Hardware AMD FX-8350 review

Bit-tech or reviewers please refine form calling BT type CPUs 8 core when its 4 Module with 8 Integer cores (you could call them core assist)
if it was really an 8core cpu it be beating most of Intels cpus when doing muti-threading tasks, where are currently it has issues beating the AMD X6 cpus

 

AMD are calling it 8 core - so please contact them.Thank you.

 

If I'm not terribly mistaken, there's at least one more coming: Steamroller.

Assuming my Phenom II doesn't die, I'll likely wait for Steamroller. I'm just a wee bit tempted by the 6-core version of Piledriver, but there are a whole lot of other things I could do with that money, computer-wise, before I'd upgrade. Once Steamroller drops, I'll see at that point whether it's worth the while to upgrade my proc. If my current box seems tired by then, the options will be $150-ish dollar processor upgrade, versus $700-ish for a switch to Intel (both being very rough guesses). It'll be Haswell or maybe Broadwell by then, and I have to admit I'm a little stoked on the idea of 14nm processors. If AMD can get it together, hopefully they'll be on 22nm by then.

 

Apols for brevity, on phone.

Amd over achieved relative to size and scale, they are now performing about right, but we as enthusiasts want them back to their glory days...

This is a move in the right direction. I expect steamroller to be decent but still lag intel.. However is cpu 'grunt' really that important to many people anymore ? What can't a piledriver do really and truely?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Ps i always find bit tech and custom pc take a negative slant on amd, even if its generally negative they are at the extremes so i don't read their amd cpu reviews anymore. This started under lizard imho.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Yep..Steamroller is due next year sometime, it's where AMD eat a whole load of humble pie and put back in some hardware calculation units they took out for Bulldozer cores, basically moving back to full fat cores rather than this 'module' design, as well as moving to 28nm.

Internal slides seem to suggest that it should/will result in a 20-30% IPC improvement over Piledriver, but who knows.

 

Still waiting on Anandtech's report for that one. While Bulldozer put up a decent fight in the server space, L1 cache as well as other cache related problems means despite the extra cores, performance is below what it should be.

Change can't and won't happen without R&D. It takes time to develop but what is most alarming is AMD seem to be relying on software to fix hardware problems. APU's could be the future but again they will require software solutions. Top it off that Intel will always have something up their sleeve where as AMD has to roll the dice and hope people will buy enough to fund the next step.

Maybe it's time for AMD to look at something other than x86 and try and gamble with a change in computing. Apple could move away from it, Windows has RT which is usable on ARM and Nvidia, Intel are also pushing in that direction maybe roll the dice that that is the next step computing takes.

 

I'm suprised that AMD have not gone for a kind of x86_64 FPGA style CPU based on their APUs. Just have one CPU with a massive bunch of general purpose process cores that can be leveraged in different ways, on the fly in realtime, depending on the required work load/application that is running.

 

its still 4 module cores with extra Integer cores that are very limited use (as tests show)

was all the bit-tech tests done with the 2 MS patches to fix core parking issue and how work got loaded onto the each module and core (so 1 thread did not end up onto 2 modules)

 

I wonder if AMD is too worried about competing in performance against Intel anymore. They have some kind of APU in the Wii U and they are also reportedly providing CPUs and/or GPUs for the PS4 and next Xbox.

I have a 3670k Llano APU in my HTPC and it works great. They seem to be more interested in expanding their markets rather than trying to beat Intel at their own game.

 

Even though I use 2500k would love to see AMD back on its feet and kick intels monopoly ok so called locked CPU.... they are forcing the lower budget class enthusiast to purchase higher end CPU.... this has to stop...

 

I've been running an i5 something-or-other and an i7-2600K@3.4GHz for a while and couldn't be happier but I need another machine so I started shopping around. Naturally AMD's claim to have put "8 genuine cores" on 1 die impressed me immensely especially considering the price. Unfortunately for AMD I want perfomance and don't give 2 hoots about spending an extra $150 to get it because an additional $150 divided by the number of years I'll use the CPU works out to peanuts.

Another unfortunate thing for AMD is the fact they lie. Their 8 cores are in fact 4 cores. I really think I should mix up 1000 lbs. of explosive (high nitrogen fertilizer soaked in diesel fuel works well), blow a big hole in their wall, steal all their Pileacrap CPUs and hock 'em on Ebay for 2 pennies apiece just to show them that if they want to play the dishonesty game then they should expect to run into people who play the game better than they do and have even fewer scruples when pushed. I hate liars!!!!

Nevertheless it behooves me to get the best CPU for my purposes and I wonder if AMD isn't actualy the better CPU for me and what I want to do with it. I do realize it didn't perform well with the software in the test suite but I see 2 problems with that: first, it all ran on Windows which is a piece of crap and maybe the applications don't really stess the CPU the way they claim or the way it is assumed they do.

Linux's scheduler is far superior to Windows scheduler and has been for some time. I wish comparisons could be done on Linux instead or perhaps in addition to Windows tests. That would address the first problem I mentioned. Secondly, I run BOINC which is a distributed computing platform I use to donate CPU time to underfunded projects doing scientific investigations in a number of different areas. Typically my machines are running 1 science application per virtual core. For example, my i7-2600k runs 8 science apps simultaneously as I pretend the 4 hyper-threaded cores are actually 8 real cores. BTW, extensive testing shows that I do get more work done that way than if I run only 4 science apps as long as I run 8 different apps. So it's not 1 or 2 applications that may or may not multi-thread properly trying to keep several cores busy, it's 8 applications each running full bore, mostly floating point operations... that's what I do. And my question is... how would the FX-8350 fair under those circumstances? I guess I should buy one, do a comparison against my i7 and report but I'd like to hear what this group has to say first.

I would love to see AMD return to those halcyon days when Athlon II thoroughly kicked P4 butt but if they've turned into little lying b*tches then the sooner they go broke the better.

 

So much hate for 8.54am. Someone not get their coffee this morning?

I think the only way for you to answer your own question and to get an answer you are happy with would be to buy one and bench it yourself, as you suggested.

 

I don't drink coffee. What for? A good diet and plenty of exercise provide all the stimulation a body needs and caffeine is just so bad for you. Sorry if I offended your finer sensibilities but the reason AMD and so many other con artists get away with their lies is because most of us don't have the courage to say or do anything about their lies. That's the worst thing about caffeine... shrinks your testicles. I think you should quit.

 

Should still get the 2500k AMD cpus arent up to scratch!! 7xxx Gpus on the other hand are a boss!

 

I get your sentiment about AMD mate but this is a bit much.

 

Just found this review, and I gotta say its typical Intel bias.
The only games benched were ones using a single core.
Run the AMD up against an intel CPU in the likes of BF3 where more cores are used to and see different results. With more games being optimised for multi core, the AMD CPUs will hold their own against more expensive intel CPUs

 

BT have said they wont be using ANY AMD cpu`s in any reviews - its sad since in both crysis 3 and tomb raider , AMD is shining

 

And will only get more so in the future since both new consoles are using AMD 8 core chips, so any games written for both console and PC will favour the AMD chips.