GigaHertz Wars 2.0? AMD Releases World's First 5.0 GHz FX Processor
June 11, 2013 3:16 PM
comment(s) - last by
Chip may be competitive with Haswell on basis of price, multi-threaded performance
Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. (
dropping the Gigahertz hammer
on rival Intel Corp. (
) announcing a new
-core based line of "FX"-branded processors) octa-core chip that has a turbo clock of 5.0 GHz.
I. AMD Announces "First Commercial 5.0 GHz CPU"
While some may consider the fact that the stock (non-turbo) clock speed of the FX-9590 is something lower than the 5.0 GHz (AMD didn't announce the exact speed, but expect ~4.5 GHz), this marks the first time that a commercially available (x86 consumer) CPU has broken this speed barrier.
There's no word on how much power the chip is sucking down to attain that impressive clock speed.
AMD also announced that it would offer a 4.7 GHz turbo-clocked octa-core chip (FX-9370). Together the chips will release in pre-built PCs this summer, with packaged availability trailing somewhat. AMD also mentions that both chips are unlocked, allowing for even greater overclocks, cooling permitting.
Bernd Lienhard brags, "This is another proud innovation for AMD in delivering the world's first commercially available 5 GHz processor."
Computer history buffs will recall that AMD was the first chipmaker to break the 1.0 GHz barrier with a stock x86 commercial CPU. By Mar. 2006 Intel had released the 3.73 GHz Pentium "Extreme Edition" 965 dual-core chip, built on the 65 nm node. So far the
announced has been the Core i7-4930MX, a quad-core design turbo-clocked to 3.9 GHz.
II. The Gigahertz Myth 2.0? Sort Of
in heavily threaded loads, while falling behind in lightly threaded application performance. Pricing has allowed AMD to stay competitive (for example a FX-8350
currently, while an Intel i7-3770K
So will the new FX processors truly be faster than Intel's just-launched
processors? It certainly looks to have a shot in multi-threaded performance.
's benchmarking shows the i7-4770K (the
successor to the i7-3770K)
outperforming the FX-8350
by anywhere from 2 to 9 percent in heavily threaded applications like pixel pushing demoes or x264 transcoding. [
]. Given the 20 percent boost in raw core clock while in Turbo mode, it's very possible that the 32 nm FX-9590 may top Intel's 22 nm
processors in multi-threaded applications.
AMD is unlikely to be able to keep up with
in single-threaded performance.
In single-threaded benchmarks where Intel's
(i7-4770K) often has a 50-60 percent lead over the FX-8350, the 20 percent bump may close the gap somewhat, but it seems unlikely that it will match Intel's single-threaded performance. Thus the most important thing may boil down to price. Intel's i7-4770K costs $349.99 USD. If AMD can hit a price point around $200 USD when the chips finally air, it could be very competitive.
After all, even if it surrenders 30-40 percent in single threaded performance, if it costs 40 percent less, it may make sense to buyers, especially considering its strong multi-threaded performance and (generally) more affordable chipsets.
This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
6/12/2013 2:22:09 AM
speed will vary depending on what you are doing and what platform you are doing it on.
A stock piledriver beats, ties, or barely loses to stock 4770k (and 3770k and 2600K) in most multithreaded things on Linux.
YET IT LOSES BY A LOT ON WINDOWS.
please, learn that operating systems and how stuff is coded affects how fast almost everything that does calculations actually is.
Well, you could claim Intel had the first over 5Ghz PART OF A CHIP with their double pumped ALU in Netburst, but IBM was the first that truly made a 5Ghz Chip and AMD is the first to make a chip that can REACH 5Ghz that most people can use (most people don't use operating systems that support POWER_ architecture)
6/12/2013 3:22:17 PM
Huh? How do you figure "most people don't use operating systems that support POWER_ architecture"? Linux supports POWER architecture, and Linux has conquered pretty much every niche of computing except the desktop peecee.
You are correct that Linux delivers much better multi-threading performance than Windows. Linux has supported multi-processor systems since the 1990's, while Windows was single-threaded until years later, with XP. (Yes, win2k could do 2 cpu's, but it was a hack and performed poorly). So its no surprise that Windows is still playing catch-up when it comes to multi-cpu performance.
6/17/2013 10:39:33 AM
Most people, meaning more than half, don't use Linux.
"Intel is investing heavily (think gazillions of dollars and bazillions of engineering man hours) in resources to create an Intel host controllers spec in order to speed time to market of the USB 3.0 technology." -- Intel blogger Nick Knupffer
Intel Computex 2013: Haswell Released, 22 nm Atom Silvermont Tablets Approach
June 4, 2013, 2:00 PM
AMD's Bumps FX Series With New Piledriver Cores, Close Gap With Intel
October 23, 2012, 6:34 AM
"Prepare to be Punished": Microsoft is Killing OneDrive With Cuts, Blames Users
November 3, 2015, 8:23 PM
Apple's New "Magic" Peripheral Line Packs High Tech, High Prices
October 13, 2015, 9:39 PM
Samsung Adds 2 TB 850 EVO, PRO SSDs for $800, $1000
July 7, 2015, 4:23 PM
Seagate Senior Researcher: Heat Can Kill Data on Stored SSDs
May 13, 2015, 2:49 PM
How to Recover Most Apps After Your NVIDIA Driver Crashes in Windows 10
March 30, 2015, 12:54 PM
Tinkerer Gets Old School Mac Plus Running on the Modern Web
March 24, 2015, 6:41 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 2016 DailyTech LLC. -
Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information