News - AMD FX processors won’t get Steamroller cores in 2014

[watercooled]

Anandtech did a good review of plx mobo for haswell. http://anandtech.com/show/6170/four-...cs-and-evga/26
AMD CPUs behaved differently to NVidia with single AMD GPU configurations taking a 3-7% hit on fps versus non plx. Nvidia single 580 was "indifferent". For both AMD and NVidia multi GPU got a boost with plx though it varied depending on how it was implemented by the manufacturers. power consumption takes a hit, as does price as plx chips are $40+

All I see are error margin results with a few minor exceptions for 3+ GPU setups. Plus, they don't explicitly list (coloured bar) a decent control there, just different implementations of PLX.

However, we can see the non-PLX Gigabyte GZ-Z77X-UD5H is 'faster' than any of the PLX boards with single and dual cards, and on par or still faster with 3.

TBH those graphs have just further reinforced my option to steer well clear of PLX boards, it seems to offer no realistic benefit despite the non-insignificant added cost.

[ik9000]

All I see are error margin results with a few minor exceptions for 3+ GPU setups. Plus, they don't explicitly list (coloured bar) a decent control there, just different implementations of PLX.

However, we can see the non-PLX Gigabyte GZ-Z77X-UD5H is 'faster' than any of the PLX boards with single and dual cards, and on par or still faster with 3.

TBH those graphs have just further reinforced my option to steer well clear of PLX boards, it seems to offer no realistic benefit despite the non-insignificant added cost.

and yet other mobo are slower particularly with NVidia cards. my conclusion was that for my budget I don't need plx. it only seems to yield benefits if you run 3 or 4 cards and I can't ever see myself being able to afford that.

[scaryjim]

ala PS4 and Xbox one?

not really, the PS4 and XBox One use semi-custom APUs based on Jaguar cpu core with a big chunky lump of coherent GPU. No MCM shenanigans there. I also doubt they have that many PCIe lanes, since they don't need to to connect many high-bandwidth peripherals.

... 2/ To do an MCM of two CPUs you need a way of tying them together. The Pentium 4 used the front side bus which was designed to easily make 2 socket motherboards. Opterons use HyperTransport as that is what it is designed for. All an FM2 part has is PCIe, which people have used for an inter CPU network but you can't do NUMA over it AFAIK, it requires additional electronics to switch the PCIe, and latency sucks.

It's OK, I do know that,I was just intrigued by the possibility. Also, if AMD do multicore processors with onboard PCIe and HT links for new FX/Opterons, it will give any MCM versions *huge* numbers of PCIe lanes. Makes me wonder if they might go down the route of smaller dice with clever linking to produce MCMs with 3 or 4 dice for the higher thread counts ... if that's even possible?

The only thing that would worry me about FM2+ being the way forward is the 100W limit on those motherboards.

Presumably that's just down to VRM/cooling design, and there's no reason FM3 couldn't have a more robust VRM specification to support higher TDPs. I suspect you get 100W TDP limits specified because there are *no* FM2+ APUs with TDPs higher than 100W....

[loyal986]

Well, we will see apu's with steamroller CPU and smoking fast graphics as integrated. I just wish the price to be low and my next machine is here...

[crossy]

It's OK, I do know that,I was just intrigued by the possibility. Also, if AMD do multicore processors with onboard PCIe and HT links for new FX/Opterons, it will give any MCM versions *huge* numbers of PCIe lanes. Makes me wonder if they might go down the route of smaller dice with clever linking to produce MCMs with 3 or 4 dice for the higher thread counts ... if that's even possible?

Am I misremembering, but I thought that when HyperTransport was introduced that there was a suggestion that it would be used for high-bandwidth stuff like cpu-cpu connections? I also can't help wondering if some kind of "book" arrangement (module containing close coupled discrete cpus with cooling) like IBM used for their high-end PowerPC stuff would be usable - surely something'd be possible in around the same size as a standard processor+large cooler volume?

Presumably that's just down to VRM/cooling design, and there's no reason FM3 couldn't have a more robust VRM specification to support higher TDPs. I suspect you get 100W TDP limits specified because there are *no* FM2+ APUs with TDPs higher than 100W....

Presumably that's just down to VRM/cooling design, and there's no reason FM3 couldn't have a more robust VRM specification to support higher TDPs. I suspect you get 100W TDP limits specified because there are *no* FM2+ APUs with TDPs higher than 100W....

Agree. I remember looking at 700 series chipset-based AM3+ board and being "limited" to 100W TDP, whereas the latest 990FX based board (Asus Sabertooth R2.0) I have proudly proclaims that it "Supports 140W Processors", but if you check on the board's spec page for cpu support, it says:

FX-9370(FD9370FHW8KHK, 4.4GHz, 8C, L3:8M, 220W,rev.C0,AM3+) ALL 1708 Due to the high TDP, please be noted there are limitations while using this CPU(i.e. special thermal required..)
FX-9590(FD9590FHW8KHK, 4.7GHz, 8C, L3:8M, 220W,rev.C0,AM3+) ALL 1708 Due to the high TDP, please be noted there are limitations while using this CPU(i.e. special thermal required..)

Which I'm guessing means that the board itself is fine as long as you find a way to dump all that waste heat!
We're having a heatwave;
a tropical heatwave;
the temperature's rising;
it isn't surprising
...
(Irving Berlin - and yes, I like that a whole lot better than White Christmas)

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

People do realise that the 220W TDP is not that uncommon for overclocked Phenom II X6 and FX8000 series CPUs?? Any of the decent 970 and 990X based motherboards from around £70 can handle overclocked Phenom II X6 and FX8000 CPUs. People need to consider the FX9000 series the same as an overclocked FX8000 CPU,and it would not surprise me if an FX9370 or FX9590 is easily to cool than a normal FX8000 CPUs overclocked to the same clockspeed.Imagine if Intel released a 150W TDP Core i5 4690K running at 4.5GHZ,it would be the same in theory.

People have been handling 200W+ TDPs with overclocked CPUs fine for years.

[watercooled]

Am I misremembering, but I thought that when HyperTransport was introduced that there was a suggestion that it would be used for high-bandwidth stuff like cpu-cpu connections?

HT *is* used for cpu interconnect, I think that's what others have been saying. For example multi-socket Opterons, and the MCM processors e.g. Magny-Cours, Interlagos, Abu Dhabi.

[scaryjim]

HT *is* used for cpu interconnect, I think that's what others have been saying. For example multi-socket Opterons, and the MCM processors e.g. Magny-Cours, Interlagos, Abu Dhabi.

Yup, spot on. The die for all FX processors actually has 4 16bit HT links baked on to the silicon. FX only uses one of them, to connect to the northbridge, but the Opteron versions also use them for both connecting 2 dice in an MCM package (this is how they get up to 16 cores), and connecting CPUs in a multisocket system. At some point it seems likely that AMD will bring a lot of the northbridge functionality back into the CPU silicon, so the real question is how they will manage that and still support multi-socket server platforms.

I'm not sure how many separate dice it's possible to link in an MCM, but it they could make, say, a single 2-module die with HT links and 24 PCIe lanes, then block 4 of them together in an MCM to get 16 cores, that'd be a processor with a *lot* of PCIe interconnect on it! Even a dual-die MCM would give you 48 PCIe lanes: that's plenty for an enthusiast platform...

[ik9000]

I'm not sure how many separate dice it's possible to link in an MCM, but it they could make, say, a single 2-module die with HT links and 24 PCIe lanes, then block 4 of them together in an MCM to get 16 cores, that'd be a processor with a *lot* of PCIe interconnect on it! Even a dual-die MCM would give you 48 PCIe lanes: that's plenty for an enthusiast platform...

I want, I want. not that I'd be able to afford enough GPU but it would be good to have the option.

[Bergy]

Then we will have to wait till 2015 I guess, just like for the 6-core i5...

[shaithis]

Then we will have to wait till 2015 I guess, just like for the 6-core i5...

The way things are currently going, I doubt we will see a 6 core i5 any time soon.....it's more likely they will keep using the "extra" silicon for the iGPU.

[djsarcher]

The way things are currently going, I doubt we will see a 6 core i5 any time soon.....it's more likely they will keep using the "extra" silicon for the iGPU.

This is why I'm currently thinking that for my next PC I'll be going AMD (8 Core Piledriver), as I'm assuming with both the Xbox One and PS4 being based on 8 core Jaguar chips that game development will continue to move toward multi-threaded optimisation. I could be wrong though.

[ik9000]

This is why I'm currently thinking that for my next PC I'll be going AMD (8 Core Piledriver), as I'm assuming with both the Xbox One and PS4 being based on 8 core Jaguar chips that game development will continue to move toward multi-threaded optimisation. I could be wrong though.

hardly a huge cost outlay to be wrong on though is it? I'm thinking along the same lines, and it's a cheaper gamble than going i7 haswell

[djsarcher]

hardly a huge cost outlay to be wrong on though is it? I'm thinking along the same lines, and it's a cheaper gamble than going i7 haswell

Yeah, this is what i'm thinking. Sure if you absolutely need the extra CPU power that i5/i7 provide, go for it, but certainly seems like AMD FX line is very well positioned at the moment for the mainstream PC gamer.

My only concern with the FX chips is heat and getting a decent cooling solution.

[DanceswithUnix]

Yeah, this is what i'm thinking. Sure if you absolutely need the extra CPU power that i5/i7 provide, go for it, but certainly seems like AMD FX line is very well positioned at the moment for the mainstream PC gamer.

My only concern with the FX chips is heat and getting a decent cooling solution.

If your case is a reasonable size then heatpipe tower coolers are pretty cheap and very quiet. I can see more of a need for an Intel system if you want to use a shoebox case where getting the heat out is non trivial, but then the lack of decent uATX AM3+ boards will get you first there.

[ik9000]

If your case is a reasonable size then heatpipe tower coolers are pretty cheap and very quiet. I can see more of a need for an Intel system if you want to use a shoebox case where getting the heat out is non trivial, but then the lack of decent uATX AM3+ boards will get you first there.

Exactly. It's almost like Intel are bribing the mobo makers not to produce m-itx and uATX boards for AM sockets or something.... sure there's the odd one. ONE uATX for AM3+. Come on Asus, Gigabyte, AS-Rock, MSI et al.