› ›

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In Register

Quick Links

Piledriver preorder info

RidelynnRidelynn Member EpicPosts: 7,383
in Hardware

http://www.cpu-world.com/news_2012/2012092001_Pre-order_prices_of_AMD_FX_Piledriver_CPUs.html

Pre-order prices of 6- and 8-core parts seem too high, considering that the flagship FX-8150 is sold for $55 less in the same store. The second best upcoming AMD chip, FX-8320, should perform close (within 5% - 10%) to older FX-8150 model, however its pre-order price is about $45 higher. The only price, that makes sense, is $131 for the FX-4300 quad-core CPU. For reference, pre-order prices of the first generation of FX processors, codenamed "Zambezi", were on average $20 higher than official introduction prices.

Hit the link for the models and prices. Quoted the above from the article, saying preorder prices look high (about $50 too high), and that preorder prices on Zambezi were about $20 higher than the final introductory prices.

Only one bin 4 and 6 core, 2 8 core bins.
Stock clocks are going up: top bin is 4/4.2 GHz Boost, most comparable bins to Zambezi are going up around 2-300Mhz

Will be interesting to see how much better than Zambezi they come in at, and how much of that is due to architecture changes and how much just due to the clock bumps.

Comments

  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 25,355
    It's interesting that the FX-4300 supposedly has only 4 MB of L3 cache, as opposed to 8 MB for the others.  All of the Zambezi-based chips had the full 8 MB of L3 cache.  I wonder if AMD is making a separate die for the FX-4300 that is much smaller, rather than relying on salvage parts.  Yields should hopefully be much better now that they're launching the chip on a mature process node and have done cores of the same architecture in Trinity chips.
  • CleffyCleffy Member RarePosts: 6,412
    Not sure if the performance will be there to preorder these chips at those prices.  However, if they prove to be competitive with Intel Chips it will be quite interesting as they will be in low supply for the first 3 months if its true.
  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 25,355
    We have a good idea what performance will be because we've already seen Piledriver cores in Trinity.
  • CleffyCleffy Member RarePosts: 6,412
    The main difference is the clock rate and number of cores.  The Trinity devices had 1 ghz less clock rate and half the number of full cores.  So it will perform better then their trinity counterparts and bulldozer counter parts by about 15~20%.  The thing that is hard to guage is the effect from an increased clock rate since performance effects at a higher clock are not linear.  The Bulldozer devices were also clocked 1 ghz less then the upcoming piledriver cores.
  • QuizzicalQuizzical Member LegendaryPosts: 25,355

    Desktop Trinity is already out, even if it's OEM only.

    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16883103462

    Which means that anyone can buy one and benchmark it however they want.

    http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/a10-5800k-a8-5600k-trinity-apu,3241-2.html

    What they really should have done is to get an FX-4170, downclock it to match Trinity clock speeds, and put it on the same charts at the same clock speeds.  But the comparison to desktop Llano with no turbo core gives you a good idea of what four Piledriver cores can do.  Adding L3 cache will improve performance a little but probably not a lot.

  • RidelynnRidelynn Member EpicPosts: 7,383

    Originally posted by Quizzical
    Desktop Trinity is already out, even if it's OEM only.http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16883103462Which means that anyone can buy one and benchmark it however they want.http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/a10-5800k-a8-5600k-trinity-apu,3241-2.htmlWhat they really should have done is to get an FX-4170, downclock it to match Trinity clock speeds, and put it on the same charts at the same clock speeds.  But the comparison to desktop Llano with no turbo core gives you a good idea of what four Piledriver cores can do.  Adding L3 cache will improve performance a little but probably not a lot.

    Well, there are probably some other differences. The A10 is a 65W TDP chip 4 core 3.4/4.0Ghz, I expect the FX 4300 to probably be closer to 95W and 3.8/4.0Ghz. Yes, it's Piledriver, but that's a big difference in TDP and in Boost clock (especially considering Trinity has a GPU, Piledriver will not), so I'd expect there to be a bit more differences under the hood than just multiplying a Trinity chip up by the clock speed difference and calling it a day. I'm just guessing on that TDP based on current FX4100 levels (although it looks more or less accurate: http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Bulldozer/AMD-FX-Series FX-4300.html), maybe it will be a good deal more efficient, but the clock speeds are published.

    The Tom's link is a good comparison for Bulldozer to Piledriver - you can make a decent inference from that

Sign In or Register to comment.