Originally Posted by Partol
no vrm heatsink is, in my opinion, a big mistake, for a 100W TDP apu.
For core i3 with graphics card, no VRM heatsink is not a problem.
I've never heard of a motherboard VRM burn out from a non-overclocked core i3 with separate graphics card.
But there are plenty of cases of amd boards which burn out.
It's not fair, but AMD buyers should generally avoid cheap, heatsink-less motherboards.
A great point in all this I think that was overlooked.
You can overclock an AMD quad cpu, but in order for it to handle an overclock that is stable enough longterm to show its full value over the i3 your going to need an 85-100 dollar board with good caps. xd_1771 has spent a good amount of time and energy trying to drive this point home to people and even he runs an AMD solution.
Also the reason AMD has lost alot of customers is their chipsets need SERIOUS,SERIOUS updating. The 990fx is basically a modified 790fx(which was a flagship Phenom 1 chipset from 2007). The 950 SB is considered old in todays world compared to a even an X58 or P55 1156 board as the SSD performance,etc. is lacking vs even the older Intel solution. AMD doesnt even have a native SATA3/USB3 chipset for AM3+. It uses an add in controller like Eton,etc.
The link they used with Trinity is a better PCIe based bus instead of a HT one but it still isn't as good as it should be.
AMD cut R@D on their chipsets in 2010 so they have more money for the Fusion project and its haunting them to this very day. The compatibility factor is what they chose longterm as well as the low cost to keep resuing old tech in a different package and its put them in a position where it makes all their flagship processors perform worse than they really should. They rode Phenom II's success to long and its now hurting them very badly in the high end.
You put a FX 8350 with a QPI link and you will see Intel owners get scared real quick. The FX never got a proper chipset to compete with Intel the way it should have. If I am buying a Vishera I want a chipset that is better than the 990fx they have right now. The problem is that there isn't one. Who wants to spend $200 on an AMD motherboard that uses a chipset that basically is the same one I bought on a $200 AMD motherboard in 2009.
According to the data sheet i found on Hypertransport the scalability is limited to 32 nodes with HT
this seems to have been addressed in in Intel's QPI sheet which says instead of using slower higher latency DRAM to address these functions(which Hypertranport uses), low latency cache is used instead, which might explain why Intel now has a large Level 3 cache when they never used it in the pre Nehalem.
Intel must be using its smaller level 2 to address direct memory communication with the CPU while the L3 is doing other I/O functions, since I/O functions need more than say 256kb which is fine on a properly optimized processor to handle that direct communication with the memory but not the rest of the system.
So it looks like AMD has all this level 3 cache that basically goes to waste as HT is using system memory to handle these functions, and which might also explain why the Athlon II X4 which has no level 3 isnt much slower than a Phenom II.
So if AMD had its own version of QPI it could use it's L3 to actually improve performance and scalability since its lower latency(even though higher than Level 1 or 2 is still much faster than using system memory to handle this. When crossfire comes into play you can almost guarantee low latency communication matters alot.Edited by dlee7283 - 2/22/13 at 5:38am