AMD's Bumps FX Series With New Piledriver Cores, Close Gap With Intel
October 23, 2012 6:34 AM
comment(s) - last by
(The core's namesake)
Vishera FX is power hungry and still weak in single-thread performance, but is highly overclockable and cheap
In the consumer CPU market Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.'s (
today. The announced chips, which bear the FX designation, swap out
the 32 nm
for refined 32 nm
cores, offers quad-, hexa-, and octa-core configurations.
, a 32 nm
die shrink war is over
and Intel Corp. (
) has won, but AMD is still trying to stay competitive in the consumer PC market with its high-core-count, inexpensive second-generation processors on the 32 nm node.
Intel has not brought hexa- or octa-core
(22 nm) chips
to bear yet (though it does enjoy a
large and diverse lineup
), so AMD has the good fortune of having its second-generation 32 nm architecture compete with Intel's quad-core 22 nm parts.
As one might expect AMD chips earn wins in heavily threaded benchmarks,
, who tested the new
Series chips. In single-thread loads, though, even the lowly Core-i3
parts beat up on the cream of the
crop. That means that gaming -- which is mostly GPU bound and lightly threaded -- tends to wind up in Intel's favor.
Note, the maximum frequencies are for half-load; the maximum frequency for full load is 100 MHz slower in all cases except the FX-8320, where full-load is 200 MHz slower.
II. The Bad
Let's consider the bad news first. Looking at the price, that you get
performance in single-core loads than an
; dual-core; 3.3 GHz).
AMD did deliver on its promise of faster single-threaded execution;
is approximately 20 percent faster in
's testing than
. That said, the new core architecture only closed approximately half the gap in single-thread execution time -- the Core-i3 (
) is still roughly 20 percent faster than
in single-threaded loads.
only halfway closes the single-thread performance gap w. Intel's
[Image Source: BBC News]
The other bad news is that while power consumption has actually dipped slightly since
, it's still far higher than
So to recap, in single threaded performance and power consumption,
is better than
, but worse than
III. The Good
But there's also a fair amount of good news.
shone brightest (multi-threaded performance),
does even better, beating out
parts. Price-wise it's compelling to see the FX-8350 (
, octa-core; 4.2 GHz)-- a roughly $195 USD part -- beating the
; quad-core; 3.9 GHz Turbo).
The comparison is fair, as the cost of LGA-1155 motherboards (for
) and Socket-AM3+ motherboards (for
) is about the same -- starting at around $30 USD for the cheapst boards. Both chipmakers kindly opted to stick with their current socket design with their latest core generation, so many consumers will be able to upgrade without replacing the board.
An interesting observation by
is that overall while AMD still suffers the same weaknesses that it did 2 years ago, that its latest releases have pushed it closer to closing the single-threaded performance gap, while widening the multi-threaded performance gap. In other words, if AMD is able to keep up this trend, it could find itself beating Intel in both single-threaded
multi-threaded performance in a couple of years.
The new AMD parts are highly overclockable. [Image Source: Zazzle]
More good news comes regarding the overclockability. The quad-core FX-4300 was clocked up to 5 GHz (a 28.2% overclock) in
's testing (using AMD's stock closed-loop liquid cooling solution), which placed it on par with the hexa-core FX-6300 in multi-threaded loads. The octa-core FX-8350 clocked up to 4.8 GHz (a 14.3% overclock), earning the best scores in heavily-threaded loads. Beware, though -- a 4.8 GHz FX-8350 part consumes an epic 294.3 watts under heavy load.
IV. To Buy or Not to Buy?
and the new
core worth a purchase? That depends a lot on the consumer. As single-core performance generally dictates the consumer experience, one could argue that the answer is generally "no".
That said, the overclockability and great multi-threaded performance of the 32 nm part make it hard to overlook entirely, particularly when it's priced reasonably competitively.
is probably the better solution for most, but if you do bu a
chip, you won't be getting a bad deal.
(left) is a significant improvement from
(right). [Image Source: AMD]
The real potential for
likely lies in its sister-series, aimed at enterprise users. We should have some details on that in the near future to share with you.
In the mean time think of how the
core gains might be amplified by a highly-thread dependent load, such as hosting virtual environments for a thin-client deployment. We'll say this -- if AMD keeps the pedal to the metal on the enterprise parts side, it may have a more clear-cut winner for many applications.
(For those interested, AMD's core gets its name from the titular piece of heavy machinery, which drives "piles" into the ground, pillars which support buildings.
is named after a river in Russia.)
This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
RE: Any wonder
10/23/2012 8:25:25 PM
Intel lost the antitrust lawsuit and while they probably didnt pay as much as they gained they still had to pay a hefty sum.
I read a few websites benchmarks and the new chips are not all Doom and Gloom. They do quite well in applications where multiple cores are utilized. Unfortunately not all apps are well optimized for multiple cores and Im not someone who uses 90% of the apps they test with. Seriously is everyone rendering images with POV tracing? I dont even use Photoshop its not in my budget and I dont use Visual Studio enough to complain about compile times but I do game.
Lets also keep in Mind AMD managed to produce an 8 core CPU with less transistor count than Intel's quad core even with hyper threading. Which is important to manufacturing costs and hopefully they can squeeze in some profits. The pricing is in line with their performance they arent trying to charge anyone a premium for a chip that doesn't outperform the Intel equivalent. No trickery going on here.
If you bought an AMD motherboard there is some additional cost savings in that you can likely upgrade just the CPU for a performance boost and sell off your old core.
However if your building a new rig you might opt to go the Intel route if you going to have to buy a Mobo and some Ram anyhow.
AMD said they would have a good performance jump in the next generation of CPU's so I would expect they realize they took a step back with thier branch preduction unit when they went bulldozer.
RE: Any wonder
10/23/2012 9:10:55 PM
There is a place for these chips considering the pricing and highly threaded applications. My post is simply about the architecture. With thuban they were actually ahead of piledriver in overall IPC and managed to fit 6 cores in there. I don't know if there was some issues fitting in more cores with a shrink or something but it seems to me like shrinking down phenom and trying to up core count/frequency would've been a better choice in overall performance. It reminds me of the p4~conroe transition where intel eventually went back to a design similar to their p6 for core2 chips.
RE: Any wonder
10/24/2012 4:33:55 PM
Yup I felt the exact same way they should have continued to refine and shrink Thuban as they wound up doing like the P4 with PileDriver. Too deep a pipeline with a bad penalty for performance lowering their IPC.
“And I don't know why [Apple is] acting like it’s superior. I don't even get it. What are they trying to say?” -- Bill Gates on the Mac ads
Fourteen New Intel Ivy Bridge Chips Announced
May 31, 2012, 11:52 AM
Intel Launches Ivy Bridge, Hypes Low TDP to Counter Poor Graphics
April 23, 2012, 12:45 PM
AMD Concedes Die-Shrink Race to Intel, Considers ARM Cores
February 6, 2012, 11:45 AM
AMD Launches FX CPUs with Bulldozer Architecture
October 12, 2011, 12:01 AM
SanDisk Unveils Pricey iXpand USB 2.0/Lightning Drive to Expand iPhone, iPad Storage
November 13, 2014, 2:29 PM
HP's 15.6" Omen Gaming Laptop is Incredibly Thin, Powerful
November 4, 2014, 10:34 AM
Tim Cook Touts Apple’s Product Portfolio, Performance in Letter to Employees
October 21, 2014, 8:05 AM
Lenovo Once Again The Top Global PC Maker, Apple Takes 50% of PC Profits
October 9, 2014, 7:46 AM
It’s Official: HP to Split Into Two Business Units
October 6, 2014, 8:14 AM
Quick Note: HP Plans to Split PC, Enterprise Units
October 5, 2014, 4:31 PM
Most Popular Articles
Android-Powered BLU Studio 7.0 Claims to be the "World's Largest Smartphone"
December 19, 2014, 2:40 PM
Paramount Bans Team America Screenings, Cowers Submissively to North Korea
December 18, 2014, 10:26 PM
Miyamoto: Nintendo is Prepping Successor to Troubled Wii U
December 22, 2014, 6:28 PM
Amazon's Kindle Fire HDX 8.9 Drops to $299 (30 Percent Off) for a Day
December 22, 2014, 10:57 AM
News Corp's Fox is Terrified of North Korea, Kills Upcoming Steve Carell Film
December 18, 2014, 4:09 PM
Latest Blog Posts
Sceptre Airs 27", 120 Hz. 1080p Monitor/HDTV w/ 5 ms Response Time for $220
Dec 3, 2014, 10:32 PM
Costco Gives Employees Thanksgiving Off; Wal-Mart Leads "Black Thursday" Charge
Oct 29, 2014, 9:57 PM
"Bear Selfies" Fad Could Turn Deadly, Warn Nevada Wildlife Officials
Oct 28, 2014, 12:00 PM
The Surface Mini That Was Never Released Gets "Hands On" Treatment
Sep 26, 2014, 8:22 AM
ISIS Imposes Ban on Teaching Evolution in Iraq
Sep 17, 2014, 5:22 PM
More Blog Posts
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. -
Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information