Originally Posted by 2010rig
Hopefully AMD isn't prepping the market for higher prices to come. IF SR does live up to the 30% IPC increase claim, I can't see their 8350 replacement being $200 again.
Originally Posted by AcEsSalvation
I saw an article when it first came out describing everything on the chip, including that they made it with an update on the cores. They described it as 'Vishera 2.0'... but can't find it anymore.
30% IPC puts it about where for Intel? I'm not great with determining IPC - I'm a budget builder, so it's all about staying above 40FPS for me
I don't know about Vishera 2.0, but look at the Piledriver based A10-5800K vs the A10-6800K.
A10-5800K: 3.8 - 4.2Ghz out of the box, overclocks to ~4.6Ghz on air.
A10-6800K: 4.1 - 4.4Ghz out of the box, overclocks to ~5Ghz on air.
If you go back through the reviews you would be reminded that the 5800K struggled to get much past 4.4Ghz, the best most would do was 4.6Ghz.
Now look at the A10-6800K, most were shocked to find that it overclocked like a champ, most of them getting 5Ghz easily, some even on air.
Also despite running higher CPU and iGPU clock the power consumption was at worst the same for the 6800K as for the the 5800K, some seen a slight improvement.
They are defiantly improved cores, by some way, and I suspect the FX-9### has the same improved cores, OcUK have one, they have not yet published any data but they did say its an interesting chip, I don't know what they mean by that but they did say they got 5.2Ghz out of it on all 8 cores and felt it could do more but seemed held back by the Motherboard, and while they come with water cooling that stock 5Ghz can be supported by a good air cooler, the FX8350 by comparison burns at 4.8Ghz on a good water cooler.
The FX-8 and FX-9 are not the same chip. they have some architectural tweak and probably a much improved Resonant Clock Mesh.
I have no loyalties to one or the other, I have and use both, I like them both, but I will declare a level of respect for AMD, Intel for me its a given that they are this and that, they are as a company huge with unlimited funds for R&D, I expect a certain level from them.
AMD are very much the under dog, and I find it incredible that they are able to hold their own against Intel, even survived at blatant attempt by Intel to crush them out of existence.
AMD are fighters, they have good tech, innovation and tenacity.
Having both 40nm 4core 8 thread i7 Lynnfield and 40nm 6 core 6 thread Thuban chips and I know which one runs cooler and uses less power, it is also in a lot of ways just a nicer chip.
People forget that that while yes the FX chips use a lot of power compared with Intel they are not bad when you think about it, they have 8 Integer units and a huge L3 pool built on a 32nm node,
By comparison the competing Intel has 4 Integer units and 8 threads built on a 22nm node, its almost like half an FX-8350.
Intel have 3D Transistors, AMD have their Resonant Clock Mesh.
AMD will eventually make good their CPU's, they just don't have the R&D to do all that they want all in one go, so we get it in steps, eventually it will be a good architecture.
Clock for clock core for core it would put it in Sandy Bridge territory, so if we assume we will have 4, 6 and 8 core variants running at ~4Ghz then that's what they will be.
A 4, 6 and 8 core 2500K running 4Ghz out of the box and overclocking to between 4.8 to 5.2Ghz (or more) on the 28nm Node with the improved Resonant Clock Mesh.
I suspect though in reality the IPC improvement will be 20% +Edited by Abundant Cores - 7/14/13 at 1:33am