Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [xbitlabs] AMD: We Are On Track With Steamroller Micro-Architecture in 2013.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[xbitlabs] AMD: We Are On Track With Steamroller Micro-Architecture in 2013. - Page 23  

post #221 of 718
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malo View Post

look at BF3 for example.... AMD's "weaker cores" run that game better than intels "stronger" 4 core 3570k.... MoH warfighter is the same way, sme with crysis 2-3....
no it doesn't and I can get more charts but they are all consistent.



Quote:
The Sandy Bridge-E-based Core i7 easily beats the Ivy Bridge-based Core i5-3550 and Vishera-based FX-8350, which both achieve about 50 FPS, on average. Unfortunately for AMD, its CPU dips to 21 FPS, while the Core i5 maintains at least 31 FPS.

As for the Core i3, Pentium, Phenom II X4, and quad-core A8 APU, none maintains more than a 20 FPS minimum frame rate at the High detail preset.

Thinking that this might have been an avoidable bottleneck caused by our detail settings, we dropped the preset to Low and re-tested the Phenom II X4 and Core i3-3220. Even then, we didn't see minimums any higher than 25 FPS. The issue wasn't fixed in the recent 1.2 patch, either.

Our benchmark sequence does have that taxing bottleneck at the end of the run. But no matter how you process the data, processor performance is going to be an important consideration in Crysis 3. We can't recommend anything less than a Core i5 to gamers building a PC capable of handling this game, and serious enthusiasts will want a Core i7. Crysis 3 appears to be one of those rare games optimized for multi-core processors, as evidenced by the six-core Sandy Bridge-E's strong result compared to quad-core Ivy Bridge.

Having said that, AMD's FX-8350 provides serviceable Crysis 3 game play. Despite the frame rate valley we experienced in our benchmark run, this CPU achieves smoother performance on average. Perhaps this is something Crytek will be able to address through a future update.

AMD FX 8350 vs Intel 3570K vs 3770K vs 3820 - Gaming and XSplit Streaming Benchmarks
Quote:

Here are the test system specs (all CPU's running at stock speeds):

AMD FX 8350 Rig

MSI 990FXA-GD80 Motherboard
16 GB Kingston 2133MHz DDR3
Corsair H80 Liquid Cooling Unit
Kingston HyperX3K 120 GB SSD
HIS ICEQ Radeon 7870

Intel Z77 Rigs (3570k and 3770k)

EVGA Z77 Stinger mini-ITX Motherboard
16 GB ADATA 2133 MHZ DDR3
Corsair H100
ADATA 256 GB SX900 SSD
HIS ICEQ Radeon 7870

Intel 3820 Rig

ASRock X79 Extreme4m Motherboard
16 GB Gelid 2133MHz DDR3
Corsair H80 Liquid Cooling Unit
Kingston HyperX3K 256 GB SSD
HIS ICEQ Radeon 7870

Here are the benchmarks:
AMD FX 8350 -

Crysis 2

1080 - 29.84
1440 - 20.96

Crysis Warhead xsplit

1080 - 26.44
1600x900 - 39.28
720 - 48.28

Crysis Warhead

1080 - 35.64
1440 - 26.772

Black Mesa

1440 - 188.8
1080 - 262.6

Metro 2033

1440 - 20.44
1080 - 36.44

TERA

1440 - 42.80
1080 - 75.2

Trine 2

1440 - 36.84
1080 - 58

_______________________

Intel i5 3570k -


Crysis 2

1080 - 39.520
1440 - 22.760

Crysis Warhead xsplit

720 - 37.120
1080 - 24.920
1600x900 - 31.040

Crysis Warhead

1080 - 26.840
1440 - 18.720

Black Mesa

1080 - 196.320
1440 - 121.120

Metro 2033

1080 - 21.200
1440 - 12.800

Trine 2

1080 - 38.800
1440 - 23.600


Intel i7 3770k -

Crysis 2

1080 - 39.520
1440 - 22.760

Crysis Warhead

1080 - 38.440
1440 - 23.880

Black Mesa

1080 - 197.440
1440 - 111.920

Metro 2033

1080 - 27.480
1440 - 12.960

Trine 2

1080 - 47.280
1440 - 27.840


Intel i7 3820 -

Crysis 2

1080 - 35.64

Crysis Warhead xsplit

720 - 42.88
1080 - 26.00
1600x900 - 36.6

Crysis Warhead

1080 - 26.840

Black Mesa

1080 - 196.320

Metro 2033

1080 - 21.32

Trine 2

1080 - 31.96

Edited by malmental - 4/1/13 at 4:12pm
post #222 of 718
I hope they retire the 900 series mobo's you can only refresh a mobo so many times before it gets blah.. Or maybe bring the Extreme back or something.......... But id love to the NB get a shrink and an update, and maybe make 2400mhz the standard and 2666mhz the oc'able
Taint3d
(20 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
4970k 4.8 EVGA z97 Classified EVGA 1080 Ti G.Skill 2400 
RAMRAMRAMHard Drive
G.Skill 2400 G. Skill 2400 G. Skill 2400 Samsung 840 Pro 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 840 Pro Samsung 850 Evo Custom Koolance/EK Watercooler Windows 10 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Acer Predator X34 G-Sync @ 100hz Corsair Vengeance K70 EVGA supernova 1300 g2 Rosewill Blackhawk Ultra 
MouseMouse PadAudioOther
R.A.T 7 Corepad SoundBlaster Z Philips SPH 9500 Headphones 
  hide details  
Taint3d
(20 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
4970k 4.8 EVGA z97 Classified EVGA 1080 Ti G.Skill 2400 
RAMRAMRAMHard Drive
G.Skill 2400 G. Skill 2400 G. Skill 2400 Samsung 840 Pro 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 840 Pro Samsung 850 Evo Custom Koolance/EK Watercooler Windows 10 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Acer Predator X34 G-Sync @ 100hz Corsair Vengeance K70 EVGA supernova 1300 g2 Rosewill Blackhawk Ultra 
MouseMouse PadAudioOther
R.A.T 7 Corepad SoundBlaster Z Philips SPH 9500 Headphones 
  hide details  
post #223 of 718
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malo View Post

look at BF3 for example.... AMD's "weaker cores" run that game better than intels "stronger" 4 core 3570k.... MoH warfighter is the same way, sme with crysis 2-3....

The only site I've seen claim that the 8350 did better in BF3 was pureoc and their results were ridiculous for many reasons.

Here's an extensive 64 player MP CPU test of BF3 on caspian border:



Increasing the resolution will make the gaps between the CPU smaller but it won't change the order.

Much in the same way the only site I've seen claiming that AMD CPUs do better in crysis 3 is gamegpu. Never actually remember seeing any site claim they were superior in crysis 2.

The thing is as has been stated countless times. Games aren't really parallel tasks, you're not going to get 100% out of your 8 core CPU before it's absolutely obsolete. Games still need strong singlethreaded performance even though some tasks can be performed on other cores. There is no "make the game for 8 cores" button on the KB of the developers.
Edited by Alatar - 4/1/13 at 4:17pm
 
Benching
(17 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
[i7 5960X @ 4.8GHz] [Rampage V Extreme] [Titan 1400MHz (1500MHz bench)] [Various] 
Hard DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
[250GB 840EVO +2x SpinpointF3 1TB RAID0] [LD PC-V2 SS Phase Change] [XSPC X2O 750 pump/res] [Monsta 360 full copper + EK XT 360 + XT 240] 
MonitorPowerCaseAudio
[Crossover 27Q LED-P 1440p+ASUS 1200p+LG 1080p] [Corsair AX1200] [Dimastech Easy v3.0] [Sennheiser HD558s] 
CPUCPUMotherboardGraphics
FX 8320, FX 8350, Phenom II x2 555BE i7 3930K, i7 860, i7 4770K, 68x Celeron D CVF, commando, 2x RIVE, Z87X-OC Asus 4870x2, Sapphire 4870 
GraphicsGraphicsGraphicsGraphics
2x 5870, 5850, 5830, 5770 2x 3870x2, 3870 GTX Titan, GTX 480, GTX 590 GTX 285, GTX 260, 4x 9800GT, 8800GTX 
RAMHard DriveCoolingCooling
4x4GB vengeance, 2x4GB predatorX, 2x1GB OCZ DDR2 Intel X25-M 80GB LD PC-V2 SS Phase Change OCN Marksman 
CoolingCoolingOSPower
2x old tek slims (GPU) Various watercooling stuff win7, winxp AX1200 
Case
test bench / cardboard box 
  hide details  
 
Benching
(17 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
[i7 5960X @ 4.8GHz] [Rampage V Extreme] [Titan 1400MHz (1500MHz bench)] [Various] 
Hard DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
[250GB 840EVO +2x SpinpointF3 1TB RAID0] [LD PC-V2 SS Phase Change] [XSPC X2O 750 pump/res] [Monsta 360 full copper + EK XT 360 + XT 240] 
MonitorPowerCaseAudio
[Crossover 27Q LED-P 1440p+ASUS 1200p+LG 1080p] [Corsair AX1200] [Dimastech Easy v3.0] [Sennheiser HD558s] 
CPUCPUMotherboardGraphics
FX 8320, FX 8350, Phenom II x2 555BE i7 3930K, i7 860, i7 4770K, 68x Celeron D CVF, commando, 2x RIVE, Z87X-OC Asus 4870x2, Sapphire 4870 
GraphicsGraphicsGraphicsGraphics
2x 5870, 5850, 5830, 5770 2x 3870x2, 3870 GTX Titan, GTX 480, GTX 590 GTX 285, GTX 260, 4x 9800GT, 8800GTX 
RAMHard DriveCoolingCooling
4x4GB vengeance, 2x4GB predatorX, 2x1GB OCZ DDR2 Intel X25-M 80GB LD PC-V2 SS Phase Change OCN Marksman 
CoolingCoolingOSPower
2x old tek slims (GPU) Various watercooling stuff win7, winxp AX1200 
Case
test bench / cardboard box 
  hide details  
post #224 of 718
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malo View Post

look at BF3 for example.... AMD's "weaker cores" run that game better than intels "stronger" 4 core 3570k.... MoH warfighter is the same way, sme with crysis 2-3....

*sigh* why don't folks just do right and compare SR to PD and BD like it ought to be compared to, that kept things all nice. but no once someone mentions comparing the apple to the orange FUD starts coming out.

so a FX beats a i5 in c2 huh?


or the gpu bound game MOH?:ok there is a 3470 that is clocked 40% lower than the 8350 . .


or even C3??? again, ok there is a 3470 that is clocked 40% lower than the 8350 . .



on a side note:
i would love to see AMD do what they did back in '94 when i had a 5x86-133 that performed as well as a P-75 for 1/3 the price.
but lets be realistic
Edited by looniam - 4/1/13 at 4:18pm
loon 3.2
(18 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-3770K Asus P8Z77-V Pro EVGA 980TI SC+ 16Gb PNY ddr3 1866 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
PNY 1311 240Gb 1 TB Seagate 3 TB WD Blue DVD DVDRW+/- 
CoolingCoolingOSMonitor
EKWB P280 kit EK-VGA supremacy Win X LG 24MC57HQ-P 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Ducky Zero [blues] EVGA SuperNova 750 G2 Stryker M [hammered and drilled] corsair M65 
AudioAudio
SB Recon3D Klipsch ProMedia 2.1  
  hide details  
loon 3.2
(18 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7-3770K Asus P8Z77-V Pro EVGA 980TI SC+ 16Gb PNY ddr3 1866 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
PNY 1311 240Gb 1 TB Seagate 3 TB WD Blue DVD DVDRW+/- 
CoolingCoolingOSMonitor
EKWB P280 kit EK-VGA supremacy Win X LG 24MC57HQ-P 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Ducky Zero [blues] EVGA SuperNova 750 G2 Stryker M [hammered and drilled] corsair M65 
AudioAudio
SB Recon3D Klipsch ProMedia 2.1  
  hide details  
post #225 of 718
Quote:
Originally Posted by TopicClocker View Post

Piledriver cores compared to jaguar cores which are practically tablet hardware, I'm sure the Piledriver cores will demolish the puny Jaguar cores which are in the PS4

You're very badly informed when they would go like this, for example one Piledriver Core/Thread at 1.7ghz vs Jaguar Core at 1.7ghz results would surprise you bacause Jaguar is not Bobcat Core. wink.gif



AMD Steam Engine
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Phenom II X6 1055T Asrock A770DE+ Powercolor Radeon HD 3650 Kingmax Mars ddr2 800mhz, 3GB 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung HD502JH 500GB LG GSA H-30N CPU Cooler Spire Coolgate 2011 Windows 7 Ultimate 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Benq GW2760HS Logitech Media Keyboard 600 Seasonic S12II 430W Gigabyte GZ-X2 Black 
Mouse
Trust Laser 
  hide details  
AMD Steam Engine
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Phenom II X6 1055T Asrock A770DE+ Powercolor Radeon HD 3650 Kingmax Mars ddr2 800mhz, 3GB 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung HD502JH 500GB LG GSA H-30N CPU Cooler Spire Coolgate 2011 Windows 7 Ultimate 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Benq GW2760HS Logitech Media Keyboard 600 Seasonic S12II 430W Gigabyte GZ-X2 Black 
Mouse
Trust Laser 
  hide details  
post #226 of 718
Quote:
Originally Posted by malmental View Post

why when you will always be wrong... that would drive me crazy..
always behind but as long as they are better then the previous gen (not like FX-Bulldozer was to Deneb C3 wink.gif), it's a win for them..

AMD won't always be behind, though, they've been gaining very slowly on Intel, and eventually it'll reach the point where there's no application that 1) You'd run on a normal desktop and 2) runs noticeably slower on any modern CPU, remember...Back in the day, the jump from a 386DX-25 to a 386DX-33 was massive even though it was only an 8Mhz faster chip, these days 8Mhz is unnoticable and you'd be hard pressed to notice the difference between AMD and Intel in normal usage. (ie. Internet, Word, etc)

Yes, they have a lower R&D budget...but they always have, AMD was able to match and even beat Intel until 2006, even when Intel had newer chips, AMD had faster versions of the old one (eg. 486DX-33 vs 386DX-40)
Quote:
Originally Posted by malmental View Post

as do you think FX-Bulldozer was much of an improvement over Deneb C3 or Thuban E0..?

In performance? Not unless you do certain tasks, where the lower IPC is countered by the extra 2 cores and higher clocks.
In future proofing? Yes, especially as an architecture.
Quote:
Originally Posted by frozne View Post

Except it won't be. The decode change will be most of it and that will primarily benefit multi-threaded scenarios (Basically they are eliminating a bottleneck when two threads are active on a single module). Single core speed won't go up 30%.
This. Intel could sell 6 cores at the same price they sell the mainstream i7 3770k's and still make a profit, though not as much. Right now they are making bank because AMD can't compete. If they even started coming close they could just drop the price of the high end stuff and put AMD back to where they were.

Yes, but not much actually just uses one core now...A lot of programs and games use 2-4 meaning there will be an increase.
3DMark is hardly the best bench for CPU performance in gaming, but even it shows a nice increase of 15% in 3DMark11 if my maths is correct.
That's also not including any and other changes they do.

The truth is, not much that actually is CPU limited runs on a single core these days...Even games use around 3-4 cores worth of performance which is why a Core i5 is noticeably faster than a Core i3 which is noticeably faster than a Pentium, different clocks and IPC aside it's mostly from the i5 being a true quad, the i3 having 4 threads and 2 cores and finally the Pentium having 2 cores and 2 threads.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malo View Post

most new games are multithreaded.... and the 8350 is pretty much on par with the 3570k in gaming, cept for those horrible ports (skyrim) and SC2.... other than those can you find me NEW games that are dual threaded??? there really isnt any...

*edit*
not to mention, come steamroller time I dont need a new mobo, I hate intel for changing their socket so much

I still can't see the difference from going to my i5 from my FX in Skyrim, it's there if I look at fraps but it's not that big...It's seriously a smaller difference than the difference of my card at stock (950Mhz) vs OCed (1150Mhz)
Quote:
Originally Posted by almighty15 View Post

But at least you get a performance jump to warrant changing mobo's... what did you get from moving from 890FX to 990FX? SLI support and a black socket rolleyes.gif

You do realize Intel did the exact same thing with P35 to P45, right? Small changes that make no difference to the end-user.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alatar View Post

Making games use 8 cores =/= not needing strong cores.

Games are pretty hard to code so that they'll use tons of threads efficiently. You'll still need strong single thread performance even if some parts of the game can be offloaded to other cores. It's not like the programmers at game studios can hit a button to make a game run better on a multi-core CPU. Also even if games could theoretically 100% take advantage of all the cores on a FX8350 that does not mean that it would match a 3770K or beat a 3570K by a big margin.

Also good to note that current consoles already have CPUs that can be described as very much multi-threading oriented. The cell with its 6 (or 7, I can't remember) SPEs and the Xenon has 3 full cores (6 logical). Moving to 8 slow cores isn't going to be that much of a change as people are saying.

The main reason people are saying it is because it's 8 x86 cores, I doubt it'll make much of a difference myself..But whatever.
Quote:
Originally Posted by computerparts View Post

You guys arguing over the performance (seems to be the usual bunch of Intel advocates) are forgetting that future games are going to be OPTIMIZED for the AMD architecture. Common sense should tell you that alone will make a good difference in AMD's favor.

The chips in the PS4 and Durango are Jaguar based...This is AMDs Atom competitor, not based off or related to Bulldozer/Piledriver/Steamroller in any real way.
Quote:
Originally Posted by looniam View Post

did you look at the third bench listed? i don't think you did since you had to mention that.


yep, .61 fps more. but look again at the first pass:


the 12.09 fps of the i7 would more than certainly make up for it.

and you have to do the first pass before the second, no?

No, I did...The first pass is mostly single-threaded and usually finishes very quickly compared to the 2nd pass, I'm pulling numbers out of my rear here but I wouldn't be surprised if it was 1/64th of the total workload.
It's like when they measure performance using LAME: Sure, in a single instance the FX would be slower...But most encoders use as many instances at once as there are threads, so AMD is doing 8 songs at once more slowly than Intel who are doing 4. There's caveats like that with a lot of benchmarks people often look past or forget.
Quote:
Originally Posted by os2wiz View Post

No Intel CPU has 8 cores.

The Xeon E5 2650 would like a word with you.
And even if an FX-8350 gets its cores fully utilized in gaming, it won't make much of a difference...1) Games are mostly GPU dependent anyway, 2) It'll just be slightly ahead of the i5 3570k and nearer to the i7 3770k.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i5 3570k @ 4.5Ghz ASRock Z77 Pro3 Powercolor Radeon HD7950 3GB @ 1150/1350 4x4GB G.Skill Ares 2000Mhz CL9 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Samsung 840 250GB Western Digital Black 1TB WD1002FAEX Seagate Barracuda 3TB ST3000DM001 Samsung Spinpoint EcoGreen 2TB 
Optical DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
Pioneer DVR-220LBKS Noctua NH-D14 Scythe Gentle Typhoon 1850rpm Corsair AF140 Quiet Edition 
CoolingOSMonitorMonitor
Arcitc Cooling Acclero Twin Turbo II Arch Linux x86-64, amdgpu BenQ G2220HD BenQ G2020HD 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Ducky Shine III Year of the Snake, Cherry Blue Silverstone Strider Plus 600w CoolerMaster CM690 II Black and White SteelSeries Sensei Professional 
Mouse PadAudioOther
Artisan Hien Mid Japan Black Large ASUS Xonar DX NZXT Sentry Mesh 30w Fan Controller 
  hide details  
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i5 3570k @ 4.5Ghz ASRock Z77 Pro3 Powercolor Radeon HD7950 3GB @ 1150/1350 4x4GB G.Skill Ares 2000Mhz CL9 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Samsung 840 250GB Western Digital Black 1TB WD1002FAEX Seagate Barracuda 3TB ST3000DM001 Samsung Spinpoint EcoGreen 2TB 
Optical DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
Pioneer DVR-220LBKS Noctua NH-D14 Scythe Gentle Typhoon 1850rpm Corsair AF140 Quiet Edition 
CoolingOSMonitorMonitor
Arcitc Cooling Acclero Twin Turbo II Arch Linux x86-64, amdgpu BenQ G2220HD BenQ G2020HD 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Ducky Shine III Year of the Snake, Cherry Blue Silverstone Strider Plus 600w CoolerMaster CM690 II Black and White SteelSeries Sensei Professional 
Mouse PadAudioOther
Artisan Hien Mid Japan Black Large ASUS Xonar DX NZXT Sentry Mesh 30w Fan Controller 
  hide details  
post #227 of 718
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alatar View Post

It's not that simple.

Core count doesn't matter, overall performance does. If intels 6 cores beat AMD's 8 by well over 50% there's pretty much nothing that good multithreaded code can do for that. If a 4 core 3770K beats a 8350 even in multithreaded scenarios where all cores are being used, ultithreaded code will not make the FX better than the i7. And this is in a purely hypothetical scenario where the load is 100% parallel, scenarios like this don't exist in gaming for CPUs.

I'd also like to point out that 8 Jaguar cores =/= 8 BD/PD/SR cores, there are some huge architectural differences. And also pointing out that there are 8-core intel CPUs.
True however I think you're overestimating the difference that makes when it comes to games being multithreaded or not. Fact of the matter is that games do offload certain tasks to quite many cores but there are just parts of games that aren't parallel like that.
For the cell? Yes. For the Xenon? Not as far as I know, correct me if I'm wrong though.

I'd also wager that at least one of the Jaguar cores will be used for the OS or other functions (recording, livestream, social) on the PS4 but that is of course yet to be seen.
You are almost pathetically funny. The I7 3770 is a $300 plus chip and barely outperforms an FX-8350 in most tasks. Stop throwing old single threaded crap as a criteria. Those apps are dead or dying fast. Virtually any class of applications has some multi threaded apps in it. None of those multi threaded apps gives your I7 3770k better than a ten per cent advantage in almost all cases.
post #228 of 718
Quote:
Originally Posted by os2wiz View Post

You are almost pathetically funny. The I7 3770 is a $300 plus chip and barely outperforms an FX-8350 in most tasks..

Suffice it to say that some Intel chips can go where no AMD chip can. The argument that the flagship AMD chip offers almost the same performance as a mid-tier i7 is a budget argument and not a performance one. If someone is looking for performance, Intel is the way to go. When you are pushing all you have, that 5% difference in IPC (or whatever it is now) will matter. And if your budget cannot afford the price that Intel commands, there is no shame in buying AMD. You are getting almost the level of performance that Intel offers at a greatly reduced initial cost.
Quote:
Originally Posted by os2wiz View Post

Stop throwing old single threaded crap as a criteria. Those apps are dead or dying fast. Virtually any class of applications has some multi threaded apps in it. None of those multi threaded apps gives your I7 3770k better than a ten per cent advantage in almost all cases.

How multi-threaded can a word processor be? There are a lot of tasks that cannot be multi-threaded. Read this! If you don't get it, learn to program and give writing a multi-threaded application a try - it is harder than you think, and you can't just multithread everything.
Lucy
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 950 3.503Ghz @ 1.04v ASUS Sabertooth X58 EVGA GTX 460 768mb 24.5GB Corsair Dominator 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Intel 320 Noctua NH D14 Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit ASUS VW246H 
MonitorPowerCaseMouse
ASUS VW246H OCZ ModXStream Pro 700W CoolerMaster HAF X 942 Logitech G9x 
  hide details  
Lucy
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 950 3.503Ghz @ 1.04v ASUS Sabertooth X58 EVGA GTX 460 768mb 24.5GB Corsair Dominator 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Intel 320 Noctua NH D14 Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit ASUS VW246H 
MonitorPowerCaseMouse
ASUS VW246H OCZ ModXStream Pro 700W CoolerMaster HAF X 942 Logitech G9x 
  hide details  
post #229 of 718
PCGH tests are kinda pointless when it comes to BF3 multiplayer. They take a jeep from one of the camps and go all the way to the hill in the middle of caspian.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2FMw3kv4FFQ

No real action, not many players in the vicinity (which defeats the purpose of the test as 64man etc.). And the resolution is a bit lol too-they way frostbite 2 works I wouldn't be surprised if it game workload gets more well threaded as pixel count rises. As a matter of fact even the self proclaimed Logan debunkers found the 8350 equal (if not a hair faster) to a 3570k (64 map too i think it was).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2EcXrgJLY0

All in all if you want a true BF3 benchmark (or some other similar multiplayer game) you need to play multiple games for several hours,all around the maps and then evaluate lows highs and averages. I recently had my first hands on experience with an FX-8320 and I just didn't anticipate it would feel that fast-I was caught up in the whole FX wave of negativity and it sort of blew me away. I have my sights set on an ivy hexa but If steamroller delivers and offers performance comperable to ivy quads (3570k-3770k) I may "cheap out" and get that instead. Coming from an Q9450 I am upgrading anyway.biggrin.gif
On the other hand if the flagship is as good as they claim,it will be more expensive than the 8350.

Threads and consoles. The main reason current games typically do not support more than 2-3 cores are indeed consoles. They do not have the core count and pretty much forced PC ports to be made using DX9 which doesn't really support multithreaded rendering-no reason for developers to invest extra just for PC version. DX11 does that and with new consoles being multicore, it will be the norm, DX9 will pretty soon be dropped. FX processors perform nicely on such well threaded games which is good news since the future is made of Battlefields and Far Cries and not Skyrims. It doesn't mean trouble for intel though. At worst case scenario they will have to balance their cpu range a bit, ask less for those overpriced pentiums and i3s. no biggy really.
Mastodon Ryzen
(12 items)
 
HP Z220
(8 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
R7 1800X Asus Crosshair VI Hero Sapphire RX Vega 64 reference Gskill TridentZ 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Pny SSD 240GB Crucial MX100 CM Nepton 280L Win 10 
MonitorPowerCaseMouse
Acer Predator XG270HU Freesync XFX 750W Pro HAF XM Logitech G502 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsCooling
i7 3770 HP Quadro K2000 HP 
OSPowerCaseMouse
Win 7  HP 400W HP CMT RAT 7 
  hide details  
Mastodon Ryzen
(12 items)
 
HP Z220
(8 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
R7 1800X Asus Crosshair VI Hero Sapphire RX Vega 64 reference Gskill TridentZ 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Pny SSD 240GB Crucial MX100 CM Nepton 280L Win 10 
MonitorPowerCaseMouse
Acer Predator XG270HU Freesync XFX 750W Pro HAF XM Logitech G502 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsCooling
i7 3770 HP Quadro K2000 HP 
OSPowerCaseMouse
Win 7  HP 400W HP CMT RAT 7 
  hide details  
post #230 of 718
Quote:
Yes, but not much actually just uses one core now...A lot of programs and games use 2-4 meaning there will be an increase.

It will be an increase, but it won't be quite enough to catch up. Intel's single thread advantage scales to number of physical cores. If Ivy is 50% faster than PD in single thread, that also means an i7 will be roughly 50% faster than a 8350 even at 4 threads because it has 4 physical cores. AMD starts to catch up after 4 threads because hyperthreading is not as good as the modular PD design for heavy multi-threading.

I haven't seen what Haswell will do, but I think Steamroller will beat Ivy in multi-thread when 8 threads can be used, but it will still be behind in 5-6 threads or less.
Sab Tower
(12 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 3770k ASRock Z77 OC Formula HIS IceQ Radeon 7950 Corsair Dominator Platinum 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung Samsung 830 XSPC Raystorm EX360 OpenSUSE 12.2 
MonitorPowerCaseMouse
Acer 21 Inch Flat Screen Seasonic x650 NZXT Switch 810 Logitech MX510 
  hide details  
Sab Tower
(12 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 3770k ASRock Z77 OC Formula HIS IceQ Radeon 7950 Corsair Dominator Platinum 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Samsung Samsung 830 XSPC Raystorm EX360 OpenSUSE 12.2 
MonitorPowerCaseMouse
Acer 21 Inch Flat Screen Seasonic x650 NZXT Switch 810 Logitech MX510 
  hide details  
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Hardware News
This thread is locked  
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [xbitlabs] AMD: We Are On Track With Steamroller Micro-Architecture in 2013.