• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

AMD FX "Vishera" Processor Pricing Revealed

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
piesquared said:
Yup and ivy bridge is a 3-8% improvement over sb, while running hotter and lower overclock.

Chickens and hatching come to mind.
Click to expand...


Right, because everyone goes for 5GHz overclocks. 🙄

On avg. the 3570K and 3770K OC to at least 4.6GHz on good air cooling, and most people running and OCing 2500K/2600Ks were at around 4.5GHz.

Heat only becomes an issue when you raise voltage significantly. Like with Sandy Bridge, that was typically right at 4.7GHz. Is it gonna run around 10-15C hotter than SB at normal OCs? Yes, but as long as you don't go over 80-85C in something like IBT you'll have thermal headroom.

Taking average OCs in mind it's really no different. You can easily get 4.5GHz out of a 3570K or 3770K with a $30 cooler like a Corsair A50 or CM Hyper 212+. Of course, you quickly forget about the fact it consumes a good amount less power than SB.

Nice try, though.
 
LOL_Wut_Axel said:
On avg. the 3570K and 3770K OC to at least 4.6GHz on good air cooling.
Click to expand...

That's just a flat out lie, there are no air coolers that would keep ivy under 90c at 4.6ghz full load. Safe oc for ivy is 4.2 to 4.3. Anything higher and you're pushing 80c gaming temps which is ridiculous. Also, your numbers are missleading, Ivy has a 5% gain at best in *VERY* limited situation's.
 
LoneNinja said:
And if your bringing up Microcenter.

FX 4100 $89.99 + free motherboard
FX 6100 $109.99+ free motherboard
FX 8120 $139.99 + $50 off select motherboards


And I'll say what I said in another leaked pricing thread, with the FX 8120 priced at $140-$160 depending on retailer, who would buy Piledriver?
Click to expand...

Right now Amazon has the 6100 for $105 also - think I paid around $160 for one. I'm currently using a 960T - depends on reviews and pricing what I'm going to do next upgrade.
 
LOL_Wut_Axel said:
Right, because everyone goes for 5GHz overclocks. 🙄

On avg. the 3570K and 3770K OC to at least 4.6GHz on good air cooling, and most people running and OCing 2500K/2600Ks were at around 4.5GHz.

Heat only becomes an issue when you raise voltage significantly. Like with Sandy Bridge, that was typically right at 4.7GHz. Is it gonna run around 10-15C hotter than SB at normal OCs? Yes, but as long as you don't go over 80-85C in something like IBT you'll have thermal headroom.

Taking average OCs in mind it's really no different. You can easily get 4.5GHz out of a 3570K or 3770K with a $30 cooler like a Corsair A50 or CM Hyper 212+. Of course, you quickly forget about the fact it consumes a good amount less power than SB.

Nice try, though.
Click to expand...


Nah There's really no compelling reason for anyone with a sb to sidegrade to Ib. Most sb clocks were at or just below 5ghz, what you're selling is pure FUD. You gain nothing and lose a bunch of money in the process. AMD offers much more value for consumers hard earned dollars.

And yes, as you pointed out, the heat is an issue. And it costs more. So basically you agree that Ib is hotter, clocks lower and is more expensive. So IOW pretty much what I said.

And your conclusion was, "nice try"?
 
piesquared said:
Nah There's really no compelling reason for anyone with a sb to sidegrade to Ib. Most sb clocks were at or just below 5ghz, what you're selling is pure FUD. You gain nothing and lose a bunch of money in the process. AMD offers much more value for consumers hard earned dollars.

And yes, as you pointed out, the heat is an issue. And it costs more. So basically you agree that Ib is hotter, clocks lower and is more expensive. So IOW pretty much what I said.

And your conclusion was, "nice try"?
Click to expand...

If AMD offers so much value, why does Intel win every category of the best CPU for the money in the Toms Hardware monthly evaluation?
 
Phynaz said:
Possibly, as long as the motherboard can handle the power draw.
Click to expand...
As long as you go by the CPU support list you should be fine. So if board supports 125W "old" FX CPUs it will support,with proper BIOS, the Piledriver FX 125W models.
 
piesquared said:
Nah There's really no compelling reason for anyone with a sb to sidegrade to Ib. Most sb clocks were at or just below 5ghz, what you're selling is pure FUD. You gain nothing and lose a bunch of money in the process. AMD offers much more value for consumers hard earned dollars.

And yes, as you pointed out, the heat is an issue. And it costs more. So basically you agree that Ib is hotter, clocks lower and is more expensive. So IOW pretty much what I said.

And your conclusion was, "nice try"?
Click to expand...

There isn't, but you just said that Sandy Bridge is better than Ivy Bridge which it is not. Ivy Bridge equivalents cost the same amount, anyway, so it's foolish to buy SB right now. Yes, runs at higher temps, and? It's made to take the heat, and if you took a class in thermodynamics you'd know temperature does not equal heat output like you make it sound to be. It consumes a good amount less power than SB.

And most 2500Ks and 2600Ks overclocked on average to 4.5-4.6GHz. Just because a few people here could get to higher than that doesn't mean everyone can. If you could get 4.8-5GHz without insane levels of voltage you had a golden chip.

And AMD offers no such thing as more performance for you dollar. Rather, they offer more mediocrity for your dollar. The FX-4100 needs to be overclocked just to keep up with a Core i3-2120/3220, and it consumes nearly twice as much power as well. As far as their APUs go, the only reason why they're giving you a CPU and GPU for $130 or under is because both parts are mediocre. At least Intel can see the logic and give you a good CPU instead, since you can easily upgrade to a discrete card. Most consumers care more about CPU than GPU/IGP performance, contrary to what many gamers here would have you believe.
 
Since the 3570k is the newest mainline IB chip in the same price range as the 8350, on price alone, it will be the comparison point. The 3570k is $229.99 at Newegg as I type this. No "official" price list is out yet but one dealer has the 8350 tentatively listed at @$258. If Newegg lists it at $239.99 then there is near parity in price.

I love my 2500k rigs and also now enjoy my 8150 rig more and more. I paid @ $219-239 for my 2500ks and $170.00 for my 8150.

From a dollar to dollar based value the 3570k will most likely be a better value. It's hard for me to believe that the 8350 PileDriver will beat the 3570k in anymore benchmarks than the 8150 Bulldozer did to the 2500k.

IF the 8350 goes to the price the 8150 is now, $189.99 or slightly less, the gap narrows for price performance significantly.
 
Last edited:
LOL_Wut_Axel said:
There isn't, but you just said that Sandy Bridge is better than Ivy Bridge which it is not. Ivy Bridge equivalents cost the same amount, anyway, so it's foolish to buy SB right now. Yes, runs at higher temps, and? It's made to take the heat, and if you took a class in thermodynamics you'd know temperature does not equal heat output like you make it sound to be. It consumes a good amount less power than SB.

And most 2500Ks and 2600Ks overclocked on average to 4.5-4.6GHz. Just because a few people here could get to higher than that doesn't mean everyone can. If you could get 4.8-5GHz without insane levels of voltage you had a golden chip.

And AMD offers no such thing as more performance for you dollar. Rather, they offer more mediocrity for your dollar. The FX-4100 needs to be overclocked just to keep up with a Core i3-2120/3220, and it consumes nearly twice as much power as well. As far as their APUs go, the only reason why they're giving you a CPU and GPU for $130 or under is because both parts are mediocre. At least Intel can see the logic and give you a good CPU instead, since you can easily upgrade to a discrete card. Most consumers care more about CPU than GPU/IGP performance, contrary to what many gamers here would have you believe.
Click to expand...

OMG I had to wait 15 seconds instead of 8 seconds to render my picture. /wrists

We are so splitting hairs at this point its beyond silly.
 
kelco said:
OMG I had to wait 15 seconds instead of 8 seconds to render my picture. /wrists

We are so splitting hairs at this point its beyond silly.
Click to expand...

If those 7 seconds don't matter then why is AMD spending billions developing steamroller and excavator?
 
This "good enough" attitude is so nasty. There is a concept, I don't know if people are familiar with it. It is called "progress"...
 
Gikaseixas said:
FX 4300 4 cores @ 3.8 - 8MB - 95W ------- $131.62
FX 6300 6 cores @ 3.5 - 14MB - 95W ------ $175.77
FX 8320 8 cores @ 3.5 - 16MB - 125W ----- $242.05
FX 8350 8 cores @ 4.0 - 16MB - 125W ----- $253.06

Those two 8 cores will have to perform better than a i5-3570K, otherwise it's going to be another failure for AMD.

http://hothardware.com/News/AMDs-Ne...-Architecture-PreOrder-Info-Leaks-To-The-Web/
Click to expand...

Since the 4 "core" edition does a pretty good stance vs. i3, I'd expect the 8 core to do pretty well vs i5 as well. It's not a lost cause.
 
boxleitnerb said:
This "good enough" attitude is so nasty. There is a concept, I don't know if people are familiar with it. It is called "progress"...
Click to expand...

The "good enough" is just an excuse by fanatics for the lackbuster performance from their favourite company. A oneway love affair tho.
 
Good enough is good enough for some people. The only hit I take from my 8120 is in games, and it hasn't been enough for me to notice. Otherwise I'll render a few photos a month, run a few applications, and browse the internet. Sure I'm not going to be as fast as many modern Intel rigs in most cases, but the $80 difference for my processor and the i5 was enough to convince me to go for the cheaper option. Maybe in two years when I buy a new computer, the extra power from bulldozer will total to the $80 I saved. I like both companies, and I do wish I had an Intel rig because they're pretty amazing, but honestly what I have now is "good enough"

Anyway talking about Vishera, they better perform as well as they claim, or it is gonna be a big hit for AMD. I got suckered into bulldozer and upgraded my mobo prematurely, but I'm not gonna do that again. Maybe when it's cheaper it will be worth upgrading. Those prices are asking a little too much right now for what will probably be the performance that should have come with bulldozer.
 
Greenlepricon said:
Good enough is good enough for some people. The only hit I take from my 8120 is in games, and it hasn't been enough for me to notice. Otherwise I'll render a few photos a month, run a few applications, and browse the internet. Sure I'm not going to be as fast as many modern Intel rigs in most cases, but the $80 difference for my processor and the i5 was enough to convince me to go for the cheaper option. Maybe in two years when I buy a new computer, the extra power from bulldozer will total to the $80 I saved. I like both companies, and I do wish I had an Intel rig because they're pretty amazing, but honestly what I have now is "good enough"

Anyway talking about Vishera, they better perform as well as they claim, or it is gonna be a big hit for AMD. I got suckered into bulldozer and upgraded my mobo prematurely, but I'm not gonna do that again. Maybe when it's cheaper it will be worth upgrading. Those prices are asking a little too much right now for what will probably be the performance that should have come with bulldozer.
Click to expand...

Good enough for this generation is a realistic mentality. Will this chip do what 99% of the population needs it to do? Yes.
 
ShintaiDK said:
The "good enough" is just an excuse by fanatics for the lackbuster performance from their favourite company. A oneway love affair tho.
Click to expand...
The PC hooked to my TV is a Athlon X2 and is "good enough" for recording TV shows, web browsing, office productivity, and my daughters games (Barbie Pet Shop, etc). If it fried itself I would look seriously at Trinity as a replacement because its got a "good enough" CPU and a good GPU at an excellent price.

My main PC is a different story. There I want performance. If Piledriver doesn't deliver sufficient value than its off to Intel I go.
 
anything close to or exceed 200 will be pointless, as piledriver cores only add like 10-15% more performance compare to BD, you might as well add a little and get ivy.
 
-Slacker- said:
Are there any vishera benches that I'm not aware of?
Click to expand...
Did you see the Cinebench R11.5 vs Cinebench R13(with R14 render)?
With Phenom II X6 vs FX-8350 vs i7 3770K?

R11.5
1st. i7 3770K
2nd. FX-8350
3rd. Phenom II X6

R13(with R14 render)
1st. FX-8350 22x seconds
2nd. i7 3770K 22x seconds
3rd. Phenom II X6 3xx seconds

Off the top of my mind^ but really we are comparing a FX-8350 to an i7 3770K

In the i7 3770K each thread has access to a 256-bit unit.
In the FX 8350 each thread has access to a 128-bit unit.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top