Ok guys, finally some computex news (still not official by AMD though). Thanks goes to Hexus' and overclocknet's CPU forums
.It's semi-official, there will be a "high-TDP" FX models presented soon, gigabyte lists it as 5Ghz AMD FX lol
Original source is donanimhaber.
Some rough perf. and power estimates :
I've just read sweclocker's review of 4770K/4670K. I wanted to see
what kind of difference, power wise, are we looking at Vs 8350. It turns
out that in OCCT 4770K draws 140W vs 210W
for 8350, both at stock. When OCed to 4.4Ghz, the power draw of 4770K
spikes to 190W while performance increases roughly by ~11% or so
(logical since the chip almost always tries to run at full turbo of
3.9Ghz).
Now when we look at the rumored OCed-out-of-the-box FX models, we see them having the rather high TDP of 220W. This is 95W higher than official TDP spec for 8350 (or a bit less than that considering 8350 can actually go above 125W). Now looking at sweclocker's link I posted above, the FX9000 @ 5Ghz should be sitting at 210+95~=305W. This is with 20% clock (performance) increase since both rumored stock and Turbo clock are ~20% higher than on 8350. 305W of "stock" FX9000 vs 190W of OCed to rather expected/normal 4.4Ghz for 4770K on air- that's 115W of difference, roughly of course. Since the jump with FX9000 is 20% vs the perf. increase of 10% the OC of 4700K nets, we have the FX9000 actually closing the gap when compared to OCed 4770K. Versus stock 4770K, new "stock" FX should be winning some of the benchmarks and closing the gap significantly in others. In some situations the gap will still be there though and with a hefty power difference at that.
Finally the pricing structure. If AMD prices these parts at lower range than 4770K, somewhere close to 4670K or a bit higher (250-260$), it could be an "OK" purchase for those wanting great MTed performance and somewhat competitive ST performance (5Ghz Vishera is pretty fast chip in ST tasks, still slower than IB and co though). Lastly those buyers should be ready to accept the fact their chip will be drawing >120W more than OCed IB/Haswell setup,but will be cheaper ~100$ or so.
__________________
Now when we look at the rumored OCed-out-of-the-box FX models, we see them having the rather high TDP of 220W. This is 95W higher than official TDP spec for 8350 (or a bit less than that considering 8350 can actually go above 125W). Now looking at sweclocker's link I posted above, the FX9000 @ 5Ghz should be sitting at 210+95~=305W. This is with 20% clock (performance) increase since both rumored stock and Turbo clock are ~20% higher than on 8350. 305W of "stock" FX9000 vs 190W of OCed to rather expected/normal 4.4Ghz for 4770K on air- that's 115W of difference, roughly of course. Since the jump with FX9000 is 20% vs the perf. increase of 10% the OC of 4700K nets, we have the FX9000 actually closing the gap when compared to OCed 4770K. Versus stock 4770K, new "stock" FX should be winning some of the benchmarks and closing the gap significantly in others. In some situations the gap will still be there though and with a hefty power difference at that.
Finally the pricing structure. If AMD prices these parts at lower range than 4770K, somewhere close to 4670K or a bit higher (250-260$), it could be an "OK" purchase for those wanting great MTed performance and somewhat competitive ST performance (5Ghz Vishera is pretty fast chip in ST tasks, still slower than IB and co though). Lastly those buyers should be ready to accept the fact their chip will be drawing >120W more than OCed IB/Haswell setup,but will be cheaper ~100$ or so.
No comments:
Post a Comment