Why has AMD never bundled dCPU and APU with their own dGPUs?

[cbn]

Recently there has been a lot of commentary in the Anandtech Video card forum about how Nvidia's GTX 1050 and GTX 1050 Ti (set to release Oct. 25th) will greatly help pre-built desktop increase their PC gaming capability. (re: the card does not need a PCIe power connector despite its strong projected performance).

In fact, I have noticed 6 out of the 9 Nvidia launch cards shown below are very short and should fit in any full width OEM Pre-built desktop:

This, in contrast, to the current 13 AMD RX460 cards listed on Newegg where only 3 out of the 13 fit this same "short card" category. In fact, some of these cards even have 6 pin power connectors:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=100007709 8000 601206353&IsNodeId=1&bop=And&ActiveSearchResult=True&order=BESTMATCH

However, with that mentioned, there has been even more commentary about Nvidia's GTX 1050 Ti and GTX 1050 likely forcing AMD to lower prices on the RX460.

So I got to wondering where all these potentially discounted RX460s will likely go? A small amount of them (the shortest ones) will be able to be used in Regular (non-gamer) pre-built desktops (ie, the kind of desktop with a 300W PSU and no PCIe power connector).

But the rest will need to go into either Gamer/Boutique Pre-builts or DIY Gamer PCs ( A used Workstation or Non-gamer Desktop that is more generous in size than the typical non-gamer desktop would also work but I believe represents a small number of machines).

So I got to thinking why doesn't AMD offer some kind of CPU or APU bundle coupon for purchasers of RX460 or better dGPUs? This to help DIY uptake of the larger RX460s or the RX460s with 6 pin power connectors.

Anyone wonder why AMD hasn't done this in the past? (Or have they done this in the past....and I haven't noticed it?).

Does anyone besides myself want to see this happen or think it is a good idea?

 

[dealcorn]

Explain again why AMD should limit a price concession to ~10% of the market rather than trying to grow share in the overall market?

 

[Burpo]

In CPU's & overclocking? Really?

 

[cbn]

Explain again why AMD should limit a price concession to ~10% of the market rather than trying to grow share in the overall market?

Its not a simple price concession (ie, lower price of CPU, APU or dGPU individually)

Its the idea of AMD bundling their CPU or APU with their dGPU in order to "grow share in the overall market".

This is something neither Intel or Nvidia can do.

 

[cbn]

In CPU's & overclocking? Really?

Yes, CPU and dGPU bundled together....just like we talk about (and benchmark) APUs in this forum.

 

[Blitzvogel]

Its not a simple price concession (ie, lower price of CPU, APU or dGPU individually)

Its the idea of AMD bundling their CPU or APU with their dGPU in order to "grow share in the overall market".

This is something neither Intel or Nvidia can do.

Sites like Newegg already have this kind of practice, except they create combos of whatever they want instead.

It would be interesting if AMD could convince OEMs to purchase APUs/CPUs + graphics cards for a volume discount. An 860k + RX 460 2GB would actually make for a decent entry level gaming PC.

 

[cbn]

It would be interesting if AMD could convince OEMs to purchase APUs/CPUs + graphics cards for a volume discount. An 860k + RX 460 2GB would actually make for a decent entry level gaming PC.

AMD actually does sell OEM desktop GPUs or OEM cards:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/9241/amd-announces-oem-desktop-radeon-300-series

So I would be very surprised if there wasn't already some kind of volume bundling deals happening.

 

[DrMrLordX]

Probably because AMD knows that their own share of the desktop CPU market is tiny, and trying to pair them with their dGPUs would probably bring down their dGPU market share more than it would bring up their CPU market share.

 

[cbn]

Probably because AMD knows that their own share of the desktop CPU market is tiny, and trying to pair them with their dGPUs would probably bring down their dGPU market share more than it would bring up their CPU market share.

Yes, I think that could happen if lets say a person needed to buy a FX series CPU at full price in order to buy a RX series at full price.

But what lets say instead of mandatory bundling there was some kind of incentive system in place?

For example, AMD currently has the FX CPUs at what appears to be regular price at Newegg, but has added Deus EX Mankind Divided game code:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&IsNodeId=1&N=100007671 50001028 600213781&Manufactory=1028

Perhaps another option would be to add additional game codes for those that purchased FX CPU and AMD dGPU either together or within a certain time apart from each other?

Example:

1 game code for FX6350
2 game codes for FX8350
1 game code for RX460
2 game codes for RX470 or RX480
3 game codes for FX6350 + RX460 (rather than two game codes if purchased separately)
6 game codes for FX8350 + RX470 or RX480 (rather than four game codes if purchased separately)

 

[DaveSimmons]

The problem is that AMD CPUs are currently second-rate for gaming compared to intel, most people don't want them.

There's some value in the APUs for all-in-one CPU + GPU power with the GPU somewhat better than intel, but that's a narrow "light gaming" niche between intel IGP and real gaming that needs a dGPU. If you want to game above 720p you need a dGPU anyway so why not pair that with an intel CPU?

Hopefully Zen will make AMD CPUs good for gaming again like they were before Core 2 took over. Competition would be great to have. But Zen's not here yet.

 

[cbn]

The problem is that AMD CPUs are currently second-rate for gaming compared to intel, most people don't want them.

Some games like Battlefield 1 FX is performing well (notice the DX12 results below):

http://gamegpu.com/action-/-fps-/-tps/battlefield-1-test-gpu

With that mentioned, I've noticed that in other games (DX11) the FX8xxx is often below a Core i3.

Also, the FX systems have rather high idle.

But for a computer user that doesn't spend much time in idle or plans on playing DX12 these FX processors may not be such a bad idea. Now only if AMD could provide some additional incentive to buy them (either game codes in the US or some kind of coupon/voucher/rebate for countries where game piracy is a problem).

 

[DaveSimmons]

The 9590 is a $230 + $60 for liquid cooling = $290 CPU, with 220 watt TDP.

I think most gamers would rather have a $230 i5-6600 (65 watt TDP) or $340 i7-6700K (91 watt TDP) for much more consistent performance and for the perceived higher safety of air cooling.

> But for a computer user that doesn't spend much time in idle or plans on playing DX12

I suspect it's more that B1 makes decent use of the 8 cores rather than it being DX12, but that's just a guess. Most games still favor stronger single-core performance.

 

[moonbogg]

So I got to thinking why doesn't AMD offer some kind of CPU or APU bundle coupon for purchasers of RX460 or better dGPUs?

Because AMD CPU's suck and AMD is trash. That's why.

That's the reaction you wanted, right?

 

[master_shake_]

just use intel.

the stuff works.

 

[frozentundra123456]

You mean kind of like bundling a Ford Pinto with a discounted set of tires??

 

[superstition]

If a person has a Micro Center near they can score a board and an FX CPU capable of 4.4 with that board (the same clock as the 9370 only with a low-leakage E chip instead) for like $125 plus tax.

I posted a list of 28 games that I found that do well on FX and I didn't look at all available game by any means. For a lot of games it makes more sense to spend the extra money on the GPU. If you want to run at just 1080 with a weaker GPU then AMD's 8 core CPUs probably aren't for you. But if you want higher settings and higher resolutions they look better.

Deserts of Kharak
http://pic.yupoo.com/ztwss/FiwDYvFo/medish.jpg

The Division
http://pic.yupoo.com/ztwss/FiwDXyVu/medish.jpg

more:

http://slickdeals.net/f/9094735-amd...o-center-byo-in-store?p=90238335#post90238335

http://slickdeals.net/f/9094735-amd...o-center-byo-in-store?p=90234483#post90234483

 

[cbn]

I suspect it's more that B1 makes decent use of the 8 cores rather than it being DX12, but that's just a guess. Most games still favor stronger single-core performance.

If you look at the two charts in post #11, DX12 does give a good improvement (for some of the processors).

For example, in BF1 DX11 FX8350 is only a hair better than Core i3 6100 and behind i5 2500K and i5 4670K.....but when in BF1 DX12 the FX8350 beats the i5-2500K and i5 4670K and is within 1 FPS of the i5-6600.

BF1 DX11:

FX-8350: 77 min FPS, 92 avg. FPS
i5-4670K: 85 min FPS, 96 avg. FPS

BF1 DX12:

FX-8350: 91 min FPS, 103 avg. FPS
i5-4670K: 81 min FPS, 97 avg. FPS

i5-4670K only gains 1 avg. FPS in DX12, but FX8350 gains 11 avg. FPS in DX12.

 

[cbn]

You mean kind of like bundling a Ford Pinto with a discounted set of tires??

I don't think that is a good analogy because the AMD FX and dGPU combo is good at specific task (DX12) compared to what the equally priced competition (Core i3 and Nvidia Pascal GTX).

Reason: AMD dGPUs are said to have better DX12 support than Nvidia Pascal and FX 6 or 8 core appears to scale better in DX12 than Core i3.

In fact, I think it would be really interesting to see some kind of comparison where a simulated OEM box with perhaps Core i3-6100 , Haswell Core i5 or maybe the new 3.8 Ghz Kabylake Pentium G4620 (which has 2C/4T) and a non power pin GTX 1050 Ti or GTX 1050 goes up against some combination of FX CPU and RX dGPU.

 

[DaveSimmons]

If you look at the two charts in post #11, DX12 does give a good improvement (for some of the processors).

For example, in BF1 DX11 FX8350 is only a hair better than Core i3 6100 and behind i5 2500K and i5 4670K.....but when in BF1 DX12 the FX8350 beats the i5-2500K and i5 4670K and is within 1 FPS of the i5-6600.

BF1 DX11:

FX-8350: 77 min FPS, 92 avg. FPS
i5-4670K: 85 min FPS, 96 avg. FPS

BF1 DX12:

FX-8350: 91 min FPS, 103 avg. FPS
i5-4670K: 81 min FPS, 97 avg. FPS

i5-4670K only gains 1 avg. FPS in DX12, but FX8350 gains 11 avg. FPS in DX12.

My bad, I looked at the charts yet completely missed that one was DX11

I'll change my answer to:

B1's DX12 engine makes good use of the 8 cores. We'll need to see how much difference 4 vs 8 cores make for other DX12 engines especially UE4. If it's as good at using the cores as ?frostbyte? then many AAA games will have the FX performing like that. If Unity does the same then other games will too.

Still, if you want good DX11 and DX12 performance, pay the extra $50 for intel i7.

 

[cbn]

The 9590 is a $230 + $60 for liquid cooling = $290 CPU, with 220 watt TDP.

I think most gamers would rather have a $230 i5-6600 (65 watt TDP) or $340 i7-6700K (91 watt TDP) for much more consistent performance and for the perceived higher safety of air cooling.

I agree that is bit expensive.

Here are the current Newegg prices for FX processors:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=100007671 600213781 8000&IsNodeId=1&bop=And&Order=PRICE&PageSize=36

FX-4300: $79.99 free shipping (includes Deus EX Mankind Divided game code)
FX-4350: $89.99 free shipping
FX-6300: $99.99 free shipping (includes Deus EX Mankind Divided game code)
FX-8300: $114.99 free shipping (includes Deus EX Mankind Divided game code)
FX-8320E $129.99 free shipping (includes Deus EX Mankind Divided game code)
FX-6350 $129.99 plus $.99 shipping (includes Deus EX Mankind Divided game code)
FX-8320 $134.99 free shipping (includes Deus EX Mankind Divided game code)
FX-6350 Wraith cooler: $134.99 free shipping (includes Deus EX Mankind Divided game code)
FX-8350 $149.99 free shipping (includes Deus EX Mankind Divided game code)
FX-8350 Wraith cooler: $179.99 free shipping (includes Deus EX Mankind Divided game code)
FX-8370: $189.99 free shipping (includes Deus EX Mankind Divided game code)
FX-9370: $189.99 free shipping
FX-8370 Wraith Cooler: $199.99 free shipping (includes Deus EX Mankind Divided game code)
Fx-9590: $229.99 free shipping

For the critics out there how would you reprice these processors? Take into account motherboard price as well when comparing to Intel.

P.S. I know most of you use HEDT or i7-4790K or i7 6700K processors for personal use, but according to this thread some of you also build or are involved the Gaming Pre-builts for other people using lesser processors.

 

[frozentundra123456]

If you look at the two charts in post #11, DX12 does give a good improvement (for some of the processors).

For example, in BF1 DX11 FX8350 is only a hair better than Core i3 6100 and behind i5 2500K and i5 4670K.....but when in BF1 DX12 the FX8350 beats the i5-2500K and i5 4670K and is within 1 FPS of the i5-6600.

BF1 DX11:

FX-8350: 77 min FPS, 92 avg. FPS
i5-4670K: 85 min FPS, 96 avg. FPS

BF1 DX12:

FX-8350: 91 min FPS, 103 avg. FPS
i5-4670K: 81 min FPS, 97 avg. FPS

i5-4670K only gains 1 avg. FPS in DX12, but FX8350 gains 11 avg. FPS in DX12.

Yea, but that is the problem with FX. In a best case scenario, it is only equal to an intel skylake i5, which costs only about a hundred dollars more, will use less energy, probably has more overclocking headroom than the FX, and has much more well rounded performance in a variety of games. The only scenarios where the FX makes sense at all is as a drop in replacement for an older system or if one can get the microcenter deal.

 

[cbn]

Here is a potential PC that with GTX 1050 Ti or GTX 1050 could be used as baseline comparison for various DIY FX + RX dGPU bundles:

$399.99 free shipping Acer Desktop PC Aspire T ATC-710-UR61 Intel Core i5 6th Gen 6400 (2.7 GHz) 8 GB DDR3L 2 TB HDD Intel HD Graphics 530 Windows 10 Home 64-Bit

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16883101452&ignorebbr=1

It is fairly small at 27.5 liters as well (only slighter larger than the Fractal design core 1000 uATX case which is 26.1 liters. It even has a drive cage mounting system that is a very similar to the Core 1000).

 

[cbn]

Another PC at 339.99 free shipping after $20 promo code that could be used with GTX 1050 Ti or GTX 1050 for comparison to various FX CPU and RX dGPU bundles:

HP Desktop PC ProDesk 400 G3 (Y2P45U8#ABA) Intel Core i3 6th Gen 6100 (3.70 GHz) 4 GB 500 GB HDD Intel HD Graphics 530 Windows 10 Pro 64-Bit

(It has 4GB less RAM (but is DDR4 2133 rather than DDR3L 1600) and a HDD that is 1.5TB smaller than the Acer Aspire T. This in addition to having a Core i3 6100 rather than a Core i5 6400. Keep in mind though it does have Windows 10 Pro as opposed to the Windows 10 Home)

Volume of this PC is 21 liters.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16883285492

 

[jihe]

Most prebuilt desktops are sff these days and you are looking low profile cards, not full height.

 

[cbn]

Thinking about what Intel LGA 1151 processor (Core i5 6400 with DDR3L 1600 vs. Core i3 6100 with DDR4 2133 RAM) found in these budget pre-builts would go better with GTX 1050 Ti or GTX 1050 I believe the Core i5 6400 with DDR3L 1600 would be the better choice.

This based, in part, on AtenRA's testing of Core i3 6300 with DDR3 1866 vs. Core i5 2500K with DDR3 1600 vs. FX8150 with DDR3 1866. (re: the Core i5 2500K @ stock speed even though it had the slower RAM was smoother with HD7950 @ 1000 Mhz than the Core i3 6300 with its somewhat faster RAM).