DirectX 12 and Bulldozer+ FX CPU's.

Discussion in 'AMD x86 CPUs and chipsets' started by Nian, Aug 17, 2016.

  1. Nian

    Nian Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Messages:
    739
    So. We all remember the whole reason for Mantle, right? True multi-core / thread support in the graphics API. Mostly to assist with AMD's FX processors. Also, to add support for AMD's GCN GPU's. This was passed on to DirectX 12 and Vulkan.

    Ok

    Here's the thing. I can't find a single review or article, thats written or video, that shows the performance gains and improvements for the FX series CPU's when using these two new API's.

    Nothing, nudda, zip.

    Now we all know that with DirectX 11, the FX CPU's bottleneck good new GPU's and the framerate is almost always lower than an Intel CPU. But what about with DirectX 12? Does an FX-8350 still loose to a Intel quad?


    Any solid info would be great.
     
  2. DiGiTaL MoNkEY

    DiGiTaL MoNkEY Inverted Monkey

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2005
    Messages:
    26,863
    Location:
    Melbourne, Victoria
    Last edited: Aug 17, 2016
  3. Sipheren

    Sipheren Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2002
    Messages:
    3,176
    Location:
    Gold Coast
    Mantle is now Vulkan, DX12 is also similar but not the same.

    Anyway, for me Vulkan is awesome on my system, huge difference, but most of it is from the removal of the CPU overhead and full utilisation of the GCN cores.

    Here is a video with some info for you: https://youtu.be/erAh6EAEu08?t=4m48s
     
  4. DiGiTaL MoNkEY

    DiGiTaL MoNkEY Inverted Monkey

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2005
    Messages:
    26,863
    Location:
    Melbourne, Victoria
    Some nice performance boosts for the new version of Doom. Hopefully more games take it on board.
     
  5. OP
    OP
    Nian

    Nian Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Messages:
    739
    So no-one actually read what I asked then.

    My question again. Simplified.


    Does an AMD FX CPU work better now and is it on par with an equally priced Intel CPU, when it is using DirectX 12 or Vulkan and a GCN GPU?
    Are there any reviews or articles available?
     
  6. Sipheren

    Sipheren Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2002
    Messages:
    3,176
    Location:
    Gold Coast
    Sorry, I thought I answered well enough. The CPU will never be on par with an Intel chip on IPC, but when talking about something of the same price, I guess you would compare an 8350 with the 4770 or 3770, in most games, even with Vulkan or DX12, the Intel chips will still be better, but you are talking about only a few frames difference.

    In multi-threaded stuff you may get a closer to the Intel chips, but the FX chips will pretty well never beat the Core chips.

    Just for a side note, I went from a 4770K to a 2670 Xeon and now the FX 8320 all on the same GPU. The current setup is slower than the Xeon in everything, but not by a huge amount.
     
  7. AMD-G

    AMD-G Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2008
    Messages:
    166
  8. DiGiTaL MoNkEY

    DiGiTaL MoNkEY Inverted Monkey

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2005
    Messages:
    26,863
    Location:
    Melbourne, Victoria
  9. OP
    OP
    Nian

    Nian Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Messages:
    739
    The thing is, does IPC matter as much with DirectX 12 and Vulkan?
     
  10. Sipheren

    Sipheren Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2002
    Messages:
    3,176
    Location:
    Gold Coast
    Yeah, better IPC is always better, the Intel chips with Hyper Threading are much the same as the FX chips with their cores with shared cache, so we are talking about a similar number of threads.

    The FX chips will only compete with i3's and i5's from what I can see, that's even with the new API's.

    Just wait for the new Zen FX chips to come out next year, they will be better :)
     
  11. Toliandar

    Toliandar Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2010
    Messages:
    210
    I think you will also find that not all Vulkan/DX12 games will be made equally and the amount of multi-threaded CPU performance will depend on how well the game developer designed it. I suspect that Doom yielded some pretty big gains particularly for AMD gpus because Id tend to make highly optimised engines; it wouldn't surprise me if id tech 6 running on Vulkan has a better CPU load balancer then say DX12 AotS
     
  12. Euphoreia

    Euphoreia Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2012
    Messages:
    1,356
    Even Skylake i3 (2 Core, 4 Thread) is frequently smacking down the FX8350's in game/overall performance in anything but rendering. It's a 4 year old chip that was never that good to begin with, and is now currently in a very sad state of affairs. Mind you, the i3 is $100 cheaper, less than half the power consumption, less PSU requirements, better boards are cheaper and less HS/F noise...
     
  13. Sipheren

    Sipheren Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2002
    Messages:
    3,176
    Location:
    Gold Coast
    Exactly, I bought my FX for shits and giggles, I just wanted to see how much I could OC it, I defiantly knew it would be shit and slow lol.
     
  14. OP
    OP
    Nian

    Nian Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Messages:
    739
    That was in the DirectX11 and older days. The question is, With DirectX 12 and Vulkan, do more cores make a big difference from here on?
     
  15. Euphoreia

    Euphoreia Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2012
    Messages:
    1,356
    Not really, no, because it also takes better advantage of Intel's Hyperthreading.
     
  16. Rockman.EXE

    Rockman.EXE Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2004
    Messages:
    169
    Location:
    Ballarat
    Better IPC is better IPC, software optimising will not fix that.
     
  17. Mika75

    Mika75 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2015
    Messages:
    1
    AMD FX 8300 vs. Intel i3 6100
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLkaNWo0EV0

     
  18. General_Cartman

    General_Cartman Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2005
    Messages:
    2,698
    Location:
    The Confedaracah!
    AMD multi-thread scaling is better than Intel's as a Bulldozer module has more execution resources than a core with hyper-threading (this is comparing a 4 module bulldozer with a 4 core i7).

    Bulldozer was uncompetitive because it has a shockingly low IPC compared to the Core series and because it never hit the clock speeds it was designed for, its single threaded performance was crap - which was more important than multi-threaded performance then and even now.
     
    Last edited: Aug 30, 2016
  19. mAJORD

    mAJORD Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2002
    Messages:
    8,909
    Location:
    Griffin , Brisbane
    it Arguably did when it launched, alongside Sandybridge, That was many years ago now - Skylake core has not only more resources, but lower latencies throughout, this giving it higher throughput not matter what you throw at it.

    That said, the old FX's do alright in games with highly threaded , particularly those which are more Integer bound on the CPU side.

    This kind of answers the OP's question at the same time - The goal posts have moved, so it's more a case of it 'still' doing OK , or doing better compared to its competition at the time of launch in modern DX12 titles - providing the dev has taken advantage of MT
     
  20. OP
    OP
    Nian

    Nian Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2007
    Messages:
    739
    Nice video. Sounds like they are getting closer to their true potential

    Even if it is below the current mid/high end Intel CPU's, at their current price AMD FX processors are by the looks of things, the budget kings. Especially with Windows 10, DirectX12, and Vulkan.
     

Share This Page