I hope so, AMD seem to have there palm permanently glued to there face when it comes to there CPU's these days.
Its only there GPU's thats is keeping them afloat.
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
AMD Expects Significant Performance Improvements with Steamroller Microprocessors
- Thread starter opethdisciple
- Start date
I hope so, AMD seem to have there palm permanently glued to there face when it comes to there CPU's these days.
Its only there GPU's thats is keeping them afloat.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Nov 2009
- Posts
- 25,747
- Location
- Planet Earth
The thing is that the current FX CPUs have very variable performance in games. A £100 FX4170 can similar performance in some games to a Phenom II X4 960T and in others is faster than a Phenom II X4 980.
If the A10-5800K can hit the level of a Phenom II X4 965 in games and have a decent IGP in a 100W TDP then TBH it should actually be a good all round CPU IMHO. There are some indications from benchmarks that integer performance should be much better as the hardware divider in both Llano and Bulldozer were disabled in both CPUs.
The current HD6550D is around HD5550 GDDR5 level performance and can reach HD5570 level in some games. If the HD7660 can be at least be HD5570 level performance but can reach HD5670 level performance in some games that would be pretty useful.
Last edited:
APU's are a good thing, yes.
Both Intel and nVidia hate AMD for doing this (which is a good thing)
For Desktop's its not something most of the likes of you and me are going to adopt due to the fact that even to crossfire the on DIE 7660 GPU with its stand alone OEM version will not give us the minimum GTX 560 / 6870 performance we look for.
But a casual gamer looking to spend Intel i3 money will get that with a GPU good enougth for his casual gaming, this with the on DIE GPU alone, certainly vastly better then the one you get with the i3.
Now for Laptops an APU is an absolute no brainer even for you and me, good standalone mobile GPU performance from the on DIE GPU alone and better battery life to boot.
Microsoft and Sony will both use APU's for there next GC's, that's lots of money into AMD's coffers, a welcome thing indeed.
On the FX-4### CPU's,- the high clocked FX-4's also beat the low clocked FX-8###.
This is because games don't yet use 8 core threads, so the higher clocked 4 cores will beat low clocked FX-8's as there using the same amount of cores, the FX cores themselves are ok, or as good as Thuban when it comes to D11 gaming, they just fall down everywhere els...
As for increasing performance by disabling hardware? i did not know that and would love to learn more if you have any info?
Both Intel and nVidia hate AMD for doing this (which is a good thing)
For Desktop's its not something most of the likes of you and me are going to adopt due to the fact that even to crossfire the on DIE 7660 GPU with its stand alone OEM version will not give us the minimum GTX 560 / 6870 performance we look for.
But a casual gamer looking to spend Intel i3 money will get that with a GPU good enougth for his casual gaming, this with the on DIE GPU alone, certainly vastly better then the one you get with the i3.
Now for Laptops an APU is an absolute no brainer even for you and me, good standalone mobile GPU performance from the on DIE GPU alone and better battery life to boot.
Microsoft and Sony will both use APU's for there next GC's, that's lots of money into AMD's coffers, a welcome thing indeed.
On the FX-4### CPU's,- the high clocked FX-4's also beat the low clocked FX-8###.
This is because games don't yet use 8 core threads, so the higher clocked 4 cores will beat low clocked FX-8's as there using the same amount of cores, the FX cores themselves are ok, or as good as Thuban when it comes to D11 gaming, they just fall down everywhere els...
As for increasing performance by disabling hardware? i did not know that and would love to learn more if you have any info?
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Nov 2009
- Posts
- 25,747
- Location
- Planet Earth
I am quite interested in the 65W A10-5700:
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-DC4JSPvNLTY/TzmK_BwME7I/AAAAAAAAG98/OXK5Tbe0QnA/s640/aa.jpg
Imagine a mini-ITX rig based around on of these in a case like the Antec ISK110:
http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=FS-002-AN
I said the hardware divider in Bulldozer and Llano were disabled. However,if enabled it leads to improved performance:
http://translate.google.com/transla...newspub/viewnews.cgi?category=1&id=1334532731
AMD,disabled it due to the problems,but it seems Piledriver will have it enabled.
Here are some single threaded BOINC results for Trinity:
http://citavia.blog.de/
Despite having no L3 cache,floating point performance is similar to Bulldozer at the same clockspeeds and integer performance is 10% better. Also,Trinity probably consumes far less power than the FX4100 or FX4170 as it has a 100W TDP for the entire APU. Despite no change in TDP the A10-5800K seems to have between 10% to 15% improved floating performance and at least 30% improved integer performance over an A8-3870K.
Considering that the A8-3870K was only available in quantity early this year,it seems the perfomance per watt of the A10-5800K looks a decent improvement despite using the same process at a similar time.
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-DC4JSPvNLTY/TzmK_BwME7I/AAAAAAAAG98/OXK5Tbe0QnA/s640/aa.jpg
Imagine a mini-ITX rig based around on of these in a case like the Antec ISK110:
http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=FS-002-AN
I said the hardware divider in Bulldozer and Llano were disabled. However,if enabled it leads to improved performance:
http://translate.google.com/transla...newspub/viewnews.cgi?category=1&id=1334532731
AMD,disabled it due to the problems,but it seems Piledriver will have it enabled.
Here are some single threaded BOINC results for Trinity:
http://citavia.blog.de/
Despite having no L3 cache,floating point performance is similar to Bulldozer at the same clockspeeds and integer performance is 10% better. Also,Trinity probably consumes far less power than the FX4100 or FX4170 as it has a 100W TDP for the entire APU. Despite no change in TDP the A10-5800K seems to have between 10% to 15% improved floating performance and at least 30% improved integer performance over an A8-3870K.
Considering that the A8-3870K was only available in quantity early this year,it seems the perfomance per watt of the A10-5800K looks a decent improvement despite using the same process at a similar time.
Last edited:
