:
      • Dell Inspiron 5570
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10
      • Monitor(s):
      • 15" 1080p laptop panel

    Re: News - AMD FX-8350 Piledriver-based CPU to land mid-Q3

    Quote Originally Posted by Bagpuss View Post
    Which was already a whole 40-50% faster than Phenom II clock for clock....
    Questionable stat. At launch the differences between the two were very dependant on which test you were looking at.

    Besides, how is that relevant to your point? You were complaining that Piledriver was only 6% higher IPC than Bulldozer, so the comparison against the improvement between two Intel generations is valid. No-one was claiming that Piledriver was going to pulp IB, just that they're a clear improvement over BD. Personally I'd take +10% clockspeed *and* IPC improvements at the same TDP: after all, IB only managed a +3% clockspeed improvement, and despite cutting the TDP by 18W IB actually draws almost exactly the same amount of power as SB, which shows you exactly how much you can read into TDP figures...

    Quote Originally Posted by crossy View Post
    ... Actually looking at the current AMD processors and - to my untutored eye at least - they appear pretty uncompetitive v's the 1155 stuff from Intel. In my case particularly the AMD TDP's seem pretty high for the relatively modest performance (if the b'mark's I've looked at are representative). ...
    Bulldozer certainly had higher power draw than expected and lower performance - for a whole raft of reasons. Piledriver addresses a number of those concerns, but not all of them - some are down to architecture decisions and may never be fully resolved (the unusually low floating-point performance, for instance); others may need fixing in software (the Windows thread scheduler in Win 8 is meant to be much better optimised for Bulldozer/Piledriver, for instance). Power-draw is one that should improve massively - based on Trinity laptop reviews and desktop previews Piledriver is a much more efficient core.

    Of course, 95W octo-core processors already exist - the original FX-8100 is such a beast. But it's low-clocked and under-performing: a 95W Phenom II X6 is currently a better multithreaded option.
    Last edited by scaryjim; 02-07-2012 at 04:34 PM.

  16. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    780
    Thanks
    30
    Thanked
    49 times in 38 posts

    Re: News - AMD FX-8350 Piledriver-based CPU to land mid-Q3

    Quote Originally Posted by crossy View Post
    95W octo-core would be on my shopping list too. Actually looking at the current AMD processors and - to my untutored eye at least - they appear pretty uncompetitive v's the 1155 stuff from Intel. In my case particularly the AMD TDP's seem pretty high for the relatively modest performance (if the b'mark's I've looked at are representative).

    So at the moment if/when I decide to move off my current 1090T (which is serving me very well - despite some benchmarks painting it as performing not much better than a good Core2Duo) I think I'll be defecting to Intel for the first time in a long time, (been an AMD user since the days of the Duron).
    Depends on what you're going to be doing with it really. I bought a 2500K last month (yes I deliberately didn't buy Ivy) because I'm a gamer and I basically need the extra single threaded performance. If you're using it mostly multithreaded there really isn't much point in switching.

    Piledriver will close the gap, but not by enough to count for gamers. If you are a gamer, might as well go ahead and buy that 2500K now.

  17. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    363
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked
    23 times in 17 posts
    • Bagpuss's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Pro Wi-Fi
      • CPU:
      • Intel i9-9900K
      • Memory:
      • 32GB Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro DDR4 3400
      • Storage:
      • Gigabyte 512GB NVMe SSD, Crucial 1Tb NVMe SSD, 6Tb Seagate 7200
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVGA 2080 Black Edition
      • PSU:
      • Corsair 850 RMx 850 Gold
      • Case:
      • Fractal Meshify C Copper Front Panel
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10
      • Monitor(s):
      • LG UK850 27in 4K HDR Freesync/Gsync
      • Internet:
      • Three Mobile 4G Unlimited Data (35-45Mbit)

    Re: News - AMD FX-8350 Piledriver-based CPU to land mid-Q3

    Quote Originally Posted by scaryjim View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Bagpuss View Post
    Which was already a whole 40-50% faster than Phenom II clock for clock....
    Questionable stat. At launch the differences between the two were very dependant on which test you were looking at.
    Not questionable at all for the stuff i use my PC for, and coming from a Phenom II @3.8ghz, to a 2500k at 3.6Ghz, it's 40% faster..

    I ran AMD for 4yrs, no blind fan here, Bulldozer was a flop, and for the foreseeable future, any CPU based on the fundamental design, is nothing but lipstick on a pig...

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •