Wii U vs PS4 vs Xbox One FULL SPECS (January 24, 2014)

[JEMC]

D-Joe said:

JEMC said:

HoloDust said:

JEMC said:

Aren't Sandy Bridge-E CPUs 6 core rather than 8 core?

And replacing it for an 8 core FX processor which uses more power, runs hotter and gives less performance even with 2 more cores... it is a bit odd. Sure, it's cheaper, but it's still odd.

About the GPU, a Nvidia GTX570 gives about the same performance of an AMD HD7870, which will be on par with an HD8770 Sea islands GPU?

I don't know what to think. Yes, it looks very powerful, but also quite expensive.

It's probably 4core/8thread SB CPU (though it might be EP variant with 8 physical cores). As for 8-core FX CPUs, there are versions with 95W TDP, so that seems plausible - guess we'll finally see well optimized 8-core code after all ;). And GPU performance does seem to be in line with for a long time rumoured 78xx performance...

As far as I know, the lowest 8 core FX chip is the FX-8120 and is rated at 125W.

Anyway, the difference in between those CPU is brutal, that's the strange thing. Going from a weak one to a stronger one is understable and doesn't affect the development of the games, but the other way around is strange. Also both CPUs use a different architecture, making this change more strange.

Just look at this comparison between the lowest spec'ed 4 core Sandy Bridge-E i7-3820 and the best of the FX chips, the 8 core FX-8350. The intel chip destroys the AMD one (sadly). And then add that the i7-3820 uses 160W at load while the FX-8350 uses 195W (the numbers are for the whole system).

As I said, it's a bit odd.

well,FX8300 is 95W

From AMD's site

http://www.amd.com/us/products/desktop/processors/amdfx/Pages/amdfx-model-number-comparison.aspx

There are only 2 FX 83xx models and both feature a TDP of 125W.

But I agree that I was wrong, the FX 8100 (that wasn't in Anandtech's chart that I took the numbers of) is an 8 core CPU with a TDP of 95W. My bad.