Overclock.net › Forums › AMD › AMD CPUs › AMD No longer a viable option for mid-high end?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

AMD No longer a viable option for mid-high end? - Page 59  

post #581 of 1593
Im pretty sure I read something that 768p is the most common resolution today though
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 2670 @ 2.8Ghz m4600 m5100 @ 1100c/1500m 16GB DDR3 1333Mhz 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
c300 128GB SSD 2TB FireCuda 7mm 2TB Firecuda 7mm 1TB 5400rpm 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
750GB 5400rpm Windows 10 x64  1920x1080 @90hz 150w 
Mouse
Corsair M40 
  hide details  
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 2670 @ 2.8Ghz m4600 m5100 @ 1100c/1500m 16GB DDR3 1333Mhz 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
c300 128GB SSD 2TB FireCuda 7mm 2TB Firecuda 7mm 1TB 5400rpm 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
750GB 5400rpm Windows 10 x64  1920x1080 @90hz 150w 
Mouse
Corsair M40 
  hide details  
post #582 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kinaesthetic View Post

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdlvx View Post

Some of you are missing the point of APUs.


HSA is the future for AMD. The problem is that HSA has the chicken and egg problem.


Developers won't make HSA programs because no one has HSA hardware, and people won't buy HSA hardware because there is no software for it.


What AMD is trying to do with Kaveri is grow an install base for HSA compatible systems, so AMD can approach software developers with HSA tools, show them people do own HSA enabled devices, and then the software company will be more likely to support HSA.


AMD's end game is HSA.





7850k with HSA should even beat 4930k. But it needs the software. And as I mentioned earlier, there's a big problem with getting the software or the hardware out there first.


AMD is making an effort to get hardware sold by pushing gaming. Some day they will "flick a switch" and there will be HSA software for all these APU systems that are HSA aware. But for now HSA is just a few really good benchmarks for things a lot of enthusiasts who care about gaming won't run.


Also






FX 8350 competes with 4770k, not 4670k, but only in workloads that scale properly to several threads. 4770k is 6% faster than FX 8350, but FX 8350 is 16% faster than 4670k in x264 (a benchmark I would consider that scales properly with multiple threads.


I'm not sure if that version of x264 is using AVX2, but like I say with everything regarding Intel vs AMD. You need to look at what programs you actually run and if the trade offs of going AMD are worth it.


For me, Blender is the most important thing for me and FX 8350 runs very well compared to Intel's offerings when Intel is just using Windows. I don't care about x264. But some people might care about x264 and not care about Blender.


But my point is that the entire question of "if AMD is viable on the high end" is way too broad of a question. In fact, I'd say it even treads into the troll bait category. It's not much better than saying something like "is Linux even a good desktop OS?"


FX 8000 series is somewhat of a niche product where it can do some things extremely well for the price and some not. But overall I would say that it is capable of competing on the high end, at lest high end of what Intel calls the "mainstream" socket. It really just depends on what you are going to do with your computer.


I know there are plenty of benchmarks where FX doesn't look nearly as good, but my point is that it is a completely viable option if you're buying your computer to (at least) render and transcode video.

I think the problem with HSA is that by the time there is market permeation, they'll have sacrificed too much by relying on HSA to cover the differential between them and Intel. And Intel might catch up with AMD's HSA performance (given Intel's current roadmap vs AMD), or join in on HSA bandwagon, putting AMD back to square one in either scenario. HSA isn't AMD proprietary tech. It's essentially an open standard.

Which is exactly why I 95% think AMD is going to release some sort of monster HSA setup for HPC and high end desktops. HSA as software has amazing potential, but limiting themselves to mid range CPU and mid range GPU is going to kill the platform. It's like ricing out a really crappy car.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kinaesthetic View Post

Hence why relying on HSA to bridge the gap is more of a fool's gambit in my honest opinion. I'm not knocking down AMD's APUs either. Heck, I use one, and it does a great job. But for long term reliability versus Intel offerings, I just don't see it happening.

I agree 100%. But as I said, I expect to see something better come out of AMD than mid range products. In the future, I imagine AMDs product lineup to look something like:

Mobile tablets/phones:
split between cat cores and ARM

Laptops:
cat core APUs and bigger APUs, only dGPU for Intel CPU or with APU

Server:
ARM CPUs with HSA

HPC:
APU, CPU, and GPU held together by a really fast interconnect we don't have yet

high end desktop:
A neutered form of the HPC hardware

AMD needs something like that for HSA to become completely viable in the future. I'm just making baseless conjecture at this point, but to me it seems like a smart move, even if you're kind of spreading things thin. Hopefully wins from consoles and emerging markets, like those new low cost Kabini system, can help push up the other markets.

I do think AMD is done with x86 n servers because Bulldozer was designed as a server architecture first. It left them with a poor desktop chip compared to Intel and it wasn't even that popular in servers. However AMD needs that large HPC/Workstation/Cloud market because they have huge margins there and they are the kinds of people who are looking for solutions to software they will write themselves.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kinaesthetic View Post

And for once, I do agree with you that AMD does compete with Intel's high-end mainstream sockets in some respects, and falls behind in others. But otherwise, its a competitor. Its just that once you start going past that, AMD falls flat on its face.

It seems to me that people tend to forget that Bulldozer family is something radically different. In a way it's like comparing a shovel and a pick axe. Sometimes one tool is better than the other for certain tasks, but there is no real way of saying that one is significantly better than the other.

If it were the case that AMD were truly uncompetitive, we wouldn't even have anything to discuss in this thread. It would be a few fanboys talking about something unreleated to performance.

But AMD can compete. It is just that it's best to think of the two CPUs as tools and each having different costs associated with them, as well as one excelling at certain tasks given the cost of the tools.
Tyrant Kuma
(13 items)
 
Starscythe
(13 items)
 
Mobility
(6 items)
 
CPUCPUCPUCPU
Opteron 8431 Opteron 8431 Opteron 8431 Opteron 8431 
MotherboardGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Super Micro h8qme-2+ Sapphire 4870 Samsung DDR2 ECC 667mhz western digital caviar blue 
CoolingCoolingOSPower
FX 8350 stock cooler FX 6300 stock cooler Gentoo Linux 2x Silverstone PSU 
Case
Custom Fabbed Steel Case 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX 8350 gigabyte 990FXA-UD5 7970 Mushkin Enhanced Blackline 16GB 
OSOSMonitorKeyboard
Gentoo Linux Windows 7 x64 Yamakasi Catleap Q270 Corsair K90 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
Silverstone Strider Gold Evolution 850W 80 PLUS... Antec 1200 Logitech G9x Asus Xonar D2X 
Other
XSPC RS360 Raystorm with custom radiator mounts 
CPUGraphicsRAMOS
a4 5000 Radeon HD 8330 8GB G. Skill DDR3 1600 9-9-9 Gentoo Linux 
OSOther
Windows 7 Lenovo Thinkpad x140e 
  hide details  
Tyrant Kuma
(13 items)
 
Starscythe
(13 items)
 
Mobility
(6 items)
 
CPUCPUCPUCPU
Opteron 8431 Opteron 8431 Opteron 8431 Opteron 8431 
MotherboardGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Super Micro h8qme-2+ Sapphire 4870 Samsung DDR2 ECC 667mhz western digital caviar blue 
CoolingCoolingOSPower
FX 8350 stock cooler FX 6300 stock cooler Gentoo Linux 2x Silverstone PSU 
Case
Custom Fabbed Steel Case 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX 8350 gigabyte 990FXA-UD5 7970 Mushkin Enhanced Blackline 16GB 
OSOSMonitorKeyboard
Gentoo Linux Windows 7 x64 Yamakasi Catleap Q270 Corsair K90 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
Silverstone Strider Gold Evolution 850W 80 PLUS... Antec 1200 Logitech G9x Asus Xonar D2X 
Other
XSPC RS360 Raystorm with custom radiator mounts 
CPUGraphicsRAMOS
a4 5000 Radeon HD 8330 8GB G. Skill DDR3 1600 9-9-9 Gentoo Linux 
OSOther
Windows 7 Lenovo Thinkpad x140e 
  hide details  
post #583 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdlvx View Post


Which is exactly why I 95% think AMD is going to release some sort of monster HSA setup for HPC and high end desktops. HSA as software has amazing potential, but limiting themselves to mid range CPU and mid range GPU is going to kill the platform. It's like ricing out a really crappy car.
I agree 100%. But as I said, I expect to see something better come out of AMD than mid range products. In the future, I imagine AMDs product lineup to look something like:

Mobile tablets/phones:
split between cat cores and ARM

Laptops:
cat core APUs and bigger APUs, only dGPU for Intel CPU or with APU

Server:
ARM CPUs with HSA

HPC:
APU, CPU, and GPU held together by a really fast interconnect we don't have yet

high end desktop:
A neutered form of the HPC hardware

AMD needs something like that for HSA to become completely viable in the future. I'm just making baseless conjecture at this point, but to me it seems like a smart move, even if you're kind of spreading things thin. Hopefully wins from consoles and emerging markets, like those new low cost Kabini system, can help push up the other markets.

I do think AMD is done with x86 n servers because Bulldozer was designed as a server architecture first. It left them with a poor desktop chip compared to Intel and it wasn't even that popular in servers. However AMD needs that large HPC/Workstation/Cloud market because they have huge margins there and they are the kinds of people who are looking for solutions to software they will write themselves.
It seems to me that people tend to forget that Bulldozer family is something radically different. In a way it's like comparing a shovel and a pick axe. Sometimes one tool is better than the other for certain tasks, but there is no real way of saying that one is significantly better than the other.

If it were the case that AMD were truly uncompetitive, we wouldn't even have anything to discuss in this thread. It would be a few fanboys talking about something unreleated to performance.

But AMD can compete. It is just that it's best to think of the two CPUs as tools and each having different costs associated with them, as well as one excelling at certain tasks given the cost of the tools.

 

But you need to look at it from both companies.

 

Mobile/Tablets: Ship has already sailed (mostly) for both companies. Intel is barely caught the ship departure by speedboating it to reach the ship, and AMD was left behind because they didn't really try.

 

Laptops: Ship has once again sailed for AMD. Intel dominates in this regard. AMD needs to implement better power management during idle states or low usage like Haswell, and they need to fix their graphics switching tech (Enduro), which in my experience, was utter garbage, and (pardon my language) a buggy piece of stinking, wet diarrhea.

 

Servers: Ship has already sailed for AMD. Intel is far too ahead and ingrained in this market compared to AMD. AMD wouldn't just have to make good products worthy of server usage, but they would also have to build the support structure that Intel has maintained in this market. Which is huge.

 

HPC: AMD might have some chance here, as applications are generally tailored to the system configuration. Problem is, is that Intel, once again, dominates this field in performance and power (which in the scale that HPC exists, is a huge difference. This also applies to server infrastructure). And support structure too.

 

High-end desktop: An area that AMD can compete in. But like I said, AMD is playing from behind here. They can release a solid performing part with HSA implementation, but the problem then lies with the fact that they could easily be outpaced by Intel, if Intel were to implement HSA compliant hardware. And Intel does have the weight, that AMD does not, to push developers to take advantage of HSA.

 

I've agreed with you mostly, but I highly disagree with you on consoles and emerging markets. Consoles are a dead-end market, with sales already slowing down compared to launch. The profit margins from console chip sales are incredibly low compared to other markets too. Currently in regards to emerging markets, there just isn't much out there to explore with the architecture that even both Intel and AMD are built upon.

 

And I do hold the opinion that Kabini is already DOA. Bay Trail outpaces it in most situations, and socketed Kabini is such a small market, that it won't matter in the grand scheme of things.

 

AMD has a long road ahead of them, and I think they are making some good choices, and some bad choices. And right now, that is leaning more into the bad choice realm in regards to long-term business.

 

 


 

But when it comes down to it, I still do think AMD is competitive. However, I also agree with what Alatar has also pushed in this thread too, whether you or others like him or not. Both have their uses in desktop implementation. But one is more cost effective than the other for the general user. And I do think that Intel has a more cost effective solution for the general user than AMD. But keep in mind, that isn't all situations. Both have their uses in different applications. And both are cost effective in their areas of usage. And both are great solutions for the end user.

 

And in my personal opinion, I hate fanboys/girls on either side that try to deride either side. Which is unfortunately why this thread has blown up to hold more than 550+ replies.

 

 

 

Just my :2cents: overall though.

post #584 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by AMDATI View Post

That's funny because what he was describing was 2 different games, and pointing to the one that could run at 1080p, while ignoring the ones that couldn't even get 30fps at 1680x1050......now that's more like moving a goal post.

Let's not forget, that 1080p benchmark was without AA, only high settings @ barely 30fps....and skyrim is a 3 year old game that wasn't very demanding to start with!! so again, talk about moving goal posts.

Just say those benchmarks out loud to see how ridiculous it sounds defending a $185 quad core APU that has less performance than a 5 year old midrange GPU.

Price was never part of the equation, you only brought it up when your arguement ("not good for even 1050p low/mid") was defeated again and again and again. And I didn't show just 2 games but several (Tomb Raider, Skyrim,WoW, Grid 2, F1 2013) and you only need to read a few reviews to see there is a wide variety of perfectly playable current titles with kaveri@1080p and not just with low settings. As I was saying (before you swifed the arguement to price/performance), the performance is there.
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 #585 of 1593
Quote:
FX 8350 competes with 4770k, not 4670k, but only in workloads that scale properly to several threads. 4770k is 6% faster than FX 8350, but FX 8350 is 16% faster than 4670k in x264 (a benchmark I would consider that scales properly with multiple threads.

As i've said to someone who quoted the same benchmark and a few other people, you're quoting a benchmark using a two years out of date encoder version. That's not what performance looks like any more.

Updated encoder version, bench i linked:

3930k@4.4ghz - 7.12fps -
bc13ed92_x264_test_updated.png


4770k@4.5ghz - 6.1fps -
M7uGHl8.png

Since nobody in the thread provided bench when we posted the above numbers, i got my friend to run on his 8350 - if anyone else wants to go grab a number, you're free to do it, i asked openly to thread earlier

8350@4.765ghz - 5.21fps -
ciryjnP.png


I think that this could be a little higher, maybe not ran perfectly since he got different FPS numbers. It's what i expected though, and what i originally said when i pointed out no, 4670k is not a significant downgrade from FX for using x264. It may in fact be even stronger.

Corrected for frequency, this puts things:

Baseline, 8350 - 1.00x
4770k, ~1.24x faster than baseline, clock for clock
3930k, ~1.48x faster than baseline, clock for clock

If anybody would like to provide some more numbers for FX, they are welcome to do so - i posted the bench. It has the settings, the video file, everything, just click a batch file. You can read it yourself before you run if you think it's malicious (it's not)

Meanwhile, i'l take some numbers for HT off, which performs essentially identical to 4670k. I originally posted because somebody quoted 2012 benchmark for x264 performance and i wanted to point out that is was wrong, x264 is a strong point of Haswell and i can't let people be mislead by commonly used out of date benchmarks (because there's a "convenient" benchmark package that everybody uses that it from the time of sandy bridge and bulldozer..) so here's some real numbers. Open to discussion, these three shots are from OCN members and it falls about where i would expect
Edited by Cyro999 - 3/16/14 at 5:22am
Insert Name Here
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
6700k Asus Maximus VIII Hero Gigabyte Aorus Xtreme 1080ti Corsair LPX 2x8GB 3200c16 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Old Seagate HDD Samsung 850 EVO Thermalright Silver Arrow SB-E SE Windows 7 Home Premium 64 bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Asus PG258Q (240hz + Gsync) WASDKeyboards.com v1 semi custom w/ mx browns, ... Superflower Golden Green HX550 Air540 
MouseMouse Pad
Logitech G Pro Qck+ 
  hide details  
Insert Name Here
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
6700k Asus Maximus VIII Hero Gigabyte Aorus Xtreme 1080ti Corsair LPX 2x8GB 3200c16 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Old Seagate HDD Samsung 850 EVO Thermalright Silver Arrow SB-E SE Windows 7 Home Premium 64 bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Asus PG258Q (240hz + Gsync) WASDKeyboards.com v1 semi custom w/ mx browns, ... Superflower Golden Green HX550 Air540 
MouseMouse Pad
Logitech G Pro Qck+ 
  hide details  
post #586 of 1593
AMD simply doesn't have the R&D resources to pull off another win against Intel in the mid-high end. They are now relying on third party foundries to do the R&D on the fabrication process, but neither GloFo or TSMC can keep up with Intel, so that puts AMD at a big disadvantage. Also the Bulldozer module design is not well suited for desktop workloads, they probably wanted a separate design for desktop but can't afford it, so they just tried to clock up the Bulldozer for the desktop. However GloFo can't shrink the process smaller than 32nm on that design for some reason, so that's why AMD is basically dead in the water when it comes to CPU.
FairladyZ
(14 items)
 
Twin Turbo S2000
(13 items)
 
Skyline
(13 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 2600k Asus P8Z68-M Pro MSI GTX970 Gaming 4G Corsair Ballistix Sport DDR3-1600 16GB 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Western Digital Black Hybrid 1TB WD10S12X Asus BW-12B1ST Thermaltake WATER2.0 Pro Windows 7 Ultimate x64 SP1 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
MAG Innovision 22 inch LCD Samsung SyncMaster 2220wm Microsoft Sidewinder X4 Antec Earthwatts 750w 
CaseMouse
Cooler Master Elite 430 Microsoft Trackball Optical 1.0 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Q6600 (@3.4ghz, lapped) ASRock P45TurboTwins2000 HD4850 (@800gpu/1087mem) Patriot PC2-6400 2x2GB 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
WD6400AALS/WD6400AAKS Emprex DVD±RW Win7 Ultimate x86/XP Pro(Dual Boot) MAG 22" WS LCD 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
HP 5302H Multimedia Keyboard Antec Basiq 500w + Ultra Xconnect 500w Cooler Master Mystique 632S Microsoft Trackball Optical 1.0 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Athlon X2 4600+ (@2.75ghz, lapped) ECS KN1 Lite Sapphire X1950GT 512mb (@681/661) 2x1GB Mushikin DDR400 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Hitachi 80GB Maddog DVD-RW Windows XP Pro SP2 Mag 22" WS LCD LT2219WDB 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Hewlett Packard 5302H Apevia 500w Generic CompUSA Microsoft Trackball Optical 1.0 
Mouse Pad
None 
  hide details  
FairladyZ
(14 items)
 
Twin Turbo S2000
(13 items)
 
Skyline
(13 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 2600k Asus P8Z68-M Pro MSI GTX970 Gaming 4G Corsair Ballistix Sport DDR3-1600 16GB 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Western Digital Black Hybrid 1TB WD10S12X Asus BW-12B1ST Thermaltake WATER2.0 Pro Windows 7 Ultimate x64 SP1 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
MAG Innovision 22 inch LCD Samsung SyncMaster 2220wm Microsoft Sidewinder X4 Antec Earthwatts 750w 
CaseMouse
Cooler Master Elite 430 Microsoft Trackball Optical 1.0 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Q6600 (@3.4ghz, lapped) ASRock P45TurboTwins2000 HD4850 (@800gpu/1087mem) Patriot PC2-6400 2x2GB 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
WD6400AALS/WD6400AAKS Emprex DVD±RW Win7 Ultimate x86/XP Pro(Dual Boot) MAG 22" WS LCD 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
HP 5302H Multimedia Keyboard Antec Basiq 500w + Ultra Xconnect 500w Cooler Master Mystique 632S Microsoft Trackball Optical 1.0 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Athlon X2 4600+ (@2.75ghz, lapped) ECS KN1 Lite Sapphire X1950GT 512mb (@681/661) 2x1GB Mushikin DDR400 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Hitachi 80GB Maddog DVD-RW Windows XP Pro SP2 Mag 22" WS LCD LT2219WDB 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Hewlett Packard 5302H Apevia 500w Generic CompUSA Microsoft Trackball Optical 1.0 
Mouse Pad
None 
  hide details  
post #587 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by AMDATI View Post

With Kaveri the GPU and memory bandwidth is the bottleneck, not the CPU Thus, your point is very dull.


show me a benchmark where a system runs less FPS @ 1680x1050 compared to 1080p.
Drivers can only go so far in increasing performance. It's not some magical tap that forever increases performance. Drivers can not make up for lack of memory bandwidth and GPU strength in general.

30fps at normal and low settings, am I supposed to be impressed? It's not even really that in depth of a review...it has limited data, and doesn't say whether it's max fps or min fps or any other settings like AA (not that it really matters since it isn't really a positive anyways considering the performance vs price) It's the kind of review someone cites when they're nitpicking.
Well I can see you have no desire to be reasonable and you prefer the ignorant route. Besides harping about the Memory shows the shallow pool of intelligence you are pulling from. So lets try this:

Kaveri is in direct competition with other CPUs with an iGPU ( that is on-die Gpu) aka: Intels HD-4000/4600/5200, although the 5200 is not in direct competition being a near $300 premium with the CPU it is attached.

1:How does it perform in this market?

2: (since you love pricing so much) How is it priced in this market and can any logical outcomes be made for one being higher than the other?

3: What hardware specs are required in these early stages for HSA and gauging its performance with HSA enabled how would you qualify that performance against the rest of the market?

Should be simple enough from that to garner its place in the now and the likelihood of future hardware implementation. But let me help you further:


http://www.hardcoreware.net/kaveri-review-a10-7850k/1/ This is a review of the Kaveri against its competition, notice no 780Ti or 290X. Read the first page it may help you better understand what Kaveri is for. And to help with the aforementioned discussion:




Notice the frametimes. And given the FPS not too bad given the market it is in and its competiton. But again:




Same thing here, frametimes. So it should be easy to tell that Kaveri is doing what it needs to and is the top performer in its market, with ease at that. Also as a little side note, many have gotten their GPU to 1000mhz or higher and in the review it was at 844mhz. And this was PRE 14.2 which has shown huge increases.And to help with the argument, these Betas like 14.2 are more for the APUs than anything else. Just keep that in mind.

Now lets move to the future and realistic manufacturing and marketing.

Why would AMD release a 8core CPU with a Huge, say 7970 level, iGPU with an introduction. That seems to be what you are insinuating not to mention the least of which adding GDDR5 memory to a board would add some hefty cost and then I am sure you will be complaining about that. Fact is it is probably best to start small and in a part of the market that you can be sure to be a top performer. On that, mission accomplished. Now I gather it will be a bit but we will start to see some stronger Kaveri, or latter designation, with more cores and more than likely higher iGPUs. And lets not forget L2 cache and much lower latencies with DDR3 and HUMA. Bandwidth may initially cause some performance reduction over the added benefit of Graphics but even then the CPU portion would be far better off with DDR3 over GDDR5. And even as terrible as you try to make that out to be, Kaveri is still leading its segment.

It just isn't viable or a smart move to start with huge APUs in this market. The 8350 is still viable for at least 2 years. It is not likely the software market will outgrow it that quickly. And Bulldozers worst part was nothing was utilizing it efficiently enough that it looked greatly inept. But now those 8150 are running well with the multitude of optimizations windows has added in the last year and a half. But none of us want a repeat of that. Seriously the Kaveri is only out a month and it has increased in performance 10% minimum. And with HSA coming with a multitude of programming support ie: Java in 2015, it is only going to get better.

So I guess you better get your bashing of Kaveri out of the way before it starts performing at even higher levels, and definitely before HSA starts to show up in actual software. And maybe go ahead and decide on that new forum name so no one can remind you of this discussion as well.
post #588 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kinaesthetic View Post

But you need to look at it from both companies.

Mobile/Tablets: Ship has already sailed (mostly) for both companies. Intel is barely caught the ship departure by speedboating it to reach the ship, and AMD was left behind because they didn't really try.

Laptops: Ship has once again sailed for AMD. Intel dominates in this regard. AMD needs to implement better power management during idle states or low usage like Haswell, and they need to fix their graphics switching tech (Enduro), which in my experience, was utter garbage, and (pardon my language) a buggy piece of stinking, wet diarrhea.

Servers: Ship has already sailed for AMD. Intel is far too ahead and ingrained in this market compared to AMD. AMD wouldn't just have to make good products worthy of server usage, but they would also have to build the support structure that Intel has maintained in this market. Which is huge.

HPC: AMD might have some chance here, as applications are generally tailored to the system configuration. Problem is, is that Intel, once again, dominates this field in performance and power (which in the scale that HPC exists, is a huge difference. This also applies to server infrastructure). And support structure too.

High-end desktop: An area that AMD can compete in. But like I said, AMD is playing from behind here. They can release a solid performing part with HSA implementation, but the problem then lies with the fact that they could easily be outpaced by Intel, if Intel were to implement HSA compliant hardware. And Intel does have the weight, that AMD does not, to push developers to take advantage of HSA.

I've agreed with you mostly, but I highly disagree with you on consoles and emerging markets. Consoles are a dead-end market, with sales already slowing down compared to launch. The profit margins from console chip sales are incredibly low compared to other markets too. Currently in regards to emerging markets, there just isn't much out there to explore with the architecture that even both Intel and AMD are built upon.

And I do hold the opinion that Kabini is already DOA. Bay Trail outpaces it in most situations, and socketed Kabini is such a small market, that it won't matter in the grand scheme of things.

AMD has a long road ahead of them, and I think they are making some good choices, and some bad choices. And right now, that is leaning more into the bad choice realm in regards to long-term business.


But when it comes down to it, I still do think AMD is competitive. However, I also agree with what Alatar has also pushed in this thread too, whether you or others like him or not. Both have their uses in desktop implementation. But one is more cost effective than the other for the general user. And I do think that Intel has a more cost effective solution for the general user than AMD. But keep in mind, that isn't all situations. Both have their uses in different applications. And both are cost effective in their areas of usage. And both are great solutions for the end user.

And in my personal opinion, I hate fanboys/girls on either side that try to deride either side. Which is unfortunately why this thread has blown up to hold more than 550+ replies.



Just my 2cents.gif  overall though.
Well I think you aren't looking at it from the right side. In the laptop market, even the tablet market, Kaveri is a godsend. It shows sooo strong a potential that most, including myself, are screaming for it. Look at the release benches where the 45TDP kaveri was at 80% of the performance of the 95TDP Kaveri. I think it was the A8-7800k. Maarten12100 has that pic, should have copied it, that shows the TDP/watt and why an APU is the way to go in mobile. The APU was like <30, thinking 18 but that seems low, and the others with CPU,iGPU and northbridge the total was like 52. So a huge win in the tablet/laptop market.
post #589 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyro999 View Post

Quote:
FX 8350 competes with 4770k, not 4670k, but only in workloads that scale properly to several threads. 4770k is 6% faster than FX 8350, but FX 8350 is 16% faster than 4670k in x264 (a benchmark I would consider that scales properly with multiple threads.

As i've said to someone who quoted the same benchmark and a few other people, you're quoting a benchmark using a two years out of date encoder version. That's not what performance looks like any more.

Updated encoder version, bench i linked:

3930k@4.4ghz - 7.12fps -
bc13ed92_x264_test_updated.png


4770k@4.5ghz - 6.1fps -
M7uGHl8.png

Since nobody in the thread provided bench when we posted the above numbers, i got my friend to run on his 8350 - if anyone else wants to go grab a number, you're free to do it, i asked openly to thread earlier

8350@4.765ghz - 5.21fps -
ciryjnP.png


I think that this could be a little higher, maybe not ran perfectly since he got different FPS numbers. It's what i expected though, and what i originally said when i pointed out no, 4670k is not a significant downgrade from FX for using x264. It may in fact be even stronger.

Corrected for frequency, this puts things:

Baseline, 8350 - 1.00x
4770k, ~1.24x faster than baseline, clock for clock
3930k, ~1.48x faster than baseline, clock for clock

If anybody would like to provide some more numbers for FX, they are welcome to do so - i posted the bench. It has the settings, the video file, everything, just click a batch file. You can read it yourself before you run if you think it's malicious (it's not)

Meanwhile, i'l take some numbers for HT off, which performs essentially identical to 4670k. I originally posted because somebody quoted 2012 benchmark for x264 performance and i wanted to point out that is was wrong, x264 is a strong point of Haswell and i can't let people be mislead by commonly used out of date benchmarks (because there's a "convenient" benchmark package that everybody uses that it from the time of sandy bridge and bulldozer..) so here's some real numbers. Open to discussion, these three shots are from OCN members and it falls about where i would expect

Stock FX processors outperformed the most modern Intel I7's also at stock in the same benchmark. No more misleading than any other benchmark score in my opinion.

I clicked on the link you provided , but just couldn't bring myself to download it.
Ryzen Shine!
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Ryzen 1800X @ 4125mhz 1.432 Volts MSI X370 Titanium   Fury  G.SKILL TridentZ Series 32GB (4 x 8GB) 288-Pin... 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 850 pro Hp 1260 I liquid unobtanium Koolance 480mm radiator, 39... Win 7 HP/Winspy 10 64bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
24" hp @ 1900x1200 Logitech G19 PC power and cooling 910 watt silencer Thermaltake P5 
MouseMouse Pad
Logitech MX 518 fUnc industries 
  hide details  
Ryzen Shine!
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Ryzen 1800X @ 4125mhz 1.432 Volts MSI X370 Titanium   Fury  G.SKILL TridentZ Series 32GB (4 x 8GB) 288-Pin... 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung 850 pro Hp 1260 I liquid unobtanium Koolance 480mm radiator, 39... Win 7 HP/Winspy 10 64bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
24" hp @ 1900x1200 Logitech G19 PC power and cooling 910 watt silencer Thermaltake P5 
MouseMouse Pad
Logitech MX 518 fUnc industries 
  hide details  
post #590 of 1593
Quote:
Originally Posted by cssorkinman View Post

Stock FX processors outperformed the most modern Intel I7's also at stock in the same benchmark. No more misleading than any other benchmark score in my opinion.

I clicked on the link you provided , but just couldn't bring myself to download it.
I thought about giving it a shot, but the popups kept me from being able to. Maybe another way to DL.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: AMD CPUs
This thread is locked  
Overclock.net › Forums › AMD › AMD CPUs › AMD No longer a viable option for mid-high end?