Rumor: Limited-edition AMD FX processor to reach 5GHz

Since October, AMD’s top-of-the-line desktop processor has been the FX-8350. Based on Vishera silicon, this chip boasts eight Piledriver cores clocked at 4GHz with a 4.2GHz Turbo peak. The FX-8350 may soon give up its flagship status, but not to the sort of successor one might expect. The guys at Hexus say they “have it on good authority” that AMD is readying a faster, Vishera-derived model that can run at 5GHz.

Codenamed Centurion, this new addition “is guaranteed to run at 5GHz,” according to the site. While guarantees are pretty emphatic, it’s unclear whether the quoted frequency refers to the base clock, the Turbo peak, or some sort of validated headroom for overclockers. AMD told overclockers to expect the FX-8350 to reach 5GHz, so that speed certainly isn’t unreasonable for a new high-end part based on the same foundation.

We haven’t seen AMD offer a truly high-end desktop processor in a long time, but Centurion appears to fit the bill. Hexus claims the chip will be available in “very limited quanities” and be priced at an eye-popping $795.

I’ll give you a moment to let that sink in.

For reference, the FX-8350 sells for just $200 right now. Expecting folks to pay four times more for a chip that runs only 25% faster seems like a stretch, regardless of how many free games are bundled with the CPU. Several generations of Intel Extreme Edition processors have carried similarly lofty premiums, but they’ve also been able to stake reasonable claims to the “fastest desktop processor” crown. Even at 5GHz, Vishera may be unable to top the fastest Sandy Bridge-E processors on the market. Perhaps that’s why it’s purportedly priced at about 800 bucks; the Core i7-3970X rings in at over a grand.

The Intel chip has a 150W TDP, and it seems likely that a 5GHz Vishera-derived processor would require more thermal headroom than the FX-8350’s 125W rating. Hexus says Centurion will hit 5GHz with only air cooling, though.

Comments closed
    • anubis44
    • 7 years ago

    If the chip is fabbed at 28 nanometer, all these anti-AMD bets are off. In that case, it really could run at 5GHz cool on air, draw less than 95W and have overclocking headroom. Not to mention that a small number of very select tweaks to the pre-fetcher and branch prediction could improve its IPC by 20% or more. Wait, what if this ‘Centurion’ is really 8 steamroller cores?

    I can already hear the slack jaws of Intel-lovers hitting the pavement…

      • albundy
      • 7 years ago

      tell ya wut man, get’r dun!

    • tbone8ty
    • 7 years ago

    FX-55 was $999 back in the day

    • NeelyCam
    • 7 years ago

    This news is fake. Everybody knows there is a 4GHz barrier through which no chip can go without totally blowing the power budget

      • chuckula
      • 7 years ago

      Good to see you back to posting, especially for this issue.
      Einstein proved that the 4GHz barrier cannot be broken. If you could break it, then you’d travel back in time somehow.

        • NeelyCam
        • 7 years ago

        Posting from Thailand. So cool to be connected everywhere.. modern technology is pretty amazing.

        Also, I was forced to use my old Moto Atrix (which was unlocked), and again realized that I really like it better than the SGS3. Its keyboard is just so much snappier. Maybe I should illegally unlock the Galaxy 3 and sell it on eBay..

          • Meadows
          • 7 years ago

          How are the underage prostitutes?

            • Farting Bob
            • 7 years ago

            I see Neelycam as more of a fan of Thai ladyboys.

            • Arclight
            • 7 years ago

            Bangkok?

            • albundy
            • 7 years ago

            Charlie: “Holes is holes, Hank.”

            • NeelyCam
            • 7 years ago

            Illegal..?

            • Arclight
            • 7 years ago

            Pshhh like that would ever stop you, or so i hear.

    • maroon1
    • 7 years ago

    i7 3930K is cheaper and better

    • clone
    • 7 years ago

    who knows, maybe AMD has done another respin, tweaked the power management shutting off cores between cycles and switched doping materials so that the TDP for a 5ghz chip will be under 250 watts.
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    yes, I’m joking.

    • uni-mitation
    • 7 years ago

    Does it make you a sandwich?

      • cynan
      • 7 years ago

      Rig a panini press plate on top of it in lieu of a heat sink, and I’m sure it’d put out almost enough heat to get pretty darn close.

        • uni-mitation
        • 7 years ago

        Hey! Hey you! Don’t ridicule me or AMD! I think there is a HUGE untapped market that intel is not servicing by its own hazard! What is that untapped market? As you already read, the marketing geniuses of AMD have rightly seized on this emerging trend: a cpu that makes sandwiches. How awesome can it get? Now, you are just a hater.

        Can’t wait to get a payroll advance to get my limited edition centurion. Here i I go!

    • chuckula
    • 7 years ago

    Another way to rationalize the $795 price tag: That price tag ain’t for the CPU, it’s for the CPU + a 7970 GHz edition GPU in a bundle. At that point, the price of the CPU + GPU would suddenly be much more reasonable overall.

    • Spyder22446688
    • 7 years ago

    I’d rather just have an Ivy Bridge for $200. But I credit AMD for continuing to do what it can to produce performance products for the enthusiast market.

      • cynan
      • 7 years ago

      Either that, or an FX-8350 for $200. Unless this thing hits substantially higher than 5 GHz (like 7GHz+) the purported asking price is just a bit ridiculous.

        • Arclight
        • 7 years ago

        If it gets to 5 GHz on air cooling, 6 GHz on a custom water loop and 7 GHz on phase change and beyond, this could be a great limited edition chip for professional overclockers that want to break world records. That said, it’s highly unlikely the chip will OC much furthur than 5 GHz. Personally i think it will only OC a few hundred MHz higher than the guaranteed 5 GHz considering the FX 8350 is the base chip for it.

    • delsydsoftware
    • 7 years ago

    I snagged an 8350 a couple months ago for $190, and added a Corsair h110i for $100. That got me to 5ghz for $290 and a little bit of fiddling. $795 is nuttier than squirrel turds.

    • chuckula
    • 7 years ago

    As much fun as this rumor has been, I’m not buying it without further evidence. First of all, AMD doesn’t seem to need to pull these stunts (but maybe I’m wrong). Second of all, even if AMD is doing this, the price sounds unrealistic. $395? Sure. $495 to slightly undercut the 3930K? Possible. $795? Ain’t likely.

    This is not even to mention the fact that while this chip is AM3+, there are going to be a crap-ton of motherboards out on the market that won’t have the power delivery juice to get this thing going right, so compatibility is going to be a major issue, no matter what the price is.

      • Srsly_Bro
      • 7 years ago

      It’s a novelty item, lady.

    • LukeCWM
    • 7 years ago

    I’m less interested by the 5GHz claim and more interested in the $795 claim. Of course I don’t expect it to be “good value” for that price, and of course I can’t afford one, but AMD’s got to have some genuine surprises up its sleeve to charge $795 for a new flagship processor instead of $225-300.

    I want to know what these surprises are, and I’m rooting for AMD to have some really impressive technology here. I say this not as a fanboy, but as someone who understands the value of competition and is intrigued by innovation and excited about advancement. If they have a genuine powerhouse in this new processor, it’s good news for the AMD and good news for the consumer!

      • brute
      • 7 years ago

      it’ll take a genuine powerhouse to generate enough current to power this thing

        • cynan
        • 7 years ago

        Meh. I’m sure the the standard 15-20 Amp/120V wall socket you’re using now will do just fine.

    • smilingcrow
    • 7 years ago

    According to FanboyzGotaSemiForInaccurateFUD there’s a perfectly good reason for the high price. With AMD’s marketing budget being gobbled up by the games bundles they had to think outside of the box(ed cooler) to garner more eye time.
    The deal is that these will only run at 4GHz unless you are in IG4A mode. To enable this mode you need to be wearing the limited edition T-shirt that is bundled with the package. It’s more complicated than that so read on.

    The T-shirt turns out to be the most advanced tech that AMD have designed for almost 10 years and is the reason that they have fallen so far behind Intel.
    It’s self powering via light or heat and is self aware to the extent that it knows when it is being worn as the top layer and whether the wearer is awake.
    When you purchase this CPU you have to send a bundle of your biometric data to AMD including a DNA sample. The T-shirt is registered just to you and you earn points by wearing the T-shirt in public. The more points you have the longer you can run the CPU in IG4A mode. You get points depending on how many people are around you and how close they are to you. The T-shirt’s optics and microphones detect this and it will report back to AMD’s server when you have accrued extra points. Your PC needs to be online to receive points updates.

    So for $795 you are getting a $250 CPU bundled with a T-shirt with a notional value of $545 but which cost millions to develop per shirt as this is a very limited edition. So a bargain for you considering that all those engineers that were assumed to be in idle mode for years whilst AMD produced nothing of significance were actually diligently working on this masterpiece.
    These will likely be very valuable in the future and seen as works of art. Not everyone though is enough of a dilettante to pull off wearing in public a T-shirt that has the IG4A slogan on both front and back:

    [b<]I’m Gay 4 AMD[/b<] In affect if you buy this you are paying to advertise for AMD. Note: The release has been delayed as the current version of Turbo Core as used in the T-shirt has a glitch which causes the T-shirt to combust if the wearer has sex whilst wearing it. In real world usage it’s highly unlikely that the geeks buying this would ever get laid but the International Federation of Hookers (Tech Convention Branch) has asked for the bug to be fixed or else they will down tools; which sounds ominous.

      • auxy
      • 7 years ago

      This would be funny if …

      … no, sorry, this just isn’t funny at all. ┌П┐(►˛◄’!)

      • Srsly_Bro
      • 7 years ago

      Bigotry much? Perhaps if you were more open minded about worldly things, you might be able to develop a more thought out, rational opinion. Instead, whatever you’ve written is overshadowed by your ignorance and bigotry. Congrats to you!

        • smilingcrow
        • 7 years ago

        Seriously Bro, you take things too seriously and much to literally.
        For a self confessed man of the world you come across as a small minded reactionary.

          • brute
          • 7 years ago

          id guess that more than the mind is small judging by those crocodile tears

            • smilingcrow
            • 7 years ago

            “crocodile tears”

            Which coincidentally is the liquid that AMD will be using in the heatsinks for this special edition supposedly as a self effacing nod to the fact that it to appears to be a dinosaur.

    • OneArmedScissor
    • 7 years ago

    New 5 GHz core clock…same 2.2 GHz L3 / HT / memory controller as Phenom II in [u<][b<]2009![/b<][/u<] AMD, this game got old 3 years ago.

      • tfp
      • 7 years ago

      Sounds like this game just got 4 years old to me.

    • credible
    • 7 years ago

    I think its a great idea for AMD to do this, they really can’t lose as far as I can see.

    • HisDivineOrder
    • 7 years ago

    I guess AMD heard about nVidia ‘s Geforce Titan cards and yelled, “Someone. I want something absurd and overly expensive with a grand, mythological-esque, and epic name. Make it happen. Don’t care what.”

    They didn’t have time to manufacture a new high end GPU, so… they had CPU’s lying around no one was buying and they thought, “Heeeey, let’s find all of the 10 or so of these CPU’s that will overclock at low voltages and make ’em MYTHIC!”

    The Centurion was born.

      • Arclight
      • 7 years ago

      Plausible.

    • Arclight
    • 7 years ago

    It’s nice that they are trying but a more interesting product would have been an 8 module/16 cores version compatible with AM3+ boards at 150W TDP.

      • Airmantharp
      • 7 years ago

      Not trying to bash, but it’d still be limited by the same factors that limit the four module/eight core variants: low IPC.

      And the current ones compete very well if just those eight cores are actually put to use. They’re definitely more useful than hyper-threading in a number of situations.

      • ronch
      • 7 years ago

      Yeah, I’m sure that’s gonna be one interesting product at 2.2GHz. Should be fun seeing 16 cores under Task Manager.

        • Arclight
        • 7 years ago

        3+ GHz on water, not too shabby me thinks. Plus if you read some undervolting/underclocking reviews for Vishera and Piledriver you should notice that the highest effiency for this architecture is under 4 GHz. While increasing voltage it reaches a point of diminishing returns since power consumption goes through the roof just to get a few MHz higher.

      • just brew it!
      • 7 years ago

      That would require a complete respin of the silicon. The resulting CPU would also be starved for memory bandwidth since Socket AM3+ doesn’t support more than 2 channels.

      Their 16-core Opterons are multi-chip modules (really 2 separate CPUs in a single package) and support quad-channel memory.

        • Airmantharp
        • 7 years ago

        I’d bet that they could mitigate that somewhat on the consumer side if they baked in support for DDR3-2400+, but at that point it might be cheaper to get a single-socket Opteron board instead.

        • Arclight
        • 7 years ago

        Indeed i knew that such chips exist in the Opteron lineup, i was just suggesting it would be nice if they sold it for AM3+ boards as well, even with the memory bandwidth limitation (although i admit that i have no idea how much it would affect performance).

        My non professional observation was that even the fastest memory (tri channel, quad channel, w/e) doesn’t increase performance in games by much (sub 5% from what i noticed) so i assumed that even if the chip was bandwidth starved it’d still be good for desktop users that don’t want to use the chip like an Opteron.

          • accord1999
          • 7 years ago

          Even if it wasn’t bandwidth starved, it would still be terrible for desktop users because of the poor per-core performance at such low clock speeds.

            • Arclight
            • 7 years ago

            You forgot the most important thing, epeen,

          • just brew it!
          • 7 years ago

          There are some other issues with trying to stuff a MCM CPU onto an AM3+ board though.

          How do you assign the existing 2 channels to the two physical CPU chips? One channel per chip, or both channels to one chip and the other one has to do a double-hop over HT through the 1st CPU? The former case hurts your single-thread performance on a design that is already weak in that area; the latter causes the 9th through 16th cores to take a hit on memory latency relative to the 1st through 8th cores.

          There may be electrical issues as well (are there any external signals that need to be duplicated for the 2nd chip?) which make it completely infeasible.

            • Arclight
            • 7 years ago

            All valid points to which i have no idea how they could be fixed for AM3+. Worst case they’d launch a separate enthusiast socket, kinda like Intel did for their Extreme chips, although i despise the idea ever since it was implemented.

            With prices so low i don’t see why mainstream mobos couldn’t have come with quad channel memory support. It could have actually boosted sales for the struggling RAM manufacturers since they could sell quad channel memory in higher volumes at a higher price compared to dual channel or simple memory.

            • just brew it!
            • 7 years ago

            It wouldn’t need to be a new socket per se. They would just need to convince motherboard makers to produce Socket G34 boards with enthusiast oriented features, and release FX chips for Socket G34.

            They’ve done stuff like this before. Back in the day the original Athlon 64 FX CPU was on Socket 940 (which was nominally their server platform at the time), and they released a few low-end Opterons for Socket 939 (which was nominally their high-end consumer platform).

            Probably the biggest hurdle to doing this is the thermals. To get the clock speeds up to where enthusiasts might be interested, you’d probably be looking at something north of 250 watts. The 16-core Opteron 6282 is a 140W part, and that’s at only 2.6 GHz.

      • tipoo
      • 7 years ago

      They could go to 32 cores and still be limited by Amdahl’s law for all but a few percent of apps.

        • Arclight
        • 7 years ago

        It would be a halo product, performance gains wouldn’t be expected anyways, except for a few programs. Just like Intel’s $1000 chips when compared to “normal” desktop Ivy Bridge quads in gaming benchmarks.

    • chuckula
    • 7 years ago

    Cue Bensam123 saying that this is an amazing opportunity and that the 3930K is overpriced in 3, 2, 1….

    • PopcornMachine
    • 7 years ago

    [quote<]Hexus claims the chip will be available in "very limited quanities" and be priced at an eye-popping $795.[/quote<] Does the Brooklyn Bridge come with it? If so, I'm in!

    • anotherengineer
    • 7 years ago

    “For reference, the FX-8350 sells for just $200 right now. Expecting folks to pay four times more for a chip that runs only 25% faster seems like a stretch,”

    I agree with you, however we see somewhat similar things in the graphics card arena.

    [url<]http://www.ncix.ca/products/?sku=80662&vpn=GTXTITAN-6GD5&manufacture=ASUS[/url<] [url<]http://www.ncix.ca/products/?sku=69828&vpn=FX787ACNFC&manufacture=XFX&promoid=1371[/url<] 4 fold price difference and only about double the performance (in some benchies) [url<]http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_Titan/15.html[/url<] The joys of the high end, even if it's the fastest by only 10%, it will sometimes command a 50% or more price premium for being the 'fastest' at the time. That said I can't see a 25% clock increase producing a 25% increase in benchmarks though, but I guess the "limited edition" makes it more $$ Still overpriced IMO though, should be no more than $400, maybe $75 for clock and $125 for limited edition, could make your money back on ebay to some fanboi's 🙂

    • sschaem
    • 7 years ago

    Did AMD confirm the $795 price tag ? because the price sound beyond ridiculous.

    • ronch
    • 7 years ago

    Perhaps AMD could bundle a liquid nitrogen cooling unit with these to justify the $800 premium.

    (Ok, I don’t know how much those LN2 coolers cost.)

      • brute
      • 7 years ago

      LN2 cooler is just a tube with mounting hardware and insulation. gotta get a dewar and keep pouring that stuff in

        • brute
        • 7 years ago

        price is maybe a couple hundred bucks.

    • chuckula
    • 7 years ago

    So someone who bought a 2700K for $350 and overclocked it to 5GHz in 2011 and has had that system running for over a year payed *way* too much money now that AMD has broken the 5GHz barrier… right?

      • ronch
      • 7 years ago

      Not sure what you’re getting at, chucky…. but… even if we consider those SB cores in the 2700K to deliver twice the performance of each PD core (4 strong cores vs. 8 weak cores) at 5GHz, which results in roughly similar [b<]aggregate[/b<] performance, you still only would've paid $350 for the i7 while AMD is thinking about charging you $800 for a Centurion.

    • ronch
    • 7 years ago

    Here’s a thought. If AMD can run those Piledriver cores at 7.5GHz, they can probably compete with those $1,000+ Core i7-3970X’s. According to some synthetic benchmarks such as [url=http://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html<]Passmark[/url<], those PD cores deliver about 46% the IPC of one of those $1K Intel CPUs. Passmark is pretty much linear when it comes to measuring CPU performance. As of this post, the baseline score for the i7-3970X is 13,008, while an FX-8350 scores 9.159. Let's compute how an FX-8350 would score if we lop off 2 out of its 8 cores and downclock it from 4.0GHz to 3.5GHz: 9,159 / 8 * 6 / 4000 * 3500 = 6,010 6,010 / 13,008 = 0.462 3500 / 0.462 = 7,575 So, you theoretically need to clock all those PD cores at 7.5GHz to match the 3970X's per-core performance, and provide about 33% higher aggregate performance (at 7.5GHz, those 8 PD cores can theoretically score 17,344). AMD can sweeten the deal by pricing it at $1,000 just like those snooty Intel chips. But at 5GHz, we're talking about delivering just 89% of the 3970X's aggregate performance. It could work, but I see most folks still going with the Intel option. Run those PD cores at 7.5GHz while staying within the 125w TPD and AMD has a real competitor. Ok, time to wake up.

      • dpaus
      • 7 years ago

      [quote<]at 5GHz, we're talking about delivering just 89% of the 3970X's aggregate performance[/quote<] ...and at just 79% of the price of those 'snooty Intel chips' 🙂

        • ronch
        • 7 years ago

        Not enough to persuade most folks to trade per-core performance.

        • anotherengineer
        • 7 years ago

        Cmon after 13% tax that’s only $1403.77 here in Canada.
        [url<]http://www.ncix.ca/products/?sku=77899&vpn=BX80619I73970X&manufacture=Intel[/url<] Pocket change for Deanjo 😉

          • Prestige Worldwide
          • 7 years ago

          $1049, which NCIX would pricematch and memoryexpress would pricebeat

          [url<]http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819116877[/url<] edit: Didn't read your post properly to see the after tax thing. However, on all NCIX orders, I only pay 5%, so would still only be $1101.45 + shipping

            • anotherengineer
            • 7 years ago

            If you are not in Ontario or elsewhere where the sales tax is not 10% or higher you are not taxed enough to be considered a true Canadian 😉

        • cynan
        • 7 years ago

        Or you can get near as darn 3970X performance with by easily overclocking a 3930k. At 70-75% the proposed asking price of this new AMD chip. Potato-tomato.

        Getting these top-tier chips isn’t about value or common sense. For everyone who isn’t running mission critical high-power computing applications (where they can’t even think about risking instability or reliability that comes with overclocking) – which isn’t 99% of the people who buy them, it’s purely about bragging rights.

        Who in their right mind would pay a 300% markup (over the FX-8350) for an 25% clock speed that they don’t need most of the time, will cost them more to run, etc, that they could probably get close enough to if they ever bothered to look into how to properly overclock their 8350? (hint: begins with “s” and rhymes with truckers).

      • Welch
      • 7 years ago

      I think if they could managed to hit 7.5ghz while staying within the 7.5 TDP, they would do it and charge the price premium. I don’t think it is possible with the current core design. What it sounds like they are doing is capitalizing on the existing FX-8350 and just factory overclocking a very select bin capable of hitting 5ghz. Then turning around and selling it like its a whole new CPU and re-branding it.

      Nothing new here, both Intel and AMD used to do this in much more grander scales with their CPU lineups, but usually in reverse as we all know. Take bins incapable of hitting their required clocks, down clock them, under volt maybe and even disable cores in order to meet a lower end market while not having to discard product. This time around its meeting the higher end market that they have never really met before. Short of Opterons, has AMD ever had a CPU that cost this much :O? I know they have never broken the 1k mark for their consumer grade stuff. Usually they stay right around or under the $400 mark for their flagship chip.

        • brute
        • 7 years ago

        wrong.

        FX-53, FX-55 (clawhammer and san diego), FX-57, FX-60 were all a grand.

        the Athlon 64 X2 4XXX chips were similarly high-priced, with the 4800 costing $800, as i recall. not a top of the line chip, either.

          • Welch
          • 7 years ago

          Noted, I do recall the FX chips being high priced, but don’t really remember them being 1 grand, must have been short lived. Those chips were badass for their time when AMD was king for gaming. But then again, how many years/CEOs later was that :P. Ancient history.

          Almost seems like AMD is striking in the CPU market hoping for Intel to abandon x86 in favor for mobile chips. Intel seems very concerned with the big change in the market, just as AMD should be. Then again if AMD can’t put out a decent mobile (I mean tablet/phone), then if Intel backs down their desktop chip market, there is room for 1 chip maker to make a decent living in the market……….. for now.

            • brute
            • 7 years ago

            that was in 04 to early 06, before the Core 2 Duo came out. Ruiz was on top, gliding in Sanders’ wake. i dont think anyone was expecting C2D to have the incredible performance or power usage it had, not to mention it was overclockable like hell. Netburst could OC but its ridiculously long pipeline killed performance, and none of AMD’s offerings could go too far – roughly 3.0GHz on air was the cap.

    • swaaye
    • 7 years ago

    This should be quite entertaining from a performance per watt perspective. 😉

      • Chrispy_
      • 7 years ago

      …and even more entertaining from a performance per dollar perspective 😉

      • Arclight
      • 7 years ago

      Some people just want to watch the world burn…..

    • Game_boy
    • 7 years ago

    So AMD has this bin that can’t possibly be yielding in quantity and everyone rightly calls it a PR trick.

    But then Geforce Titan does the same thing, has the biggest ever transistor count on a GPU, huge price tag, and people believe it’s a solid product that is yielding well?

      • chuckula
      • 7 years ago

      In Nvidia’s defense (and they don’t always deserve it):
      1. The chip for the Geforce Titan is fundamentally different than any other piece of Nvidia silicon on the consumer market.
      2. The Titan puts up the performance numbers that are very impressive (but not necessarily worth the price premium).
      3. The Titan does all of this in a very reasonable power envelope and by all accounts the cooling requirements are very reasonable and the fans don’t sound like an F5 tornado.
      EDIT: 4. While Titan is crazy expensive, it is at about a 2x premium to the next higher-tier of cards. This thing is about 4x as expensive as the exact same piece of silicon that AMD sells with a 25% lower clock speed. Even Intel rarely has price premiums on a curve that steep.

      Is the Titan overpriced? Sure.
      Is AMD’s FX-whatever overpriced? Sure, but it can’t make any of claims 1 – 4 above in its defense.

        • Bensam123
        • 7 years ago

        1. Doesn’t matter to the end user.
        2. You can’t disprove this about AMDs chip as TR hasn’t tested one at 5.0ghz and other reviews I’ve seen of 8350s running at those speeds are pretty shotty.
        3. You don’t know how much power these binned chips will use (there are a few rather unique articles about transistor bleed with IBs past their rated power envelopes).
        4. Poor justification that has relatively nothing to do with a ultra high end part. High end parts are never about $/dollar.

          • chuckula
          • 7 years ago

          Holy crap dude… the difference between my trolling and your trolling is that I know I’m joking. You, on the other hand, can’t wait to find ways to justify any and every action that AMD takes, no matter how much you would bash Intel for taking the *exact same action*.

      • Geonerd
      • 7 years ago

      You’ve got a point.

      After the sticker price/LOL reaction subsided, the chip started to make a bit of sense.
      Assuming it’s not terribly expensive to bin these in this manner, WHY NOT sell a superclocked chip to the hardcore OC crowd?

      Hoping this also represents an across-the-board improvement in GloFo’s fab processes that will lead to faster mainstream FX chips. Bring on the 8370, or whatever they call it.

        • Game_boy
        • 7 years ago

        The problem I’m having is that Nvidia sent out this card for review with no mention that they’re incapable of producing more than a few hundred. They got all the publicity for having a card that’s ‘able to do X’ without needing to actually mass produce X. And I’ve seen plenty of claims elsewhere that this means Nvidia ‘won’ and have the better cards overall.

        The difference between this comment thread and the Titan review is huge. It shouldn’t be. They both have the same scarcity.

          • MFergus
          • 7 years ago

          chuckula’s post points out the basic differences between the two.

      • ronch
      • 7 years ago

      That’s because AMD’s marketers and PR people have become notorious as of late.

      • smilingcrow
      • 7 years ago

      “So AMD has this bin that can’t possibly be yielding in quantity and everyone rightly calls it a PR trick. But then Geforce Titan does the same thing”

      Isn’t the Titan a repositioned Tesla which is a very expensive card so in that context there is no similarity?
      nVidia probably don’t have fantastic yields on the GPU but it’s not a special bin in the sense that the AMD chip appears to be.
      So basically they are completely different: one is even being bought as a (relatively) cheap card for workstations whilst the other is pointless fluff for fanboyz; if the price is true.

      • Deanjo
      • 7 years ago

      Well if you were to compare it to the Titan, AMD would have to take an Opteron 6386 SE, disable a couple of cores and ramp the clock up to 3.6 Ghz. This rumored chip is more like a binned GTX-680 for EVGA’s GTX-680 Classified.

      • jihadjoe
      • 7 years ago

      Yes, because 18688 GK110s in a single supercomputer, before the desktop Titan card even released is “not yielding well.”

        • just brew it!
        • 7 years ago

        It doesn’t necessarily mean anything one way or the other, we don’t have enough information.

        Maybe yields were great, as you imply. Or maybe Cray was willing to pay enough for the chips that nVidia was still able to make a profit [i<]in spite of[/i<] crappy yields. Or maybe they [i<]didn't[/i<] make a profit, supplying the chips at a loss to meet a contractual obligation. Or maybe the [i<]reason[/i<] desktop cards didn't launch right away was because yield issues meant they couldn't simultaneously meet demand from both Cray [i<]and[/i<] the graphics cards vendors. Unless you can rule out all of those alternative scenarios, the Titan supercomputer tells us nothing about how the chips were yielding.

    • Sahrin
    • 7 years ago

    [quote<]Several generations of Intel Extreme Edition processors have carried similarly lofty premiums[/quote<] Emergency Edition.

    • Deanjo
    • 7 years ago

    *yawn* wake me when it can do 5 Ghz staying within a 35 Watt TDP.

      • ronch
      • 7 years ago

      Better hope we’re still alive when you wake up from cryogenic suspension.

    • rogue426
    • 7 years ago

    I’m still waiting on the Pentium 4 to ramp up to 5-10 ghz speeds like they said Netburst was capable of doing.

      • Beelzebubba9
      • 7 years ago

      Overclocked Prescotts could hit 8+Ghz with appropriate cooling, and Intel shipped normal P4s with their ALU clock in the 7.5Ghz range (they ran at twice the core clock).

      The problem wasn’t the circuit design, just heat. It’s pretty clear by looking at Intel’s roadmap circa 2003 that even they didn’t see that coming.

      Edit: One could also assume that on Intel’s 22nm Fin-FET process, Netburst could have likely scaled very high compared to how the chips behaved at 90nm. I’m pretty sure at 10Ghz Prescott would still have a hard time keeping up with Ivy Bridge, but it’d be cool to see how far NetBurst could go given a ton of process headroom.

    • Geonerd
    • 7 years ago

    $795?!

    Someone must have found the crack pipe Hector stashed under the tiles in stall #3.

      • brute
      • 7 years ago

      people will pay copious amount of money for “Exclusivity”. if this is a “limited release” with a “cool” and “Extreme” box, then they won’t have a problem getting that money. plus, there’s the whole 5ghz thing.

        • Geonerd
        • 7 years ago

        For that money, the 5 GHz better be the factory set turbo frequency, not some promised overclock.

        Is a base clock of 4.5 too much to hope for?

        Can they keep the TDP at 140W or lower? (I suspect 125W is a hopeless fantasy.)

          • brute
          • 7 years ago

          ti could be an extremely high-binned part. and for that price, a cool box, swag of some sort, promised exclusivity and “CENTURION” are enough. if the chip is called AMD Centurion, like NVIDEA TITAN, then they’re golden

          the value in this part isn’t performance or price. it’s the magic 5ghz and exclusivity for AMD fanatics

    • mganai
    • 7 years ago

    Kind of like the old FX chips from a decade ago, which actually prompted Intel’s EE series as a response.

      • chuckula
      • 7 years ago

      Kind of like how Intel’s chips have prompted AMD to produce massively overclocked and high-power draw parts in response to having more efficient lower-clocked parts on the market, just like a complete bizzaro-world mirror image of Intel’s EE series….

      • anubis44
      • 7 years ago

      A quite feeble response, as the Pentium IV was hopelessly outclassed by the Athlon 64 X2.

        • chuckula
        • 7 years ago

        Actually… if you looked at cherry-picked SSE-heavy benchmarks, the CedarMill P4s could beat the Athlon 64 X2s (while requiring higher clocks and power draws to do it). Also, those CedarMill P4s (even the expensive ones) were cheaper than the high-end Athlong 64s, which cost about what a 3970K costs today (more if you account for inflation).

        Gee… does that sound [b<]anything[/b<] like the situation between competing chips that are out on the market today? Nah...

          • jihadjoe
          • 7 years ago

          My head asplode.

          • Krogoth
          • 7 years ago

          Cedar Mill was what Prescott should have been at launch, but the damage was done and Netburst dyansty was on its way out. Conroe was just around the corner. 😉

    • chuckula
    • 7 years ago

    Pshaw… 5Ghz isn’t the real story, AMD chips have been overclocking that fast for years and AMD just let the community do the overclocking because unlike Intel they care about end users.

    Did you check the cores in that chip? You might find that they.. [i<]steamroll[/i<] the so-called competition that can't even keep up with Piledriver...

      • brute
      • 7 years ago

      they care about end users? they care about making money, just like intel. AMD doesnt charge much because AMD can’t get much.

      remember the Athlon 64 days? AMD was charging out the ass, just like intel.

        • Mr. Eco
        • 7 years ago

        You took the bait.

    • brute
    • 7 years ago

    should we blame microsoft, windows 8 or EA for this one?

      • Narishma
      • 7 years ago

      Yes.

        • willmore
        • 7 years ago

        Well done, young Vorlon.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This