According to AMD's roadmap, sometime in 2017 at the earliest for Zen APUs, and that is assuming no delays. Not even sure if the initial consumer APUs will have HBM.
I would buy that in a heartbeat. I just hope AMD makes this APU sooner rather than later.
Nice? It's a piece of trash!
With a 980Ti is enough for now!
In general I agree with this. If the 7850k launched with about 2x the IGP performance, AMD would have a monster seller. As it stands by the time they get to that level, Intel will also be there with similar IGP performance should they wish it.
If AMD had an actual APU that seamlessly leveraged GPGPU to offset the slower cores, they'd also have a more compelling argument. But Llano, Trinity, and Richland aren't APUs. Kaveri is close, but still really isn't one.
How do you qualify the statement that Fiji in crossfire is trash?
Had the 7850k launched at a lower price, it would have been more successful. At least AMD learned their lesson and launched the 7870k at ~$145.
OpenCL2.0 may make this more plausible in the future. I am unsure of how strong is AMD's driver support for all 2.0 features, though.
Its the same old story...wait for something new. OpenCL didnt really change much at all to put it bluntly. Its more or less just another version of CUDA with the same types of apps and limitations. Lets be honest, GPGPU havent moved.
It seems there is around 300K users of SLi/CF combined over multiple generations. Its pretty much irrelevant how they perform there. And that includes all kinds, hybrid, lowend , mainstream, highend etc.
But it still wouldnt change anything. Because what the 7850K delivers isnt something many users demand. Its the entire concept of AMDs APUs thats the problem.
Its the same old story...wait for something new. OpenCL didnt really change much at all to put it bluntly. Its more or less just another version of CUDA with the same types of apps and limitations. Lets be honest, GPGPU havent moved.
The question remains, how does that make it trash?
Actually, it's an excellent processor for someone running F2P Steam games, among other things (though something like the 7600 does about as well).
Besides, remember all the arguments people made, getting all blue in the face about how a standalone CPU like the 760k (or some i3) plus a dGPU was a better buy? All the 7850k had to be was cheaper. Or, alternatively, all AMD had to do was release something like the 7650k back in early 2014 and make it broadly available, at ~$104. Reactions would have been very different.
OpenCL is not new, and it has changed quite a bit for people that bother to use it. 2.0 will be great for Intel iGPUs. I remain skeptical of how it benefits/will benefit AMD APUs since it does not appear that their OpenCL drivers are built on top of the HSA stack (at least not as of right now; maybe that will change). Most of what I know about AMD's support for OpenCL2.0 features is from a year ago, which doesn't help.
Sorry, I have to strongly disagree. The problem with any APU so far, even Iris Pro, is that the performance just is not good enough. Price is only part of it. The problem is that so much better performance is still available for not that much more money. An 860k is 74.00 on New Egg, and a 260x is around 100.00. So call it 175.00 for about twice the performance of Kaveri, and on top of that, no need to buy expensive ram.
Now if Kaveri is 175.00 like they tried to charge out of the gate, it is a complete no brainer to go for the discrete system. Even now, the 7850k is still 130.00. Who in their right mind is not going to spend 50 dollars or less (10% of even a very budget 500.00 system) for twice the performance? It just makes my head spin that anyone tries to portray that as a good compromise. Even if one hates intel with an absolute passion and refuses to use their prodects, AMD itself offers a hugely better solution. And please dont start that argument that I am trying to say everyone should have a hex core intel and quad titanXs. Nothing could be further from the truth. We are talking about the difference between playable and not playable at 1080p for a quite a number of games, at least at any kind of decent framerate.
How is Kaveri not strong enough (for it's price).
It easily plays Dota 2, LoL, Warframe, TF2, CS:Go and the like maxed out. And guess what...those are like...the most played games on the gawd darn planet. Again...terrible Marketing + being priced just a few dollar too high initially ruined most of it imho.
Kaveri is a 250mm^2 die, it is more expensive than most Intel chips to manufacture both because of the bigger die size and of the lower yields. That it has to be priced lower than 120mm^2 Intel chips should give you an idea on how conceptually flawed this product is, and how constrained AMD is regarding to pricing their products. AMD APU + CMT is a real failure on the CPU consumer market.
So you're comparing die areas on 28 vs 14 nm? Does not seem fair.
How is Kaveri not strong enough (for it's price).
It easily plays Dota 2, LoL, Warframe, TF2, CS:Go and the like maxed out. And guess what...those are like...the most played games on the gawd darn planet. Again...terrible Marketing + being priced just a few dollar too high initially ruined most of it imho.
Not at all. Intel kept the 2C die size close floating between 110 and 130 since Sandy Bridge, with the notable exception of the 2C GT3 parts.
Yeah, but you we're comparing against AMD's latest APU (Kaveri). So then you also need to compare against the latest Intel CPU.
And 200 mm^2 (28nm) vs 100 mm^2 (14 nm) is not a fair comparison. You cannot say the 200 mm^2 die is more expensive than the 100 mm^2 just because the area is bigger. Because the price per mm^2 is much higher on 14 nm than 28 nm.
And 200 mm^2 (28nm) vs 100 mm^2 (14 nm) is not a fair comparison. You cannot say the 200 mm^2 die is more expensive than the 100 mm^2 just because the area is bigger. Because the price per mm^2 is much higher ion 14 nm.
Betting the future of AMD on cable companies moving rapidly seems like a bad idea. Have you looked at a cable box recently?
4K blu-ray players are going to have all the features of a PS4 (above, after October) except game playing and will eventually sell for about $199 (no GDDR5 or APU). A refreshed PS3 with the same features and PS3 game playing could sell for $249.
The 100mm2 is still cheaper for Intel than the 200mm2 is for AMD.
You should also factor in the R&D cost and all investments in process tech that Intel has made in 14 nm. They need to get ROI on that too.
And anyway, what are you suggesting AMD should create a chip with less transistors, and thus less performance? That would be a much worse idea. Because it would not be competitive at all - they already have a hard time competing with Intel on CPU performance. So better to make a larger APU, and at least sell some chips but at a lower margin.
You should also factor in the R&D cost and all investments in process tech that Intel has made in 14 nm. They need to get ROI on that too.