-
Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!
FX-8350 (Vishera) owner testing.
- Thread starter Frakk
- Start date
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2012
- Location
- Barberton, OH
Seems like release is within a few weeks.
AMD is going through a tough time right now, rumors of 30% cuts in engineering and sales.
If this CPU and Trinity both do not flourish (ie. maybe they can not keep up with demand, even) with consumers and OEMs, AMD will have some trouble.
AMD is going through a tough time right now, rumors of 30% cuts in engineering and sales.
If this CPU and Trinity both do not flourish (ie. maybe they can not keep up with demand, even) with consumers and OEMs, AMD will have some trouble.
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2012
- Location
- North Carolina
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2012
- Location
- Barberton, OH
We only make up like 5% of the sales...
When Dell allows HD8870 or whatever in the future to be base model GPU on upscale machines, or FX-8350 the default CPU of a gaming or business machine, and sprinkle upscale AMD options equal to upscale Intel options they get help.
But the world is moving a different direction, those OEMs are pushing hard new All in one PCs with touch screens and CPUs equivalent to Trinity or less.
People don't care about the performance anymore and your typical home desktop "workstation" is going by the wayside for ARM devices and server-side virtualization in the cloud and other cloud services. (Google Docs, the idea behind OnLive)
Someday, what OnLive tried to do with gaming (make it cloud gaming, cloud computing) is what will happen to everything...and instead of pay once, own yours, they will be subscription based just like that service was.
You won't choose your GPU any more, you would choose your CPU anymore...and you won't get to upgrade unless they do, or you pay more...
Cloud Photoshop...already have cloud subscription music and video services, already cloud office suites...next will be cloud encryption services or someday maybe even cloud desktops, you log in to the cloud server and the cloud does EVERYTHING, you only have a thin client-type machine...like "remote desktop" everything.
Companies like AMD are forced to adapt, Microsoft too, to this market so they can keep sales, AMD is struggling bigtime because they are not ARM-based but x86, Microsoft, well...Windows 8. And the desktop users, professionals, and those that do work on those platforms, all hate it or think it is less productive.
It is streamlined...it is a better toy for the people, with so many social possibilities. Humans have gotten themselves addicted to being connected to each other at the hip, it will only get "worse" or should I say, get "more" over time.
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2012
- Location
- North Carolina
If absolutely EVERYTHING goes to cloud computing, you can count me out. I'll pick up farming or something. I want MY OWN stuff on MY OWN computer. Add in having to pay every month for it... I want nothing to do with that.
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2012
- Location
- Dayton, Ohio
I might just buy a Piledriver sometime in the near future then.
agreed, i want to try out the 8 core out anyways
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2012
- Location
- North Carolina
agreed, i want to try out the 8 core out anyways
I'm not going to buy it as soon as it releases like I did with my FX-4100 though. I'm gonna wait a few months or so for the silicon to cool and the prices to lower.
I'm still not too sure I'd get an 8 core. I just don't need that many cores. I'll probably end up getting a PD quad core or hex core.
- Thread Starter
- #12
Not that i'm willing to turn this into an investment thread, but AMD's share price has fallen from $8 to $2.75 in the last 6 months alone, and still falling, if that sounds bad, it's worse, far worse.
Their Market cap right now is $2bn, Company value including assets is $6bn with $2bn debt.
Intel have a legal challenge to AMD for the x86 license, whicht to their credit are not pursuing.
Having said that a potential buyer would need to add potential legal wranglings with Intel into their equations.
AMD will be lucky to survive 2013 if they can't turn their fortunes around.
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2012
- Location
- Barberton, OH
Well...I mean, maybe not everything...
But people "in the business" (that maybe do not even perform the tasks they are porting to the cloud...) will find it logical to make some things cloud-based or virtualized in a cluster of servers in some building somewhere...
Regardless of how you and I feel about personal belongings and hard copies.
Music/video is already there, OnLive tried it, subscription services -
Rhapsody, Spotify...music in the cloud...personally this is how I get my music (I like being able to listen to new things at whim)
NetFlix, Hulu, etc, those types of services, you don't ever own a hard copy...these all put blockbuster out of business, and is why nobody buys BluRay movies
OnLive tried it with gaming...your game running in their cloud, access it anywhere, but because some games are big$$, some not, you also pay for the game
With Win8, they want you to sign into Windows Live, or whatever, so you can further "connect" your world.
Google Apps, Google Docs, Google "insert name here", or anything related to "Facebook, Twitter"
In my head, I hate some things.
Spotify requires facebook, shares every darn thing you listen to to all facebook "friends" at whim, some artists say "Hey, you pay me 3/100ths of a cent, wtf I hate you, you don't get my new albums"
Netflix, Hulu, other online video services...the quality SUCKS (the internet is not offered at 100/100mbps for $20/month and on top of that, not everywhere) and they don't have everything. BluRay won against HD-DVD for image quality, then everyone realized they didn't care in the first place.
OnLive, while the idea of being able to game wherever you want is great, gamers didn't like the extra network latency, and the fact that you don't own it...unlike a movie, you play games all the time as a gamer, and unlike music, you don't interact with music...on top of all of this, you don't control the quality of visuals, it is left up to what they set or what you pay for or whatever...but you know they say "No more need for $1000 computer! Just sign up and play!"...
Google Accounts, and online cloud storage, like Apple offers, lets people work on and edit documents, store data, whatever and securely access it from where-ever, whenever. No longer do you lug around a flash drive...
Youtube, Facebook, all that other "do in a web browser jazz"...people would MUCH rather do it on their phone, or tablet...than do it on a desktop...
Ultrabooks sacrifice compute power and optical media drives, as well as physical connectivity, to pretend to be as sleek as our ARM devices, but "everything you ever wanted" too...by bridging the gap between a normal, functional, portable laptop and a 9mm thick tablet.
AMD is trying to make x86 tabs popular, but is failing hardcore, because the slow CPUs needed means you can't do squat for x86, and all the fun stuff for ARM like Angry Birds and more is just not written for x86. Furthermore people complain about battery life because x86 needs to be power hungry to even boot the darn OS and run a program...if people want x86 tabs, they want them to be as fast as their damned desktops!
Our world is changing...
Yeah, I thought for a minute there that AMD dug themselves out of the 2005-2009 hole, in 09 when Phenom II flourished and GPU division was competitive.
Then, between manufacturing troubles at GF and worse single thread performance of the new uarch, they fell once again, now more behind than they ever were.
On top of that they are trying really hard to push into the tablet market with x86, but are failing because of what I said above regarding x86 and mobile...
It is sad...
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2012
- Location
- Dayton, Ohio
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2012
- Location
- North Carolina
that would make me really sad.
They need to make a Phenom III with 128bit or something
That just seems unnecessary at this point in time...
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2012
- Location
- Barberton, OH
Well...that would make me really sad.
They need to make a Phenom III with 128bit or something
BD was released and it sucked...
Llano with Phenom II (similar) cores was released and it did not overclock like 45nm Phenom II parts.
This was the ideology of the hardcore fanboys that deny AMD is falling: (sad but true...!)
"BD 8 core performs up to 22% faster in obscure multithread benchmark ABOUERMarkBench v11 vs Phenom II X6!" <---(Neglect to realize 33% more "cores"/threads)...
"Look how bad Llano overclocks, you think they could make Phenom II X6 or X8 on 32nm? BD is better design and uses more power, and it's all GlobalFoundries fault!"
"Quit bringing up that Llano has a GPU or that it is made to be power-efficient. It overclocks for crap, so Phenom II would have too! Think of what BD would have done on 45nm!" <---(die size of 8 core BD would be bigger than theoretical Phenom II X8)
"GlobalFoundries Manufacturing process is s*** and that's why it was delayed!, also power consumption is so bad because of the process being bad!"...
"Single thread performance sucks because they missed clock targets to fit in TDP AND the manufacturing process was so bad, so they don't OC well either, and the CPUs didn't launch at 4.6 GHz like they were supposed to!"...
(Real world example)
...
...
"BD was designed for servers, WHAT DID YOU EXPECT???"...
...
"See what I mean? Look here~! 64 core /64 thread AMD BD server (2-thick blade) beats intel 16 core/32 thread Sandy Bridge (single-thick) blade in virtualization benchmark Virtobscuromark 17.1 by 40%! ...Rock on!" ...<---fanboy neglects to realize the intel blade takes 50% less space, and AMD server has 400% more cores, and AMD put 128GB less ram in the AMD setup to make it seem like both setups are what you'd be buying to be the cost-of-ownership effective choice for both companies...
"Trinity OCs bad? Only 4.2-4.4? It is supposed to be power efficient, what do you expect!?!?!" <---but they disregard anything said about Llano and the effect of power optimization on overclocking...
Times are tough for AMD...and they are trying their best to sell product and compete but it's just not happening. The fanboys/curious enthusiasts are causing more selling/buying than the product's performance is...
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2012
- Location
- North Carolina
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2004
BD didn't suck, they just tried to charge too much for it combined with people having super high expectations for it. I can see the potential in the architecture, I just hope the company survives long enough to make it shine.
Having said that, Intel are far enough ahead that AMD isn't every likely to catch up. They're not sitting on their laurels as they were in the P2/3 era.... They are however artificially crippling their chips from an overclock perspective. Thats just what happens whenyou have no real competition unfortunately.
No matter which way you look at it, AMD have some product that can do ok in certain markets, though overall they simply can't compete toe to toe with Intel anymore.
Having said that, Intel are far enough ahead that AMD isn't every likely to catch up. They're not sitting on their laurels as they were in the P2/3 era.... They are however artificially crippling their chips from an overclock perspective. Thats just what happens whenyou have no real competition unfortunately.
No matter which way you look at it, AMD have some product that can do ok in certain markets, though overall they simply can't compete toe to toe with Intel anymore.
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2012
- Location
- Barberton, OH
Sorry, that should read "AMD server has 400% more cores".64 cores x 400% = 256 cores
64 cores - 256 cores = -192 cores
I don't think very often
There is potential, but as far as making it shine outside of APUs, it will never happen. AMD is exiting this sector in the future, unless they find a breakthrough in ST performance, leaving intel's 3570K/3770K to sit in that monopoly.
What is sad though, is that 3770K is something intel wants to consider a mainstream product. If intel launched Ivy-E tomorrow with 6 cores/12T, and priced it starting at $400, AMD could not even make a physical product that could match it in multi-thread...partially because they are on 32nm.
AMD's transistion to BD from Phenom II would be similar to a scenario performance wise where intel replaced 4 core Sandy Bridge with shrunken 22nm Core 2 "Eight"...
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2012
- Location
- Dayton, Ohio
competition keeps prices down, what would happen if Amd wasn't in the picture.
