WCCFAMD Zen Architecture Could Feature in APUs in 2016, ASUS a Key Player

[BSim500]

Except bit-tech, non of the other reviews you posted have multi-Tasking :whiste:

LOL! So it really is a case of "they're all wrong I tell you!" So predictable...

The thing is that A10-7850K HAS NO COMPETITOR, thats why it sells that high. You cannot find another Unlocked 95W TDP CPU + GPU and be able to use it in Slim mini-iTX cases.

So the goalposts have moved yet again to only include those niche ultra-slim mini-ITX cases with no expansion slots at all which absolutely no-one was talking about before? I think I see what you're doing... :sneaky:

Believe me, I would LOVE for AMD to come out with a CPU with a much higher IPC and perf-watt ratio simply out of desiring serious healthy competition. Right now though, all we ever seem to have is a whole lot of "every benchmark is wrong unless it involves running every application you've got all at once" excuse making and "moving the goalposts" niche 'how can we better stack the deck' bias...

 

[Pilum]

That was my impression. I know things aren't as bad for them on the desktop as they are in the server sector, where they have maybe a 4% market share, but still, 30%? No way.

AMDs market share in 2Q14 was:
x86 overall, counting consoles: 16.3%
x86 overall, without consoles: 11.2%.
x86 segments: console=100%, DT=15.0%, mobile=9.6%, server=2.2%.

I doubt they managed to double their DT market share in the last quarter with their anemic offerings, so there's no way for the 30% to be true... on a global scale, anyway. Maybe the article refers to DT share in a specific region or country, so the number may be true somewhere.

 

[Abwx]

So the goalposts have moved yet again

here how to move goalposts when perfs of the i3 are not correct on a task :

Even a 7770 beats that

Why buying a CPU with an IGP..??.
Or is it the usual deflection once Intel s GPUs are scrutinized..?.

Here another one with 83w delta consumption (load-idle) which itself is lower than actual consumption. Let me guess it'll now be labelled "guru3dtroll" by Abwx for not agreeing with him that absolutely every 7850K everywhere uses exactly 67.000w.

But 83W delta at the main is no more than 0.81 x 83 = 67W CPU TDP, at worse...

Even a 7770 beats that and I've seem them go for as little as $30-40.

yes, of course....

Plenty of other sites. Here's one from Abwx's favorite site:-
http://www.hardware.fr/articles/913-7/cpu-performances-applicatives.html

Since you talked about perfs/watt and that you like Guru3troll let s check their numbers....once the IGP is used, because we can do some gaming on the IGP, isnt it..

How much is you estimation of Haswell s perfs/watts when the IGP is somewhat used...??.

here to help compute the numbers :

And of course no gaming power comsumption numbers in their 4770K review, surely that the numbers were too good to be true..

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/core_i7_4770k_review,11.html

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/core_i7_4770k_review,22.html

 

[BSim500]

Why buying a CPU with an IGP..??.

The point is a $80 7750 + $70 G3258 / $80 X4-750 is cheaper and performs better (due to DDR5 vs DDR3), so "bang for buck", yes the 7850K is typically $20-30 over-priced in the "budget" arena (as is widely commented on, on the web, eg, "For all that, AMD prices the A10-7850K very high" - Bittech, "The A10-7850K on the other hand is a bit pricey for my liking" - eteknik, etc). I just find it amusing that "lowest possible cost" WAS the ultimate deciding factor for budget gaming builds with people picking even a $10 cheaper package with FX8350 vs i5 premium builds - and now a $30 premium for a budget build suddenly 'isn't an issue' for some people as and when it suits them... :whiste:

Since you talked about perfs/watt and that you like Guru3troll

"xtrollabs, bitechtroll, anandtechtroll", etc. Honestly, I really stopped reading here. Attaching "troll" onto the end of every website's benchmarks name then yelling it over & over is childish beyond belief and I'm really not interested in feeding that cr*p. Have a good day.

 

[Abwx]

The point is a $80 7750 + $70 G3258 / $80 X4-750 is cheaper and performs better (due to DDR5 vs DDR3), so "bang for buck", yes the 7850K is typically $20-30 over-priced in the "budget" arena (as is widely commented on, on the web, eg, "For all that, AMD prices the A10-7850K very high" - Bittech, "The A10-7850K on the other hand is a bit pricey for my liking" - eteknik, etc). I just find it amusing that "lowest possible cost" WAS the ultimate deciding factor for budget gaming builds with people picking even a $10 cheaper package with FX8350 vs i5 premium builds - and now a $30 premium for a budget build suddenly 'isn't an issue' for some people as and when it suits them... :whiste:


"xtrollabs, bitechtroll, anandtechtroll", etc. Honestly, I really stopped reading here. Attaching "troll" onto the end of every website's benchmarks name then yelling it over & over is childish beyond belief and I'm really not interested in feeding that cr*p. Have a good day.

There s the A8 7600 if price is a concern; as for Xbit and Bitech they are obviously not honnest sites, particularly Xbit wich is blatantly anti AMD, the guy (Anton Shilov the well named..) trash them as much as he can since they do no more send him free CPUs, heck, he received his 290X from Nvidia and was delivered a full Haswell line once he finished to slaughter AMD s AM1, check this latter review, an exemple of bad faith and doctored numbers...

As for Bitech, why dont they publish IGP perfs numbers and are using high end cards with low end chips.??.

Find me a logical explanation and i ll do all necessary apologies but i doubt that you ll find anything justified in this respect.

For the little story i was in a general store today, there was about no PC with an added GFX, intel offerings are i3 mainly and people have to rely on his GPU, so it s not misleading the general consumer to point that this CPU, or rather APU in this case, is underhelming if they intent to do some games, on the other hand could you point me an application where a Kaveri would be lacking..?..

 

[DrMrLordX]

AMDs market share in 2Q14 was:
x86 overall, counting consoles: 16.3%
x86 overall, without consoles: 11.2%.
x86 segments: console=100%, DT=15.0%, mobile=9.6%, server=2.2%.

I doubt they managed to double their DT market share in the last quarter with their anemic offerings, so there's no way for the 30% to be true... on a global scale, anyway. Maybe the article refers to DT share in a specific region or country, so the number may be true somewhere.

They probably massaged the number using some dubious metrics, possibly by combining desktops and consoles and eliminating laptops, tablets, and phones from the picture. Hard to say though, since it's just a throwaway number in a piece about Zen.

But yeah, the chances of AMD shooting ahead from 11.2% or 16.3% to 30% are basically non-existent.

 

[AtenRa]

LOL! So it really is a case of "they're all wrong I tell you!" So predictable...

I specifically debate you on you statement about Multi-Tasking, you posted links that dont have any Multi-Tasking benchmarks on them. :whiste:

So the goalposts have moved yet again to only include those niche ultra-slim mini-ITX cases with no expansion slots at all which absolutely no-one was talking about before? I think I see what you're doing... :sneaky:

I mainly outlined why A10-7850K is selling for that high. It is the same story with Intel Iris-Pro SKUs. You can have a Core i3 + dGPU for cheaper and will completely destroy any Iris-Pro SKU out there.
But Mini-iTX is not the only reason, it is the whole package, A10-7850K is the fastest APU in the market at its price point. There is not a single Intel SKU to even come close in iGPU performance even at higher prices.

Not only that, but you are the one to bring used prices in to the equation and you are talking about changing goalposts ???

Believe me, I would LOVE for AMD to come out with a CPU with a much higher IPC and perf-watt ratio simply out of desiring serious healthy competition. Right now though, all we ever seem to have is a whole lot of "every benchmark is wrong unless it involves running every application you've got all at once" excuse making and "moving the goalposts" niche 'how can we better stack the deck' bias...

You know, AMD doesnt sell A10-7850K for its CPU performance ONLY. This is the fastest APU in the market today, outperfoming even the 50%+ higher priced Iris-Pro SKUs. If you want to compare the A10-7850K to Intel Core i5s do so but as a complete product, that is with its CPU and iGPU. And although those two are in the same price point, they are completely in different market segments. People going for the A10-7850K are more interested in the iGPU performance and the ones going for the Core i5 are opting for its CPU performance. Those two SKUs are not directly competing in the same segments unless you really want to make one of them look bad and you ONLY concentrate in the CPU or iGPU performance alone

 

[AtenRa]

How much is you estimation of Haswell s perfs/watts when the IGP is somewhat used...??

Well, nobody talks about Intels iGPUs NOW because they are far behind. And they are so far behind that even with a 22nm FF they loose in Performance/watt to AMDs 28nm planar. :whiste:

http://apusilicon.com/apu-wars-amd-a10-7700k-vs-intel-core-i3-4330/

 

[ShintaiDK]

APUsilicon.com? Owned by a pro AMD guy on this forum? Sounds legit

 

[el etro]

APUsilicon.com? Owned by a pro AMD guy on this forum? Sounds legit

If AMD win against Intel in ONE BENCH, is not legit?

 

[AtenRa]

APUsilicon.com? Owned by a pro AMD guy on this forum? Sounds legit

I was 100000000% sure you would say that, but dont worry, if you have any doubt i could make some videos just for you

Edit: I guess the following graphs are not legit as well

 

[ShintaiDK]

If AMD win against Intel in ONE BENCH, is not legit?

When the owner is on the AMD influencer leaderboard it raises its doubts to put it mildly.

 

[AtenRa]

When the owner is on the AMD influencer leaderboard it raises its doubts to put it mildly.

Really ?? then every Intel supporter, like your self, raises doubts for every single thing they post

And just to get things straight, that review is mine

 

[ShintaiDK]

Really ?? then every Intel supporter, like your self, raises doubts for every single thing they post

And just to get things straight, that review is mine

I didnt doubt your affiliation to the site. And it doesnt help the numbers you link any bit.

 

[AtenRa]

I didnt doubt your affiliation to the site. And it doesnt help the numbers you link any bit.

I didnt expect you to actually say anything else, next time though be careful of what you link, you may find you will be called as a pro-Intel supporter and your links may be dismissed and treated as not legit.

 

[frozentundra123456]

I specifically debate you on you statement about Multi-Tasking, you posted links that dont have any Multi-Tasking benchmarks on them. :whiste:




I mainly outlined why A10-7850K is selling for that high. It is the same story with Intel Iris-Pro SKUs. You can have a Core i3 + dGPU for cheaper and will completely destroy any Iris-Pro SKU out there.
But Mini-iTX is not the only reason, it is the whole package, A10-7850K is the fastest APU in the market at its price point. There is not a single Intel SKU to even come close in iGPU performance even at higher prices.

Not only that, but you are the one to bring used prices in to the equation and you are talking about changing goalposts ???



You know, AMD doesnt sell A10-7850K for its CPU performance ONLY. This is the fastest APU in the market today, outperfoming even the 50%+ higher priced Iris-Pro SKUs. If you want to compare the A10-7850K to Intel Core i5s do so but as a complete product, that is with its CPU and iGPU. And although those two are in the same price point, they are completely in different market segments. People going for the A10-7850K are more interested in the iGPU performance and the ones going for the Core i5 are opting for its CPU performance. Those two SKUs are not directly competing in the same segments unless you really want to make one of them look bad and you ONLY concentrate in the CPU or iGPU performance alone

No, it is not the fastest APU on the market, or even in its price range. It has the fastest igpu in its price range. Even though AMD fans would love to ignore it, an APU is both a cpu and an igp. So whether it is "fastest" depends on the application. For something that uses primarily cpu, it certainly is *not* the fastest, and loses miserably to a similarly priced i5 and in a lot of applications to a cheaper i3. For something that uses primarily the igp, it is the fastest in its price range. So it gets a premium price for fitting into the small niche of those who want mediocre cpu performance, better igpu performance than intel, but worse gpu performance than a discrete card, is that what you are trying to validate?

So bottom line, except for niche small form factor applications, it is outclassed in cpu performance by intel and in gpu performance by its own cheap cpus with a discrete card. I fail to see how this merits a premium price.

 

[BSim500]

I specifically debate you on you statement about Multi-Tasking, you posted links that dont have any Multi-Tasking benchmarks on them. :whiste:

Probably because demanding constant multi-threaded load on all cores of a 95w APU stuck in a 35-65w TDP limited Thin-ITX case, powered by a typical 80w Thin-ITX brick PSU was a rather pointless exercise in unrealism itself... :sneaky:

Well, nobody talks about Intels iGPUs NOW because they are far behind.

No-one talks about iGPU's / APU's outside of SFF PC enthusiasts & AMD enthusiasts because for even for budget gamers, iGPU's and APU's are still a massive false economy in general. Average 22-28fps @ 1366x768 even with all quality settings turned right down on an A10-7850K in Watch Dogs is just not my idea of "fun" let alone "immersion" in a game (let alone a new-build 2014 rig that's supposed to last the "gamer" 2-3 years). For the sake of +$30 ($99 260X + i3 / FX6300) which can do 1080p on 30-50fps Medium, the so called "APU savings" & "efficiency" are utterly crippling in terms of "gameplay" and being DDR3 bandwidth starved:-

Perf-per-pixel-per-$ (Watchdogs):-
7850K = 22-28fps @ 720p for $180 = Baseline of 1.0 perf/USD
i3-4130 / FX-6300 + 260X = 30-50fps @ 1080p for $210 = 1.7-2.85 perf/USD

I honestly question the integrity, mentality and honesty of anyone who turns down 200% higher performance (and over +180% high perf-per-$) for the sake of "saving" $30 due to "cost" whilst simultaneously talking up buying premium thin Mini-ITX motherboards & cases (see the $100-$110 FM2 Mini-ITX boards) plus potentially another $95 for 2x 4GB 2133MHz SODIMM's (another $20 premium over regular DDR3) to avoid crippled APU performance on "Thin" boards... I'm sorry, but I simply cannot sit there and read that with a straight face without laughing if the only thing in your "budget build" that actually has a budget is the CPU.

As for "the smaller the better", beyond a certain point, this is false information. The "ultra-tiny, ultra-thin" you're pushing (due to an artificial requirement of "no expansion slots ever" which only you created), make a great netbox / workbox / media playback center, but you certainly wouldn't want to load a 95w CPU / APU constantly for hours on end as with many such cases, it's a case of "low heat vs low noise - pick one of two" (due to tiny slim "blower fans"). Even those tiny Intel NUC's with 35w "T" chips can get noisy. Many of the passive "heatsink cases" (eg, Akasa Euler) have TDP limits often of 30-40w. Other budget cases which come with 300w "generic" $10 PSU's are precisely the same ones desktop users steer well clear of due to iffy voltage regulation, reliability, fan noise and for some, outright fire hazard. Those ultra, ultra tiny & slim, cases with external sub 100w PSU's are often designed for constant load only of sub 20w Atom / Kabini style boards, with many ITX motherboards openly stating "65w max".

If the purpose genuinely is a budget gaming rig in a fairly small case which doesn't annoy the hell out of you once the SFF novelty has worn off (ie, you start craving a slightly larger case simply to get rid of those tiny "blower fans" that tend to develop a whine after a couple of months), then a slightly larger "toaster" ITX or compact HTPC style Micro-ATX case (for the living room) with larger but slower spinning fans is a far better choice and 1x expansion slot anyway (not just for GFX cards, but TV cards if used as a HTPC in the bedroom / living room, etc). You can even buy 2" / 50mm height Mini-ITX cases with PCI-E x16 riser cards, or ones with low-profile expansion slots, so your "Mini-ITX = no expansion cards" really is a fake limitation that only you have imposed on everyone as "the average budget build" solely to exclude budget dGPU's for no real reason...

If AMD released a new APU tomorrow - let's call it the "7950K" - that had 2-3x the GPU performance but was priced at only $30 more - we both know you'd be all over it - yet that's exactly what a $210 i3 + 260X already does (so a "hard cut off price" of exactly $179.99 is fooling no-one...)

Edit : Why didn't AMD just shove an A10-7850K in a XB1 & PS4? That's not really a question since we all already know the answer - When people talk about "budget gaming" in 2014, they typically mean 7790/750Ti as a baseline, not slow-as-treacle DDR3 APU's at 24fps + desktop resolutions below that of what was primarily popular back when these were in fashion...

 

[MiddleOfTheRoad]

AMDs market share in 2Q14 was:
x86 overall, counting consoles: 16.3%
x86 overall, without consoles: 11.2%.
x86 segments: console=100%, DT=15.0%, mobile=9.6%, server=2.2%.

I doubt they managed to double their DT market share in the last quarter with their anemic offerings, so there's no way for the 30% to be true... on a global scale, anyway. Maybe the article refers to DT share in a specific region or country, so the number may be true somewhere.

AMD has about 30% marketshare in the retail market (Best Buy, Walmart, etc.). The APU's are pretty popular with consumers. AMD lags in enterprise/business, which is why overall x86 marketshare is only 12 - 15%.

Historically, they were up over 50% marketshare in retail at one point:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/other/display/20040913050508.html

 

[monstercameron]

Probably because demanding constant multi-threaded load on all cores of a 95w APU stuck in a 35-65w TDP limited Thin-ITX case, powered by a typical 80w Thin-ITX brick PSU was a rather pointless exercise in unrealism itself... :sneaky:


No-one talks about iGPU's / APU's outside of SFF PC enthusiasts & AMD enthusiasts because for even for budget gamers, iGPU's and APU's are still a massive false economy in general. Average 22-28fps @ 1366x768 even with all quality settings turned right down on an A10-7850K in Watch Dogs is just not my idea of "fun" let alone "immersion" in a game (let alone a new-build 2014 rig that's supposed to last the "gamer" 2-3 years). For the sake of +$30 ($99 260X + i3 / FX6300) which can do 1080p on 30-50fps Medium, the so called "APU savings" & "efficiency" are utterly crippling in terms of "gameplay" and being DDR3 bandwidth starved:-

Perf-per-pixel-per-$ (Watchdogs):-
7850K = 22-28fps @ 720p for $180 = Baseline of 1.0 perf/USD
i3-4130 / FX-6300 + 260X = 30-50fps @ 1080p for $210 = 1.7-2.85 perf/USD

I honestly question the integrity, mentality and honesty of anyone who turns down 200% higher performance (and over +180% high perf-per-$) for the sake of "saving" $30 due to "cost" whilst simultaneously talking up buying premium thin Mini-ITX motherboards & cases (see the $100-$110 FM2 Mini-ITX boards) plus potentially another $95 for 2x 4GB 2133MHz SODIMM's (another $20 premium over regular DDR3) to avoid crippled APU performance on "Thin" boards... I'm sorry, but I simply cannot sit there and read that with a straight face without laughing if the only thing in your "budget build" that actually has a budget is the CPU.

As for "the smaller the better", beyond a certain point, this is false information. The "ultra-tiny, ultra-thin" you're pushing (due to an artificial requirement of "no expansion slots ever" which only you created), make a great netbox / workbox / media playback center, but you certainly wouldn't want to load a 95w CPU / APU constantly for hours on end as with many such cases, it's a case of "low heat vs low noise - pick one of two" (due to tiny slim "blower fans"). Even those tiny Intel NUC's with 35w "T" chips can get noisy. Many of the passive "heatsink cases" (eg, Akasa Euler) have TDP limits often of 30-40w. Other budget cases which come with 300w "generic" $10 PSU's are precisely the same ones desktop users steer well clear of due to iffy voltage regulation, reliability, fan noise and for some, outright fire hazard. Those ultra, ultra tiny & slim, cases with external sub 100w PSU's are often designed for constant load only of sub 20w Atom / Kabini style boards, with many ITX motherboards openly stating "65w max".

If the purpose genuinely is a budget gaming rig in a fairly small case which doesn't annoy the hell out of you once the SFF novelty has worn off (ie, you start craving a slightly larger case simply to get rid of those tiny "blower fans" that tend to develop a whine after a couple of months), then a slightly larger "toaster" ITX or compact HTPC style Micro-ATX case (for the living room) with larger but slower spinning fans is a far better choice and 1x expansion slot anyway (not just for GFX cards, but TV cards if used as a HTPC in the bedroom / living room, etc). You can even buy 2" / 50mm height Mini-ITX cases with PCI-E x16 riser cards, or ones with low-profile expansion slots, so your "Mini-ITX = no expansion cards" really is a fake limitation that only you have imposed on everyone as "the average budget build" solely to exclude budget dGPU's for no real reason...

If AMD released a new APU tomorrow - let's call it the "7950K" - that had 2-3x the GPU performance but was priced at only $30 more - we both know you'd be all over it - yet that's exactly what a $210 i3 + 260X already does (so a "hard cut off price" of exactly $179.99 is fooling no-one...)

Edit : Why didn't AMD just shove an A10-7850K in a XB1 & PS4? That's not really a question since we all already know the answer - When people talk about "budget gaming" in 2014, they typically mean 7790/750Ti as a baseline, not slow-as-treacle DDR3 APU's at 24fps + desktop resolutions below that of what was primarily popular back when these were in fashion...

im super biased so be that as it may, this post is unfounded crap.
few points to focus on:

1. no one touts the apus as a powerhouse, at best they are a decent compromise
2. you say price doesnt matter but i reckon the super majority of the world does.
3. ddr3 prices have stabilized and the "$20" doest really exist as a constant.
4. also very non sensical using the latest most unoptimized game to show perf/dollar compared to a dgpu.
5. if you want to compare games why not base it iff the top 20 games out there like league or dota?
6. lastly i dont think you understan what budget gaming is it isnt a constant.

 

[Blitzvogel]

It would be so ironic if the Zen core turned out to be a revival of Stars with expanded SIMD :awe:

Considering CMT won't have any legacy, would it be more prudent to use Stars or Jaguar as a staring point for a new core?

 

[DrMrLordX]

I have speculated that AMD may pull a Conroe on us and release a heavily-updated Stars chip as Zen. It might make some sense. There are many things that were in need of improvement for Stars, and, though I am ignorant of exactly how open the OpenPOWER consortium works (is AMD a member?), maybe they are adapting part of POWER8 for Zen? That's a lot of speculation and maybes.

Also, what is Asus' stake in all of this Zen business? They get future discounts, check. What do they know (or suspect) about AMD's future products that makes them so interested in getting in bed with AMD?

 

[NostaSeronx]

"Zen" will be 2nd Gen Cluster-based Multithreading.

 

[Azuma Hazuki]

What I'd like to see is focus on the "supporting" parts of the chip, specifically the memory controller and the L2 and L3 cache.

Remember when AMD's Hypertransport was new, and kicked copper-plated hell out of Intel's FSB? Remember why Netburst's massive pipeline and (relatively) small caches made a cache miss absolutely devastating to uop throughput?

AMD needs to do something like that again. Intel's internal ring bus is an amazing design, and I suspect the Orochi family would have done much better if its cache latencies were lower and its L2 and L3 caches were larger. In a way it's almost like a person with venous/arterial insufficiency or other circulatory problems.

Orochi and family had fairly powerful hardware that shone under the right circumstances (heavily-threaded, integer-emphasized loads), but I get the impression the cores were hungry all the time due to the above issues. So were I on the Zen team, my motto would be "Feed the cores!"

If, as Nosta Seronx says, they're going to continue the 2:1 ratio of integer to floating units, I also REALLY hope they'll make the FPUs double-wide. From the beginning, this seemed like a questionable design choice to me, and the generally poor FP performance from Orochi and its descendants confirms this

 

[NostaSeronx]

If, as Nosta Seronx says, they're going to continue the 2:1 ratio of integer to floating units, I also REALLY hope they'll make the FPUs double-wide.

From my findings rumaging around AMD Research and Patents.

1st Gen AMD CMT;
Dual-core Module

2nd Gen AMD CMT;
Dual-Module Cluster

Int/FPU Execution Clusters + AGLU Clusters + 1st Level PRF
^above is a single core.

The next level up is
2nd Level PRF(Stack Cache) shared between cores in a module.

The next level up is
L1 Data Cache shared between modules and locally coherent.(Data going between modules goes here)

The next level up is
L2 Data & Instruction Cache shared between modules and is globally coherent. It is the last level cache on die.(Data going between clusters and off-chip goes here)

There is aggressive data deduplication in the L1d and L2.

Stack Cache(per module) + L1i(per module) + L1d(per cluster) + L2(per cluster) are all connected through a series of network routers(Network in Cluster?). LD/ST bus only goes to the stack cache. Requests and acknowledges go through the routers.

Future AMD CMT processors do not share the FPU.

 

[cbn]

Perf-per-pixel-per-$ (Watchdogs):-
7850K = 22-28fps @ 720p for $180 = Baseline of 1.0 perf/USD
i3-4130 / FX-6300 + 260X = 30-50fps @ 1080p for $210 = 1.7-2.85 perf/USD

I have to agree with you that dollar for dollar a discrete card + cpu definitely beats the high end APUs

No-one talks about iGPU's / APU's outside of SFF PC enthusiasts & AMD enthusiasts because for even for budget gamers, iGPU's and APU's are still a massive false economy in general.

I think it depends on what you mean by a budget gamer.

For lower end games like Team Fortress 2 and others, I am building the following secondary desktop from hot deals parts:

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2402196&highlight=

Plus the following power supply (which I got free after rebate) replacing the bundled one in the first link---> http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2328809


So far my build costs $64.99 AR free shipping with the following components:

All I need is an FM2+ motherboard and one of my old HDDs.

With a budget FM2+ board I will be under or around $100 in parts plus the hard drive.

Running Linux (and reusing a HDD) the entire machine is around the cost of your R7 260x by itself.