backtop


Print 70 comment(s) - last by navair2.. on Jun 11 at 1:26 AM


  (Source: Bright Side of the News)
Upcoming release should offer an alternative to Sandy Bridge, but will it perform?

Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. (AMD) is sitting pretty with strong graphics card sales and better than expected sales of its lightweight, power efficient fusion CPU+GPU systems on a chip (SoC).  The company is now profitable after years in the red.

Looking to continue its success, AMD previewed [press release] "Scorpius" at the 2011 Electronic Entertainment Expo (E3) at the Los Angeles Convention Center (LACC) in Los Angeles.  Scorpius is AMD's answer for the high-end gaming market.

The design will feature an octacore, unlocked Zambezi processor dubbed "FX", reviving AMD's old enthusiast CPU branding.  Zambezi, codenamed after a river in Africa, is AMD's high performance 32 nm SOI process upcoming desktop CPU based on the company's new Bulldozer architecture.

The new platform will also feature a Radeon 6xxx HD graphics card from AMD and an AMD 9-series chipset motherboard (socket AM3).

Leslie Sobon, AMD's vice president of worldwide product marketing, comments, "AMD’s FX brand will enable an over-the-top experience for PC enthusiasts. By combining an unlocked, native eight-core processor, the latest in chipset technology, and AMD’s latest graphics cards, FX customers will enjoy an unrivalled feature set and amazing control over their PC’s performance."

The obvious competitor of Scorpius will be Intel Corp.'s (INTCSandy Bridge, possibly paired with GeForce 5xx series GPUs from NVIDIA Corp. (NVDA).  With eight physical cores, Scorpius will arguably have the edge over single-socket Intel designs, though, which currently only feature four cores (eight threads).  Intel will bump its core count to six cores in the near future, but it remains to be seen whether that will be enough.

Performance numbers on Bulldozer are still lacking, so it remains to be seen exactly how powerful this octacore gaming rig will be.

One thing that may excite some is AMD's growing array of HD3D partners.  HD3D, AMD's proprietary 3D technology works fully with the company's EyeFinity firmware, which supports up to six displays driven by a single graphics card.

AMD claims over 400 current and upcoming titles support the 3D gaming tech, including, Eidos Montreal's upcoming "Deus Ex: Human Revolution", Bioware's "Dragon Age II", Creative Assembly's "SHOGUN 2: Total War", and Codemasters' "DiRT 3."

Regardless of who comes out on top performance wise, it's refreshing to see a reinvigorated AMD challenging both Intel and NVIDIA in the CPU and GPU sectors.  A competitive market should push all three PC hardware makers to quicken the release of powerful new hardware that will delight PC gamers and enthusiasts -- few as they may be, these days.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Process technology ?
By EricMartello on 6/7/2011 11:56:56 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
Gaming wise the 990 is currently beaten by the 2600k. So whatever is replacing the 990 is most likely what it is targeted at and the current 2600k.


I have a 980X, and I've had it for a while now. The 2600K and even the 2400 will outperform it in certain benchmarks, however it's worth noting that the difference is not substantial. There are also benchmarks where the 980X still outperforms the newer CPU...to say "beaten" isn't really accurate. It's more like "contending with". If you use your computer to do anything other than gaming, the 980X would still be a better choice for the money, and you can OC it to the 4GHz realm reliably to squeeze more life out of it if need be.

quote:
That being said i'm betting sandy and ivy will still be faster than amd. But all amd needs to do is get within 10-15% of sandy and ivy realisticly and then keep the prices reasonable and they will have an easy win with thier more flexible setups.


No, I would say that they need to be equal to or better than Intel's offerings to compete. Once you cross a certain price point - the price point where you're really just interested in performance and not 'bang for the buck' - most people are going to go for the platform that offers the best performance.

AMD's prior success was due to them being able to match or exceed Intel's performance while offering a less expensive price point.


RE: Process technology ?
By shompa on 6/8/2011 8:07:23 AM , Rating: 1
The fun thing with X980/intel Extreme editions CPUs are that you don't need to overclock them. Just set Turbo to 4.4ghz on all cores. This is a very elegant solution since when people overclock, they use more energy and produce more heat.

With the turbo solution, the extra heat/energy is only used when it is needed.

BTW. How many are using 100% CPU time with a 4+ ghz CPU? The only windows program I have used that maxed out my cores are video encoding/rendering. (and even with video encoding: most programs only use 2-8 threads. Not a single program was faster when I switched from 4core/8thread intel to a 6core/12thread intel)


RE: Process technology ?
By EricMartello on 6/8/2011 7:18:05 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The fun thing with X980/intel Extreme editions CPUs are that you don't need to overclock them. Just set Turbo to 4.4ghz on all cores. This is a very elegant solution since when people overclock, they use more energy and produce more heat.


That's what I do and it works great.

quote:
BTW. How many are using 100% CPU time with a 4+ ghz CPU? The only windows program I have used that maxed out my cores are video encoding/rendering. (and even with video encoding: most programs only use 2-8 threads. Not a single program was faster when I switched from 4core/8thread intel to a 6core/12thread intel)


Since most multicore chips are 2 cores / 4 threads (for intel chips with HT), I'd guess that software developers optimize threaded software for the most widely deployed platform. I know that 3DSMax or other high end rendering software can and does utilize all available cores. Studios will often customize the code of 3DSMax for their custom setup...but that is a far stretch from the typical home user.

Anyway, the main reason I bought a 980X is not only because I want the best performance I can get, but also for longevity. I like having a reliable system and each time I upgrade I do it from a "clean" install, so I have to reinstall all my programs and it's a pain in the ass...so if I can get by upgrading once every 2-3 years all the while having a high-performing system I'll take it.

Also, even if software is only using 4 of the 6 cores, that means you can still have a responsive system while rending something in the background...without compromising the speed at which it renders.


"If a man really wants to make a million dollars, the best way would be to start his own religion." -- Scientology founder L. Ron. Hubbard














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki