ITT: We discuss future pricing and availability for AM3+ processors and mobos

[Worlocked]

What I don't understand is why AMD is jumping from one idea that was before its time to another. How many years is it gonna take for this HSA stuff to pay off? Have they even mentioned HSA support in Mantle? That's their own API for gods sake and I can't find a word on it. They are about to drop their first full HSA 1.0 chips and there is gonna be diddly-squat to do with them for years. If those CUs are gonna sit idle for people with dedicated graphics cards APUs are gonna stay worthless to gamers.

It's funny too, because CMT is finally starting to make sense in 2014 with cryengine and frostbite seemingly showing which way the wind is blowing. I wonder how long they can keep AM3+ on life support? I bet when 8 threads for optimal performance starts to be the norm is right when AMD will EOL AM3+. And game engines that use HSA will probably still be years away then too. Hopefully they cave and give enthusiasts some 4 module FM# parts by then.

 

[ShintaiDK]

For traditional desktop, do we really want APUs? If anything I would rather see AMD cut supply there instead of AM3+.

Thast where the fun stuff begins. It doesnt matter what you want, it only matters what the 99% crowd wants.

You have to ask yourself, and without bias. How much would x product sell. Can it pay itself back. AMD already decided that steamroller and excavator on AM3+ cant pay itself back in any reasonable way. And AM3+ is a very outdated platform to put it mildly.

 

[itsmydamnation]

AM3 is outdated but at the same time the stuff that its outdated is in most cases is all but useless. USB3 is the main thing and just about all MB have usb3 chips on them.

 

[Abwx]

And AM3+ is a very outdated platform to put it mildly.

Then Intel s most recent DDR3 plateforms are also outdated because they do not perform better than an AM3+.

 

[Alatar]

The most recent BF4 MP graph from gamegpu:

Then Intel s most recent DDR3 plateforms are also outdated because they do not perform better than an AM3+.

Every intel platform since P67 outperforms AM3+.

Also AM3+/990FX lack a lot of the modern features that intel boards have.

Even my two crosshair V formula (z and a non-z) are hopelessly bare bones and outdated as far as features go compared to my X79, Z87 and X99 boards.

 

[cbn]

For traditional desktop, do we really want APUs? If anything I would rather see AMD cut supply there instead of AM3+.

Thast where the fun stuff begins. It doesnt matter what you want, it only matters what the 99% crowd wants.

I don't think 99% want an APU in a traditional desktop. Besides, what is the point of having a full power APU that is held back by lack of bandwidth?

Not only that AMD's Big core APUs can be really expensive. And for what purpose? So a person can have a really big iGPU that is overkill for everyday usage, but inadequate for most gaming?

Like I mentioned back in post #23 (shown below), the APU makes more sense for mobile or (to a lesser extent) very small form factor low power desktop.

.

Maybe mobile and to a lesser extent very small form factor/low power desktop is a better place for the big core AMD APUs.

 

[cbn]

You have to ask yourself, and without bias. How much would x product sell. Can it pay itself back. AMD already decided that steamroller and excavator on AM3+ cant pay itself back in any reasonable way. And AM3+ is a very outdated platform to put it mildly.

Just because AMD decided not make AM3+ Steamroller doesn't mean continuing on with the existing design doesn't make sense to them.

Instead of AM3+ not be viable, maybe they simply thought designing a new Steamroller AM3+ die on 28nm bulk didn't offer enough improvement over Piledriver on 32nm SOI to be worth the investment?

And AM3+ is a very outdated platform to put it mildly.

AM3+ with the 970 chipset is still plenty modern enough for a product in the value segment. It does lack usb 3.0*, but does have six SATA 6 GBps and is capable of PCIe 2.0 x16 and PCIe x4 together.

*All 970 AM3+ boards I have seen on Newegg do have third party usb 3.0 though.

 

[cbn]

If you have $500 buy a console. $500 in a gaming PC is $400 once you inevitably put Windows in the equation.

I would rather having a low end gaming PC than console.

With a PC I can play games not found on console. And for the PC games that are also found on console, I can mod them (which a console can't do).

Then there is the issue of a PC being being upgradeable and supporting multiple monitors (AMD Eyefinity and Nvidia Surround)- neither of which is possible on a console.

 

[ShintaiDK]

I don't think 99% want an APU in a traditional desktop. Besides, what is the point of having a full power APU that is held back by lack of bandwidth?

Not only that AMD's Big core APUs can be really expensive. And for what purpose? So a person can have a really big iGPU that is overkill for everyday usage, but inadequate for most gaming?

Like I mentioned back in post #23 (shown below), the APU makes more sense for mobile or (to a lesser extent) very small form factor low power desktop.

.

On this forum? Maybe not. OEMs and real world? Completely different story. There is a reason why 99% of Intels consumer shipment is CPU+IGP. And AMDs amount of APUs is growing.

Just because AMD decided not make AM3+ Steamroller doesn't mean continuing on with the existing design doesn't make sense to them.

Instead of AM3+ not be viable, maybe they simply thought designing a new Steamroller AM3+ die on 28nm bulk didn't offer enough improvement over Piledriver on 32nm SOI to be worth the investment?



AM3+ with the 970 chipset is still plenty modern enough for a product in the value segment. It does lack usb 3.0*, but does have six SATA 6 GBps and is capable of PCIe 2.0 x16 and PCIe x4 together.

*All 970 AM3+ boards I have seen on Newegg do have third party usb 3.0 though.

USB3 is just one thing. PCIe another and so on. Plus its still a 2 chip design that cost more. 315mm2+northbridge+southbridge vs 245mm2+FCH.

AMD didnt do AM3+ on 28nm because the amount of people buying it is too low contra the cost. Not to mention the FX8xxx series is a very low volume product. Even at the height of the series they shipped around 125K units per quarter. The FX4xxx sold 3 times more than the FX6xxx and FX8xxx combined.

Lets just for the sake of argument say they can ship a million units a year at your desired 80$ retail price. That ends up as what, 40-50$ to AMD? As in 40-50mio$ a year revenue. Then you can calculate what it cost to make a million 315mm2 units at 32nm and subtract that. Whats left you have to pay for all other expenses.

 

[frozentundra123456]

I don't think 99% want an APU in a traditional desktop. Besides, what is the point of having a full power APU that is held back by lack of bandwidth?

Not only that AMD's Big core APUs can be really expensive. And for what purpose? So a person can have a really big iGPU that is overkill for everyday usage, but inadequate for most gaming?

Like I mentioned back in post #23 (shown below), the APU makes more sense for mobile or (to a lesser extent) very small form factor low power desktop.

.

The vast majority of consumers and enterprise users do want "apus". Unfortunately for AMD Intel sells them too, and they generally have better efficiency, CPU performance, and plenty good enough graphics for normal use. An OEM or enterprise user is not going to want to use an am3 chip that already uses more power and then have to add a gpu as well, or live with motherboard graphics.

So AMD is stuck with am3 chips that have no igpu and FM2 chips that are hamstring by lack of bandwidth.

 

[cbn]

AM3 is outdated but at the same time the stuff that its outdated is in most cases is all but useless.

Did you instead mean to say "AM3 is outdated but at the same time the stuff that is not outdated is in most cases is all but useless."

If so, I tend to agree.

Take, for example, the FM2+ platform with PCIe 3.0. While having 16 3.0 lanes for video card would be great for a strong cpu, currently the best cpu on FM2+ leaves a lot to be desired. (Even the FX-6300 beats A10-7850K/athlon x4 860K in most games).

So yeah, with FM2+ you get the most up to date PCIe lanes, but the CPU is basically too weak to make use of it in an efficient manner.

 

[cbn]

The vast majority of consumers and enterprise users do want "apus". Unfortunately for AMD Intel sells them too, and they generally have better efficiency, CPU performance, and plenty good enough graphics for normal use. An OEM or enterprise user is not going to want to use an am3 chip that already uses more power and then have to add a gpu as well, or live with motherboard graphics.

I agree integrated graphics are important for the everyday user, but yes the Intel chips appear to be a better fit for the average user (re: stronger CPU at any given price point, with lower power consumption, adequate iGPU).

Now as far as AM3+ goes, it doesn't need to extend up into the super high volume enterprise market where those LGA 1150 chips get sold. It just needs to increase in volume.

 

[Kuiva maa]

The most recent BF4 MP graph from gamegpu:

Every intel platform since P67 outperforms AM3+.

Also AM3+/990FX lack a lot of the modern features that intel boards have.

Even my two crosshair V formula (z and a non-z) are hopelessly bare bones and outdated as far as features go compared to my X79, Z87 and X99 boards.

200fps cónstant on BF4 multiplayer. Gamegpu.ru is dishing out one bogus/irrelevant bench after the other. A stock 4770k can't keep 100fps min always with DX11, let alone 200. Let's see mantle too.

Yep, so we get worse performance across the board,now? At this point they compete with pclab.pl for the most useless/botched benchmarks. Oh yeah, let us see the part they benched.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMGTwG6XN_4

Irrelevant, like always.

 

[cbn]

Those BF4 Final Stand CPU benchmarks numbers are the first time I have seen a Haswell Core i3 beat a FX-8350 in Multiplayer.

And yes, 200 FPS was a tip off something was wrong there. (scene not demanding enough)

 

[cbn]

I don't think 99% want an APU in a traditional desktop. Besides, what is the point of having a full power APU that is held back by lack of bandwidth?

Not only that AMD's Big core APUs can be really expensive. And for what purpose? So a person can have a really big iGPU that is overkill for everyday usage, but inadequate for most gaming?

Like I mentioned back in post #23 (shown below), the APU makes more sense for mobile or (to a lesser extent) very small form factor low power desktop.

On this forum? Maybe not. OEMs and real world? Completely different story. There is a reason why 99% of Intels consumer shipment is CPU+IGP. And AMDs amount of APUs is growing.

You mention that AMD's APUs are growing, but is this in traditional desktop? or mobile? Or very small form factor/lower power desktops? (I am specifically referring to the big core APUs for all three categories I just mentioned, not the cat core ones)

 

[ShintaiDK]

You mention that AMD's APUs are growing, but is this in traditional desktop? or mobile? Or very small form factor/lower power desktops? (I am specifically referring to the big core APUs for all three categories I just mentioned, not the cat core ones)

In the desktop space the FMx socket sits at above 70% of AMDs big core shipments. And of those left on AM3+, only a tiny part (5-10%) are FX8xxx. With another 10-15% being FX6xxx. The rest ~75% is quadcores.

I dont get why you keep advocating for socket and CPUs even the producing company gave up on.

 

[schmuckley]

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16819113359

That's not cheap.
That's about the same price as the flagship 965BE was.
..and less powerful.
FAIL

 

[Abwx]

Also AM3+/990FX lack a lot of the modern features that intel boards have.

Not true at all, that s a hollow sentence, but i would be curious if you could point thoses so called modern features because there s none actualy set apart in some rehashed hearsays..

And of those left on AM3+, only a tiny part (5-10%) are FX8xxx. With another 10-15% being FX6xxx. The rest ~75% is quadcores.

In France the most sold FXs this year in quantities are the FX8350, 6300, 8320, 6350, 9370, the quads are marginal in comparision to thoses ones.

 

[cbn]

In the desktop space the FMx socket sits at above 70% of AMDs big core shipments. And of those left on AM3+, only a tiny part (5-10%) are FX8xxx. With another 10-15% being FX6xxx. The rest ~75% is quadcores.

I am not surprised in the slightest that on desktop the FMx socket is higher volume. This due to the fact that prices for low end APUs start at $40 for it while AM3+ processors start at $100.

But you mentioned AMD's APUs are growing and I just don't believe this is happening for traditional desktop. Mobile possibly, and very small form factor low power desktop (based on Mobile big core APUs) possibly as well.

I dont get why you keep advocating for socket and CPUs even the producing company gave up on.

AM3+ is a better platform for traditional desktop than FM2+. I believe price adjustments could fix some problems AMD might be having with adoption/sales, etc

Big Core APUs are better served in gaming laptops and (to a lesser extent) some type of very small form factor desktop (using mobile derived big core APUs).

As far as mainstream stuff goes, like AIO desktops, I'm thinking AMD should just push their Jaguar stuff as hard as they can. (eg, All four jaguar cores @ 2.4+ Ghz.....not the ridiculous amount of binning we see today with dual Jaguar cores @ 1.45 Ghz, etc)

 

[ShintaiDK]

I am not surprised in the slightest that on desktop the FMx socket is higher volume. This due to the fact that prices for low end APUs start at $40 for it while AM3+ processors start at $100.

But you mentioned AMD's APUs are growing and I just don't believe this is happening for traditional desktop. Mobile possibly, and very small form factor low power desktop (based on Mobile big core APUs) possibly as well.



AM3+ is a better platform for traditional desktop than FM2+. I believe price adjustments could fix some problems AMD might be having with adoption/sales, etc

Big Core APUs are better served in gaming laptops and some type of very small form factor desktop (using mobile derived big core APUs).

As far as mainstream stuff goes, like AIO desktops, I'm thinking AMD should just push their Jaguar stuff as hard as they can. (eg, All four jaguar cores @ 2.4+ Ghz.....not the ridiculous amount of binning we see today with dual Jaguar cores @ 1.45 Ghz, etc)

Because you dont believe it doesnt mean its true. The statement comes from AMD. So its irrelevant what you may believe or not.

FMx is a much better platform in any way than the AM3+. The only place it lacks is the 6-8 cores part. But the amount of desktop CPUs that is shipped with that accounts for something like 5-7% and something like 2% for the 8 core you dream of. If anything, they would make 6-8 cores to the FMx platform instead. However they desided not to.

And your price adjustment wishes are extreme. Remember the business case. Its not a charity or some non profit organization.

Jaguar even at 2.4Ghz isnt going to cut it. Plus power usage would quickly go up.

 

[ShintaiDK]

In France the most sold FXs this year in quantities are the FX8350, 6300, 8320, 6350, 9370, the quads are marginal in comparision to thoses ones.

Got some links to that? It would really be sad if a super niche product even outsold quadcores.

 

[cbn]

Jaguar even at 2.4Ghz isnt going to cut it. Plus power usage would quickly go up.

Beema A6-6310 is 2.4 Ghz at 25 watts:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7974/...tecture-a10-micro-6700t-performance-preview/2

And as yields improve, more of those SKUs will be available over time.....if they are not so already.

 

[cbn]

And your price adjustment wishes are extreme. Remember the business case. Its not a charity or some non profit organization.

As yields on 32nm improve, AMD can certainly offer octcores at a hexcore price. Nothing hard to understand about that.

The rest is more complicated, but I believe with R &D now paid for there is room to lower price even further.

 

[monstercameron]

So let me get this straight, enterprises will choose Intel apus because they are good enough but not AMDs...this train of though is very hard to follow.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Beema A6-6310 is 2.4 Ghz at 25 watts:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7974/...tecture-a10-micro-6700t-performance-preview/2

And as yields improve, more of those SKUs will be available over time.....if they are not so already.

Its 1800Mhz base, 2.4Ghz turbo. And performance is far below Kaveri. With Kaveri you get 2.1Ghz base, 3.3Ghz turbo at 19W. Or 2.7Ghz base, 3.6Ghz turbo at 35W, including much faster IGP.