AMD Needs to make FX APUs!

1991ATServerTower

Distinguished
May 6, 2013
141
4
18,715
I really like the Socket FM2 platform. It's has quite a lot of features and all three chipsets are reasonably up to date. With that in mind, I think it would be great if AMD made an FX line of APUs for FM2. This would cover the folks who care more about processing power as well as those who are going to use a discrete graphics card.

AFX-4390

  • ■ 4GHz - 4.4GHz
    ■ 4 Cores (2 Piledriver modules)
    ■ 8MB L3 Cache
    ■ 80 Shader Cores
    ■ 95W

AFX-6390

  • ■ 3.6GHz - 4GHz
    ■ 6 Cores (3 Piledriver modules)
    ■ 8MB L3 Cache
    ■ 80 Shader Cores
    ■ 125W

AFX-8390

  • ■ 3.6GHz - 3.8GHz
    ■ 8 Cores (4 Piledriver modules)
    ■ 8MB L3 Cache
    ■ 80 Shader Cores
    ■ 125W

And here's an odd-ball suggestion - For the folks who want more graphics performance on lightly threaded games. Give it a $79 retail price and it would be the best deal in the low budget, "casual gaming" market.

AFX-3390

  • ■ 4.3GHz - 4.6GHz
    ■ 2 Cores (1 Piledriver module)
    ■ 2MB L3 Cache
    ■ 896 Shader Cores
    ■ 125W
 

1991ATServerTower

Distinguished
May 6, 2013
141
4
18,715


With only 2 or 4 cores and no L3 cache. My suggestion is to offer FM2 platform processors that have L3 cache and more cores, at the cost of having lesser video capability. Use this to retire AM3+ and the "need" for multiple platforms going forward.
 

elemein

Honorable
Mar 4, 2013
802
0
11,160



If I remember correctly, in APUs, all the space the IGP consumes takes up the entirety of the L3 cache die real estate, and then some. What you would want to do would increase heat, power consumption, and cost, while giving limted videa capability.

Maybe on the next node shrink this will be possible without compromise, but something must be taken away from the FX processors for your idea to work. In addition, even more space will need to be partitioned off for not only the IGP itself, but also the data busses needed to circulate the extra videa data; and dont forget the extra stress on the memory controller. In addition; what market is aimed at with these products?

Not trying to put down your idea, simply putting forward the very real challenges with them.
 

1991ATServerTower

Distinguished
May 6, 2013
141
4
18,715
The AFX-4390 / AFX-6390 / AFX-8390 chips that I suggested are the same (apart from clock speed) as the current FX processors, with the exception that I added 80 shaders for basic video processing. For comparison, the low power mobile processors, like the C-50, have 80 shaders. With that in mind, they are targeted at the same market as AM3+ FX users who are already planning on buying a new motherboard.

Hard to say if there would be enough space for these. If you consider that the A10-5800k has 2 Piledriver modules, 384 Shaders, and no L3 cache, it's basically an FX-4300 that traded its L3 cache for video processors. If we wanted to speculate more precisely, I suppose we could compare the die sizes, but really that's just complicating what was supposed to be a "matter of principle" suggestion:

Socket FM2 could replace Socket AM3+ if AMD made FX processors for Socket FM2. :)
 

elemein

Honorable
Mar 4, 2013
802
0
11,160


A desktop Trinity APU cannot be directly compared to a Bobcat APU in terms of shaders. IIRC, Bobcat uses 6000 series shaders, while Trinity uses 7000 series shaders. Nonetheless, I understand what you're getting at.

At this current time, AMD has no plans of moving sockets, so there would be no users "who are already planning on buying a new motherboard" since most are choosing to stay. Maybe in the next socket refresh, both CPU/APU trees could be spliced into a single socket-- then, your idea has some mettle in it.

The A10 is actually very close to what you said; but another thing to keep in mind is the stress. A10 runs much hotter than 4300's. The extra stress on the memory controller and the fact that GPUs usually have more activity (therefore run hotter) than cache's. In your proposition, you'd have a complete FX unit, coupled with the a GPU and added memory controller stress. Heat will be very unruly here.

I believe it should go the other way personally. AM3+ should replace FM2. Though that's just my opinion; the consensus still stands. AMD should splice both sockets together and have their CPUs under a single socket, like Intel does. A good idea on their part.
 
Hey 1991ATSer*****(sorry long name buddy)
anyways I get what you are saying and personally agree with it and think it would be a pretty great idea. I honestly think it would be great to have all AMD processors with integrated graphics like Intel. Giving them 80 stream cores for all except the 8core units should be easy really. They would have plenty of space for them where those last 2 cores are, and it wouldn't generate significant heat. I don't see AMD doing it yet though.