It seems that all the tech companies are just, like “Ookay! Everyone make all your announcements on the week of the 26th of October!”
Apple releases 5 updates; Windows will(has) release(d) a triennial (Erm… it felt a little longer than usual this time) OS; AMD is finally conquering their fear of the calendar; Ubuntu 12.10 has been officially released a few days ago; Halloween is coming; Lance Armstrong is stripped of his winning titles; okay – maybe not the last couple, but they’re obviously spillovers from this eventful week.
At any rate, AMD has finally come out with their Visheras to replenish the aching Zambezi series (I have a FX-4100 which is fine, but… them standards are high).
Coming out of the epoch of darkness, the Vishera’s flagship is the FX-8350 — an octo core that runs (rather, sprints) at 4.0 Ghz, the fastest stock speed of an octo core CPU to date. So while you could have overclocked your 8150 to 4.0 Ghz comfortably, it would have meant kissing your warranty goodbye.
This new line brings 15% change – at least it is increase in performance. Though the Bulldozers weren’t great to start out with, AMD seems to have kept their promise, though I truly hope they didn’t hurt the Bulldozers purposely for that reason.
Unlike their Intel counterparts, your wallet may not be torn and sold off on eBay to recover some of the costs. At $195 ($220 actual) as the flagship’s prices, the prices are lower than the Zambezis when they came out last year at around $250 or so.
Each get 1 MB of L2 cache per core, meaning that the 8350, 8320, 6300, and 4300 get 8, 8, 6, and 4 MBs respectively. As for L3 cache, there are 8, 8, 8, and 4 MBs respectively.
While the FX-8350 is not quite besting the i5s yet, the line has come a long way from being compared to i3s. But when it comes to multicore processing, it is a beast.
It also has some room for improvement when it comes to power efficiency – its TDP is 125 watts while the Intel line’s has been lowered to a modest 77 watts.
Hats off to AMD for the processor despite the job issues that it was facing earlier!
Chances are that if you are not excited about this – even a little – you must be a die-hard Intel fan. But why would you read this? Probably to savor AMD’s defeat.
If you’re disappointed that you don’t have an alternative to Intel’s high benchmarks or think that this is useless, don’t worry! Intel will eventually have to lower prices if AMD’s performance keeps going up like this, even if it doesn’t quite beat Intel’s.
Note about CPUs today
Personally, I feel that the differences between AMD are negligible. The FX-4100 overclocked only by 200 Mhz can open most of the Office 2007 (sure, it’s not great, but I don’t really feel like upgrading it) within a few seconds (closer to like 1 or 2) and Gimp, which usually takes an eternity, opens in seconds. Before you say, “But you have the Sabertooth Mobo!” (and I think: “stalkers…”), that just shows that the CPU isn’t really a bottleneck (or at least allows for a good deal to pass through).
AND also gaming… after about 30fps (or up to 120) and up, you can’t see anything: the refresh rates are maximally 120; your eyes are only 24 fps(can we buy ones with higher refresh rates?)! Even under, some games will stay really smooth. If you’re playing for eyecandy, okay. Otherwise, the details usually can go. (I find 15 fps playable(600×800(on a laptop(anyone confused by these nested parenthesis?))))
Disclaimer: Author put more opinions into the last four paragraphs, so we respect your personal opinion on the gaming part and the others for that matter.