[UPDATE 2] AMD Making An Announcement On September 25th."You ain't seen nothing yet"

[AlwaysFSX]

B)

HE KNOWS SOMETHING......AGAIN!

[JefferyD90]

It's not about if users are concerned about power consumption or heat, I'm saying that Nvidia get their cards better with power consumption at a time while AMD doesn't. Doesn't it look like Nvidia knows better how to make GPUs? Simply the card which draws less power & is cooler, it means it's better by technologically. AMD doesn't know how to improve their cards & they just push & push them, making them even hotter & power hungrier. And by the way, Nvidia new cards have awesome prices. So it's not the right time to say that AMD got better value cards. Not anymore.

In a generation or two Nvidia's cards wont be as power efficient as AMD's cards and he will be crying "AMD doesn't know how to make cards cause they cant push them very hard".  Its a pendulum that swings back and forth.  AMD (right now) produces the more powerful cards, while consuming more power.  Lets not be fan boys.  AMD is more than likely releasing a CPU component (this follows their product outline for 2014 as they DO NOT have any known plans for any more GPU launches this year, the 285 was the last one to be launched for the year.) 

[JefferyD90]

What I want to see is a FM2+ APU with 8 Steamroller cores...  and L3 cache...  even if it doesn't have the awesome possum APU graphics.  Do this at a ~$250 price point and you have my money AMD.

[JefferyD90]

O reminds me of their claim that bulldozer was 50% faster than the i7 nehalems and even the 990x. IPC claim was a lie as well. http://www.techpowerup.com/138328/bulldozer-50-faster-than-core-i7-and-phenom-ii.html

On raw power, the 8150 was 50% more calculations per second than the i7-9xx they was comparing it to (I think it was the 960 but I'm not sure)...  The problem with the 8150 was 2 things, the shared resources were NOT figured into the Windows thread management and the instruction cache required some kind of crazy loop around (probably black magic of some kind) which often required about a 15% higher over head.  So basically, the full potential of the 8150 was hard to reach outside of synthetic benchmarks and when you only had single threaded programs they often took about 15% more clock cycles because of that overhead requirement for the instructions.

[Opcode]

What I want to see is a FM2+ APU with 8 Steamroller cores...  and L3 cache...  even if it doesn't have the awesome possum APU graphics.  Do this at a ~$250 price point and you have my money AMD.

First off, why would you want Steamroller as Carrizo is suppose to ship with Excavator. Also why would you want L3 when AMD can stack HBM on chip for cheaper. And lastly it's not effective for AMD to produce an eight core APU. There would be too much die space wasted on serial computing that could be better filled with GCN units. For right now we can only hope AMD's next APU comes with two things, Excavator and GCN 1.2. Them two things alone would bring their next APU far above what the A10-7850k is currently capable of (which is already quite impressive with Steamroller and GCN 1.1). It has to be something that would be a worthy upgrade for existing APU owners.

[Heisenbleurgh]

Competition! Yay!

[JefferyD90]

First off, why would you want Steamroller as Carrizo is suppose to ship with Excavator. Also why would you want L3 when AMD can stack HBM on chip for cheaper. And lastly it's not effective for AMD to produce an eight core APU. There would be too much die space wasted on serial computing that could be better filled with GCN units. For right now we can only hope AMD's next APU comes with two things, Excavator and GCN 1.2. Them two things alone would bring their next APU far above what the A10-7850k is currently capable of (which is already quite impressive with Steamroller and GCN 1.1). It has to be something that would be a worthy upgrade for existing APU owners.

You misunderstand my request.  Give me a A10-7850k CPU component (times 2) with a GPU component equal to a A4 or A6.   Slap a FX label on this and give me a few paper towels!  I don't want this for the GPU, the only thing I need the APU's GPU for is when my R9-290 isn't needed.

 

--

 

Edit: also Carrizo isn't suppose to ship until 2015.  Moving shipping dates up by almost 4 months just sounds disastrous, a month or two sure because everything went well.  But 4 months is WAY too much.

[ObeseWalrus]

I hope for new FX-chips and GPU's 

[Faa]

On raw power, the 8150 was 50% more calculations per second than the i7-9xx they was comparing it to (I think it was the 960 but I'm not sure)...  The problem with the 8150 was 2 things, the shared resources were NOT figured into the Windows thread management and the instruction cache required some kind of crazy loop around (probably black magic of some kind) which often required about a 15% higher over head.  So basically, the full potential of the 8150 was hard to reach outside of synthetic benchmarks and when you only had single threaded programs they often took about 15% more clock cycles because of that overhead requirement for the instructions.

Raw power? Its IPC is lower than QX9650's from 2007. http://i.imgur.com/hZzlaru.png (all cpu's at 2.8GHz)

50% more calculations per second than the i7 9xx? Lets not claim their IPC is 50% faster than nehalem which would be more than Haswell. Windows wasn't familiar with CMT, scheduling threads quite inefficient etc which was fixed a month or two later which gave a 30% gain at best but ofc it didnt have an effect on the single threaded performance. MS had to do the same for SMT for the Intel pentium that was released 10 years ago. You can read more about bulldozers issue; http://www.anandtech.com/show/7189/choosing-a-gaming-cpu-september-2013/2 (bulldozer challenge)

If AMD wants to be competive again -> push more IPC out of your chips. Or else it's just done with them or they can continue tricking people to buy their 8350 for twice the price of fx 4300 gaming performance and hope their fanboys will help spreading misinformation and linking the usual fabricated video which only idiots would take serious over the reality as proof. Pricing their 8350's just right below the 4690K to make people think its a good alternative is misleading marketing, nobody needs 6/8 cores for gaming, anyone who does productivity should have enough money to buy Intel, desktop is dying for mainstream use but no you get some 5GHz CPU pricing right below the i7 to trick people again without even being clear what motherboards will handle it. The 9590 never been any cheaper than i7's, the boards are atleast 150$ along with a 100$ cooler while still running freaking loud when you can have a 4770k/cheapest z87 board and an evo 212 for a lot less and noise.

They've been doing decent multithreaded performance/price wise other than that FX cpu's since bulldozer were overpriced gimmicks for 3 years long and now they're delaying their new architecture to 2016. Phenom came out in 2010? Which still has more IPC so after 6 years we finally got a real upgrade that hopefully has more IPC than a 8 years old QX9650. Thread title sounds so exciting, I'm expecting 150% more IPC well no you just see them moaning about their price/performance again; http://wccftech.com/amd-embedded-roadmap-2014-2016-leaked-insight-gen-apus-gpus/

 

[MEC-777]

My mouse is hovering over the "order" button for a GTX 970, pending this announcement in 2 days...

 

AFAIK AMD has no new CPU/APU's due for release any time soon, but I can totally see them surprising us with a new flagship GPU launch. Now come on, AMD, let's see what ya got!

[LAwLz]

My mouse is hovering over the "order" button for a GTX 970, pending this announcement in 2 days...

 

AFAIK AMD has no new CPU/APU's due for release any time soon, but I can totally see them surprising us with a new flagship GPU launch. Now come on, AMD, let's see what ya got!

I would wait a bit longer if I were you. Prices often change quite a lot after announcements. If AMD releases a card with better:price performance than Nvidia then they will probably lower the prices to stay competitive. Give it like a month and you will probably get a better deal.

[MEC-777]

I would wait a bit longer if I were you. Prices often change quite a lot after announcements. If AMD releases a card with better:price performance than Nvidia then they will probably lower the prices to stay competitive. Give it like a month and you will probably get a better deal.

 

Exactly. Within the first few days after the 970/980 released, we had a pretty good idea of how they performed and their overclocking potential. If this is a new GPU launch, then I'll wait for the in-depth reviews and comparison benchmarks before making any final decisions. I doubt we'll see any price cuts on the 970's though. They are already priced very aggressively. But, we shall see...

[bogus]

I would wait a bit longer if I were you. Prices often change quite a lot after announcements. If AMD releases a card with better:price performance than Nvidia then they will probably lower the prices to stay competitive. Give it like a month and you will probably get a better deal.

^This.

If I recall correctly the GTX 780 dropped it's price in ~€250 euros in like 3 or 4 months - that's a ridiculous devaluation.

[vitor_cut]

^This.

If I recall correctly the GTX 780 dropped it's price in ~€250 euros in like 3 or 4 months - that's a ridiculous devaluation.

yes thanks to the launch of the r9 290/290X,and i hope  this is a replay 

[kuddlesworth9419]

APU's much. It always is from AMD.

[patrickjp93]

APU's much. It always is from AMD.

Nope, no APUs until Q2 2015, as that's still Carrizo's launch date according to all of AMD's roadmaps.

 

This is a new GPU without a doubt, unless it's a plan to drop a bombshell on Zen being done by Q3/4 of 2015 releasing on 16nm processes.

[HippY]

I am holding off till Thursday, see if they have a competent GPU to announce. if not, that 780 deal for £230 on overclockers seem sweet to me...

[Bene]

Ha, is there Green Pills?

[Captain_Slow]

everybody prepare your power supplies and FANS! LOTS OF FANS!

[ManWithBeard1990]

Remember that rumor about something AMD having a 5 cm2 die? If that turns out to be true we'll be looking at some serious performance. And heat. I hope they can get that under control.

[HippY]

. And heat. I hope they can get that under control.

At worst they have non ref models and WC. I think if they bring out another enthusiast card, like the 295x2, that it needs spec PSU and WC, but has serious power at good price, I would be happy

[JefferyD90]

Raw power? Its IPC is lower than QX9650's from 2007. http://i.imgur.com/hZzlaru.png (all cpu's at 2.8GHz)

50% more calculations per second than the i7 9xx? Lets not claim their IPC is 50% faster than nehalem which would be more than Haswell. Windows wasn't familiar with CMT, scheduling threads quite inefficient etc which was fixed a month or two later which gave a 30% gain at best but ofc it didnt have an effect on the single threaded performance. MS had to do the same for SMT for the Intel pentium that was released 10 years ago. You can read more about bulldozers issue; http://www.anandtech.com/show/7189/choosing-a-gaming-cpu-september-2013/2 (bulldozer challenge)

If AMD wants to be competive again -> push more IPC out of your chips. Or else it's just done with them or they can continue tricking people to buy their 8350 for twice the price of fx 4300 gaming performance and hope their fanboys will help spreading misinformation and linking the usual fabricated video which only idiots would take serious over the reality as proof. Pricing their 8350's just right below the 4690K to make people think its a good alternative is misleading marketing, nobody needs 6/8 cores for gaming, anyone who does productivity should have enough money to buy Intel, desktop is dying for mainstream use but no you get some 5GHz CPU pricing right below the i7 to trick people again without even being clear what motherboards will handle it. The 9590 never been any cheaper than i7's, the boards are atleast 150$ along with a 100$ cooler while still running freaking loud when you can have a 4770k/cheapest z87 board and an evo 212 for a lot less and noise.

They've been doing decent multithreaded performance/price wise other than that FX cpu's since bulldozer were overpriced gimmicks for 3 years long and now they're delaying their new architecture to 2016. Phenom came out in 2010? Which still has more IPC so after 6 years we finally got a real upgrade that hopefully has more IPC than a 8 years old QX9650. Thread title sounds so exciting, I'm expecting 150% more IPC well no you just see them moaning about their price/performance again; http://wccftech.com/amd-embedded-roadmap-2014-2016-leaked-insight-gen-apus-gpus/

 

Fan boy much? 

 

First off by their very nature a 8 core CPU, no matter how bad it might be, is still going to produce MORE calculations per second than a quad core will.  The absolute only way a first generation core series (which only had a top end of 4 cores) could push as much numbers is if the 8150 was clock at half the speed (ie why Xbox One and PS4 are still not as powerful as some quad cores).  But numbers aren't everything, the first Windows threading fix has (as of just like 5 minutes ago) only been downloaded 27,000 times.  Windows Updates DOES NOT automatically download this, and you did have to email Microsoft support to get a link (although I think AMD has posted a perma link on their website or someone did, that's where I got mine).  And we all know that there was MANY more 8150's sold than 27,000.  So MOST people never even got the fix, what a shame.

 

The 9590 is NOT a gimmick at all, they are not the ones that create a supported CPU list the motherboard manufacture does that.  http://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/CROSSHAIR_V_FORMULAZ/HelpDesk_CPU/http://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/CROSSHAIR_V_FORMULAZ/HelpDesk_CPU/

Seems pretty straight forward according to that list, or do you not know how to shop for a motherboard?  AMD is also VERY clear about the cooling of the product as they didn't (until just recently) sell a cooler with it and telling us you need a 220watt TDP ready cooler.  So don't give us that bologna...

 

And as far as "the same old videos" what in the hell are you talking about?  I can get videos of Linus saying its a very capable part, Logan, Paul (RIP Paul), and countless other guys that I all respect as viewers.  Logan even went on to show that when you throw MORE and MORE and MORE processing at the 8350 it keeps on chugging along while the Intel parts are sitting back struggling a little, and in a lot of situations when you are multitasking the 8350 even beats the high end 3770k.  Another thing to keep in mind, the AMD product stack NEVER compares ANY of their processors to a i7, even the 9590 isn't even compared to anything because it was a PURE enthusiast card.

 

Also, another point why are Intel fans still stuck on Piledriver?  Piledriver is coming up on 3 years old, and AMD has launched a half a dozen new chips since then.  Get with the program.

[LAwLz]

First off by their very nature a 8 core CPU, no matter how bad it might be, is still going to produce MORE calculations per second than a quad core will.

Don't really want to get into an Intel vs AMD conversation but that statement is just simply wrong. Want an example? The MediaTek MT6592 vs a quad core A57 (such as the Exynos 5433 if you disable the A53 cores).

 

Cortex A7 gets 1.9 DMIPS per MHz and core. The MT6592 is clocked at 1.7GHz with 8 cores so that's 25840 DMIPS.

Cortex A57 will get up to ~5 DMIPS per MHz and core. At 1.7GHz and 4 cores that's 3400 DMIPS. In fact, with a quad core A57 you could get the same performance at ~1.3GHz. 400MHz lower clocks and half the cores.

[Vitalius]

Maybe NEW FX CPUs

Can I hear an FX APU? 

[Speedbird]

Maybe NEW FX CPUs

Overclocked Piledrivers, again.