How are FX CPUs (as well as the server versions) selling?

[eton975]

I often see FX-6300s (in particular), 8320s and sometimes even 8350s recommended in builds. Obviously, this pales to the number of i5/i7 based builds, but I wouldn't be too surprised if AMD has quite a niche in the 'budget enthusiast' market.

So am I right in saying that it is not really that AMD is doing poorly with their desktop CPUs, but rather on their server CPUs, since they can make far more money from these? If you're a sysadmin, your boss is gonna yell at you for buying a more power-hungry, less efficient Opteron over a Xeon.

So am I right in saying this, and is this why AMD seems to have a larger interest in low-power processors compared to high-end desktop ones?

 

[hungtran]

I'm an AMD fan, I don't mind buying FXs for workstations, but I'd never consider buying a current gen Opteron over a current gen Xeon. They're not even close in typical business applications. Maybe if I'm in a developing country and are afraid of the US implanting surveillance into Intel chips.

 

[zir_blazer]

As far that I recall, AMD Server marketshare became pretty much non-existant starting from Bulldozer based Opterons. Xeons badly humilliates them in nearly every metric. Add in corporate brand loyalty - AMD had to fight hard to earn recognition in that market even when they had superior products.

 

[Ayah]

As far that I recall, AMD Server marketshare became pretty much non-existant starting from Bulldozer based Opterons. Xeons badly humilliates them in nearly every metric. Add in corporate brand loyalty - AMD had to fight hard to earn recognition in that market even when they had superior products.

there are still a few niches that are more suited to AMD where cpu performance isn't particularly relevant.
usually when you just want more pcie connectivity or memory/$.

 

[TeknoBug]

I've had my hands on a dual Opteron a year ago, it was a fun machine but nope- I'd pick a Xeon over that, even those cheap-o E3/E5 Xeons.

For workstation, again, AMD isn't the smartest choice, Intel non-K CPU's offers instructions that helps with workstation tasks (I like the VT-d for virtual machines).

AMD is best for budget-midrange gaming and everyday home PC use (surfing, Facebook, videos, etc).

I miss the old server days where server CPU's were super efficient at the job and miles ahead of the consumer CPU; HP/UX, ALPHA and Sun systems and even the lower end Pentium Pro's were awesome in the 90's.

 

[NostaSeronx]

Unless the CPU is on the G34 platform or the AM3+ platform, you aren't paying for a perf/price. The issue with the server SKUs is that the C32 and G34 boards are mostly budget boards. There is heavy cost savings for C32 and G34 which places them below Intel versions.

--
If AMD wants to appease the enthusiast's appetites they must absolutely bring out a singular platform. With the FX and Opteron SKUs being able to use the same boards.

To differentiate FX from Opterom and vice versa;
Opteron: Low Power, ULV - LV
FX: High Performance, SV

 

[naukkis]

For workstation, again, AMD isn't the smartest choice, Intel non-K CPU's offers instructions that helps with workstation tasks (I like the VT-d for virtual machines).

AMD'c cpu's support all virtualization technologies too, and they aren't disabled in overclockable cpus. IOMMU virtualization for AMD is called AMD-Vi and Intel version from same technology is called VT-d.

 

[DominionSeraph]

AMD is best for budget-midrange gaming and everyday home PC use (surfing, Facebook, videos, etc).

Sad to say that for everyday home use Intel is far better. Superior single-threaded performance and lower power. Each core is so much better that two hyperthreaded cores almost equal six AMD ones.

The overclockability of the FX-6300 and the fact you can get 8 overclockable cores for slightly more in the FX-8320 is what keeps AMD in it for gaming and the only thing that keeps Intel from owning from high to low.

 

[Ayah]

AMD'c cpu's support all virtualization technologies too, and they aren't disabled in overclockable cpus. IOMMU virtualization for AMD is called AMD-Vi and Intel version from same technology is called VT-d.

problem is memory support for bang for buck workstations (for my interest fields). AMD has no high end desktop platform at all.

 

[Homeles]

Maybe if I'm in a developing country and are afraid of the US implanting surveillance into Intel chips.

Well, as for now, Intel releases unedited die shots, and it's fairly easy to see that they don't have anything on die that would do such a thing.

 

[AtenRa]

Each core is so much better that two hyperthreaded cores almost equal six AMD ones.

You mean 2C 4T equals 3 Module 6 Threads ?? Because thats not true in MT loads, even with clock to clock.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/699?vs=1192

And dont forget the FX6300 is Vishera and not Steamroller. Steamroller would walk way even further in MT loads.

 

[mrmt]

there are still a few niches that are more suited to AMD where cpu performance isn't particularly relevant.
usually when you just want more pcie connectivity or memory/$.

Memory/$ bracket will be owned by 8C atoms.

 

[AtenRa]

problem is memory support for bang for buck workstations (for my interest fields). AMD has no high end desktop platform at all.

Depending on your workloads and applications, if you need lots and lots of Threads (32 ??) then you can go for a dual Socket G34 and up to 2x 16Cores Opteron 6300 series.

One nice motherboard with lots of Memory capacity (256GB) is the dual-Socket ASUS KGPE-D16 . The only thing missing is USB-3 but im sure you can add a PCI-e controller on it.

There are also single socket C32 and G34 motherboard for up to 16 Core Opterons.

 

[OCGuy]

My guess is not very well.

 

[Ayah]

our cs dept here had 2 of those 8-way westmere-ex rigs, 80 cores, 160 with HT. 1TB memory each. at the time, 1TB ram was insane. they'll probably be replaced with IVB-EXs soon, with more RAM than probably any home has in SSDs.

for G34 vs avoton in $$/RAM: yep, intel basically stuck their hand in that niche. I haven't seen any deployments to that niche yet, but I haven't kept up to date .

also, AMD's "latest" G34 processors were released almost 2 years ago.. which is beyond depressing, and probably going to be impossible to justify at their current prices.

 

[DominionSeraph]

You mean 2C 4T equals 3 Module 6 Threads ?? Because thats not true in MT loads, even with clock to clock.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/699?vs=1192

Look again at that Cinebench multithreaded and x264 encoding. And I'm guessing right now that they're miscomparing POVRay versions since the i3's 735 result comes from the Haswell refresh review which shows the 4960X getting 2k and the 12 core/24 thread E5-2697 V2 getting 3100 to the 7850k's 800. Somehow I doubt the FX-6300 gets 3400.

I mean, something ain't right here...

And dont forget the FX6300 is Vishera and not Steamroller. Steamroller would walk way even further in MT loads.

There are no 6 core Steamrollers. The A10-7850k is a $170 part that certainly does not beat the $109 FX-6300 in multithreaded apps.

 

[DominionSeraph]

Yeah, looks like they confused the beta 23 with the RC6 results for the i3 4330.
Beta 23 scores:

RC6:

The i3 4330 score is the odd man out in the Bench.


E: LOL:

 

[SlowSpyder]

AMD is still manufacturing them, so they must be selling a little, somewhere. But it seems like around here, for every seven or eight threads you see asking about an Intel build, you'll see one for an AMD build, and those might be APU or FX. That's just a very rough guess. But, they aren't selling well compared to the competition, that much is certain.

 

[AtenRa]

Look again at that Cinebench multithreaded and x264 encoding. And I'm guessing right now that they're miscomparing POVRay versions since the i3's 735 result comes from the Haswell refresh review which shows the 4960X getting 2k and the 12 core/24 thread E5-2697 V2 getting 3100 to the 7850k's 800. Somehow I doubt the FX-6300 gets 3400.

I mean, something ain't right here...

Yes it seams the AT PovRay results are wrong, bellow are the ones i got from my testing.

A10-7700K (3.3Hz base, 3.8GHz turbo) with ASUS A88XM-Plus and 2x 2133MHz memory
Core i3 4330 (3.5GHz base) with ASUS B85M-E and 2x 1600MHz memory


PovRay 3.7 RC7 800x600 AA0.3 Benchmark

A10-7700K = 854pps, 09m, 22secs
Core i3 4330 = 800pps, 10m,00secs

Cinebench 11.5

A10-7700K --> Single = 0.98 --> MT = 3.47
Core i3 4330 --> Single = 1.54 --> MT = 3.82

Cinebench R15

A10-7700K --> Single = 89 --> MT = 307
Core i3 4330 --> Single = 137 --> MT = 354

7zip

A10-7700K = 11478
Core i3 4330 = 10979


2C 4T Intel is not close to AMDs 3 Module 6 Cores.

There are no 6 core Steamrollers. The A10-7850k is a $170 part that certainly does not beat the $109 FX-6300 in multithreaded apps.

I was taking about a hypothetical 3 Module 6 Cores Steamroller. If a dual Module 4 Cores Kaveri is equal to 2C 4T Haswell then a 3 Module 6 Cores L3 Cache-less Steamroller it would be much faster than any C2 4T Intel.
I bet a 3 Module SR with L3 cache would reach very close to Core i5 Performance in MT loads.

 

[AtenRa]

AMD is still manufacturing them, so they must be selling a little, somewhere. But it seems like around here, for every seven or eight threads you see asking about an Intel build, you'll see one for an AMD build, and those might be APU or FX. That's just a very rough guess. But, they aren't selling well compared to the competition, that much is certain.

Approximately 30% of AMDs non server SKUs sold are without iGPU.

 

[rvborgh]

You are right about power usage and core count. i use an i7-4770 every day (put it together for work to replace this Opteron machine which i brought home after retiring it), but after popping two Opteron 8439SEs (12 cores total) into this old Tyan motherboard frankly i am disappointed in the i7's performance (it really is lackluster vs the dual 8439 system). i feel AMD went the wrong direction after they abandoned K10.5

Sad to say that for everyday home use Intel is far better. Superior single-threaded performance and lower power. Each core is so much better that two hyperthreaded cores almost equal six AMD ones.

The overclockability of the FX-6300 and the fact you can get 8 overclockable cores for slightly more in the FX-8320 is what keeps AMD in it for gaming and the only thing that keeps Intel from owning from high to low.

 

[jhu]

You mean 2C 4T equals 3 Module 6 Threads ?? Because thats not true in MT loads, even with clock to clock.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/699?vs=1192

And dont forget the FX6300 is Vishera and not Steamroller. Steamroller would walk way even further in MT loads.

That's what my testing has found too: 1 fully loaded AMD module = 1 fully loaded Intel core with HT clock for clock

 

[AtenRa]

MSI unveils the 970 Gaming AM3+ motherboard

It seams they are still selling AM3+ CPUs after all, otherwise MSI wouldn't bother releasing a new AM3+ Gaming board in mid 2014

 

[Leyawiin]

MSI unveils the 970 Gaming AM3+ motherboard

It seams they are still selling AM3+ CPUs after all, otherwise MSI wouldn't bother releasing a new AM3+ Gaming board in mid 2014

Interesting. TPU says it has an 8 phase VRM count. Unusual for a 970 chipset (think Gigabyte is the only other one to do that).

 

[PPB]

Interesting. TPU says it has an 8 phase VRM count. Unusual for a 970 chipset (think Gigabyte is the only other one to do that).

Remember VRM quantity isnt the only determining factor when considering which one is better.

PS: Damn that is one good looking motherboard, but AMD MSI's mobos still have a stain in my book