AMD FX-9000 specifications

[AzeofSpadez]

According to details that Sweclockers.com (The largest computer-forum and computer news site in Sweden) have recieved, AMD is preparing a new CPU with the Piledriver architechture.
It's main features are a 5.0GHz factory turbo-boost and a whopping 220W TDP!

You can read the article here: http://www.sweclockers.com/nyhet/171...pp-till-50-ghz Just translate it with your browser and it should be quite easy to read

Post your thoughts about this heatgenerating beast of a CPU!

[Ripox]

Post your thoughts about this heatgenerating beast of a CPU!

AMD's processors tend to get overhyped and then fail hardcore in recent history.

Not going to give a crap until real benchmarks are out

[Asera]

220W leads me to believe it is fake report. Why anyone would release a high TDP CPU like that with power rates going up the way they are...

[Sicarius87]

AMD's processors tend to get overhyped and then fail hardcore in recent history.

Not going to give a crap until real benchmarks are out

This. Only real benchmarks from reputable sources matter. Techpowerup comes to mind.

[AzeofSpadez]

AMD's processors tend to get overhyped and then fail hardcore in recent history.

Not going to give a crap until real benchmarks are out

I'm not meaning "A beast of a CPU" in terms of performance but in heat generation
Essentially it's just a very factory overclocked FX-8350 with a higher TDP as you can see in the rectangle with spec-comparisons between the new and old CPU's.

[Gorgeth]

sounds like a imaginary dream from some geeks, and not a realistic product as it would require a massive rethink of everything from mainboards to cooling solutions.. its clearly not an opteron style part (those have been heading for lower and lower and lower TDP/Wattage for several years).. and there is no way that a mainline product would suddenly appear with a new chipset/mainboards to support it without more leaks..

It is far more likely to see a 12 or 16 core desktop part than to see such a huge jump in TDP with the same architecture and cores just to drive a turbo frequency.. unless what we are seeing is a misreading of leaked data regarding TDP/Wattage and they found a way to turbo that high (an example would be saying something like 220 watts normally but our new tech uses existing XXX watt design but allows much higher turbo frequency in their internal docs or off the cuff remarks and that being picked up by this article as a mistranslation)

But the fact that it is a single low volume site in a marginal market leaking "huge news" I go with the intial plan which is "ignore entire article the poster and the site in future"

Nice try to generate hits for your site though.. just a bit too blatent.. points for not using some form of the old standby iPhone news/rumors/leaks however

[AzeofSpadez]

This. Only real benchmarks from reputable sources matter. Techpowerup comes to mind.

Sweclockers is actually a very reliable source but since you're not Swedish I understand that you don't think so but it is. It is the Swedish equivalent of Techpowerup.
Well, we'll all see on 11-13th of June when they present it at E3.

[n0cturnal]

This isn't the first time we've heard about this CPU, the only news are the rumored 220W TDP.

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/Vis...ion,22015.html
http://wccftech.com/amd-preparing-pi...-ghz-cost-795/
http://hexus.net/tech/news/cpu/54057...urion-fx-5ghz/

[AzeofSpadez]

This isn't the first time we've heard about this CPU, the only news are the rumored 220W TDP.

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/Vis...ion,22015.html
http://wccftech.com/amd-preparing-pi...-ghz-cost-795/
http://hexus.net/tech/news/cpu/54057...urion-fx-5ghz/

Oh yeah, forgot that. But it's still news like you said
And if the CPU runs at 5.0GHz I wouldn't see why a 220W TDP is unreasonable since they boost the frequency so high.
It's like back in the day when Intel raised the frequencies like maniacs.

[n0cturnal]

Oh yeah, forgot that. But it's still news like you said
And if the CPU runs at 5.0GHz I wouldn't see why a 220W TDP is unreasonable since they boost the frequency so high.
It's like back in the day when Intel raised the frequencies like maniacs.

220W is not unreasonable at all, when FX-8150 first came out and reviewers overclocked it some measured the powerdraw to way over 400W for the system.
See Sweclockers & Guru3d.

[vesseblah]

Factory overclocked top bin FX-8350 that can't be used on half of AM3+ boards because of that TDP... Not sure if AMD is serious or wtf is that...

[Cyanotical]

I wouldn't see why a 220W TDP is unreasonable since they boost the frequency so high.

it's unreasonable because that pretty much requires a waterloop or high end dual tower heatsink, TDP is only average load, not max

[Deleted]

GL getting that overclocked without melting a hole in the mobo.

[Ripox]

So basically is this like the GTX 480's heat all over again?

Does this CPU come with wood on the back?

[yurano]

220W leads me to believe it is fake report. Why anyone would release a high TDP CPU like that with power rates going up the way they are...

FX-8350 already pushes 220W when overclocked to ~5 Ghz.

[Killora]

And this is why i'll never buy an AMD CPU. Not just because their gaming performance is just not up to par, but because their CPU's use so much damn power. An OC'd 3570k uses what, 100w at most? 220w is completely unreasonable for a CPU. a CPU should not use more power than a low or mid high end GPU. Not to mention the cooling requirements. GPU's have those massive heatsinks and fan solutions. You can't fit that on a CPU. theres just not enough room on the board. watercooling is practically mandatory here.

[The Cat]

GPU's have those massive heatsinks and fan solutions. You can't fit that on a CPU. theres just not enough room on the board. watercooling is practically mandatory here.

CPU's are the ones with massive heatsinks. GPU's have pretty shoddy cooling and benefit way more from water cooling than CPU's do in terms of temps. CPU's can drop a few degrees on watercooing(Giant tower air coolings is relatively good), GPU's drop like 30-50 degrees...

[AzeofSpadez]

it's unreasonable because that pretty much requires a waterloop or high end dual tower heatsink, TDP is only average load, not max

Well, maybe AMD considers it an "enthusiast CPU" and ships it without a heatsink so that you'll have to buy one for yourself... That could be their strategy.
And the TDP is actually quite close to the max load, at least for my 2700K. When I run Prime95 it draws about 100W, spiking to 110W in rare situations and the TDP is 95W. So I'd say that the TDP is very close to the maximum.

[chazus]

An OC'd 3570k uses what, 100w at most?

I literally have P95 running as I type this, and my 3570K @ 4.6ghz is pulling 72w with 77w TDP.

[Saithes]

CPU's are the ones with massive heatsinks. GPU's have pretty shoddy cooling and benefit way more from water cooling than CPU's do in terms of temps. CPU's can drop a few degrees on watercooing(Giant tower air coolings is relatively good), GPU's drop like 30-50 degrees...

Uh... what? My CPU dropped 20-25C from a CM Hyper 212 EVO to a EK Supreme HF, Swiftech MCP655 Pump and a Black Ice GTX 240 Radiator. Even the difference between a Noctua DH-14 and good custom liquid is quite a bit.

With a decent setup you can have both the CPU and GPU running 40-50C max on load with a substantial overclock. On air you'd be lucky to have both running under 65C with the same overclock.