![]() |
![]() Free Shipping for Loyal Forum Members - CLICK HERE |
|
|
#1 |
|
Gangster
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 177
|
Steamroller!!
I was thinking about upgrading my mobo, possibly my CPU too but just decided I'm better off waiting until next year to see if Steamroller is any good.
I like AMD as a company, they used to provide great value for money and didn't rip off their customers by changing socket on their new CPU's all the time. My problem is, after the poor performance of the bulldozers (in terms of gaming), do you think Steamroller will put AMD back on track for gamers looking for a competitively priced CPU. If Steamroller isn't impressive I'm going to switch over to Intel, not that I like their ruthless marketing strategy but I won't have much choice. Thoughts? PS. I currently own a 965 3.4Ghz Phenom II (really love this CPU) and from what I can make out none of the bulldozer's will improve my gaming performance so it doesn't seem worth switching to one of them for me. |
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Capodecina
Joined: Sep 2009
Location: Dormanstown.
Posts: 20,014
|
Afaik, SR's coming 2014 now, and there's no 100% guarantee it'll come out on AM3+, it's touted as such, but we've all been there before.
If you're coping fine now with your Phenom II X4, then just keep that until you feel the need to upgrade, then look what's out at the time. |
|
Last edited by Martini1991; 3rd Dec 2012 at 13:35.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Gangster
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 177
|
2014 ........ gutting.
![]() I want to go Xfire but my current mobo isn't up to it so I need to upgrade soon so I was hoping I could stay with AMD, not looking so likely now. If I have to upgrade my mobo I want to get a better CPU but AMD haven't got any that will give my rig a boost. Looks like I may have to go Intel in the future. Thanks for the info.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Capodecina
Joined: Sep 2009
Location: Dormanstown.
Posts: 20,014
|
Hold off as long you can with what you have.
It's in no way gospel that SR will be 2014. |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Capodecina
Joined: Jan 2009
Location: Aquilonem Londinensi
Posts: 11,660
|
Squeeze some more from the 965 or buy a shiny SSD/GPU/Monitor to sate the itch
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Gangster
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 177
|
Good idea. lol
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Wise Guy
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,348
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Gangster
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 391
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#11 | |
|
Capodecina
Joined: Sep 2009
Location: Dormanstown.
Posts: 20,014
|
Quote:
Performance close to Ivybridge? Consistently, or what we have now? | |
|
|
|
|
|
#12 | |
|
Capodecina
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 12,527
|
Quote:
if you play games like Crysis 2/3 BF3/4 and modern car racing games @ 1080P there is no advantage going Intel, for day to day apps like rendering, encoding and general archiving the FX-8350 is better. The only advantage you would have going for the 3570K now is if you play adventure games (which are usually the ones that are low threaded) The FX-8350 is also cheaper. So take it from any improvement on that. | |
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Capodecina
Joined: Sep 2009
Location: Dormanstown.
Posts: 20,014
|
So what we have now plus a bit then.
Not too bad I guess. Although, you've only mentioned gamers without taste
|
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Capodecina
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 12,527
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#15 | |
|
Soldato
Joined: Jan 2010
Location: South West
Posts: 6,789
|
Quote:
http://www.tweaktown.com/news/27119/...tel/index.html | |
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Capodecina
Joined: Sep 2009
Location: Dormanstown.
Posts: 20,014
|
Wasn't what I was on about, they could throw in another socketed platform as they've done in the past.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Wise Guy
Joined: Nov 2011
Location: Rugeley
Posts: 2,247
|
u could always upgrade to a 8350 / 8320 piledriver.
Was an upgrade from my 1075t |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#18 | |
|
Wise Guy
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,348
|
Quote:
Was sure you had to be as old as me. Haven't heard them called that for a very long time. You are playing down the poor gaming performance of PD Only a handfull of titles work well well with PD. This is not poor coding as you are trying to imply, it is the poor performance of PD. Intel chips are far far stronger running legacy code. AMD chose to save costs by not having hardware support for x87 etc, and it is users that suffer as that code is far from dead. | |
|
|
|
|
|
#19 | |
|
Capodecina
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 12,527
|
Quote:
Name 5 new Games that run on x87. | |
|
Last edited by humbug; 5th Dec 2012 at 16:34.
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
#20 | |
|
Sgarrista
Joined: Nov 2009
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 8,886
|
Quote:
Any modern engine which has had decent money spent on it,threads well. If you isolated the CPU power consumption on a game which only uses one thread of my Core i5,or say something like BF3 ,what do you think will show greater power consumption with my CPU?? It would be BF3 as it is pushing my CPU more. The other game cannot use the resources of my CPU,meaning it is poorly coded,as the other cores will be mostly idle. The bottleneck is the software,not the CPU. These are the very kinds of games people keep saying they need their 4.5GHZ Core i5 for. I don't overclock since I am a SFF PC user. Moreover,the vast majority of Intel desktop CPUs sold are not even overclocked too. If the single thread performance of my Core i5 is not enough for these games,I am not that bothered in supporting developers who are just cost cutting,and increasing their bottle line,and making me spend more. Screw them,until they actually spend some dosh and make the engines support three or four threads. The are just holding back PC game development,especially when the consoles versions of some of these games seem to get away with multi-threading and not the PC version!! ![]() I will only upgrade,when my CPU has been pushed fully and the performance is not enough. Even Intel and AMD are looking at things like TSX,to improve MT performance. | |
|
Last edited by CAT-THE-FIFTH; 5th Dec 2012 at 18:32.
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
#21 |
|
Capodecina
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 12,527
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#22 |
|
Capodecina
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 24,572
|
Few things, I'm not entirely sure on Steamroller, but I'm fairly sure the recently mentioned roadmap which says Steamroller for 2014, also said it about the enterprise chips. If so, I wouldn't be too surprised to see the new cores tip up in desktop/laptop apu's first, and maybe we'll get bigger desktop non apu chips first again as well.
As for the chip itself, its said to amongst many small fixes, split the instruction decoder into two wider ones fixing the main flaw in bulldozer, that alone could be worth a HUGE performance increase, coupled with everything else we could see really significant gains. One of the biggest/best gains we'll likely see for AMD chips and performance is consoles, consoles using APU's and gains being compiled specifically for AMD chips(which doesn't happen nearly often enough). You can find quite a few mini reviews showing a program recompiled with a not Intel compiler(ones that generally don't decrease Intel performance at all) will often increase performance on an AMD chip, sometimes significantly. Likewise you can find several situations where some benchmark or program which trails Intel on windows, compiled for a Linux distro outperforms the same Intel chip. Optimisation is crucial, and AMD have often been left out of the loop when it comes to optimisation for their CPU's. Gaming wise, with all the consoles going AMD gpu and 2 seemingly going AMD cpu(which will most likely be pretty heavily based on AMD's usual APU lineup) should see game dev's heavily optimising their code to extract every last drop of performance from AMD cpu's, and that will certainly spill into pc gaming. I think next gen consoles + fixed decoder will result in AMD being insanely competitive for gaming performance full stop, and the chip will be pretty damn good anyway. its already actually GOOD performance that can see a Bulldozer/Piledriver beat an 22nm chip in ANYTHING at all, that it can beat them in quite a few things and get close in others, and get spanked most often only in ridiculously obsoleted code(super pi, or a benchmark that is wholy owned by Intel, everyone knows it, but Intel pretend its not true). Steamroller has likely been delayed either because 28nm at Glofo has been pushed back, or they originally wanted to squeeze it into 32nm, but a delay by 6 months to save cash and only tape it out for 28nm makes more sense for them. The fact that Steamroller, plus AMD gaming evolved crap due to consoles and what will be almost universal AMD optimisation in gaming, plus enthusiasts liking "control" of their PC and all this happening around a time Intel is seemingly trying to upset the enthusiast market with non upgradeable Cpu's. 2014 could be a pretty fantastic year for AMD to make a real push. We'll have consoles launching seemingly late 2013 and early 2014, AMD's name plastered all over every game on the new consoles and people thinking about upgrading going "wtf you mean I can't buy a Intel CPU on its own" while the latest benchmarks could easily show AMD beating Intel across almost all new games. |
|
|
|
|
|
#23 |
|
Hitman
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 905
|
Even though my i7 920 is going damn strong atm, im tempted to go out and buy a FX8350 and board and some ram to go with it and see how it does just because i can.
Im among those who are SICK to the very core of devs using bad and horrific engines (PhysX springs to mind) and/or "forgets" to optimize properly giving one side (fx nvidia, but it goes for AMD and Intel users as well) the edge. If you make something make sure it damn well runs as good as it can no matter if the CPU is branded Intel or AMD. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#24 |
|
Mobster
Joined: Jun 2009
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 2,974
|
"Bulldozer will be awesome!" They say.
Bulldozer sucks. "Piledriver will be awesome!" They say. Piledriver sucks. "Steamroller will be awesome!" They say. ... Do we really need to wait and see? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#25 |
|
Wise Guy
Joined: Nov 2011
Location: Rugeley
Posts: 2,247
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#26 | |
|
Wise Guy
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,348
|
Quote:
You demonstrated how bad the AMD CPU performance on games can be when you posted your Skyrim benches. How can you say that was acceptable performance ? | |
|
|
|
|
|
#27 |
|
Sgarrista
Joined: Nov 2009
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 8,886
|
If you believe half the people on forums,no one with a CPU other than a SB/IB Core i5 or Core i7 overclocked to 4.5GHZ,could run any game. Of course what they don't understand is that making PC gaming look more expensive than it is,it pushes more and more people to consoles,leading to more and more crappy PC console hatchet jobs. Yay!
![]() Even a £90 CPU and a £130 graphics card would still produce better framerates and render a game at higher resolution than consoles. The thing is that I have been to a few LANs(and I also know a whole load of gamers too),and I have met Platinum League SC2 players using Phenom II X4 and Core2 quads,and many others running Skyrim at 1920X1080 too with similar CPUs. I was actually surprised at this,I really thought that at least for SC2 MP they would be having high end CPUs,going by what many people on forums say. They are obviously NOT casual players,so it seems ability is more important overall. Do people believe,that a game like Skyrim with over 10 million copies sold,everyone is running £100+ CPUs,let alone the latest ones?? It also ties into the fact,that the PC CPU market is shrinking,which means more people are sticking with their older PCs and probably upgrading them now,instead of just buying new ones. |
|
Last edited by CAT-THE-FIFTH; 5th Dec 2012 at 23:19.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#28 | ||
|
Capodecina
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 12,527
|
Quote:
Those were perfectly acceptable frame rates and the FX-8350 betters that by quite a lot as you can see from this slide its way faster than my x6 and averages 67 FPS (with vSync off) http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...w,3328-14.html Are you seriously going to sit there and try and tell me that the perfectly smooth frame rates i'm getting;- and are greatly improve on the new PD chip (67 FPS) are not good enough? Yes the i5 gets 20 FPS more @ 1080P, but whats 20 FPS on top of whats already over the 60 FPS magic number? It amounts to nothing. I would rather spend the money saved on something else and have better application performance for it Your narrow single mindedness on a few extra FPS that you don't need on a few games only; and a hit on application performance being worth more money is barking mad to me. I might even be inclined to flush that wasted money down to toilet for all the good it would do, i would feel i got more out of it watching it swirl round. Quote:
| ||
|
Last edited by humbug; 5th Dec 2012 at 23:43.
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
#29 | |
|
Capodecina
Joined: Sep 2009
Location: Dormanstown.
Posts: 20,014
|
Quote:
GT640's etc. Hell, some people will game on HD4000's .On my old 790GX board, I bet people could game on the IGP on that, I even played Aion acceptably at 1920x1080 on lowest settings while my GPU was RMA. | |
|
Last edited by Martini1991; 6th Dec 2012 at 00:20.
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
#30 |
|
Hitman
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 984
|
Also @ humbug with after the 1.4 patch optimisations the game should give better framerates, provided there wasn't already a bottleneck or framerate capping.
|
|
|
|