CPU/Mobo AMD PileDriver Discussion thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Dark Star said:
I hope you understand that nobody stresses its cpu 100% all the time or run benchmarks all day long ?

Idle consumption and average power consumption is as good as IVY if not better. However at load its gets real bad.
Click to expand...

I understand that it is not 100% utilization all the time but if the AMD processor takes more time to do the same application-specific tasks than Intel, things even out.

I am not saying AMD HATE OR LOVE teH Intel but before shooting on point of value-for-money we must understand how everything stacks up. And I am a long-time Phenom II user but I don't see myself sticking to AMD for the next upgrade unless they radically change.

Rockfella said:
Any reviews of piledriver?
Click to expand...

Here you go --
AMD’s flagship desktop processors acquired the new Piledriver microarchitecture. However, the incompatibility between the typical desktop tasks and the potential of the AMD processors are still there. New FX CPUs, just like their predecessors, cope really well with video transcoding, complex calculations, 3D modeling tasks, but at the same time fall seriously behind their competitors in typical general purpose tasks and games. In other words, even after the microarchitecture refresh AMD FX remain an excellent option for inexpensive workstations, but aren’t that attractive as universal processors for home and gaming systems.

Of course, AMD engineers tried very hard to fix these inconsistencies while working on their new Piledriver microarchitecture. And a lot of things in Vishera look much more attractive than they were in the previous-generation Zambezi. The new processors are 15% faster, more overclockable and are very appealingly priced. However, in our opinion, the new FX could be a little more versatile, like the competing Core i5 and Core i7 CPUs. The performance of contemporary Intel processors is good under any type of operational load, while AMD’s solution works great in some cases and pretty poorly in others. Moreover, energy-efficiency is another bottleneck of the FX processor family. Unlike Ivy Bridge based platforms, Socket AM3+ system consume about 1.5-2 times more power.
Click to expand...

Hope this helps and wishing all on this thread a Happy, Prosperous and Healthy New Year. Cheerio!
 
I have X6 1090T it's lacking FC 3 @ max in Full HD :( so i have also one mobo now 990FX PRo R2.0 :( i have asked a frnd to give chip for testing how good is it or :)
 
@ALPHA17: How would the AMD FX 8350 clubbed with my GTX560Ti scale with the current games compared to it's Intel equivalent? I have held off my CPU upgrade for a long time now. While browsing through Flipkart for prices, I stumbled across this CPU which was getting huge attention. What motherboard would you recommend alongside this CPU? Will it be as expensive as those Intel Z77 motherboards?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ethan_Hunt said:
@ALPHA17 help for the above query please. You've been AWOL far too long.
Click to expand...

Sorry mate, will get on it.

Profuse apologies for leaving you hanging Sire. But now am back so down to business.

You have two options and neither look very good from AMD's standpoint. Although the latest iteration of the Pile-driver architecture has improved upon the Bull-dozer fiasco last release, the points where AMD still falters are --
  • Power efficiency -- heartening to see AMD's flagship priced close to Intel's Core i5's putting up a stiff competition but the power charts are another story. For ~125W -->130W of power AMD is doing the same work Intel chips are doing sucking close ~80W -->90W.
  • Single-core performance -- for all the hue and cry of 64-bit computing and multi-core optimization most games and day-to-day PC tasks (playing music, watching HD RIPz, copying data and replying to TE posts) are still a per-core working. AMD loses here most and this adds up later to hurt even more and brings us back to the first point.
  • Are you over-clocking? -- This is more of a personal choice but if you are not over-clocking it simply makes no sense to put money down the AMD route because you get more cores that sip more power to do the same task Intel is doing anyway. Plus the cores are idle unless you load them up with VMWare type workloads.
  • Looking to the future -- Although it is amply clear that the PS4 will feature a multi-core AMD chip at its heart, it is still unclear if all of them will be utilized efficiently or no. And how long this process takes so that PC games can be made to benefit from similar core-optimization.
The street prices of AMD's (over-clockable) system is acceptable but if you are not going to use that feature and forsake it to go for an Intel based RIG you will get a cheaper system (with a Core i5), e.g. --
AMD FX-8350 ~12500/-
ASUS M5A97-V R2.0 ~7000/-
^^ AMD over-clockable RIG.
Core i5 3570 ~14000/-
GIGABYTE-B75M-D3H ~4200/- or Intel DH77-KC ~6500/-
^^ Intel non-overclockable RIG with similar performance.
Intel Core i5 3570k (@ stock clocks) vs. AMD FX-8350
The second option is that you hold out your purchase till July this year and make a move once Intel releases its Haswell chips (based on LGA 11550 socket) and analysing the performance increment vis-á-vis these offerings. If that is amiable.
For now I don't recommend an AMD based build but leave the choice to you.
Hope this answers your query, Cheers!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: Zack
ALPHA17 said:
Sorry mate, will get on it.

Profuse apologies for leaving you hanging Sire. But now am back so down to business.

You have two options and neither look very good from AMD's standpoint. Although the latest iteration of the Pile-driver architecture has improved upon the Bull-dozer fiasco last release, the points where AMD still falters are --
  • Power efficiency -- heartening to see AMD's flagship priced close to Intel's Core i5's putting up a stiff competition but the power charts are another story. For ~125W -->130W of power AMD is doing the same work Intel chips are doing sucking close ~80W -->90W.
  • Single-core performance -- for all the hue and cry of 64-bit computing and multi-core optimization most games and day-to-day PC tasks (playing music, watching HD RIPz, copying data and replying to TE posts) are still a per-core working. AMD loses here most and this adds up later to hurt even more and brings us back to the first point.
  • Are you over-clocking? -- This is more of a personal choice but if you are not over-clocking it simply makes no sense to put money down the AMD route because you get more cores that sip more power to do the same task Intel is doing anyway. Plus the cores are idle unless you load them up with VMWare type workloads.
  • Looking to the future -- Although it is amply clear that the PS4 will feature a multi-core AMD chip at its heart, it is still unclear if all of them will be utilized efficiently or no. And how long this process takes so that PC games can be made to benefit from similar core-optimization.
The street prices of AMD's (over-clockable) system is acceptable but if you are not going to use that feature and forsake it to go for an Intel based RIG you will get a cheaper system (with a Core i5), e.g. --

AMD FX-8350 ~12500/-
ASUS M5A97-V R2.0 ~7000/-
^^ AMD over-clockable RIG.
Core i5 3570 ~14000/-
GIGABYTE-B75M-D3H ~4200/- or Intel DH77-KC ~6500/-
^^ Intel non-overclockable RIG with similar performance.
Intel Core i5 3570k (@ stock clocks) vs. AMD FX-8350
The second option is that you hold out your purchase till July this year and make a move once Intel releases its Haswell chips (based on LGA 11550 socket) and analysing the performance increment vis-á-vis these offerings. If that is amiable.
For now I don't recommend an AMD based build but leave the choice to you.
Hope this answers your query, Cheers!
Click to expand...


My apologies for responding to your suggestion quite late ALPHA. I presumed you would have re-quoted/tagged me. Anyway, you have now swayed my mind back on the Intel bandwagon. So what you're essentially saying is that those 8 cores and larger cache memory isn't of much use right now, given there aren't applications/games that take advantage of it, correct?

In that case, let's say I get the 3570 and pair it with the Gigabyte motherboard, will it be able to handle the current games adequately with my 560Ti? My E8400 is severely bottle-necking it the engines which thrive on CPU. Also, how much performance difference does a the 'k' version obtain from over-clocking, compared to the vanilla ones?
 
Ethan_Hunt said:
So what you're essentially saying is that those 8 cores and larger cache memory isn't of much use right now, given there aren't applications/games that take advantage of it, correct?
Absolutely Ethan, even if with the advent of SONY PS4 and its multi-core AMD Jaguar based CPU does usher in a age of multi-thread optimized games I doubt the Intel / AMD mainstream quad-cores will face any performance issues.

Ethan_Hunt said:
In that case, let's say I get the 3570 and pair it with the Gigabyte motherboard, will it be able to handle the current games adequately with my 560Ti? My E8400 is severely bottle-necking it the engines which thrive on CPU. Also, how much performance difference does a the 'k' version obtain from over-clocking, compared to the vanilla ones?
Click to expand...

Depending on the over-clock and GPU ~10 -->15 fps tops. Current generation titles are more graphic card intensive and most Core i3's on stock can keep behemoths like AMD HD780 / nVidia GTX660Ti well fed to perform @1080p.

Sorry for such a late response. Hope this answers your query. Cheerio!

P.S. -- Next time onward feel free to drop a PM on iVG or STEAM if the matter is urgent.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
@ALPHA17: Thank you very much! I'm planning to place an order for the i5 3570 and the Gigabyte B75M-D3H motherboard next week. Flipkart has ran out of stock for the processor. So I'll either have to get it locally or from an alternate site. I noticed the RAM prices have jacked up. I should have picked them up while I had the chance. Which module do you recommend? Gskill or Corsair? A pair of 4GB sticks or single 8GB?

It's sad that you rarely visit here anymore. I merely lurk on IVG, so I wouldn't be able to contact you over there. Do answer when you have time though.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ethan_Hunt said:
Thank you very much! I'm planning to place an order for the i5 3570 and the Gigabyte B75M-D3H motherboard next week.

I noticed the RAM prices have jacked up. I should have picked them up while I had the chance. Which module do you recommend? Gskill or Corsair? A pair of 4GB sticks or single 8GB?
Click to expand...

The pleasure is all mine, feel free to contact in-case of any more doubts.

Even I was caught of guard with the recent price increment of the RAM modules, looking back at the hard-drive price crash and subsequent doctored inflationary measures the conspiracy theorist in me thinks that this is another run at that.

Get 2x 4GB 1600 MHz Corsair Vengeance modules, should be plenty for your needs.

Ethan_Hunt said:
It's sad that you rarely visit here anymore. I merely lurk on IVG, so I wouldn't be able to contact you over there. Do answer when you have time though.
Click to expand...

The constant migration has caused me to become a little uncomfortable with TE, this does not mean I shall abandon this board. Just need to get used to the layout and sort out a few things in life.

Hope this helps, Cheerio!

P.S. -- Intently waiting for Bioshock INFINITE. What about you?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom