AMD Discusses Next Gen FX CPUs, 20nm GPUs, 5-Way CrossfireX, FreeSync & DDR4

[Opcode]

Really hoping for a AM4 platform...

 

If they come out with AM4 and Steamroller CPU's, I'd buy it(depending on price:performance).

I get the feeling AMD is going to launch new FX chips for the existing AM3+ platform (maybe AM4). Tho I bet they planned on holding out to use Excavator architecture to provide an enough "wow factor" for people upgrading from Piledriver.

[mymouthandi]

I really hope AMD have got something special hidden away. I want some decent competition in the CPU market again. 

[EChondo]

I get the feeling AMD is going to launch new FX chips for the existing AM3+ platform (maybe AM4). Tho I bet they planned on holding out to use Excavator architecture to provide an enough "wow factor" for people upgrading from Piledriver.

If they use AM3+ for the "new" FX release, then it's a re-release, because what can they really do with a platform that is as old as AM3+? Hopefully a new platform can warrant either more performance, less heat, or less power, or all of the above...

 

Guess I'm kinda being optimistic here, would really love the AMD back in the days when they were king. I'd love to see true competition again.

[Brainless906]

As much as i love amd and would love for them to punch intel in the face with some real high end compitition something makes me doubt they're just gonna  "oh hey guys, we totally shrunk the process and produced an am4 socket without anyone even getting a hint of it"

 

Likely more of the same, balling good price to performance in the mid and with a little more efficiency. A man can dream though.

[connorpiper]

8 core CPUs and 5 way CrossFire

AMD = More numbers is more better

[D3MON]

15% IPC improvement, 6 module 12 thread FX (or 6 core apu), 20nm, same clock ability, ddr4, pcie 3.0 (8x/8x/8x/8x) and im there....

[harrynowl]

15% IPC improvement, 6 module 12 thread FX (or 6 core apu), 20nm, same clock ability, ddr4, pcie 3.0 (8x/8x/8x/8x) and im there....

6 module 12 threads would be dificult as you're already sharing the front end, so adding another thread to it would probably end up being a performance detriment

 

and as steamroller is ~15% over piledriver excavator should be another 15%

 

and if they ditch cmt and move back to a k10 true core design with more alus and agus that's an instant 20% multithreaded gain and it's still possible to have 20nm 8 cores.

 

like to see a sub 100w tdp though that's reasonable.

[TriBeard]

6 module 12 threads would be dificult as you're already sharing the front end, so adding another thread to it would probably end up being a performance detriment

 

and as steamroller is ~15% over piledriver excavator should be another 15%

 

and if they ditch cmt and move back to a k10 true core design with more alus and agus that's an instant 20% multithreaded gain and it's still possible to have 20nm 8 cores.

 

like to see a sub 100w tdp though that's reasonable.

I'm fine with them targeting 140w or so, as that's what X99 is, so long as they can give a 6+ core CPU that is competitive in price/dollar (doesn't have to beat it, but being close to as fast would be nice) with an i7 (8 threaded version is fine). Give this, a modern, updated platform, as well as a decent price, and you're back in the game.

[iNothing]

Seeing how little performance is gained from adding a 4th card, a 5th card would be a complete waste of money.

Its for the swag but

[Speedbird]

We need Steamroller FX.

[D3MON]

6 module 12 threads would be dificult as you're already sharing the front end, so adding another thread to it would probably end up being a performance detriment

 

and as steamroller is ~15% over piledriver excavator should be another 15%

 

and if they ditch cmt and move back to a k10 true core design with more alus and agus that's an instant 20% multithreaded gain and it's still possible to have 20nm 8 cores.

 

like to see a sub 100w tdp though that's reasonable.

it wouldnt be adding other threads, it would just be more modules no different than what we already have, well for the most part, hopefully its as modular as i like to believe.

PD is already more efficient per-core than k10 even with shared resources doe to improved pre-fetch units etc etc, i would like to see some of those shared resources optimised some more, ill take CMT over SMT at the moment, imagine having quad integer units per module, or mixing CMT and smt to have quad threads per module, course im just hypothesizing at the moment.

stuff TDP, if noone has a problem with 140w tdp intels then so be it, what matters is performance, bear in mind 780ti's had a 250w tdp and i dont see them hurting for sales.

id happily have an APU in my rig accelerating things in the background but I dont want a dual module 4 thread thing, thats like an i3  <_< 6300 with a 250x (7770) APU would be pretty badass and the die size would be around the same as an 8320 assuming 20nm. (will have to double check this)

[NoobsWeStand]

No one noticed that the source was wccf tech?

 

Well, let us hope they come up with something

[Faa]

6 module 12 threads would be dificult as you're already sharing the front end, so adding another thread to it would probably end up being a performance detriment

 

and as steamroller is ~15% over piledriver excavator should be another 15%

 

and if they ditch cmt and move back to a k10 true core design with more alus and agus that's an instant 20% multithreaded gain and it's still possible to have 20nm 8 cores.

 

like to see a sub 100w tdp though that's reasonable.

A 6m/12t is okay, CMT or SMT doesnt require special coding but SMT doesnt always add performance so you might recode to do so.

 

 

stuff TDP, if noone has a problem with 140w tdp intels then so be it, what matters is performance, bear in mind 780ti's had a 250w tdp and i dont see them hurting for sales.

TDP is a cooling spec, they define it different. The 5960x has a higher TDP than the 3960x but it consumes 20w less. Be honest you'd prefer seeing a plain quad core with 100% more single core performance and ditching CMT (module > 2 cores story) than the 8350 and preferably with a much lower power consumption which would fix the VRM throttling issues on most boards and the need of expensive boards to hit the max OC.

[Opcode]

We need Steamroller FX.

AMD roadmaps point to Steamroller being an APU only architecture. I personally am expecting the next branch of FX chips to feature Excavator. With the performance gain from Piledriver to Steamroller and then once again from Steamroller to Excavator. The next generation of FX chips could be very impressive (up to a 30% increase in IPC). So we could see a 8 core with core performance in i5-2500k waters. Which is still a ways behind Intel, but a huge step forward for AMD. I would personally buy one if the price is right (around $200).

[BobbyG2]

5 way cfx might make sense for a high end apu paired with 4 GPUs

[D3MON]

 

A 6m/12t is okay, CMT or SMT doesnt require special coding but SMT doesnt always add performance so you might recode to do so.

 

 

TDP is a cooling spec, they define it different. The 5960x has a higher TDP than the 3960x but it consumes 20w less. Be honest you'd prefer seeing a plain quad core with 100% more single core performance and ditching CMT (module > 2 cores story) than the 8350 and preferably with a much lower power consumption which would fix the VRM throttling issues on most boards and the need of expensive boards to hit the max OC.

 

yeah you got a point i would prefer X amount of cores with 2x the performance of X*2 amount of cores.

thats why i chose an fx8 over an i5, 50% better IPC is great as long as your competition doesnt have 100% more integer units.

after doing some napkin maths if amd got down to 20nm they could put a 6300 and 7790 (260x) together in an apu and be no larger in die than a 7850k and get a £125/$170 price point. hech with the 315 die size fx8's have that could be 7870's on there, bear in mind a 10% performance increase from PD to SR.

[patrickjp93]

Really hoping for a AM4 platform...

If they come out with AM4 and Steamroller CPU's, I'd buy it(depending on price:performance).

At least ask for Excavator. Don't roll over so easily.

[patrickjp93]

yeah you got a point i would prefer X amount of cores with 2x the performance of X*2 amount of cores.

thats why i chose an fx8 over an i5, 50% better IPC is great as long as your competition doesnt have 100% more integer units.

after doing some napkin maths if amd got down to 20nm they could put a 6300 and 7790 (260x) together in an apu and be no larger in die than a 7850k and get a £125/$170 price point. hech with the 315 die size fx8's have that could be 7870's on there, bear in mind a 10% performance increase from PD to SR.

You forgot AMD needs to fit in more cache/implement HBM on-die, make the control circuitry for equal-citizen scheduling, and so on. You're overestimating how much GPU power can be fit inside while disregarding the bandwidth issue.

[RexinOridle]

5 way crossfire!

So can I expect motherboards with 5 PCI E 16x slots?

Or crossfire can cross their fingers and shove them up their ass, sideways.

[RexinOridle]

am i the only person who doesnt really consider the fx cpus to be high end any more??

 

When they say “We understand that we have a very strong fan base (referring to FX). ", they actually mean that their CPU needs huge ass physical spinning fans to keep them at operational temp.

[bogus]

5 way crossfire!

So can I expect motherboards with 5 PCI E 16x slots?

Or crossfire can cross their fingers and shove them up their ass, sideways.

Maybe APU + 4 GPUs

[MEC-777]

Everybody's blowing the 5-way crossfire WAY out of proportion. They didn't say they were going to do it, so stop making that assumption.  :rolleyes:

 

For gaming, the FX 8-core CPUs offer excellent value per dollar with performance on par with i5s, but at much lower cost. This is a fact. 

[Faa]

yeah you got a point i would prefer X amount of cores with 2x the performance of X*2 amount of cores.

What do you exactly mean with this? Not sure if you understood me but what I'm trying to say is that AMD should put the 8350's multithreaded performance in a quad core without CMT (so no modules bs). That's only achieveable by improving IPC by 70% orsomething.

Let me put it this way, a new "FX2 4600" just a quad core nothing special performs multithreaded wise exactly the same as the 8350 in every benchmark. The only difference being the single threaded performance is massive that way, kicking them who knows above intels IPC.

[Maslofski]

can a motherboard even hold 5 cards without breaking off?!

[Razzaa]

can a motherboard even hold 5 cards without breaking off?!

The new AMD Dumpster boards will be able ...........