Worth going back to AMD?

[GodisanAtheist]

I have a Core 2 Quad Q9550 clocked at 3.8ghz (Sig system) and it has easily been the best processor I have ever owned in terms of how long its remained viable and what a low voltage pain free OC it has given me.

However my first love is AMD, I'd been building AMD system up to the Core 2 Line and I've let Nehalem and Sandy Bridge pass by waiting for AMD to come up with something worth upgrading to.

Have they? While my processor is great, the P45 chipset it has to be coupled with is really showing its age and I'm starting to come around to thinking about a bottom up system rebuild. Would I see a reasonable performance boost going from my 3.8ghz Q9550 to an FX8350 (which I would undoubtedly overclock) and are AMD's Chipsets any good? If not, then I'll just have to accept that the AMD ship has sailed and hold out for Haswell.

Thoughts?

 

[Rifter]

From what i have seen so far if you are going for top end performance stick with intel.

If you are going for mid range performance and care about power consumption go with intel.

If you are going for mid range performance and do not care about power consumption them go AMD.

If you are going for low range performance and care about power consumption go with intel.

If you are going for low range performance and do not care about power consumption them go AMD.

 

[buklau]

I would wait till intel haswell release.

 

[masteryoda34]

My 2 cents: get Ivy Bridge

 

[xcal237]

the 8350 will probably offer you a 10-15% increase in IPC at most while ivy bridge will offer you a 25-30% increase

 

[SPBHM]

q9xxx at 3.8GHz is not to bad, and if you waited so long, maybe it's best to wait for Haswell.

 

[MarkLuvsCS]

I would say it's not worth the upgrade cost. Would it be faster? A bit, but it's going to cost $300 for a little bit of performance, which I would say isn't worth it. I'd just wait until Haswell comes out since things you do now clearly aren't being impacted with your current system. Next year will be a good time for a new build if games start using more horsepower. You've got next gen AMD + nVidia cards as well as Haswell to look forward to.

 

[lambchops511]

I digress, I went from Nehalem Core i5 760 to Sandy Bridge Core i7 3770 and there is a HUGE difference in performance. (e.g., ~50% faster in gcc code compilation). My games run noticeably smoother too (although I do not have scientific benchmarks).

 

[SPBHM]

I digress, I went from Nehalem Core i5 760 to Sandy Bridge Core i7 3770 and there is a HUGE difference in performance. (e.g., ~50% faster in gcc code compilation). My games run noticeably smoother too (although I do not have scientific benchmarks).

not everyone is doing gcc code compilation, also, how far you overclocked the 760? his q9550 is working at 1GHz over the default clock.

 

[BrightCandle]

No it isn't worth it. About the only time its better than the CPU amd sold at the same time you bought your c2q is in highly mulithreaded workloads. Those are still relatively rare and specific. Just wait or get ivy bridge, and has not practically released a viable CPU unless you know your workload will suit it.

 

[blastingcap]

Affordable ECC support is why i still have amd rigs

 

[The Alias]

I'm getting an amd system featuring a 6300 and 970 mobo then upgrading to steamroller when it comes out . haswell is touting a 5-15% ips increase amd is touting up to 30% increase and just from that I think it's worth waiting to see who comes out on top next round

 

[kleinkinstein]

You're in luck. You've waited and sat so long on that Q9550 that the new 8350 actually can claim victory on a cpu. See for yourself...
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/697?vs=50

Wait for Haswell, it'll likely be the best and last high-performing desktop proc from anyone.

 

[The Alias]

You're in luck. You've waited and sat so long on that Q9550 that the new 8350 actually can claim victory on a cpu. See for yourself...
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/697?vs=50

Wait for Haswell, it'll likely be the best and last high-performing desktop proc from anyone.

As I said before AMD is claiming a 30% ipc improvement with steamroller plus power reductions where haswell is only claiming 5-15 so I doubt your statement is true

 

[ShintaiDK]

I'm getting an amd system featuring a 6300 and 970 mobo then upgrading to steamroller when it comes out . haswell is touting a 5-15% ips increase amd is touting up to 30% increase and just from that I think it's worth waiting to see who comes out on top next round

Oh we got a dreamer!

Not to mention SR might be FM2 only.

 

[The Alias]

Oh we got a dreamer!

Not to mention SR might be FM2 only.

steam roller's been confirmed by AMD themselves to be on am3+
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2208525/amd-sticks-with-socket-am3-for-steamroller

 

[ShintaiDK]

steam roller's been confirmed by AMD themselves to be on am3+
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2208525/amd-sticks-with-socket-am3-for-steamroller

Then they should add it to their roadmaps. ()

The article doesnt say Steamroller will use AM3+ besides thats what the journalist conclude. AMD could just as well release a few new models like they did with BD to forfill what they said.

What about those 30% IPC improvements? Is it gonna be like the Phenom and BD improvements? 30% wont happen, thats for sure. You can always manipulate data. We could easily claim that Haswell offers a 50-60% IPC improvement over IB...in AVX/AVX2 loads. And since SSE can be transformed to AVX2...

 

[Rvenger]

steam roller's been confirmed by AMD themselves to be on am3+
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2208525/amd-sticks-with-socket-am3-for-steamroller

ShintaiDK means that it might be cancelled over the abysmal recent financial results that happened after the article was published.

Please see this thread http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2277556

 

[Phynaz]

steam roller's been confirmed by AMD themselves to be on am3+
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2208525/amd-sticks-with-socket-am3-for-steamroller

I see no confirmation from AMD on that web page. There's not a single quote from AMD nor an AMD spokesman's name mentioned.

 

[Yuriman]

You're in luck. You've waited and sat so long on that Q9550 that the new 8350 actually can claim victory on a cpu. See for yourself...
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/697?vs=50

Wait for Haswell, it'll likely be the best and last high-performing desktop proc from anyone.

Looks to me like 15% better IPC is being generous, I think the only improvements the 8350 would have is corecount and clocks.

Do any of those tests use instruction sets the Core2 doesn't have?

 

[Roland00Address]

As I said before AMD is claiming a 30% ipc improvement with steamroller plus power reductions where haswell is only claiming 5-15 so I doubt your statement is true

AMD has never claimed steamroller to be 30% faster than piledriver or bulldozer on an ipc level. They did claim steamroller to be 15 to 30% more energy efficient compared bulldozer. During that slide they showed a redesign bulldozer core with a high design library (instead of being drawn by hand) that took 30% less size for the fpu unit (remember you still have the interger unit, interface, and l2/l3 cache which take up a huge part of the die.)

And even then amd uses the word up to 30% (15 to 30%) and they are comparing cpus from generation 1 (bulldozer) and generation 3 (steamroller) skipping the gains from generation 2 (piledriver) to make the numbers look better.

Image is here

Anand talks about this and other slides here
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6201/amd-details-its-3rd-gen-steamroller-architecture/2

 

[frozentundra123456]

As I said before AMD is claiming a 30% ipc improvement with steamroller plus power reductions where haswell is only claiming 5-15 so I doubt your statement is true

They might get another 15% over Piledriver to get 30% total from Bulldozer, in certain workloads, but there is no way I believe they will get another 30% across the board increases relative to Piledriver.

Edit: Sorry Roland, guess you posted the same thing a bit earlier, but I didnt see your post while I was typing mine.

 

[ShintaiDK]

The energy efficient part is the key. IB is something like 35% better than Sandy in the same metric.

Dont let marketing fool you(again).

 

[Roland00Address]

They might get another 15% over Piledriver to get 30% total from Bulldozer, in certain workloads, but there is no way I believe they will get another 30% across the board increases relative to Piledriver.

Edit: Sorry Roland, guess you posted the same thing a bit earlier, but I didnt see your post while I was typing mine.

Our differences were less than a minute it is no biggy.

 

[Abwx]

AMD has never claimed steamroller to be 30% faster than piledriver or bulldozer on an ipc level.

Mind you , there s a missing slide in Anand s article , who would
have guessed..??...

Yet i m sure it was there the days following this article ,
but let s find out at a more neutral site.

It say 30% more ops/cycle , i suppose that it s not just to
fill more cache memory and wait for the exe units to be saturated..

http://techreport.com/review/23485/amd-cto-reveals-first-steamroller-details