AMD preparing for FX-9000 @ 5,0GHz

[Nerdwall]

http://www.sweclockers.com/nyhet/17101-amd-forbereder-fx-9000-pa-upp-till-50-ghz

 

Article in swedish... I think that everyone can get the message though, 220W TDP! INSANE?!?!?

 

Is this just stupid by AMD or do they have some kind of thought behind it?!

 

EDIT:

More about this: http://hexus.net/tech/news/cpu/54057-rumour-amd-unleash-centurion-fx-5ghz/

[Hyydrah]

Sounds really interesting, thanks for sharing.

[ExDreamer]

Higher tdp mean it can oc more

[Loe]

It looks cool, I wonder if it will affect the pricing of other AMD chips however I very much doubt it will.

[Snickerzz]

O.O

[Nerdwall]

I guess it is just factory OC FX-8350? 

[Nerdwall]

Can't wait to see the stock cooler... haha

[Vic9mm]

awesome info thanks for the link.

[Godlygamer23]

I'm gonna stay Mr. Skeptic until it's official.

[Mystikalrush]

Poor AMD, there just being try hards. There doing it completely wrong. One would think they learned from piledriver that higher frequency isn't going to beat something like the 3570k running much slower. THAT TDP! :P

[CobaltMK33]

This seems like a last chance option. Power/Heat has not really been that big of a concern to me, but if I needed this level of performance then I'd just save and buy a 3770-K/equivalent Haswell.

[Ddm5]

This seems like a last chance option. Power/Heat has not really been that big of a concern to me, but if I needed this level of performance then I'd just save and buy a 3770-K/equivalent Haswell.

Mate, even after reading this I felt rather confused, I'm like you, power and/or heat doesn't really bother me but if this thing comes out at a ridiculous

price then really, what's the point in it?, if it beats the 4770k @ Stock vs the 5Ghz then people would probably throw in a few hundred dollars, pounds, and what not and shed out for a 3930k / Haswell equivalent. 

[ALXAndy]

Poor AMD, there just being try hards. There doing it completely wrong. One would think they learned from piledriver that higher frequency isn't going to beat something like the 3570k running much slower. THAT TDP! :P

 

Wow it really sounds like you have no idea what you are talking about.

 

Go off and find out what happens on a 8 core piledriver when all of the cores are being used.

 

I've already beaten a 3570k @ 4.3ghz using my 8320 @ 4.2ghz.

 

When it becomes about core count you'll see. Right now we are being fed poorly optimised console ports. By the end of the year we will be being fed X86 8 core optimised console ports that were designed to be ran on 8 core AMD processors.

 

If you want to jerk off about how fast your single core performance is? fine. But I guarantee you by the end of the year you'll switch to AMD because you'll be sick of games that just don't work very well on your Intel processor. YOU will be the outcast then.

[CobaltMK33]

Mate, even after reading this I felt rather confused, I'm like you, power and/or heat doesn't really bother me but if this thing comes out at a ridiculous

price then really, what's the point in it?, if it beats the 4770k @ Stock vs the 5Ghz then people would probably throw in a few hundred dollars, pounds, and what not and shed out for a 3930k / Haswell equivalent.

I agree, and even if they don't need that high then there's always the 3820! MicroCenter has the 3820 for the same price as a 3770-K, and if overclocking isn't your thing then you can get all the benefits of the 2011 socket!

[Godlygamer23]

AMD is winning because it has more cores. If you do the math, it makes absolute sense. GIve the 3570K eight cores, and AMD is bye byes.

[CobaltMK33]

AMD is winning because it has more cores. If you do the math, it makes absolute sense. GIve the 3570K eight cores, and AMD is bye byes.

No offense, but when one Intel core = two AMD "cores", it doesn't really make sense.

[TheMail]

http://www.sweclockers.com/nyhet/17101-amd-forbereder-fx-9000-pa-upp-till-50-ghz

 

Article in swedish... I think that everyone can get the message though, 220W TDP! INSANE?!?!?

 

Is this just stupid by AMD or do they have some kind of thought behind it?!

 

EDIT:

More about this: http://hexus.net/tech/news/cpu/54057-rumour-amd-unleash-centurion-fx-5ghz/

[ALXAndy]

AMD is winning because it has more cores. If you do the math, it makes absolute sense. GIve the 3570K eight cores, and AMD is bye byes.

 

How much does a 8 core Intel cost again? £1200 the last time I checked.

 

AMD have done this before and they will do it again ; IE - come up with something that is two years away from even being supported properly. AMD made the first desktop 64 bit CPU. Intel laughed and said they were stupid. How many people use a X64 operating system now? any one with more than 4gb ram - IE near on all of us.

 

AMD have approached this very differently to Intel. Intel have put all of their funding into single core single threaded performance, AMD have started a 'core race'. Can you see Intel putting out an 8 core CPU for £113? because you can get an AMD one for that right now.

 

Yes, right now the Intel CPUs (when the AMD ones are not being utilised properly !) win. However, that is beginning to change. The last big game release with a new engine in place that sees 8 cores sees the 8320 ahead of the 3570k and by quite a margin (Crysis 3). As soon as the new consoles hit they will ALL use 8 cores because the devs will be too lazy to make sure that they work properly on anything else.

[Godlygamer23]

They're still cores. I don't care what you say - they're cores. They're integer cores inside of modules. Simple as that - If you take a stock 8350 in Cinebench with single core and get the results, and multiply it by eight, and do the same with a 3570K, except by four...the 8350 wins. Intel definitely has better single-threaded performance.

[Godlygamer23]

How much does a 8 core Intel cost again? £1200 the last time I checked.

That is also a server CPU.

[TheMail]

No offense, but when one Intel core = two AMD "cores", it doesn't really make sense.

Please elaborate how one intel core = two amd cores? lol

[ALXAndy]

No offense, but when one Intel core = two AMD "cores", it doesn't really make sense.

 

But one Intel core does not = two AMD cores. Which is why the £113 8320 can best a 3770k in Crysis 3 (though arguably only by a single handful of FPS but still...)

[ALXAndy]

That is also a server CPU.

 

So was Bulldozer. Your point?

 

Can you really see Intel selling an 8 core CPU for £113?

 

Just a quick lesson in CPU manufacturing.. Good, fast CPUs cost more to produce than slower inferior ones. To be the best costs money, you have to be able to make that money back. The only way Intel could release a 8 core CPU now would be to rebdage a Xeon and I promise you they won't do that as it will make the Xeon completely obsolete. If they did? well just like the Pentium 4 EE they would want rewarding for it (£900 IIRC, it was the only way they could beat AMD).

 

As I continually try to make people understand, what we will be witnessing by the end of the year will be an all out core race, especially in gaming.

[CobaltMK33]

For those who want the best performance, Intel has already won. The fact is, it takes a higher clocked chip with more cores to match an Intel.

[Godlygamer23]

For those who want the best performance, Intel has already won. The fact is, it takes a higher clocked chip with more cores to match an Intel.

Correct. AMD added more cores and gave the CPU a higher frequency to cover up the holes in their architecture. Please AMD fanboys..you can't deny that.