SOLVED AMD is heading in the right direction

[csimon]

Has the Centurion rumor card been thrown in yet???

http://hexus.net/tech/news/cpu/54057-rumour-amd-unleash-centurion-fx-5ghz/
http://wccftech.com/amd-preparing-piledriver-based-fx-centurion-processor-clocked-5-ghz-cost-795/
http://www.guru3d.com/news_story/amd_centurion_fx_priced_at_795_coming.html
http://news.softpedia.com/news/AMD-...er-FX-Centurion-Superpowered-CPU-345059.shtml

I feel so trolololish

 

[Bobnova]

Not going to happen. Not within a vaguely acceptable TDP anyway. I could see a 220w TDP 5GHz thing. Have fun finding a board that supports it though
At 125w? No way. Not Vishera, not now.
At 22nm? Maybe.

 

[Boulard83]

+1 bob

 

[azanimefan]

unless they've made a breakthrough in the chip design we've not heard about i can't see it.

 

[wingman99]

The video is a joke intel kills AMD in gaming and AMD FX 8350 so called 8 core is just advertizing, it does not feature full cores like intel, it's like hypertherding and intel still beats it in most multithreading applications. I am a intel fan boy and proud to be rooting for the team.

I7 3770 vs FX 8350 http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/697?vs=551

 

[Tech Tweaker]

Seen it, old news to me.

Was nice to see AMD win at some benchmarks again though. Miss the days of AMD K8 (754/939) vs. Intel socket 478.

For the record, I'm fairly unbiased. My current main PC is Intel, my previous main PC was AMD, and my current backup PC is an AMD. I have several other motherboards sitting around as well in both AMD and Intel sockets.

I root for AMD when and where I can though, I like rooting for the underdog I guess. Intel offers good performance, but their outrageous prices make it difficult for me to support them and/or buy their products unless I buy used or find them on sale for a great deal. AMD always has at least one CPU at a price I can afford when buying new from a retailer.

 

[tym64]

Think the one thing people fail to mention about the Intel vs AMD debate, is long term value.

Intel is a expensive chip, problem is they change there socket set so often, you need to swap out motherboards to upgrade the cpu.

My build from a year or two ago, with the amd, well I can upgrade to the latest AMD, and all I have to do is swap out the CPU.

Both Intel and AMD offer a nice chip. Both work well, to say one is the clear winner is mis information.

If cost is a factor, AMD is a better long term value, If cost is not a factor, and like to upgrade your components more often, Intel may be your better bet.

In the end, us hard core PC users are becoming a thing of the past. More and more people are turning to mobile devices, I think Intel and AMD are gonna focus on the mobile market, and us PC users will get minor updates on both the AMD and Intel Platform.

 

[manu2b]

Oh, another AMD vs Intel thread!

I use both, like both...

Spent months finding the best 24/7 OC for my PhII 955 (4.1GHz), weeks to find the best OC for my 8120 (4.9ishGHz), days to find the best OC for my 2600K's (5GHz/5GHz/5.1GHz).

And well, having been lucky enough to own the 3 systems at the same time, I've been able to bench all 3 of them with Dirt2/3, WitcherII and Crysis WH (1080p). With both a GTX580 and a 5830's CF.

Not talking about SuperPi or 3DMark's as not relevant (and not wanting to throw oil on fire).

Verdict:
- AMD's are funnier to tweak.
- PhII [email protected] gives the same framerate as [email protected] with all 4 games.
- [email protected] gives (a bit) more FPS than [email protected] or [email protected] with all 4 games.

Edit: if my budget was not that tight at the moment, I'd get a both a PD and an Haswell rig...

 

[Enablingwolf]

Will it be faster packing/unpacking a 50GiB RaR? Perhaps a re-encode, maybe a compile for some bits of code..

I want real world results. Since I neither game, nor use a computer for synthetic benchmarks.

 

[manu2b]

^Thread is about gaming.

Don't know about encoding (the very few encoding I did was using Lucid Virtu and MediaEspresso, and it's 3 to 4 times faster than with using the CPU, either AMD or Intel).

PhotoShop runs better with an Intel (8150 vs 2600k vs 2500k):
http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/arti...-i5-2500K-and-Core-i7-2600K-CPU-Review/1402/6

Same with AfterEffect:
http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/arti...-i5-2500K-and-Core-i7-2600K-CPU-Review/1402/7

Same with WinZip:
http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/arti...-i5-2500K-and-Core-i7-2600K-CPU-Review/1402/5

Roughly equal on DivX encoding:
http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/arti...-i5-2500K-and-Core-i7-2600K-CPU-Review/1402/5

Edit: and finally some Anandtech comparison 8150vs2500k:
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/434?vs=288

 

[wagex]

Think the one thing people fail to mention about the Intel vs AMD debate, is long term value.

Intel is a expensive chip, problem is they change there socket set so often, you need to swap out motherboards to upgrade the cpu.

My build from a year or two ago, with the amd, well I can upgrade to the latest AMD, and all I have to do is swap out the CPU.

this argument is not really much of one. amd doesnt change much of the physical socket.. but you cant take and am3+ chip and put it in an am3 board.. afaik. so yea you still have to upgrade the mobo. they seem to keep the same regime with eachother, intel had sandy and ivy on the same socket while amd had Zambezi and vishera on the same. intel will be changing who knows if amd is going to go to am4.

 

[Anonaru]

Tell this guy to run "Very High" FSX on an AMD then Intel chip. Show me the results

I could cherry pick benchmarks and probably make a 480GTX beat out a Titan if I tried hard enough, the video in question kind of made me roll my eyes, its pretty bad. I'm rooting for AMD, but I'm gaming on my 3930k.

 

[azanimefan]

but you cant take and am3+ chip and put it in an am3 board..

sure you can. most AMD chips are backward compatible at least 1 socket generation (and in some rare cases 2) assuming the MB manufacturer supplies the required bios update. while you cannot plug an AM3 chip into an AM3+ MB, you can plug an AM3+ chip into a properly supporting AM3 MB. search around, you'll see a number of AM3 MBs supporting in bios updates AM3+ FX chips.

Some of the first gen AM3 PhII chips could even plug into and even be overclocked in an AM2 mb... so yes... AMD most certainly is backward compatible.

 

[Bobnova]

Sure, one gen, loosing features, if the mobo manufacturer supports it.
Yay?

How many generations fit S754? S939?
How many fit LGA775 (4)? How many fit LGA1155 (2, loosing features and based on BIOS support, much like AM3+/AM3)?

Same boat, people, same boat.

 

[wagex]

sure you can. most AMD chips are backward compatible at least 1 socket generation (and in some rare cases 2) assuming the MB manufacturer supplies the required bios update. while you cannot plug an AM3 chip into an AM3+ MB, you can plug an AM3+ chip into a properly supporting AM3 MB. search around, you'll see a number of AM3 MBs supporting in bios updates AM3+ FX chips.

Some of the first gen AM3 PhII chips could even plug into and even be overclocked in an AM2 mb... so yes... AMD most certainly is backward compatible.

thanks for clipping out the afaik. because "as far as i know" doesnt mean i know much lol i havent dabbled with amd since my 700mhz k6-3d.
and thanks for the info i wasnt aware of this.
so there are a few boards that you can go backwards with, and iirc it was pretty buggy for the most part because amd did not officially support am3+ cpu's in am3 motherboards. things like fan pwm signals not working, and power saving features not working because of the temp sensors.

and for the most part idk if it matters that you can put an am3 cpu in an am3+ chances are if you buying the motherboard you are going to be getting amd am3+ cpu the majority of people dont just upgrade their montherboard.

they are only backwards compatible under pretty limited circumstances. the companies themselves dont know their board will be compatible with the next gen of processors just random boards will happen to work when the time comes, even then its not supported by amd.

and if we hold those standards to intel, they are just as backwards compatible. such as the switch from sandy to ivy, some boards needed a bios flash but thats two series that work on the same socket, and were intended to be from intel.

all i was pointing out in the post you chopped/qoted was that the backwards compatibility is not a thing that is better than intel. if anything intel intends their socket compatibility and amd accidentally does it.

in short i was saying that they were equally superior in backwards compatibility.

edit: sorry took a while to hit submit got side tracked at work

 

[azanimefan]

they are only backwards compatible under pretty limited circumstances. the companies themselves dont know their board will be compatible with the next gen of processors just random boards will happen to work when the time comes, even then its not supported by amd.

all i was pointing out in the post you chopped/qoted was that the backwards compatibility is not a thing that is better than intel. if anything intel intends their socket compatibility and amd accidentally does it.

Didn't mean to imply intentional ignorence on your part. i just don't like quoting a whole post when only part of it is pertenant to what i'm writing about.

This is a perfect case in point. Considering the socket design of the AMD chips has remained identical (for the most part) since AM2, i'd say it's completely intentional on AMDs part. They do a lot of work to keep chips backward compatible. (in fact, did you know with the proper bios update, you can plug an FM2 APU into an AM3+ MB? You'd just lose the onboard graphics.)

It's not "random" motherboards that will work with the newer chips either. It's not like a winning lottery ticket. Just pure dumb luck. Basically, the MBs remain compatible with new socket designs IF the company chooses to provide their own bios update to support it. Asus remains the champ of this, supporting MBs with bios updates years after the boards were discontinued.

Obviously it's not a perfect backward compatibility, and you're right, certain features can stop working, or work improperly, and not all of the new chips will work as well in the older boards (or work at all). But since there are chips which can work with boards nearly 5 years older then themselves, or that the "next" socket design from AMD is said to be 2 or 3 chip generations away (intentionally granting it's users longer life for their MBs) or that their next socket design is supposed to merge FM2 with AM3+, for an unified socket design... yeah I'd say AMD is pretty intentional with their backward compatability.

 

[wagex]

so every single am3 motherboard would be compatible long as long as the company took the time to release a bios? or just certain ones with certain chipsets that were designed later on to support am3+ cpu's this was the time they started freeing up the closed hole in the socket to accompany the newer cpu's.

5 year old am3 sockets sockets have a pin blocked off that will not allow am am3+ cpu's to be put in them. they didnt start opening the hole until im guessing early to mid 2011 when they knew that am3+ was going to need the extra pin.the same time they started implementing the 890?/870?fx chipsets in preperation for am3+ so you are right its not like hitting the lottery, it was indeed planned, but not until after they changed the am3 layout in preparation for am3+ cpu's. so the compatibility goes back about two years from what i can tell, but i can be wrong again lol.

 

[azanimefan]

so every single am3 motherboard would be compatible long as long as the company took the time to release a bios? or just certain ones with certain chipsets that were designed later on to support am3+ cpu's this was the time they started freeing up the closed hole in the socket to accompany the newer cpu's.

5 year old am3 sockets sockets have a pin blocked off that will not allow am am3+ cpu's to be put in them. they didnt start opening the hole until im guessing early to mid 2011 when they knew that am3+ was going to need the extra pin.the same time they started implementing the 890?/870?fx chipsets in preperation for am3+ so you are right its not like hitting the lottery, it was indeed planned, but not until after they changed the am3 layout in preparation for am3+ cpu's. so the compatibility goes back about two years from what i can tell, but i can be wrong again lol.

View attachment 126586

no... you're correct... if you really want to fry your brain, there are some guides on the net at to how to clip off pins from your amd cpu to fit an older socket... (something i'd never do, but apparently can work after a fashion for some chips)

As to 5 year old compatibility, i'm mostly talking about the handful of AM2 MBs which supported a number of the first gen AM3 PhII cpus... though i suppose at the time it would have been more accurate to call it 3 year old compatibility... it's still pretty cool, that a socket designed for an Athlon XP x2 cpu could run a PhII x4...

and you're right about the AM3 boards which opened up the pin holes in prep for the upcoming AM3+ socket, though think about what that implies. That implies AMD went out of their way to give the board manufacturers the heads up about the impending socket change and the tech specs necessary to make their AM3 boards compatible with an AM3+ chip... years before the socket change.

about the only socket change that seemed to come out of left field in recent memory (for an AMD chip) was the sudden abandonment of FM1, after just 1 generation of chips. Though from what i've read on the topic, that was as unexpected to AMD as it was to everyone else... and necessary from a technical standpoint, due to the need to kill some performance bottlenecks with their fledgling APU.

 

[wagex]

ah makes sense now thanks for clarifying.

they make socket adapters for 478 chips to run on 775 weird stuff people will do lol though i doubt it works the other way around.

 

[rescuetoaster]

sure you can. most AMD chips are backward compatible at least 1 socket generation (and in some rare cases 2) assuming the MB manufacturer supplies the required bios update. while you cannot plug an AM3 chip into an AM3+ MB, you can plug an AM3+ chip into a properly supporting AM3 MB. search around, you'll see a number of AM3 MBs supporting in bios updates AM3+ FX chips.

Some of the first gen AM3 PhII chips could even plug into and even be overclocked in an AM2 mb... so yes... AMD most certainly is backward compatible.

If anything, it's the other way around. I have an AM3 PII in an am3+ board.