Anyone know when the AMD "Carrizo" will launch?

CmdrJeffSinclair

Reputable
Aug 29, 2014
785
1
5,010
Anyone who doesn't want to read about AMD can skip to my question at the bottom. Anyway, so the 4th generation of AMD's Steamroller architecture (codename Carrizo) is going to be better than the FX Series (Vishera) since it will add a decoder to the "dual core cores" design to substantially improve parallelism across the 8-cores. Since the Vishera runs 4 dual cores (1 physical, 1 logical), it effectively makes it a unique 8 core design (with greater parallelism but poorer single threading). I need this quite badly for many uses over Intel's powerhouse single thread optimization, however I am a gamer and would prefer not to make the sacrifice of entertainment due to my need to higher multithreading.

It's been said that the next architecture is supposed to utilize these cores more effectively all around, and hopefully they will be stronger for parallelism but also wield better performance with single threaded applications with the new decoders.

I am about to buy an AMD FX9590 but can clearly read that it has some trouble with utilizing its cores in some heavy multithread situations. This will certainly handle my need for parallelism for my business needs, but I am told there may be some suffering for video games since they are not terribly optimized yet for multi-core designs yet. It may even be a couple years before multithreading is more standardized....That's a long time to deal with poor FPS in games.

THE POINT: Articles from 2013 stated that the new ("Carrizo") line of the Steamroller architecture to succeed Vishera will launch in 2015, however what about now? It's late 2014 and I want to know if it's on schedule or will be a long time still to arrive.

Thanks! NO INTEL FANBOYS! Don't troll and keep this discussion purely about AMD's next launch of APUs!
 
Solution
Well, there is some misinformation here. FX-8/9 processors do not have 4 physical cores. They have 8 physical cores, each divided into pairs to share resources (Modules). So AMD processors run 8 physical cores spread into 4 modules. This cuts back on costs, and allows for more cores cheaper.

As per the processors. Addressing the FX-9xxx series first, dont. They are the same thing as the 8320, same base architecture with a large power draw and an OC that can hardly be considered stable. You will get identical performance from OCing an 8320 by yourself. If you need performance look at intel, AMD has better budget options.

The new lineup of processors is up in the air. Many including myself would find it no surprise if AMD leaves the...
Well, there is some misinformation here. FX-8/9 processors do not have 4 physical cores. They have 8 physical cores, each divided into pairs to share resources (Modules). So AMD processors run 8 physical cores spread into 4 modules. This cuts back on costs, and allows for more cores cheaper.

As per the processors. Addressing the FX-9xxx series first, dont. They are the same thing as the 8320, same base architecture with a large power draw and an OC that can hardly be considered stable. You will get identical performance from OCing an 8320 by yourself. If you need performance look at intel, AMD has better budget options.

The new lineup of processors is up in the air. Many including myself would find it no surprise if AMD leaves the high end market for the time being. They placed their bets on using more cores rather than strong ones, well it didnt quite work out like that. However, AMDs APU and budget market is going strong, and they are likely to focus on that until they can return. Many have said the AM3+ socket wont be receiving any more releases, which seems logical enough for AMD.
 
Solution