Does the AMD FX line make sense

[daveybrat]

Microcenter is currently running a new promotion for an AMD Vishera FX 8320 processor for $159.99 AND $50 off any compatible motherboard.

Now that is a very enticing offer for an 8-Core cpu and discounted motherboard.

Granted it is Microcenter and not everyone has one near them or at all, but for those who do, this is a great offer.

 

[crashtech]

That's a great deal! At that price it's a no-brainer, that's less than an i3 when you figure the mobo in.

 

[VirtualLarry]

I ordered 50 fx6100's through Newegg over the holidays for a major computer upgrade at the school I work at. These were on special for $105 each. This was the regular price for the Fx 4100.
The old systems had been in service for 6.5 years, but the cases and power supplies are still like new, so drop in replacements were easy, a GB MB, 4GB DDR3, and the CPU. Considering the performance and price Intel had nothing comparable other than a low end I3 for $15 more or a something in the G series. These systems will also be in service for 5 - 7 years, just having the 6 core capability ensures that we will be in a position to upgrade software within that period while still having a platform that can handle it.

Have you compare the TCO of those platforms, including the power comsumption, over 5-7 years, as compared to those "$15 more expensive" i3s?

What apps are being run that actually can use 6 cores (3 modules)?

I'm no fan of Intel, but if I were in your shoes, I might well have chosen the i3 route. After all, the FX 6100 is Bulldozer, not Piledriver.

 

[Uhtrinity]

They dropped into systems that old? What systems were they?

Acer mini atx systems, replaced MB, CPU, and Ram, amounted to $185 in parts per machine. A similar Intel upgrade using low end i3's were coming in at ~$205. Quit a difference when you have $7k a year to work with. The same machines were also migrated from Windows xp to Windows 7.

**on a side note there is a thread on here related to me purchasing 53 of those Acers in 2006. I was reamed by someone on this site because I didn't go through a company like Dell with a service contract. Now 6.5 years later all 53 machines still run great, they are just getting slow hence the upgrades.

The cheapest I3 at the time ran over $120 at the time I ordered, I see thay are down to $114, but that is also the lowest end i3. The total upgrade would have ran over $20 more per machine X 50. When you are trying to stretch two years worth of tech budget for one big project a $1000 makes a difference. I know it might sound callous, but power isn't part of my budget and any power I save does not credit back to my budget.

On that note Idle power usage is comparable to other cpus in the same class and I admit usage under load is quit a bit higher but not an issue as it means I don't have to run heat in the area with the highest concentration of systems. That is the computer lab with 35 systems and those systems only run ~4 hours a day. AC is only required about 2 - 3 months out of the whole 9 month school year. In addition the i3 2000 series benchmark lower in quit a few productivity apps as well as games compared to the fx6100's. They are more on par with the fx4100's.

Software is a mix of educational, office, and productivity such as photoshop, and some very light gaming once a week (after school activity). Having cpus capable of running more threads also future proofs us for the anticipated refresh cycle of 5 - 7 years. As we all know software development continues and more emphasis is being put on multi threading.

 

[VirtualLarry]

When you are trying to stretch two years worth of tech budget for one big project a $1000 makes a difference. I know it might sound callous, but power isn't part of my budget and any power I save does not credit back to my budget.

Makes sense now thanks.

 

[FlanK3r]

Sofar its a Q4 for the Kaveri(FM platform) on 28nm. But still nothing for the FX line.

I think, SR FX will be Q1/Q2 2014 (if we will see new Pilderiver revision of Vishera, after Q2/Q3 2014)

 

[ShintaiDK]

I think, SR FX will be Q1/Q2 2014 (if we will see new Pilderiver revision of Vishera, after Q2/Q3 2014)

Its worth noticing, that for the server platform. AM3+ is dead and FM platform replaces the single socket. So I wouldnt bet on anything after the current FX PD.

 

[FlanK3r]

Maybe 2 scenarios...FM3 will be OK for both (for FXs and Kaveri too). Or there will be FM3 and AM4. HT is still good point for comunications of enthusiast CPUs (servers), adding PCIe to CPU could be not problem. So something as 1090FX? But still is point of speculation

 

[inf64]

If AMD intends to continue the FX lineup(why wouldn't they?) , new FX will probably come to the unified socket that will be primarily for APUs. Common platform will mean lower cost and new server SKUs are supposed to feature integrated PCI-E controller anyway.

 

[ShintaiDK]

If AMD intends to continue the FX lineup(why wouldn't they?) , new FX will probably come to the unified socket that will be primarily for APUs. Common platform will mean lower cost and new server SKUs are supposed to feature integrated PCI-E controller anyway.

When you sell less than 200K server CPUs a quarter. Then you cant be picky.

Whatever they use the FX brand on another platform is irrelevant. Its only a name, a tarished name.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Maybe 2 scenarios...FM3 will be OK for both (for FXs and Kaveri too). Or there will be FM3 and AM4. HT is still good point for comunications of enthusiast CPUs (servers), adding PCIe to CPU could be not problem. So something as 1090FX? But still is point of speculation

I guess there will be 2 platforms. FM and a 2/4P platform. But no such thing as AM4.

HT is not good at all for enthutiast CPUs. Its only usefulness is for multisocket, same as QPI.

 

[itsmydamnation]

they will change socket when memory requirements force them. who knows we might end up with an Am3++ at same stage :ninja:

 

[Fox5]

I guess there will be 2 platforms. FM and a 2/4P platform. But no such thing as AM4.

HT is not good at all for enthutiast CPUs. Its only usefulness is for multisocket, same as QPI.

AFAIK, AMD decided to use AM3+ for their low end server platforms. I think Intel already uses their consumer socket for low end Xeons.

In fact, just in December, AMD released a couple Delhibased quad and octo core Opterons for AM3+. Unfortunately, that means that AMD has 3 server sockets, AM3+, C32, and G34. There does not seem to be a large difference between C32 and G34 though.

C32 adds an extra hypertransport bus and the option for dual processor configs. G34 can do quad processor configs. There doesn't seem to be a big reason for AMD to have 3 server sockets though, one could server all 3 markets.

 

[FlanK3r]

without FX will be sad (read without 8 core CPus or more) because FXs are good alternative to i5/i7. Specially for video working, 3D rendering or simply mutlithreading. And for games are still OK for this price. Some negative is higher power consumption in load (but Vishera fixed horrible OC power consumption after OC of Bulldozer)

 

[ShintaiDK]

AFAIK, AMD decided to use AM3+ for their low end server platforms. I think Intel already uses their consumer socket for low end Xeons.

In fact, just in December, AMD released a couple Delhibased quad and octo core Opterons for AM3+. Unfortunately, that means that AMD has 3 server sockets, AM3+, C32, and G34. There does not seem to be a large difference between C32 and G34 though.

C32 adds an extra hypertransport bus and the option for dual processor configs. G34 can do quad processor configs. There doesn't seem to be a big reason for AMD to have 3 server sockets though, one could server all 3 markets.

Remember, FM2 is AMDs equal of LGA1155.

Also AM3+/C32/G34 are all dead on the server platform. And all will be replaced with a 2 chip platform instead of the current 3 chip. Just like Intel.

 

[ShintaiDK]

without FX will be sad (read without 8 core CPus or more) because FXs are good alternative to i5/i7. Specially for video working, 3D rendering or simply mutlithreading. And for games are still OK for this price. Some negative is higher power consumption in load (but Vishera fixed horrible OC power consumption after OC of Bulldozer)

The key problem is volume. Its simply too low to warrant the product. Its like throwing money into a black hole for AMD. Also why AMD will focus on 3 platforms. (Essential BGA, FM and 2/4P.). Today they are trying to maintain 5 platforms.

 

[inf64]

Flanker,there will be 8T models,the difference will be they will slide in the APU socket (most probable scenario ). After 28nm 8T will be defacto standard for APUs,smilar as how 4T is today on FM2.

 

[Phynaz]

The FX 8350 is mediocre at what exactly? It is power hungry i know but it's a good processor overall. I use one, i know.



Why would you pick a BD review (http://techreport.com/review/23246/i...ith-today-cpus) when the PD review (http://techreport.com/review/23750/a...essor-reviewed) could be as easily found??

I used the link I had bookmarked.

Let's use yours:

Yet the FX-8350's gaming performance almost exactly matches that of the Core i3-3225, a $134 Ivy Bridge-based processor. Meanwhile, the Core i5-3470 delivers markedly superior gaming performance for less money than the FX-8350.

Jeez man, you just owned yourself.

What what were you saying about STFU?

 

[KingFatty]

without FX will be sad (read without 8 core CPus or more) because FXs are good alternative to i5/i7. Specially for video working, 3D rendering or simply mutlithreading. And for games are still OK for this price. Some negative is higher power consumption in load (but Vishera fixed horrible OC power consumption after OC of Bulldozer)

Where did you find that chart?

I would like to see the same for the FX-6300 being overclocked etc.

It seems that for boards that support 140 W processors, an overclocked FX-8350 would suck it dry like a vampire and still want more juice, so if someone wants to overclock, it would be better to use FX-6300 to make use of the available 140 W when overclocking the CPU?

 

[Phynaz]

Acer mini atx systems, replaced MB, CPU, and Ram, amounted to $185 in parts per machine. A similar Intel upgrade using low end i3's were coming in at ~$205. Quit a difference when you have $7k a year to work with. The same machines were also migrated from Windows xp to Windows 7.

Then they didn't drop in because you needed to replace everything. Or you replaced everything 6.5 years ago? I'm afraid your post isn't clear.

Edit:
I re-read your original post. Umm, dude, replacing the CPU, MB and RAM isn't a drop in replacement. That's why I asked how the heck your were dropping FX6100's into 7 year old computers.

You weren't.

 

[AnonymouseUser]

I used the link I had bookmarked.

Let's use yours:

Yet the FX-8350's gaming performance almost exactly matches that of the Core i3-3225, a $134 Ivy Bridge-based processor. Meanwhile, the Core i5-3470 delivers markedly superior gaming performance for less money than the FX-8350.

Jeez man, you just owned yourself.

What what were you saying about STFU?

Outside of Anandtech forum members, most people do more than just game on their PCs, and in those cases the FX line is very competitive.

The overall performance scatter (which includes gaming results) offers some good news for AMD fans: the FX-8350 outperforms both the Core i5-3470 and the 3570K in our nicely multithreaded test suite. As a result, the FX-8350 will give you more performance for your dollar than the Core i5-3570K, and it at least rivals our value favorite from Intel, the Core i5-3470.

Personally, I don't game 8+ hours every day, so gaming isn't the most important aspect for me.

 

[Gikaseixas]

I used the link I had bookmarked.

Let's use yours:


Jeez man, you just owned yourself.

What what were you saying about STFU?

Also from from my link:

The overall performance scatter offers some good news for AMD fans: the FX-8350 outperforms both the Core i5-3470 and the 3570K in our nicely multithreaded test suite. As a result, the FX-8350 will give you more performance for your dollar than the Core i5-3570K, and it at least rivals our value favorite from Intel, the Core i5-3470.

From Anandtech's final words just in case you still have doubts that it's a decent cpu (http://www.anandtech.com/show/6396/the-vishera-review-amd-fx8350-fx8320-fx6300-and-fx4300-tested/9)

Vishera is a step in the right direction for AMD, it manages to deliver tangibly better performance than last year's disappointing FX processor without increasing power consumption. Thanks to architectural and frequency improvements, AMD delivers up to 20% better performance than last year's FX-8150 for a lower launch price, while remaining within the same thermal envelope.

Hmmm i see that what i said really messed you up, not that you weren't already. Go find another thread to derail and troll (two things you have mastered quite well)

 

[Phynaz]

Let's refer to the the OP's post shall we? You know, the where he specifically talks about gaming? And he asks if the FX line makes sense for gaming?

By your own provided links an i3 is faster than and costs less than an FX8350 for gaming. Therefore the answer must be "no".

And you're going tell me that I'm derailing the thread. I guess I am for you if I'm blocking your agenda with facts.

 

[Phynaz]

Outside of Anandtech forum members, most people do more than just game on their PCs, and in those cases the FX line is very competitive.



Personally, I don't game 8+ hours every day, so gaming isn't the most important aspect for me.

The OP's post is specifically about gaming. He didn't mention a thing about what you do with your computer.

Owned yourself again. Or maybe it's that reading comprehension thing.

Phynaz, I'm not sure what crawled up your hindquarters today, but this kind of antagonistic posting is going to have to come to a stop one way or another
-ViRGE

 

[Piroko]

Dude, Phynaz, chill.
The op also specifically asked about future gaming and we're already seeing two-threaded processors struggling badly in at least one game. It wouldn't be unreasonable to expect games to scale beyond four threads (well actually two strong and two weak threads in the case of i3s) and thus picking up performance on the 8350 compared to any IB i3.

The question is only when that will happen, and if those two processors are still relevant at that time. My guess is "increasingly within the next three years" and "somewhat".
Also comparing Haswell to Steamroller i'd say the i3 Haswell series - if it stays at 2+2 threads - will be less recommendable compared to i5s and i7s. And Steamroller - well, actually, no clue where it'll fit in. Depends on its performance.