During the 30 Years of Graphics & Gaming Innovation celebration on the weekend, AMD took the opportunity to announce several new models of FX Processors that will be coming to market soon. The new models announced are the FX-8320E, the FX-8370, and the FX-8370E. The E at the end represents a lower TDP than the normal model.

As this was not a true product launch, details were light, but based on previous releases of the FX processors we should be able to make some assumptions. The turbo clock speed was announced as 4.0 GHz for the FX-8230E which is the same as the older FX-8320 which is 3.5 GHz as a base, so we can assume the base clock will be 3.5 GHz. The FX-8370 and FX-8370E are new to the product lineup however, with an announced boost speed of 4.3 GHz for both. No base clock speed was revealed for these processors though, but the previously announced FX-8350 comes in at a base of 4.0 GHz, so the higher model number should be slightly higher than that.

AMD FX CPU Comparison
Release Date October 2012 August 2014 October 2012 August 2014 August 2014 June 2013
Modules 4
L1 Cache (Code) 256 KB
L1 Cache (Data) 128 KB
L2 Cache 8 MB
L3 Cache 8 MB
TDP 125 W 95 W 125 W 125 W 95 W 220 W
Base Frequency (MHz) 3500 3200 4000 4000 3300  4700
Turbo Frequency (MHz) 4000 4000 4200 4300 4300 5000
Core Name Vishera
Microarchitecture Piledriver
Socket AM3+
Memory Support DDR3-1866

The E designation is slightly interesting. As a tradeoff for a lower TDP of 95 watts versus the 125 watts of the standard CPU, only the amount of boost time is affected. Base and boost clocks are the exactly the same as non-E chips the base clock is lowered but the Turbo clock remains the same.

The final announcements on the FX side of the presentation were to do with pricing. The FX-9590 will see a “significant” price cut this month, and AMD will now offer CPUs in a six-pack bundle to offer a lesser price per chip when bought in a relatively small volume. Whether the price cut of the FX-9590 affects the rest of the lineup is unclear, but we should know more soon.


AMD has now announced the official clock speeds for the new processors. The table has been updated with the correct info now rather than the estimated info. Unfortunately someone at the AMD had some incorrect information and the base clocks of the E series chips is in fact lower, with the Turbo clocks being the same.

AMD 30 Live

Comments Locked


View All Comments

  • Alexvrb - Tuesday, August 26, 2014 - link

    Well I've read some sources that the base clock is also 100Mhz higher. Not that this changes much, and overall I would tend to agree with what you've said. On the other hand if it's a better bin it might be a better overclocker. At a minimum new releases might help to push prices down on the lower models.

    Out of curiousity, does anyone know if it's still C0 stepping?
  • mgilbert - Tuesday, August 26, 2014 - link

    I want AMD to succeed as much as anyone, as competition benefits the technology and the end user, but a TDP of 225 watts for a CPU that can't outperform an Intel processor that generates less than half that much heat? AMD has a long way to go...
  • hojnikb - Tuesday, August 26, 2014 - link

    They should rather focus on the chipset front, insteand of releasing new bins of old arch.
    9 series is getting really old now.
  • SlowSpyder - Tuesday, August 26, 2014 - link

    Awesome seeing AM3+ still getting some love from AMD!
  • Malih - Tuesday, August 26, 2014 - link

    Don't really care much about AM socket CPUs anymore, I'm very interested in FM socket CPUs though, I like building a mini ITX systems as a hobby at least once a year.
  • willis936 - Tuesday, August 26, 2014 - link

    >new FX SKUs
  • iwod - Tuesday, August 26, 2014 - link

    Come On! All of these FX processors uses Double the Power while being like 50% Slower.
    That is a 4x difference in pref / watts!
    Has AMD given up completing in x86 market?
  • LarsBars - Tuesday, August 26, 2014 - link

    If these new SKUs were steamroller or excavator, I think there would be a lot more excitement around them...
  • LarsBars - Tuesday, August 26, 2014 - link

    Ha! I like how Brett's AMD FX CPU comparison doesn't even have a core count, that's great! :)
  • barleyguy - Tuesday, August 26, 2014 - link

    The table in the article has the number of modules for each chip. The integer cores are 2x the number of modules, so all of these processors are 8 cores.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now