Friends, have you paid attention to AMD's two new CPU products lately? They are 800F and 8400F. Sounds high-end, but these two new products may not be as powerful as we think.
To be honest, when I first saw these two CPUs, I thought they were AMD's latest generation flagships! However, on closer inspection, these two CPUs are actually based on the previous 800G and 800G APUs.
What's the situation? APU is AMD's fist product, integrating powerful core graphics functions, right? Then why do the new 00F and 400F remove the core display? Isn't this just the right meat to cut your own flesh?
After some understanding, I found that AMD's approach this time is actually to cater to the market demand. You think, now that more and more people are choosing discrete graphics cards, the role of nuclear graphics is not as important as before. So AMD thought, instead of shoehorning the core graphics into the CPU and wasting costs, it would be better to remove it directly and invest more resources in improving CPU performance.
From this point of view, the 800F and 8400F do have their raison d'être. They are positioned for those who use discrete graphics cards. Will the performance be affected after removing the GPU?
When it comes to the performance of the 800F and 8400F, we still evaluate it in many ways.
First of all, from the perspective of hardware specifications, the 8700F has 8 cores and 1 thread design, and the main frequency can be as high as 5.0GHz, while the 8400F is the core thread, with a main frequency of 4.4GHz. Just looking at these parameters, the performance is naturally good. But the problem is that instead of AMD's latest-generation Zen 4 architecture, they use the previous-generation Zen 3+ architecture.
Although Zen+ is also very strong, it is a little less hot than Zen. In addition, the core graphics are removed, and the CPU may be discounted in certain load scenarios. However, we still need to wait for the measured data on how big the impact is.
On the other hand, both 00F and 400F only support DDR5 memory, which can add a lot of cost for some users on a budget. And they also don't support PCIe 5.0, only 4.0, which may limit the play of some high-end hardware in the future.
Judging by these details, the positioning of the 00F and 400F seems to be somewhat awkward. Although they have removed the GPU, they may not be as good as the new generation of competitors in terms of pure CPU performance, and there are some shortcomings in terms of budget and scalability.
Both the 8700F and 8400F have AMD's AI Engine technology built-in. This makes them perform well in terms of AI computing and acceleration. For some AI workers, it may be a very good choice.
It remains to be seen how competitive the 8700F and 8400F will be. Whether they are properly positioned and whether users pay for them are all to be tested by the market. As an innovative attempt by AMD, we would also like to give it recognition.