New Member: Sam from AMD

[PPB]

He is not trying to sell CPUs. Unless you think community managers are salesmen.

No wonder so much hate here. Guys, no need to defend your purchase and attached perception of self-worth in this thread.

 

[Matt1970]

Hello and welcome to the forums Sam! I know these guys can be kinda rough at first but hopefully you stick around and can provide some helpful insight.

This. Welcom Sam and don't put too much merit in the comments from the AMD haters.

 

[NostaSeronx]

Warsam71, http://i.imgur.com/XCNCm1L.png

Can you explain why the FX/Server processors on AM3+, C32, and G34 were chosen to get re-released. While the FM2, C2012, and G2012 processors were not given the chance to get released.

Also explain the whole issue that AMD gimped us FX'ers with IOMMU 1.26 where Trinity has IOMMU 2.0, and Kaveri will have IOMMU 2.5. If you don't know, IOMMU 2.0 is required for NT HSA, and IOMMU 2.5 is required for Unix HSA. IOMMU 1.26 can't do HSA, so nobody can do HSA with FX/Server processors.

Another thing, why does AMD Canada constantly buy Intel hardware for benchmarking? Seems like ATI hates AMD enough to waste your budget by buying 100 computers with i7 3970Xs.

 

[Fjodor2001]

I think it would be good if Sam could let us know the limitations of what types of questions he is allowed to answer. Because I think it will be hard for him to answer some of the questions posted here, which are requesting non-disclosed information about future products etc. It would of course be nice if he at least could give some answer to such questions too though, perhaps with some hints without being too specific. But ultimately it's up to him & AMD to decide what his restrictions are.

 

[Durp]

Everything that AMD has on the market right now has been out long enough for various review sites to show us the performance, power consumption, overclocking head room and price numbers. Sam says he's here to answer questions about current products but what's left to show us?

 

[Slomo4shO]

Hello Sam,

Welcome! Are there any plans to expand beyond 4 cores in the APU lineup and/or plans of adding l3 cache on the non-APU chips (Athlon X4 equivalent) of the upcoming FM2+ lineup?

 

[Warsam71]

Lots of questions, but not many answers. I guess Sam doesn't have the authority to disclose AMD's secret roadmaps... :sneaky:

Hi there, you're correct I don't have the authority to share information about any undisclosed products and services. I hope you understand...:\

 

[pcsavvy]

Hi Sam,

Welcome to the forum. I hope it will be a rewarding experience for everyone.

 

[ultimatebob]

Ok, here's a tough question... What's the deal with the AMD FX-9590? It's currently $850 on Newegg, uses a whopping 220W of power, and gets beat in most benchmarks by a $340 Core i7 4770K that only uses 84W of power.

What on earth was AMD thinking when they released that thing?!?

 

[monstercameron]

Ok, here's a tough question... What's the deal with the AMD FX-9590? It's currently $850 on Newegg, uses a whopping 220W of power, and gets beat in most benchmarks by a $340 Core i7 4770K that only uses 84W of power.

What on earth was AMD thinking when they released that thing?!?

some money or no money...

 

[Nec_V20]

You’ll see I’m passionate about hardware and gaming; my first build was an 80286 based PC, and the first game that got me "hooked" was Wolfenstein 3D (I haven't stopped playing since).

Speaking of APUs, you have never experienced anything until you have had the pure joy of playing Wolfenstein on a 286 with a Hercules Graphics Adapter running under a CGA emulation.

Eat your heart out! :biggrin:

 

[happysmiles]

Sam if there is one thing I want to get to AMD.

13" 1600x900 minimum 8+ hour battery life ultrathin AMD Kaveri preferrably Acer or Asus please!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[ultimatebob]

some money or no money...

I just don't understand why AMD doesn't stick with budget APU desktop parts that are more efficient and cost effective. Unless I'm missing something, the AMD FX-9590 doesn't seem to make any sense.

 

[SlowSpyder]

Hi there, you're correct I don't have the authority to share information about any undisclosed products and services. I hope you understand...:\

So I suppose there isn't any point in asking you about the future of AM3+?


Welcome to the forums, btw!

 

[ultimatebob]

So I suppose there isn't any point in asking you about the future of AM3+?


Welcome to the forums, btw!

He seems to be a bit shy about talking about existing products at the moment, too.

 

[Imouto]

Hey AMD folk. Sup?

Is AMD ever going to fix its OpenCL driver? I'm tired of waiting for a build of Blender Cycles working on an AMD GPU. You have the best price/performance ratio in OpenCL computing and you are letting it go waste because your driver works only with a handful of applications. Smalllux GPU benches may look holytastic but that renderer isn't production ready. Cycles is and while Nvidia runs SLG fairly well AMD doesn't work with Cycles, nothing-at-all. The amount of renderers with GPU acceleration working on AMD GPUs is so low that you can safely say it's zero. You're losing an ever growing market having the best hardware for it because your software division just sucks or at least your Catalyst and Computing guys sure suck.

TL;DR: Ppl about to build a little 3D render farm won't ever never consider AMD GPUs. Fix your damn software already!

 

[OGOC]

Ok, here's a tough question... What's the deal with the AMD FX-9590? It's currently $850 on Newegg, uses a whopping 220W of power, and gets beat in most benchmarks by a $340 Core i7 4770K that only uses 84W of power.

What on earth was AMD thinking when they released that thing?!?

If I thought I had a chance of selling $850 CPUs, I'd release some too.

Also, it's the first officially released 5ghz CPU. If you can be the first at something like that, why not create some buzz and get your name in the paper.

Anyway, I wonder if Sam would like to elaborate at all on the whole Intel/AMD compiler thing and CPU performance, and/or if software companies have updated their software to better take advantage of newer AMD CPUs. I know I'm not the only one to notice the 8350 doing noticeably better in more recent benchmarks than it did at first. I'm just not sure of the reason(s).

 

[Idontcare]

I just don't understand why AMD doesn't stick with budget APU desktop parts that are more efficient and cost effective.

Because AMD is not a non-profit entity.

How much profit, in absolute dollars, do you think VIA is pulling down right now with their processors?

Why would AMD aspire to follow them down the same path?

Unless I'm missing something, the AMD FX-9590 doesn't seem to make any sense.

Does a $350k lambo make sense? Probably not, not if you aren't a member of the target demographic.

 

[guskline]

So I suppose there isn't any point in asking you about the future of AM3+?


Welcome to the forums, btw!

The "official" word is that AMD will continue to "support" the AM3+ mb. Personally, viewing all that has gone on at AMD, I think they will continue producing Vishera 8 core chips for the AM3+ socket. I doubt they can tweak much more out of the chip after the FX 9590. As far as Steamroller? The core will find its way into the APU. I'm beginning to doubt that AMD will make a Steamroller for the AM3+ mb for sometime, if at all. The emphasis seems to be elsewhere.

I can't blame them.Look at my rigs below. The Intel 1155 only supported 2 generations of CPUs - Sandy and Ivy. The AM3+ supports the Bulldozer, Piledriver and much older chips. When the AM3+ socket was released I believe it only supported for certain the Bulldozer and one generation beyond. I hope I'm wrong and that it will support the Steamroller - if and when if ever it makes its way into the AM3+ socket.

In the meantime you have an Uber cpu FX9370! Have fun with it.

 

[guskline]

Because AMD is not a non-profit entity.

How much profit, in absolute dollars, do you think VIA is pulling down right now with their processors?

Why would AMD aspire to follow them down the same path?



Does a $350k lambo make sense? Probably not, not if you aren't a member of the target demographic.

IDC, I've given up defending the PileDriver as energy efficient. Many posters complaining about it use an Intel chip and that alone is fine, it's harder to stomach the complaint when they are running Titans in SLI with a 3970X OC'd to the moon and a 1500W PSU. I seriously doubt the use of a PileDriver will "tip the balance" on energy efficiency.

Let me be clear. My PileDriver below uses more power than my 3770k. Is it so excessive that it causes problems? No.

P.S. Sure wish I was a member of the $350k lambo target demographic!

 

[frozentundra123456]

Because AMD is not a non-profit entity.

How much profit, in absolute dollars, do you think VIA is pulling down right now with their processors?

Why would AMD aspire to follow them down the same path?



Does a $350k lambo make sense? Probably not, not if you aren't a member of the target demographic.

Well, more often than not they are a "non-profit" entity, although obviously not by design.


Edit: Seriously, we seem to have a difference of opinion of whether or not the 9570 makes sense from a consumer standpoint, because I feel it doesnt. But from AMDs standpoint, it makes perfect sense to market it. I do feel the Lambo analogy is flawed though, because while it is outrageously expensive it offers far superior performance, while the 9570 does not.

 

[frozentundra123456]

IDC, I've given up defending the PileDriver as energy efficient. Many posters complaining about it use an Intel chip and that alone is fine, it's harder to stomach the complaint when they are running Titans in SLI with a 3970X OC'd to the moon and a 1500W PSU. I seriously doubt the use of a PileDriver will "tip the balance" on energy efficiency.

Let me be clear. My PileDriver below uses more power than my 3770k. Is it so excessive that it causes problems? No.

P.S. Sure wish I was a member of the $350k lambo target demographic!

In a case like you are proposing, I agree, power consumption is not a major issue. Performance is, and anands recent article showed intel clearly faster with multi-gpu setups, but that is another issue.

What I disagree with is posters (not saying it is you) that claim the 8350 is a better buy than an i5 because it is cheaper, but then say power consumption doesnt matter, when over the lifetime of the chip the savings in power usage is significant compared to the price difference between the two chips.

 

[Gikaseixas]

8350 is a better buy than an i5 because it is cheaper

The FX trades blows with i5's. One cannot say it's better because it wins some key performance indicators but looses others and the same appllies to the people who say i5 is better. The FX in selected benches run neck a neck with i7's, so in general it is a powerhouse more often than not IMO. Try using one for yourself, might surprise you... I'm surprised of how well it performs with a HD7970 GE.

 

[frozentundra123456]

The FX trades blows with i5's. One cannot say it's better because it wins some key performance indicators but looses others and the same appllies to the people who say i5 is better. The FX in selected benches run neck a neck with i7's, so in general it is a powerhouse more often than not IMO. Try using one for yourself, might surprise you... I'm surprised of how well it performs with a HD7970 GE.

We are already off topic, so I dont really want to go into which processor is better. I admit it does depend on workload. The only point I was trying to make is that you have to consider the initial cost as well as the cost of operation when making a price comparison. The 8350 may still be a cheaper alternative, but the point is all factors must be considered.

 

[Rvenger]

They do perform really well in real world testing, just not on synthetics. I had my 8150 driving a GTX 670 without a hitch.