Anyone read about AMD's future APU's

[Frakk]

Isn't that what Hybrid Crossfire is supposed to be?

I don't know is it??????

I'm talking... um well, how about an APU + 7850 and the GPU from the APU boosts the GFX performance of the 7850 for all its worth, perhaps bringing it up to or past its bigger sister the 7870.

 

[mjw21a]

Yeah, that would be nice.... They seem to tether it to the equivalent discrete graphics card and nothing else..... Still, Intel don't offer that much....

 

[Frakk]

Perhaps this is what Intel and nVidia are getting so worked up over.

The usual line of (go Intel its better for Gaming) would be turned on its head, and if it only works with AMD cards nVidia would also find themselves at a disadvantage.

 

[mjw21a]

If they're successful enough then I can see lawsuits coming their way. It's anticompetitive practice really.

 

[ssjwizard]

The most recent word on trinity is saying southern islands cores on Trinity desktop which would allow it to dual up with the 7xxx series. Im gona guess that 7770 or 7850 will be the top card to pair with. based on the core count alone the top APU + a 7770 would be roughly equal to a 7850, or as already mentioned a 7850 + APU would be aprox a 7870.

 

[Frakk]

The most recent word on trinity is saying southern islands cores on Trinity desktop which would allow it to dual up with the 7xxx series. Im gona guess that 7770 or 7850 will be the top card to pair with. based on the core count alone the top APU + a 7770 would be roughly equal to a 7850, or as already mentioned a 7850 + APU would be aprox a 7870.

nyaha..... thats what i'm talking about. but lets not get ahead of ourselves, by 7### they could (and most lickly) mean the 7670.

Damn AMD and there secretive mentality, they don't like to give us anything to chew on while we wait, do they?

 

[ssjwizard]

Well if the 7670 is as you say a rehash of the 6670 and trinity is sporting southern islands cores then it wouldn't be possible for them to operate in dual graphics(based on current drivers).

 

[rishidev]

latest report
its more of an accurate speculation
check this link
http://hwbot.org/newsflash/1683_tri...ormance_higher_than_bulldozer_clock_for_clock


trinity not that great... mild improvement over bulldozer cores.....
bulldozer worse than phenomII and piledriver is better than bulldozer but worse than phenom II....

also DDR4 map out in 2014

http://vr-zone.com/articles/ddr4-to...Men,+Geek,+Nerd,+Overclockers+and+Enthusiast)

 

[Frakk]

Well if the 7670 is as you say a rehash of the 6670 and trinity is sporting southern islands cores then it wouldn't be possible for them to operate in dual graphics(based on current drivers).

Aparently thats exactly what the 7670 is..

http://www.techpowerup.com/158086/AMD-Slips-Out-Radeon-HD-7670-to-OEMs.html

So who knows? we will have to wait and see.

@ rishidev.

I have seen that before, the Trinity performance increase over BD looks like about 10% per core, if true that is actually pretty good, and the IGP performance, which will be used in application computation in this fusion set up, is impressive.

APU's should not be compared like normal CPU's, they simply don't work like that.

 

[rishidev]

yes i agree the improvement is more than welcome and infact the behaviour of the cpu might once piledriver is fully built...who knows because......

Hopefully looking forward to APU's................i need an HTPC that can run high framerates on my 32" sharp---play all the modern games and so on.....

 

[mjw21a]

I'm still keen on getting one..... Although I might opt for a straight PD chip if it;ll work in my current mainboard.

 

[Frakk]

I'm still keen on getting one..... Although I might opt for a straight PD chip if it;ll work in my current mainboard.

I'm pretty sure the FX-83## will be AM3+.

 

[mjw21a]

I'll have to wait and see how it goes.... I'm getting curious about IB, though from what I've seen the very first ones are going to run rather hot so it may be worth waiting until they get their process sorted.

 

[Frakk]

I'll have to wait and see how it goes.... I'm getting curious about IB, though from what I've seen the very first ones are going to run rather hot so it may be worth waiting until they get their process sorted.

If PD turns out (fairly) good, cheap and AM3+ i might upgrade to that next year....

If not i will wait a couple of years and consider IB, tho i did read that IB is going to be more a side step from SB and have your mentioned heat issues and Overclocking limits compared with SB

 

[mjw21a]

I suspect that IB's current problems stem from the use of Tri gate transistors. This is the first time they've used them after all and it will take some time for them to work all the kinks out of it. I read somewhere else here on OCF that to get them working they're running the same voltage as SB chips. Doing that with a die shrink is never a great idea as you end up with more heat being concentrated over a smaller area so heat dissipation becomes an issue.

I don't think this will hold them too long, and Intel haven't gone to a resonant clock mesh either. You need to remember that technology is free to be licensed to anyone willing to pay for it and Intel can better afford to than AMD. I think we'll see this in Intel chips within the next year or so. It's not the first time Intel have followed in AMD's footsteps. Going from Aluminium to Copper was one, that I can think of.

 

[ssjwizard]

It's not the first time Intel have followed in AMD's footsteps.

I can think of several times this has happened. Can you say DDR or X86_AMD64?

I basically feel this way about it. AMD innovates Intel polishes. Those innovations are the only thing that has kept AMD even remotely in the game.

 

[Frakk]

Yeah they will wait for AMD to get resonant mesh working correctly and then polish it up and use it themselves.

 

[mjw21a]

I can think of several times this has happened. Can you say DDR or X86_AMD64?

I basically feel this way about it. AMD innovates Intel polishes. Those innovations are the only thing that has kept AMD even remotely in the game.

I was talking specifically of manufacturing process rather than actually CPU design though, although what you're saying is definitely true.

Intel generally leads when it comes to manufacturing tech, it's that thing which gives them the edge over AMD. AMD on the other hand has occasionally been first out of the gate with process/manufacturing tech though traditionally their strength has been chip design.

 

[rishidev]

were forgetting the biggest practical picture here................
trinity is greater than bulldozer !
phenom II is better than bulldozer...
piledriver ???????
trinity has piledriver cores but no L3 cache ( as per my research). Heck ! it isnt even a CPU..... .... and still its greater than bulldozer..

Taking note that modern compilers and programs have bulldozer patches for using 4M/8T.....
Even more they are run with programs and stuff designed mainly for Intel...

Piledriver with 4M/8T with 8MB L2 and 8MB L3 might just about turn out unanticipated but obvious in a good way.............. it might actually be a shocker......trinity doesn't stand a chance.

another thing benchmarks are a facade. There are some real world SQL benches out that show the BD outperforming i7 3930k....

 

[I.M.O.G.]

I don't run SQL on my desktop. I saw a lot of benchmarks where bulldozer outperformed the 2600k when I was in Austin at the Bulldozer briefing... they were benches that no one pays attention to.

In workloads where IPC and Single threaded performance don't matter much, bulldozer looks better.