Amd Unleashes First-Ever (5 Ghz) Processor
#1
Posted 11 June 2013 - 05:18 PM
Based on the previous spec sheet of the CPU
the TDP is a whooping 220W compare to the FX8350's 125W
the die as shown below
pricing wise it might be close the i7 Core-4770K maybe slightly lower
sources here
http://www.techpower...-processor.html
http://www.techpower...s-5-00-ghz.html
http://www.anandtech...of-the-ghz-race
http://vr-zone.com/a...9590/36691.html
#2
Posted 11 June 2013 - 05:50 PM
I dunno.... hard to justify that type of purchase... let's see the benchmarks.
#3
Posted 11 June 2013 - 07:13 PM
Intel 84 W vs AMD 220 W
we will need to run a water cooler since air cooler isnt going to help
i sure hope AMD make a correct move with more speed
but i do wish for a pure 8 core 16 threads from AMD
#4
Posted 11 June 2013 - 07:26 PM
I'm currently running a water cooling set-up and even I'd be hesitant to use a chip that hot!
#5
Posted 11 June 2013 - 07:46 PM
Edited by Smokeyjedi, 11 June 2013 - 08:27 PM.
#6
Posted 11 June 2013 - 08:35 PM
not how much the CPU draw in wattage
TDP is Thermal Design Power
#7
Posted 11 June 2013 - 08:54 PM
Dragoon20005, on 11 June 2013 - 08:35 PM, said:
not how much the CPU draw in wattage
TDP is Thermal Design Power
Isnt wattage converted into heat............less heat means more efficient architecture................so if it runs less hot, and or pulls less wattage @ 4.8ghz+ this could get interesting for Intels lineup. Here is hoping for more than the last binned 8350s http://www.youtube.c...IQ&feature=fvwp
Edited by Smokeyjedi, 11 June 2013 - 08:55 PM.
#8
Posted 11 June 2013 - 09:39 PM
Read somewhere that a 5ghz amd is equivalent to a 3.8ghz haswell or something (assuming no multithreading)
(Honestly though, you don't need anything higher than a ~3.4ghz i5 or i3)
Edited by p8ragon, 11 June 2013 - 09:41 PM.
#9
Posted 11 June 2013 - 10:20 PM
the bulk of the Intel build is spent on the CPU and mobo combo leaving you with little for GPU
but in AMD you still have spare to invest on a bigger GPU
AMD selling point has always been gaming on a budget
#10
Posted 11 June 2013 - 11:36 PM
Dragoon20005, on 11 June 2013 - 10:20 PM, said:
the bulk of the Intel build is spent on the CPU and mobo combo leaving you with little for GPU
but in AMD you still have spare to invest on a bigger GPU
AMD selling point has always been gaming on a budget
You'd be spending the money saved on double heat-sinks to cool this thing!
#11
Posted 12 June 2013 - 12:24 AM
It all depends on the performance/$. Also, are these informations from AMD? Maybe someone ist just trolling around with the TDP
edit: nvm ... http://www.amd.com/u...-2013jun11.aspx
Edited by reiGngehoWn, 12 June 2013 - 01:22 AM.
#12
Posted 12 June 2013 - 01:05 AM
Dragoon20005, on 11 June 2013 - 05:18 PM, said:
Based on the previous spec sheet of the CPU
the TDP is a whooping 220W compare to the FX8350's 125W
the die as shown below
pricing wise it might be close the i7 Core-4770K maybe slightly lower
sources here
http://www.techpower...-processor.html
http://www.techpower...s-5-00-ghz.html
http://www.anandtech...of-the-ghz-race
http://vr-zone.com/a...9590/36691.html
You should take out the "gaming" part because GPU>x86 ALL DAY LONG. I'm not sure who decided to revive 1995 era thinking in 2013 but x86 does very little for your gaming since the PCI slot, AGP slot and later PCI Express slot was produced for desktops. This might be changing with AMD Kaveri CPU's later this year though with GDDR5 support.
#13
Posted 12 June 2013 - 01:10 AM
p8ragon, on 11 June 2013 - 09:39 PM, said:
Read somewhere that a 5ghz amd is equivalent to a 3.8ghz haswell or something (assuming no multithreading)
(Honestly though, you don't need anything higher than a ~3.4ghz i5 or i3)
Yes Vishera cores are slower than Haswell cores because AMD is still using 32nm and intel has already moved to 22nm for their CPU's. Very few titles (Skyrim, Starcraft II) require x86 to run well, the rest of the games require a powerful GPU. GPU>x86
#14
Posted 12 June 2013 - 01:19 AM
so i take it , its a "GENERATION" ahead of the Xbox one / Playstation 4's - 8 cores at 2.3 GHZ or something like that (not bashin consoles tho)
Next-Gen-Tech
Edited by kesuga7, 12 June 2013 - 01:21 AM.
#15
Posted 12 June 2013 - 01:54 AM
reiGngehoWn, on 12 June 2013 - 12:24 AM, said:
And since the Piledriver architecture only allows four cores to operate at the maximum Turbo-boost settings simultaneously, that is a stupid assumption.
Anyway, here's hoping this gives AMD a boost. They sure need it, and we sure need them. They're the only real competitor for Nvidia and Intel, and competition is the catalyst for innovation.
#16
Posted 12 June 2013 - 05:08 AM
#17
Posted 12 June 2013 - 05:18 AM
#18
Posted 12 June 2013 - 05:21 AM
#19
Posted 12 June 2013 - 05:28 AM
#20
Posted 12 June 2013 - 05:39 AM
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users