AMD CPU Future

[SkilledRebuilds]

Fair enough, thats isnt the PCPER article I read at all and didnt know of the one you just linked me.

[MeltyMoon]

not likely seeing as the best binned chips are becoming 9590 and 9370s, this is the perfect time to get an 8320.

6300-£105-6 threads

8320-£122-8 threads=33% more cores for 25% more money

It would at least go further than an 8320, because it would still be a better binned chip.

[Bluejay0]

It would at least go further than an 8320, because it would still be a better binned chip.

 

True. However it's still a good overclocker.

[Dravic]

The "Haswell refresh" won't be any better, at least Warsaw will be socket compatible, the Haswell refresh will require a new motherboard.

So with the 8320 you at least have one more series of processors, unlike with the 4670K where you're pretty much buying into a dead platform.

Andrew Feldman stated that :

“Warsaw” will be similar to “Richland” in the sense that it takes advantage of process improvements to increase based clock speeds, and more aggressive power management to reduce consumption and offer higher TurboBoost clocks.

So it will be a nice 10% improvement, similar to the one from Sandy/Ivy Bridge to Haswell.

 

Warsaw is for servers, what socket are you talking about? It's for Opteron socket if anything. Forget the AM3+

[TechFan@ic]

Warsaw is for servers, what socket are you talking about? It's for Opteron socket if anything. Forget the AM3+

All server processors have desktop variants, this has been the case for the past 10 years with AMD.

[Dravic]

All server processors have desktop variants, this has been the case for the past 10 years with AMD.

 

Uninformed and naive Interesting statement, got any proof? I never saw 16-core CPU for desktop even tho AMD has them for server market for a long time now.

 

http://www.amd.com/US/PRODUCTS/SERVER/PROCESSORS/6000-SERIES-PLATFORM/6300/Pages/6300-series-processors.aspx#5

 

LOL.

[WoodenMarker]

Uninformed and naive Interesting statement, got any proof? I never saw 16-core CPU for desktop even tho AMD has them for server market for a long time now.

http://www.amd.com/US/PRODUCTS/SERVER/PROCESSORS/6000-SERIES-PLATFORM/6300/Pages/6300-series-processors.aspx#5

LOL.

Link doesn't work.

[Dravic]

Link doesn't work.

Works fine for me. Well just google "amd cpu" and visit official amd site. Go to products / server / opterons such as newest 6300 or older 6200 or even 6100 etc.

[SkilledRebuilds]

Model Number/Cores/Core Speed/AMD Turbo CORE Max Frequency/L3 Cache/TDP/Maximum Memory Support/Socket Type

 

6386 SE

16

2.8GHz

3.5GHz

16MB

140W 

DDR3-1866 MHz

G34

 

6380

16

2.5GHz

3.4GHz

16MB

115W 

DDR3-1866 MHz

G34

 

6378

16

2.4GHz

3.3GHz

16MB

115W

DDR3-1866 MHz

G34

 

6376

16

2.3GHz

3.2GHz

16MB

115W

DDR3-1866 MHz

G34

 

I'll take 2 of each

[TechFan@ic]

Those 16 core CPUs are two FX 8350 processors connected together on a substrate.
The 8350 is a desktop part.
If you go back ten years past, every single desktop CPU core has a server variant and vice versa.
The 2013 client roadmap is mirrored on the 2013 server map, this happened every year for the past 10 years, no reason for 2014 to be an exception.
This coincides with AMD's statement that at least one more generation of processors will be AM3+ compatible after Vishera which is the current series of FX processors.

Also please there is no need for back-handed comments we're all forum mates here.

[GPUXPert]

All server processors have desktop variants, this has been the case for the past 10 years with AMD.

+1

Also AMD said that "Warsaw" would bring similar jump in performance to the Richland APUs in comparison to Trinity, so even if these new processors are using Piledriver cores they will run faster and consume less power.

Keep in mind that this is similar to intel's tick tock strategy, which is improved architecture then process shrink.

Might be a worth-while upgrade for folks with Phenoms or Bulldozers.

[GarryElite]

There isn't a chance, yet there is... If the APUs got so powerful and can fit enough cores to surpass a single FX series, then they might consider it. 

Like how a single intel core does? lol

[Bluejay0]

Like how a single intel core does? lol

 

I mean if APUS get faster or even surpass the FX in preformance and able to fit more cores into it without losing the dedicated GPU, then they just might have the idea on dropping the FX and make the APUs the only thing they do. Which I HIGHLY doubt. Or they drop it to resurrect the Phenom.

[D3MON]

It would at least go further than an 8320, because it would still be a better binned chip.

do you work for amd? binning is done across the board with wide guidelines, hence you can get some 8320s that overclcok better than 8350s (rare at the time but it happens, even more so now) and most people dont (shouldnt tbh) push beyond 4.5 anyway which can be done at relatively low voltages.

[Johny Boy]

Hey! I was about to build a $900 AMD FX-8320 PC. But I read that AMD might stop producing FX series processors and only produce APU's. Is this rumor true? If it is should I go for a Intel Core I5-4670K build. Or can I build the 8320 build and now I will have option to upgrade the cpu in the future

 

Thanks,

Sribeast21

Future predictions based on current leak reports suggest both Intel's 8 series chipset / AMD's AM3+ will not have any upgrade options.

Intel haswell refresh will come next with some circuit changes which will require new 9 series board due in early next year.

AMD has APU line up with steamroller based cores which will be using FM2+ socket , nothing has been said officially about next FX line CPU's based on steamroller cores.But don't confuse the term APU with non powerful /non enthusiast level processor.....every CPU which have onboard GPU is nowdays called APU.So chances are their that AMD might release new FX line cpu's with onboard graphics or disabled one on FM2+ but will AM3+ have this or not depends upon electrical circuit changes with steamroller architecture which can be supported on current AM3+ socket or else new AM3+ 10XX based series will be released.Hence new mobo.....

 

Now lets discuss about what computing needs you would like to have.

 

Option 1 - Gaming ( Old games or single threaded ) / Light multi threaded applications / general day to day pc usage.

Then go with Intel i5 4670k.

 

Option 2 - Gaming ( Future / new titles plus old ones which use multi threading like Cyrsis 3/BF3 ) / Heavy threaded applications / streaming, encoding.

Then go with either of 8320 /8350.

 

On current IPC/Threaded performance Intel win's hands down and this will continue in future but pc user wont notice till they start doing benching.

With AMD system you can add expensive GPU by money saved from not going Intel's way which will matter in games as more games are becoming GPU dependent than CPU plus taking AMD's console market i say games will use AMD hardware in better way , Intel will benefit too but price parity b/w AMD and Intel will pinch by that time when you will see both cpu's giving fps in range of 3-5% of each other only being limited by GPU.

 

AMD : 8320 / 8350 + 990Fx board + Heavy Air cooler /liquid cooler.

Intel : i5 4670k + Any Board + Heavy Air cooler / liquid cooler.

If you can get used i5 3570k with board then better go with that and later on add i7 to it.

[MeltyMoon]

do you work for amd? binning is done across the board with wide guidelines, hence you can get some 8320s that overclcok better than 8350s (rare at the time but it happens, even more so now) and most people dont (shouldnt tbh) push beyond 4.5 anyway which can be done at relatively low voltages.

All 8320s tend to be 8350s that 'failed' validation somehow, or aren't as well made as 8350s. At least that's what i was taught years ago, and it makes logical sense. Sure every once and a while a good chip will slip into a lower product line, but you said it yourself, it's a rare occurrence. Now there is 0 chance that an awesome chip will be found in the 8320 lineup, you have the 2 9000 series processors now which take all of the best silicon out of the batch.

But that's fine, he can buy an 8320 if he wants, personally i would just drop the extra 20 bucks on an 8350, but that's just my opinion.

[JujuShinobi]

If you at the FM2+ motherboards that are coming out, the next gen APUs may very well be "high end" but don't quote me on that. And I don't see a reason not to go 8320, with more applications becoming multithreaded heavy and the 8320 being a solid budget CPU that packs a punch, it's a good choice

[D3MON]

All 8320s tend to be 8350s that 'failed' validation somehow, or aren't as well made as 8350s. At least that's what i was taught years ago, and it makes logical sense. Sure every once and a while a good chip will slip into a lower product line, but you said it yourself, it's a rare occurrence. Now there is 0 chance that an awesome chip will be found in the 8320 lineup, you have the 2 9000 series processors now which take all of the best silicon out of the batch.

But that's fine, he can buy an 8320 if he wants, personally i would just drop the extra 20 bucks on an 8350, but that's just my opinion.

i think $20 could go to a better cooler and the potential increase in overclocking is negligable especialy when most dont push beyond 4.8 and theres minimal reason to go above 4.4-4.5 anyway.

http://www.techspot.com/review/655-bioshock-infinite-performance/page5.html

http://www.techspot.com/review/458-battlefield-3-performance/page7.html

 

its what im planning to do once my friend buys my phenom off me.

[totjup5]

It doesn't really matter at this point, because with an Intel platform more likely than not you will have to buy a new motherboard to upgrade anyway. If upgrading on the same platform is what you are worried about neither brand is a garrantee.

[ALXAndy]

All 8320s tend to be 8350s that 'failed' validation somehow, or aren't as well made as 8350s. At least that's what i was taught years ago, and it makes logical sense. Sure every once and a while a good chip will slip into a lower product line, but you said it yourself, it's a rare occurrence. Now there is 0 chance that an awesome chip will be found in the 8320 lineup, you have the 2 9000 series processors now which take all of the best silicon out of the batch.

But that's fine, he can buy an 8320 if he wants, personally i would just drop the extra 20 bucks on an 8350, but that's just my opinion.

 

ALL of the FX line came from the same wafer. Even the 4100 quad core is a failed 8 core. AMD don't do more than one production run per their wafers. They simply test them once they have come off the line and then BIN them depending on clocks, heat and power consumption.

 

So for example the 8320 is a 8350 that could not run @ 4ghz or whatever the stock speed is for a 8350 without using more than 125w.

 

They've always done that. That's why most of their Phenom 2 range could be unlocked at your own risk. I know of loads of X2 Phenoms that would easily unlock to quad core, but with the caveat that they would need a slight voltage bump to perform like their X4 counterpart. As I said, it's all about remaining within spec.

 

So in answer to what others have said about "getting lucky" - yes. That's correct, and the reason is nothing sinister. AMD need to provide stock for the 8320 so at times they will simply package perfectly fine 8350s as 8320s. That's pretty much how one wins the silicon lottery.

 

Me? my 8320 at 4.2ghz is reaching its thermal limits even on a H100. I'm not sure if I could push it further on a motherboard with better power stages but I can't see it. I obviously lost the silicon lottery