By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony Discussion - SONY to reveal The PS4 Processor November 13th at AMD APU13

Hynad said:
Pemalite said:
fatslob-:O said:

Bulldozer is the most screwed up architecture in AMDs entire history of designing CPUs. 


All of AMD's CPU's currently are pretty horrible in most respects.

They are however excellent at certain price points.


Because we all know that on a scale, there's only "horrible" and the "best". ¬_¬



The FX-9370 and 9590 are far from "pretty horrible in most respects". -__-

I wouldn't use those as your argument. They use 220 watts which is a huge drawback. AMD's best case is at the low end where something like the 6350 arguably trounces Intel's offerings at that price point.

Unfortunately they cant compete on performance so they compete on value. I suspect Intel isn't even interested in going after them too aggressively (there's a theory Intel likes to keep AMD around to prevent anti-trust issues). As long as they are at a harmless 15% market share Intel probably doesn't want to kill them.



Around the Network
eyeofcore said:


AMD's Jaguar is good and very competitive... I wonder how Steamroller in Kaveri will turn out...


Jaguar is competitive with Intel's Atom, that belongs in netbooks. If you think that's competitive... Who am I to argue.

Hynad said:

The FX-9370 and 9590 are far from "pretty horrible in most respects". -__-


You edited your post and added this tidbit. So I'll iterate upon it.

The FX 9590 sells for $399 AUD.
You can pick up a Core i7 3930K for that much second hand, which is still faster in every single way, whilst using less power and throwing out less heat, even with 2 cores less.

The Core i7 4770K is a "only" a Quad-Core, it's roughly $20 AUD cheaper than the FX 9590.
Despite it's 1.5ghz clockspeed advantage, it's still slower in any tasks that uses 1-4 threads, which is 99% of software.
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/62166-amd-fx-9590-review-piledriver-5ghz.html

If you were to overclock, the FX series typically tops out at around 5ghz, the 9590 comes with a 4.7ghz clockspeed, so you won't be able to push it very far.
The 4770K typically tops out at around 4.5ghz, so it's still got an extra 1ghz+ in it to obliterate the 9590 in everything.

Then over the long term, the 9590 will actually cost you more, thanks to it's much higher power consumption.

I honestly have no idea what you see in AMD as they are currently, they aren't competitive in the high-end or mid range.

Don't get me wrong, I have an FX 8120 @ 4.8ghz in my second system and a Phenom 2 x6 in my HTPC, so I'm well aware of the shortfalls AMD's provided over it's last few generations and even their respective strengths.
For single/dual threaded games such as Sins of a Solar Empire, StarCraft etc', the FX is crap, for heavily threaded games, the FX is awesome.
But in the end, my 3930K/4930K+ is awesome in lightly threaded games and heavily threaded games, you don't make any sacrifices in one area for another.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

so did they unveil or not?



El_Machete said:
so did they unveil or not?

They only revealed that it has TrueAudio technology.