AMD announce 3 new AM3+ FX CPUs

New AMD FX CPUs inbound

AMD announce 3 new AM3+ FX CPUs

 

AMD announce 3 new AM3+ FX CPUs

 

After AMD's announcement of their new Radeon R9 285 series of graphics cards, AMD announced that they will also be adding 3 new CPUs to their AM3+ FX line-up.

The CPUs AMD will be bringing to market are the FX-8370, the FX-8370E and the FX-8320E.

 

AMD announce 3 new AM3+ FX CPUs

 

All the upcoming CPUs will be based on the 32 nm "Vishera" silicon, so these CPUs should be considered as a simply Piledriver refresh.

The FX-8370 is sn AMD eight-core socket AM3+ processor which will come along with a energy efficient variant the FX-8370E, both feature out of the box clock speeds of 4.10 GHz, with TurboCore frequencies of 4.30 GHz. The standard FX-8370 variant features 125W TDP, while the FX-8370E features 95W. The two will sell at the same price-points as the existing FX-8350 $189 US).

The AMD overclocking team stated that these new variants overclock better than their existing FX counterparts, but this needs to be verified by non-AMD staff.

Finally we have the FX-8320E which is in essence an optimized FX-8320 with a core clock of 3.50 GHz, turbo clock of 4.00 GHz, an 8 MB L3 Cache and a 95W TDP. This processor is priced at $139 US.

Join the discussion on AMD's new FX CPUs on the OC3D Forums.

 

 

  

«Prev 1 Next»

Most Recent Comments

24-08-2014, 09:08:53

WYP
Alongside the launch of AMD's new R9 285 series GPUs, AMD is refreshing it's FX series with higher performing and lower TDP FX variants.

http://www.overclock3d.net/gfx/artic...085819882l.jpg

Read more on AMD's newest FX CPUs here.Quote

24-08-2014, 09:15:58

vicsrealms
Now if a lot of the motherboard manufactures would refresh those old boards to try and keep up with Intel. Might make me swing over to AMD since I blew my Z77 motherboard. Especially if they move push out an AM3+ mini-ITX and the abysmal selection of Micro-ATX boards. Here is hoping AMD can finally bring some competition for a change.Quote

24-08-2014, 09:20:32

WYP
Quote:
Originally Posted by vicsrealms View Post
Now if a lot of the motherboard manufactures would refresh those old boards to try and keep up with Intel. Might make me swing over to AMD since I blew my Z77 motherboard. Especially if they move push out an AM3+ mini-ITX and the abysmal selection of Micro-ATX boards. Here is hoping AMD can finally bring some competition for a change.
To be honest mate newer board won't help them perform well against Intel. This is a simple CPU refresh.

Without a new CPU architecture or chipset new motherboards are unlikely, the future of AMD is FM2+ or another new socket.Quote

24-08-2014, 09:31:11

vorticalbox
Quote:
Originally Posted by Watsyerproblem View Post
To be honest mate newer board won't help them perform well against Intel. This is a simple CPU refresh.

Without a new CPU architecture or chipset new motherboards are unlikely, the future of AMD is FM2+ or another new socket.
I like how this architecture works, It is a nice step away from before. it just needs to work a little better on single cores.

I been thinking about if i was upgrading i would like to go amd, just mostly to be a bit different and to help a bit.Quote

24-08-2014, 09:35:15

WYP
Quote:
Originally Posted by vorticalbox View Post
I like how this architecture works, It is a nice step away from before. it just needs to work a little better on single cores.

I been thinking about if i was upgrading i would like to go amd, just mostly to be a bit different and to help a bit.
TBH if I were to go AMD I'd wait for the Stemroller Athlon K, it will have stronger cores and generally most things don't need more than 4 cores.Quote

24-08-2014, 09:49:34

Wraith
Pretty cool but is there any need really, all I want to see from AMD right now is a refined roadmap and what they have in store for future development.

I am glad however that we're not reporting on the AMD "Price slash" getting everyones hopes up, unlike other tech sites.. because they all fail to mention it's only a price cut for tray bought CPUs with a minimum order of 10 per tray. So not really any savings to be had unless your a e-tailer.Quote

24-08-2014, 09:52:15

unclefapsalot
I am ever so slightly confused by these 8370's .... if they are the same speed, 4.1/4.3 (which is pretty high, I must say) what exactly is different about the 8370E that gives it the 30w lower tdp? Is it just a matter of throttling, or is there a silicon difference, more than just better binned? My guess is either there going to be some severe throttling happening, because 30w doesn't just disappear from binning. Or maybe they were a little too generous with how they calculated the TDP. Maybe they combined throttling with assuming the E will have a different work scenario? Just a guess.

But i'm positive that, being at the same price point, they're the same chip.

odd chips, these.Quote

24-08-2014, 09:55:09

WYP
Quote:
Originally Posted by unclefapsalot View Post
I am ever so slightly confused by these 8370's .... if they are the same speed, 4.1/4.3 (which is pretty high, I must say) what exactly is different about the 8370E that gives it the 30w lower tdp? Is it just a matter of throttling, or is there a silicon difference, more than just better binned? My guess is either there going to be some severe throttling happening, because 30w doesn't just disappear from binning. Or maybe they were a little too generous with how they calculated the TDP. Maybe they combined throttling with assuming the E will have a different work scenario? Just a guess.

But i'm positive that, being at the same price point, they're the same chip.

odd chips, these.
From what was said in the stream, the E version doesn't stay at the boost frequency as long and will clock down faster when not under load, and potentially clock lower when not under load.

It is the same idea as the configurable TDPs of Kaveri CPUs, simply put AMD can't make TDP switch-able in the bios unlike Kaveri, hence two SKUs

Here is amd's slide on how it works in kaveri. (full article here)

http://www.overclock3d.net/gfx/artic...161055725l.jpg

I hope this answers your questions.Quote

24-08-2014, 11:03:22

shambles1980
still not that impressed with the TDP on these. i was hoping to see the highest speed ones be at 95w to be honest. that would have been much better for clocking. They can take a good deal of volts though them. but if you need a phase change cooler, and a 12+4 power phase board to get the most out of them that kind of prevents your target market getting the most out of them because they would be budget builders.
im sure serious overclocks will be able to get some good numbers out of these things. but vs a 4 core i7 even at lower clocks i cant see them being the enthusiasts choice.

Personally i think they needed to double the amount of fp units in each module (i wont call them cores) i know they have stated that its the integers that are importaint "so thats what they count as a core rather than a traditional core" and they could try to shorten the pipe lines.
but so much more could have been done with these chips if they had just carried on from the phenom's core architecture.

I hope they decide that these modules aren't really working for enthusiast cpu's and go back to the drawing board and start from the phenoms and just improve on that. because i would really like to see amd make an enthusiast cpu that has clock for clock and core for core performance on a similar level to intel.
There really should not need to be a choice between a i5 and an fx-83xx cpu, if they are the same or similar price, honestly there shouldn't be a choice between an i5 and a fx-63xx cpu at the same price point either. but as it stands now. i would still get an i5 before an fx-83xx even if the i5 is a bit more expensive, which is a real disappointment.
The only choice there should be is do i get an i5 or an fx-43xx (pay more for slightly better i5 performance) to be here thinking well i could get an fx-8370 or i could get an i5 and for the most part the i5 will do slightly better in the tasks i use it for is just a bit upsetting.
What ever happened to "do i get a q6600 or a phenom x4 9500" days.
i miss that kind of decision really was down to which one i could get cheapest.Quote

24-08-2014, 11:23:27

barnsley
Dependant on what you do FX chips can still be competitive, especially at the price range.
shame that said competitiveness is in pretty unique circumstances.Quote

24-08-2014, 11:44:09

CreatiXx
why does every one always scream about the TDP? Really dont get it so can some one plz explain Quote

24-08-2014, 11:58:51

WYP
Quote:
Originally Posted by CreatiXx View Post
why does every one always scream about the TDP? Really dont get it so can some one plz explain
In essence TDP is a term for thermal/ heat output, higher the TDP the hotter the product.

But a TDP of 125w vs 95w doesn't mean that there is necessarily 30w saved at the wall. It's kinda complex.

Hopefully when OC3D gets a chance to test AMD's configurable TDP products we can properly test the affect at the wall aswell as temps.Quote

24-08-2014, 12:24:58

RamboOC
Quote:
Originally Posted by shambles1980 View Post
but so much more could have been done with these chips if they had just carried on from the phenom's core architecture.
....

What ever happened to "do i get a q6600 or a phenom x4 9500" days.
i miss that kind of decision really was down to which one i could get cheapest.
I totally agree with this. The phenoms were beasts for their time. TBH, i would choose the older 6 core phenom over fx 6100.
Thats when i really considered amd cpu's to be on par with the intel ones. Often the same performance at lower price. After the i7's came out i think amd rushed to make something new but failed. the 4 core phenom 965 at 3.2ghz would beat a fx 4100 at 3.5ghz, how come newer= worse.

EDIT


Quote:
Originally Posted by CreatiXx View Post
why does every one always scream about the TDP? Really dont get it so can some one plz explain
Usually you can get higher overclocks from a lower tdp cpu.
also that means less noise, less heat, lower power consumption

there were 2 revisions of phenom 965 be
on was 95w
the other was 120w

as you would expect, the 95w (usually) needed a lot less volts to overclock to 4ghz than the revision with 120 tdp.Quote

24-08-2014, 12:27:15

shambles1980
big clue is the T in Tdp stands for thermal.
so the higher the TDP the more cooling it needs at stock voltages and clock speeds.
the higher the tdp also is an indication that it uses more voltage.

so in theory "all things being equal" a 95w with the same base clocks as a 125w TDP cpu will be able to clock higher with the same cooling.
So really the lower the tdp the better. the cooler it will be generally the less voltages it will need and the higer you should be able to overclock it "still have the silicone lottery though"Quote

24-08-2014, 12:29:40

barnsley
Quote:
Originally Posted by RamboOC View Post
I totally agree with this. The phenoms were beasts for their time. TBH, i would choose the older 6 core phenom over fx 6100.
Thats when i really considered amd cpu's to be on par with the intel ones. Often the same performance at lower price. After the i7's came out i think amd rushed to make something new but failed. the 4 core phenom 955 be at 3.2ghz would beat a fx 4100 at 3.5ghz, how come newer= worse.
The fx 4300 is on par with a 965. AMD really messed up with Bulldozer. If they had just released Piledriver they'd have done better.

Piledriver is heaps better than Bulldozer was, it was just released at the wrong time completely. For example my ol' 8320 is faster @ stock then a slightly OC'd 8150.Quote

24-08-2014, 12:50:35

Thelosouvlakia
Roy announced a "significant" price drop on the 9590. They should drop it about 100Euros if they want to make that "value" thing validQuote

24-08-2014, 12:50:48

Dicehunter
AMD need to ditch AM3+ and bring something new out that can compete directly with Intels high end parts, AM3+ came out in 2010'ish ?

They need to step up their game.Quote

24-08-2014, 12:56:24

Thelosouvlakia
@dicehunter
A new socket would be nice... Maybe amd could also ditch pins on the cpu and go for LGA style AM4Quote

24-08-2014, 13:04:03

Dicehunter
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thelosouvlakia View Post
@dicehunter
A new socket would be nice... Maybe amd could also ditch pins on the cpu and go for LGA style AM4
Would make installing less of a nightmare, Hate installing AMD CPU's, Always feel like the pins are going to break.Quote

24-08-2014, 14:00:11

Tripp
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dicehunter View Post
Would make installing less of a nightmare, Hate installing AMD CPU's, Always feel like the pins are going to break.
Never had a problem installing them myselfQuote

24-08-2014, 14:03:13

WYP
I find both types of CPU easy to install tbh.Quote

24-08-2014, 14:09:02

shambles1980
the only issue i have with zif sockets is that if you have well cured thermal paste and you come to remove the heat sink chances are the cpu is coming off with it. i have to say i never noticed this issue with any cpu's during the time frame where intell was still using them "that includes amd cpu's"
but it does seem lately that they are a bit easy to remove. and i always have a dredful feeling that something is busted. but having said that they have always been fine.Quote

24-08-2014, 15:17:37

Zoot
So I guess this is what the announcement of a new FX chip a few months back was referring to.

I'm impressed with the FX-8370E. I didn't expect AMD to be able to improve the TDP of the Vishera FX chips so late in it's lifetime.

I doubt it's going to spur an upgrade from many, but priced right an FX 8-core is a still good alternative to an i5/i7 depending on what you're doing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dicehunter View Post
Would make installing less of a nightmare, Hate installing AMD CPU's, Always feel like the pins are going to break.
The one time I'd an Intel CPU, I had to put what I felt was an immense amount of pressure on the socket to get it to close. That is 5 years ago now though. Quote

24-08-2014, 16:17:09

davev8
I see the FX-8320E is 139 dollars..thats £85.. id buy that at that price...but we all know it got 2 hopes at that price in the UK ...no hope and bob hopeQuote

24-08-2014, 17:27:20

WYP
Quote:
Originally Posted by davev8 View Post
I see the FX-8320E is 139 dollars..thats £85.. id buy that at that price...but we all know it got 2 hopes at that price in the UK ...no hope and bob hope
remember we have VAT mateQuote

24-08-2014, 17:45:49

Dicehunter
Quote:
Originally Posted by Watsyerproblem View Post
remember we have VAT mate
They need to get rid of that, A stupid tax, People actually died in demonstrations when this was brought in that alone should tell you something about it.Quote

24-08-2014, 17:55:17

WYP
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dicehunter View Post
They need to get rid of that, A stupid tax, People actually died in demonstrations when this was brought in that alone should tell you something about it.
I'd not call it a stupid tax, but i do get your point.

I owe too much to the NHS and therefore taxes to complain against them though, I'd simply not be alive today.

Let's not make this a political discussion guys, we have to stay on topic here.Quote

24-08-2014, 18:22:46

Dicehunter
Quote:
Originally Posted by Watsyerproblem View Post
I'd not call it a stupid tax, but i do get your point.

I owe too much to the NHS and therefore taxes to complain against them though, I'd simply not be alive today.

Let's not make this a political discussion guys, we have to stay on topic here.
Indeed, Vat free Half Life 3 free with next gen AMD cards confirmed !!! Quote

24-08-2014, 18:23:36

davev8
i get the vat back as obversely it will be for a office pc.....but i bet it will be a lot more than 85+vatQuote

24-08-2014, 18:31:31

Dicehunter
I wonder how many engineers at AMD are tired of AM3+ and have wanted to move on to better things but for some reason the head guys say "No we must remain behind Intel at all times !!!"Quote

24-08-2014, 18:41:11

WYP
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dicehunter View Post
I wonder how many engineers at AMD are tired of AM3+ and have wanted to move on to better things but for some reason the head guys say "No we must remain behind Intel at all times !!!"
I don't think much engineering time is spent on AM3+, they haven't made anything new.

Everything after the 8350 has been simple production improvements and CPU core clock / boost clock changes.

even these new CPUs are a basic refresh, even the E models only have the boost clock profiles changed to make the CPU spend less time in a boost state and more quickly clock down.

Bear in mind guys that the FX-8350 was released in October 2012!

Hopefully in the next year or so we can get something like a 6-core APU with excavator cores or something. If amd could even get the single core performance of Sandy bridge it would be fantastic!Quote

24-08-2014, 18:45:47

Dicehunter
I would like a true CPU from AMD, No more of this APU non sense, Give me actual hardware pr0n !!! Quote

24-08-2014, 19:58:35

shambles1980
they have to keep the apu's for now. its where they make the most money. consoles and laptops use them. and they are the best things selling for them "barring gpu's"

i really think they should keep the apu road map just churn them out for laptops and consoles.
stop with mfr of the fx cpu's and go design a better cpu. even if it is basically the same cpu but with 6 actual cores (not just counting integer as cores) shorten the pipe lines. give them teh correct ammount of cache for 6 cores and then release those.
at the right price they could be better than i5's and still be a bit more expensive or the same price.
but i dont know what kind of funds they have to do something like that. but the am3+ socket should be able to handle it.Quote

24-08-2014, 20:07:41

Dicehunter
Quote:
Originally Posted by shambles1980 View Post
they have to keep the apu's for now. its where they make the most money. consoles and laptops use them. and they are the best things selling for them "barring gpu's"

i really think they should keep the apu road map just churn them out for laptops and consoles.
stop with mfr of the fx cpu's and go design a better cpu. even if it is basically the same cpu but with 6 actual cores (not just counting integer as cores) shorten the pipe lines. give them teh correct ammount of cache for 6 cores and then release those.
at the right price they could be better than i5's and still be a bit more expensive or the same price.
but i dont know what kind of funds they have to do something like that. but the am3+ socket should be able to handle it.
The problem is that the AM3+ socket can only accommodate so much because it's so old so any real future upgrades demand a new socket.

It's like getting a jumbo jet engine and trying to fit it into a clown car, Aint gonna end well.

It needs to be updated to AM4+ etc... with DDR4 support and some CPU's that can actually compete with Intels high end section.Quote

24-08-2014, 21:16:30

RamboOC
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dicehunter View Post
The problem is that the AM3+ socket can only accommodate so much because it's so old so any real future upgrades demand a new socket.

It's like getting a jumbo jet engine and trying to fit it into a clown car, Aint gonna end well.

It needs to be updated to AM4+ etc... with DDR4 support and some CPU's that can actually compete with Intels high end section.
comes down to the chipset mostly
There have been so many cpus made for socket 775, all the way form pentium 4's to core 2 quads, with slight chipset modifications with still the same socketQuote

24-08-2014, 21:33:38

Dicehunter
Quote:
Originally Posted by RamboOC View Post
comes down to the chipset mostly
There have been so many cpus made for socket 775, all the way form pentium 4's to core 2 quads, with slight chipset modifications with still the same socket
True but the problem is that AMD are badly starting to slip behind, Power consumption, Heat, Power used etc etc...

I wish we could see AMD return to form.Quote

24-08-2014, 21:34:17

shambles1980
they would need to move the memory controller to the mother board then. which would mean may aswell make a new socket. unless they could make a mother board that uses ddr4 memory but could use the am3+ specific cpu's "so current fx vpu users and even phenoms and stuff could upgrade to a ddr4 capable board) "it would be a way to know you should have a % of sales"

with the lga 775 the memory controller was on the board not in the cpu. but i had this conversation els where and i dont see why they couldnt make a board that just bypassed the cpu memory controller (or atleast tricked it or something)
but that would really be more of a fix. but boards can let you use all sorts of memory speeds on intell cpu's even if the cpu memory controller only supports 1333Quote

24-08-2014, 22:21:32

Kushiro
Werent there rumors about a NEW pure cpu arch after some new CEO or whatnot was hired? I was skeptic as they just fired a CEO with the potential to do this and hired a guy purely to aid in expanding their market.

@tripp: you wouldnt happen to know the guy that makes pedestals etc for the switch 810 would ya?Quote

25-08-2014, 00:07:52

MacLeod
Im just glad to see AMD come out with something new to throw our way. We enthusiasts were starting to feel neglected here lately and even though this isnt groundbreaking, I do like the idea that we're still on their radar considering AMD seems to be wetting their pants trying to come out with the next best tablet CPU and to hell with the enthusiast segment. Every news release from them is always how much less power their cell phone CPU's are drawing and to hell with actual performance.Quote

25-08-2014, 01:06:37

NeverBackDown
If AMD had their own Fabs like Intel i'm sure they would do so much more, but they don't and they have to fight for compeition to get the silicon, instead they have to settle for what silicon architecture is available and unlike intel it isn't designed for a single purpose which can lead to less performance. Intel on the other hand can optimize every single bit of the architecture for the best balance of power/efficiency.Quote

25-08-2014, 03:05:22

Tripp
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newbie_NS810 View Post
@tripp: you wouldnt happen to know the guy that makes pedestals etc for the switch 810 would ya?
Hey buddy I can't say he springs to mind, but I know a lot of people so it's always a possibilityQuote

25-08-2014, 03:11:03

Kushiro
Ahh I see, thanks. Was just hoping

Unfortunately the guys site is down and it apears he may no longer be in business just when I finally got the time to finish my switch 810.Quote

25-08-2014, 03:16:21

Thelosouvlakia
Remember when it was a time that AMD was supporting both DDR2 and DDR3 on the same CPU?
AMD could make a "new" socket and chipset that would support new stuff but could also give current AM3+ users the ability to install the new processor via a bios update....
Although... The way DDR3 works in comparison to DDR4 is way differentQuote

25-08-2014, 03:16:28

Tripp
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newbie_NS810 View Post
Ahh I see, thanks. Was just hoping

Unfortunately the guys site is down and it apears he may no longer be in business just when I finally got the time to finish my switch 810.
Awww that sucks fella, how long has the site been down for?Quote

25-08-2014, 05:23:58

Kushiro
Couple'o months it would seem, too bad.

Also Intel supported DDR2 and 3 on the same board as well at some point I believe.Quote

25-08-2014, 06:53:36

barnsley
AMD are the smaller company in a shrinking market. I'll be watching the Opteron roadmap for clues to future cpus.Quote

25-08-2014, 08:01:10

shambles1980
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newbie_NS810 View Post
Couple'o months it would seem, too bad.

Also Intel supported DDR2 and 3 on the same board as well at some point I believe.
lga 775 supported ddr ddr2 and ddr3 over the years
but the memory controller was on the mother board for lga 775...Quote

25-08-2014, 09:25:35

WYP
Quote:
Originally Posted by NeverBackDown View Post
If AMD had their own Fabs like Intel i'm sure they would do so much more, but they don't and they have to fight for compeition to get the silicon, instead they have to settle for what silicon architecture is available and unlike intel it isn't designed for a single purpose which can lead to less performance. Intel on the other hand can optimize every single bit of the architecture for the best balance of power/efficiency.
Yeah, Intel's process node lead has always been one source of their current lead over AMD. Honestly AMD are doing a good job even competing anywhere in the market.

Intel has been at 22nm for so long now, and will soon get even smaller while AMD have to stick to 28nm and 32nm while they wait for 20nm.

I personally look forward to the next few years seeing what can be done with 20nm and later on 16nm finfet.Quote

25-08-2014, 09:36:08

MadShadow
AMD are getting so desperate, they are rebranding OCZ SSDs. I wonder when they will actually become competative in the CPU market again. If the Nvidia 800 series GPUs do well, then they are screwed.Quote

25-08-2014, 13:41:01

NeverBackDown
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaddenShadow View Post
AMD are getting so desperate, they are rebranding OCZ SSDs. I wonder when they will actually become competative in the CPU market again. If the Nvidia 800 series GPUs do well, then they are screwed.
Don't see how rebranding something makes them desperate? Corsair rebrand their ssds, does that make them desperate? Its an OCZ controller but toshiba nand so its not entirely OCZ.Quote

25-08-2014, 15:37:48

hmmblah
Quote:
Originally Posted by NeverBackDown View Post
If AMD had their own Fabs like Intel i'm sure they would do so much more, but they don't and they have to fight for compeition to get the silicon, instead they have to settle for what silicon architecture is available and unlike intel it isn't designed for a single purpose which can lead to less performance. Intel on the other hand can optimize every single bit of the architecture for the best balance of power/efficiency.
AMD did have their own fabs, Global Foundries is a spin-off. They had to do something to save themselves and that was their best option at the time.Quote

26-08-2014, 01:38:05

NeverBackDown
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmmblah View Post
AMD did have their own fabs, Global Foundries is a spin-off. They had to do something to save themselves and that was their best option at the time.
Never knew that. Interesting. Well it still doesn't change my previous post anyway because they still don't have their own like intel. Sad that they had to lose it though as i'm sure if they kept it it would have made competition much different.Quote

26-08-2014, 01:58:17

RizeAllard
Its good to hear that they try to refresh their AM3+ processors, mostly in the energy efficentcy way, but they would need a new architecture to be more competetive against intel. I would like to se a real competition in every segment not just in the mid and low range. I really like the FM2 and FM2+ processors but its not enought for the future. I just can hope they will come out with a brand new core architecture next year wich can cope with the i7 of i5 sereis in every aspect. Hope never die...Quote

26-08-2014, 02:17:26

Zoot
Quote:
Originally Posted by NeverBackDown View Post
Never knew that. Interesting. Well it still doesn't change my previous post anyway because they still don't have their own like intel. Sad that they had to lose it though as i'm sure if they kept it it would have made competition much different.
Fabs are extremely expensive to run, maintain, and require huge R&D spends to keep up to date. There's a reason there's only a select few companies in the world that operate major Fabs; Samsung, IBM, Global Foundries, TSMC, Intel. You can count them on the fingers of one hand! (unless I'm missing somebody)

Have you seen the size of Intel's R&D budget? There's no way AMD could afford that, I'd much rather they stayed fabless for that reason.Quote

26-08-2014, 02:35:54

NeverBackDown
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoot View Post
Fabs are extremely expensive to run, maintain, and require huge R&D spends to keep up to date. There's a reason there's only a select few companies in the world that operate major Fabs; Samsung, IBM, Global Foundries, TSMC, Intel. You can count them on the fingers of one hand! (unless I'm missing somebody)

Have you seen the size of Intel's R&D budget? There's no way AMD could afford that, I'd much rather they stayed fabless for that reason.
Yeah but it was all hypothetical. I said if they still had it competition might be different. We will never know but its a shame.Quote
Reply
x

Register for the OC3D Newsletter

Subscribing to the OC3D newsletter will keep you up-to-date on the latest technology reviews, competitions and goings-on at Overclock3D. We won't share your email address with ANYONE, and we will only email you with updates on site news, reviews, and competitions and you can unsubscribe easily at any time.

Simply enter your name and email address into the box below and be sure to click on the links in the confirmation emails that will arrive in your e-mail shortly after to complete the registration.

If you run into any problems, just drop us a message on the forums.