AMD FX-8320E CPU Review: The Other 95W Vishera

Back in September, we reviewed the FX-8370E, a new AMD CPU based on the older Visera / Piledriver architecture, but with a lower power consumption of -95W instead of 125W. This is achieved by combining a mature 32nm process, adjusting the clock speed and (possibly) some specific binning voltage characteristics. The FX-8320E is another low-power CPU released on the day, and AMD has now reviewed it. Some people worldwide are eager to get AMD's new high-performance processors to respond to the market. Although the Blue Team's tick model represents their aggressive product development plan, the limited success of the Bulldozer architecture has taken AMD back. In principle, basic design is a good idea, but the ecosystem that supports it is not yet ready, and those who focus on existing platform metrics have almost left it behind. I can almost say that because AMD has repositioned their high-end product stack based on price, the purpose is to compete on performance. Although AMD focuses on the mid-end but higher-selling segment, AMD has not yet made new products based on this product. High-end processors. New architecture for more than two years. This Visera platform is based on a Bulldozer-based pile driver architecture and a 32-nanometer process, but many new models have been produced since its first release, including the 220W FX-9000 series, which will be available in early 2014 (read our review of this product). FX-9590) and a series of new processors (launched in September 2014). These include the 125W FX-8370 on top of the FX-8000 series with increased clock frequency, as well as the 95W 'E' processor and FX-8320E of the FX-8370E. These processors are similar to the non-E processors FX-8370 and FX-8320, but with a lower base frequency but the same turbo frequency. In theory, this means that they should be as fast and responsive as 125W similar products in handling most daily tasks, but lag behind in terms of hard-core processor mechanisms. Although the price is the same as the 125W component, AMD hopes that the lower TDP rating will attract users who may have never needed full power. Due to TDP adjustments, these processors are also more targeted at the 970 chipset. This chipset uses fewer GPU channels (one PCIe 2.0 x16 slot and one PCIe 2.0 x4 slot) and is a bit cheaper than the 990FX series. Normally, the newer 990FX motherboards are designed to use the 220W large behemoth in the FX-9000 list, but by using the 970, motherboard manufacturers can focus on the maximum 125W and hope to save customers some money. As a result of this, AMD has also sampled the (popular) most popular 970 motherboard, the MSI 970 Gaming, and we plan to evaluate it separately. For the FX-8320E, it is worth noting that the base frequency is only 300 MHz lower than a full-fat CPU. For most users, saving 30W for 300 MHz is usually a good idea because it usually indicates a better Bined CPU. 30W power may be normal under 300MHz overclocking condition, which means that FX-8320E may have overclocking potential. In terms of overclocking, the FX-8320E is ready to be overclocked by unlocking the frequency doubler, and we will get some interesting results later. As the following issues repeatedly occur when encountering the latest products of the FX series, I will copy the answers from our previous FX-8370E review verbatim: "Why update the FX series with more Visera-based processors? Can't we get updates? AMD chose these new processors in addition to the slow increase in the production of higher-grade parts and adjustments to the overall design over the past year, as well as the existence of these motherboards in the market. Due to the structure of some early motherboards used in AMD non-IGP series, these early motherboards can only support up to 95W or 125W, not to mention the 220W of the FX9590 / 9370 giant. By releasing an 8-thread Visera processor with a 95W TDP, this allows these users to upgrade without having to spend an extra $ 120 $ 200 on the new motherboard. Regarding AMD's old roadmap, it still looks bleak when we consider the FX CPU. There is no designated successor to Visera, or even the 28nm process for the latest Kaveri APU: With the Excavator brand APU coming sometime in the future, part of my hope is that AMD can release something similar on the FX series, but from a power consumption perspective, it may have the same issues as the pile driver / Vishera unit . The spiral moves upwards over 3.5 GHz without severe binning. The design of the 28nm process is more to increase the density of the transistor, especially when we consider the size of the integrated graphics that AMD likes to use on the APU, so there is controversy in AMD, that is, if the new FX version will be available on the CPU side Many features, except for higher costs. AMD said in the FX-8370E review: "AMD today provides funding for AMD tomorrow ... to ensure the continued success of products such as FX." It didn't give me hope. AMD's Jim Keller is the driving force behind Zen. The chip is planned for a pin-compatible x86 / ARM processor in 2016, and pointed out at the roundtable, "Extending from tablet to desktop" This is a barrier to focusing on AMD. But currently, we have a 95W Visera to play with, and our example is a beast. CPU, chipset and DRAM Straight up, 32nm against the wall. Intel uses a 14-nanometer process and recently released Broadwell-Y (Core M) and Broadwell-U, the latter with a power of up to 28W. This represents Intel's second-generation FinFET technology, and if we remember 32nm, it's Sandy Bridge. Having said that, the longer you spend on process nodes, the more you can optimize them and increase yield. One might argue that this reduces operating costs and thus enables AMD to bring products to market. If the problem remains that it is correct product.AMD 900 series chipset Comparative & NBSP; 990FX990X970Code NameRD990RD980RX980ReleasedQ2 2011Q2 2011Q2 2011Fab (nm) is + X16 656565IGPNoNoNoCrossFirex16 �� +. 8. 8. 8 + + + + x8x8 + x8x16 x4SLIx16 X16 X16 X8 + X8 + x8 + x8 + x8 + x8x8 + x8 NoTDP19.6W14W13.6W PCIe Four PCIe 2.0 slots Two PCIe 2.0 slots One PCIe 2.0 x16 slot Super transmission (MHz) 260026002400 From a chipset perspective, the AM3 + motherboard comes with a choice of 990FX, 990X or 970 and two 900 series south bridges. The 990FX + SB950 combination that has received the most attention so far provides two PCIe 2.0 x16 slots for CrossFire and SLI. If you want to spend a lot of money, you can use the PLX8747 motherboard, which uses PCIe 3.0 communication between GPUs. And provide more than two settings. However, regardless of the market segment, there are relatively few new motherboards on the market. Almost everyone is at least twelve months old, and some have been there recently. We recently reviewed the ASRock 990FX Extreme9, located at the top of the ASRock product stack, but they also released the 990FX Killer with an M.2 SATA slot. Asus has the 990FX Sabertooth PCIe 3.0 model, or the ROG Crosshair V Formula-Z is at the top of the range. MSI's 970 games have been the topic of the town in recent months, providing them with an outrageous goal. GIGABYTE has not released the 990FX or 970 Sniper, but if the market requires it, be sure to let them know. In terms of functionality, the 900 series chipset lacks native USB 3.0 and therefore requires a controller to implement it, which may be slower than a native solution. For example, the MSI 970 game uses two VLI controllers to provide a total of four USB 3.0 ports, although performance is not optimal. This usually also increases the cost of the controller product, which can be avoided in bargain models. On the positive side, AMD does have six native SATA 6 Gbps ports, all of which are suitable for RAID. Therefore, the main part of this review is the 95W AMD FX-8320E, which is a four-module / eight-thread component with a 3.2 GHz base clock and 4 GHz Turbo mode. The price was $ 147 at launch, but now it's $ 150. Intel's main competitors are the Core i3-4350 (54W, 2C / 4T) for $ 145 and the Core i3-4370 (54W) for $ 160. , 2C / 4T). At the time of writing, the most relevant data points for this are FX-8150, FX-8350, Core i3-4130T, Core i3-4330, and Core i3-4360, which provide enough entertainment. AMD FX-8320E super clock, test setup, power consumption