amd fx cpus were future proof...

[monstercameron]

with dx12 on the horizon, you can have your ancient fx cpus compete nicely with its big blue counterpart.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/8968/star-swarm-directx-12-amd-apu-performance

so with dx12 gaming and as more software becomes multitreaded[it will eventually happen], it seems fx cpus have a few more years.

Why didn't amd double down, I want MOAR COARZ!

 

[exar333]

The slow solution is the future-proof one? And why do you even want a 'future-proof' CPU when new ones come out every year? (at least AMD used to release new ones...)

They 'appear' future-proof because that's all they have released in years for performance parts.

 

[Morgoth780]

FX is only relevant because of the price.

 

[cbn]

So although DirectX 12 is not going to bring the same kind of massive performance improvements to iGPUs that we’ve seen with dGPUs

Going by the info from this the article, it appears AMD quad core CPUs could close the gap with Intel Core i3 provided the image quality settings are dialed up (via larger dGPUs). At lower detail settings (expected with large iGPUs or small dGPUs ) the gap between Intel Ciore i3 and AMD quad core would remain close to the same.

So based on that, I think this further supports AMD shipping future big core APUs with much smaller iGPUs being a good idea. (This for the lower cost to manufacture and thus lower potential retail price to us as consumers).

 

[Magic Carpet]

Why didn't amd double down, I want MOAR COARZ!

I would buy a 6-teen "core" FX cpu today, just to play around. Well, there is Opteron. Hmm.

Specifically, these Warsaw parts have a TDP of 99 W. As far as cost effectiveness, the 16 core model is priced at $598 and the 12 core $377.

Nevermind, Base Freq. is 2.0 Ghz :|

Voted yes.

 

[monstercameron]

FX is only relevant because of the price.

and is that a bad thing?

 

[TurtleCrusher]

The slow solution is the future-proof one? And why do you even want a 'future-proof' CPU when new ones come out every year? (at least AMD used to release new ones...)

They 'appear' future-proof because that's all they have released in years for performance parts.

Is it 1997 again? When all of your applications applications are IO limited even with an SSD and practically every game averages the refresh rate or much more on your monitor, upgrading a CPU isn't something that practically anyone but a hardware junkie will do. Once you have a sufficient amount of cores and good enough per-core performance, upgrading IO and GPU is far more beneficial to a system.

 

[ShintaiDK]

FX was released obsolete and its only gotten worse and it will continue so. There is no magic saving.

 

[frozentundra123456]

Nice gains, but why would you wait 3 or 4 years for DX 12 to become mainstream in order to just catch up to what intel offers today? If anything as someone else said it just shows how bad FX is under DX11 which will be with us for a lot of games for a long time.

However, we should be cognizant of the fact that Star Swarm is not a real game either, so the results may be different in real games.


Edit: Cameron, I do agree with you though that a big core cpu with a small igp could be a better compromise than either of the solutions that AMD offers today.

 

[crashtech]

Putting any hope I have for AMD in Zen at the moment, so, no, not really.

 

[svarog19]

FX is only relevant because of the price.

Not true... Its not just the price.

While FX has cheap 8 core CPU's, it comes in handy when splitting load between cores so nowadays most games use 4 cores and in future more and more will use 6 cores and 2 will still be left for OS and other things to do.

FX 8XXX CPU's are great for streamers on a budget due to performance and flexibility which trumps i5's in multitasking.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lHM-LBtJc2Q

 

[richaron]

FX was released obsolete and its only gotten worse and it will continue so. There is no magic saving.

Wrong as always.

8150 was competitive with Intel in a well threaded environment from the very begining. I'm sure team Intel will change their argument when the time comes tho...

 

[PC Master Race]

Wrong as always.

8150 was competitive with Intel in a well threaded environment from the very begining. I'm sure team Intel will change their argument when the time comes tho...

No FX Buldozer was a flop and not competitive with anything.
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2014/07/03/intel-core-i5-4690k-review/4

 

[ShintaiDK]

Wrong as always.

8150 was competitive with Intel in a well threaded environment from the very begining. I'm sure team Intel will change their argument when the time comes tho...

Yes the 1% cases with rendering, encoding etc with close to perfect scaling. Then lost epicly at the 99% cases. And thats just to the i5.

In case you forgot:
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/434?vs=288
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/434?vs=287


A turd is a turd nomatter how much you try and polish it.

 

[sm625]

Given the sheer number of cores, they will probably have legs for a long time. Just dont expect great performance at any one thing. On a positive note, there is nothing that would absolutely choke and die on an 8 core FX that would fly on a 4790K. The FX will run everything, unlike my G3258 which flies most of the time but will absolutely choke and die if I try to launch multiple apps while an encode is running in the background and I'm streaming a game.

 

[monstercameron]

Given the sheer number of cores, they will probably have legs for a long time. Just dont expect great performance at any one thing. On a positive note, there is nothing that would absolutely choke and die on an 8 core FX that would fly on a 4790K. The FX will run everything, unlike my G3258 which flies most of the time but will absolutely choke and die if I try to launch multiple apps while an encode is running in the background and I'm streaming a game.

good points.

 

[xthetenth]

The question of course is what it looks like when game developers can build games to take advantage of the freed up performance.

 

[coercitiv]

The question of course is what it looks like when game developers can build games to take advantage of the freed up performance.

Better games on same hardware.

 

[Ramses]

Given the sheer number of cores, they will probably have legs for a long time. Just dont expect great performance at any one thing. On a positive note, there is nothing that would absolutely choke and die on an 8 core FX that would fly on a 4790K. The FX will run everything, unlike my G3258 which flies most of the time but will absolutely choke and die if I try to launch multiple apps while an encode is running in the background and I'm streaming a game.

Our mantra years ago used to be "because two is better than one" when dinosaurs roamed the earth and CPU's were frequently found in plastic enclosures that fitted into slots on a board. It wasn't always true, but it was true often enough. It's multiplied a bit fifteen years or more later but it's still true.

 

[erunion]

We've heard this same song for years. First, we just needed to wait for newer games. Then it was win8 that would fix Fx. Then it was multithreaded directx drivers.

And now its dx12 that will save FX. And, just like before, we're celebrating before the product is even released; without any evidence that FX will benefit more than Intel.

 

[ShintaiDK]

We've heard this same song for years. First, we just needed to wait for newer games. Then it was win8 that would fix Fx. Then it was multithreaded directx drivers.

And now its dx12 that will save FX. And, just like before, we're celebrating before the product is even released; without any real evidence.

You forgot consoles would also fix it. Something thats only made it worse for FX CPUs :awe:

 

[Ramses]

A turd is a turd nomatter how much you try and polish it.

After reading this sort of thing over and over and over, and countless benchmarks, I still can't figure out why I've had such a great experience with FX CPUs. I've been at this for almost twenty years now, from 386's to this, so it can't be lack of experience. And I'm just as bright and technically savvy as the next person among this crowd. I bought an i7-4790K and a nice z97 board recently and I intend to see how differently it performs than the higher end FX chips. I'm a believer in putting ones money where their mouth is.

I've also never felt compelled to use the word "turd" in discussing any item or ideal that another person happens to favor. In fact I've never even typed it in all these years. Churchill said if you must kill a man it costs nothing to be polite, thus far I've found that to be accurate.

 

[MiddleOfTheRoad]

FX was released obsolete and its only gotten worse and it will continue so. There is no magic saving.

That is great satire, dude. I laughed my tail off.

 

[MiddleOfTheRoad]

Given the sheer number of cores, they will probably have legs for a long time. Just dont expect great performance at any one thing. On a positive note, there is nothing that would absolutely choke and die on an 8 core FX that would fly on a 4790K. The FX will run everything, unlike my G3258 which flies most of the time but will absolutely choke and die if I try to launch multiple apps while an encode is running in the background and I'm streaming a game.

That's probably the most honest assessment I've ever heard on the topic.

The FX 8 cores are probably the Dodge Vipers of CPU's. Is the new Corvette faster than a Viper? Sure. Is the Viper a gas guzzler? Absolutely. Does a Viper honestly struggle in any performance metric? Nope.

 

[DownTheSky]

That is great satire, dude. I laughed my tail off.

What satire? He's right.

That's probably the most honest assessment I've ever heard on the topic.

The FX 8 cores are probably the Dodge Vipers of CPU's. Is the new Corvette faster than a Viper? Sure. Is the Viper a gas guzzler? Absolutely. Does a Viper honestly struggle in any performance metric? Nope.

More likely a Cadillac. You can fit a lot of people but doesn't break any speed records.