Printable View
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...icroprocessors
Wondering why those volunteers be fond of making up spec. I'd prefer to believe the spec havent been finalized yet.
Ok however let's estimated those are true, then we'll get two stepping(B2,C0) when Zambezi is launched.
No way they are going to make two different steppings at the same time... When both use the same fab equipment and one is obviously superior to the other.
Because max. Turbo will be at least 1Ghz. It's also doubtfull it will be 140W TDP. The person creating that "leak" took all the knowledge available to him, missing a few things , like the turbo, which is quite a recent thing. Previously all we knew is +500mhz to all cores. And that's what you have on the slide.Quote:
Originally Posted by Oliverda
That was an April's fool made by Nordic HW... Chinese just picked it up now,2 months after the original post.Maybe they thought people will forget or something lol.
http://www.nordichardware.se/nyheter...k-edition.html
Quote:
Originally Posted by gtranslate
lol, u right, I forgot at original source :)
because the specs don't match the official docs... enough info ???Quote:
Originally Posted by Oliverda
because you know all about BD turbo specs ????? turbo 2.0 for BD is burried very deep within AMD and few board makers, only LIano turbo info for Mobile and Desktop is fully available.Quote:
Originally Posted by DarthShader
http://www.pcworld.fr/article/materi...france/513545/
There, second question, google translate might be needed.
I think JF also mentioned that somewhere, but I cannot remember where.
Tried posting this yesterday but apparently it didn't work. Hope this isn't true :(
Source: http://xtreview.com/addcomment-id-16...r-in-July.htmlQuote:
We recently spoke about the reasons for delay in the announcement of desktop processors with bulldozer architecture . The existing processors socket AM3+ do not arrange AMD from the speed side. As explained associates , AMD company decided to increase speed by increasing the clock frequencies, and for this the processors has to move to a new stepping. The existing models work at frequencies from 2.5 to 3.5 GHz, but this can be insufficient for the successful competition with intel proposals, which in the fourth quarter will be supplemented by the processors sandy Bridge- E LGA 2011 with cache volume up to 15 mb. AMD decided to transfer the announcement of desktop processors zambezi on September present year. AMD representatives at the press conference recognized that the deliveries of box processors zambezi will begin only to the end of year.
I think xtrreview just reshashed all the info that floats for some time and added sandyE part :-/.Anyhow, with 60-90 timeframe on computex 4th, the last day of it is sep 4th.So i doubt thats the case.Also it would mean respin, new info tells us otherwise.
AMD still makes C2 CPUs.Quote:
Originally Posted by zalbard
I have stang's week 1038 Athlon II in my hand that is stepping C2 :rolleyes:
C3 was out Q4 09, just shy a year before.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Formula350
If this were true, wouldn't it be a good thing though? For AMD to hold back and rearrange things to compete with SB-E is a great leap in a positive direction for all the theories that are behind BD at the moment. If AMD can release a processor that can compete with Intels latest offering, it means that they have gained massive ground from the position they were in with Thuban / Daneb, these processors (which I own / owned) were awesome for price over performance but always a generation behind Intel, if they reach a point where they are head to head even if they dont quite beat Intel, they would have made up a very respectable bit of ground since last year. :)
Well it's already officially delayed till August, which sucked from my standpoint since I was going to be upgrading to a Bulldozer, and I could've used it for review testing :\ Boards coming out, but not BD, means I had to spend 1/2 my BD budget on a Thuban :( I mean yea you're right if delaying it means boosting performance in order to compete, but there are two things about that: First is if it really IS delayed until September, or the translation to English resulted in some confusion. Second, unless they are doing some sort of core-architecture tweaks, my understanding was they were just boosting clocks on the chips to get a bit more oomph out of them (be that by tweaking or just raising multipliers). If that's the case, assuming they had a large batch of the current revision, I think they should've released what they had and sold those to make up some profits. Then in August they could release the enhanced models for people who have no problem with waiting (or forking out cash to upgrade again lol), and show more of the true performance of BD :\Quote:
Originally Posted by james333
Just my 2 cents.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Formula350
I agree in some respects but I also think about the feeling people must have had when they bought a Phenom I chip. Its almost like people were fooled by marketing (i'm talking about the average non forum using Joe) to buy these great new chips and get great performance when in reality they were a bit crappy. I didn't have one myself but i know someone who did and they were very disappointed, do you think as someone forking out £200 on a chip you would feel short changed by AMD if you got the early chip and within a month and a half they came out with a chip that rubbished the one you just paid for? I know the feeling of buying the best in the world then reading reviews 2 months later about something that demotes your hardware, im sure everyone here knows it too because we are enthusiasts and thats the nature of the speed of development that takes place in the field of our hobby.I was gutted when I spent £330 on my 5870, the fastest GPU ever and learned that soon there will be large improvements. Maybe I have gone off on a tangent here, sorry, my point is, do you really want something right now when you know its not quite as good as it could be? Would you buy a 5870 1 day before the release of the 6970?
I think we are all annoyed at AMD for being so quiet though, im watching markets as I hope to invest money in the near future so my questions consist of are AMD trying to improve something they know is sub standard and need to do all they can to increase stock performance, I mean, they sell a 1090t at 3.2ghz but they know they are all stable at 3.4, maybe 3.6, so are they making it so for instance a 3.2 BD will be sold at 3.4 to gain stock points on a SB chip? Or are they playing a game of wow factor where they are optimizing a stunning new method of calculations and needed a few more days to perfect it and the knock on effect is this delay:shrug:
Are AMD clever in business or ashamed of what they can offer??
(I don't think they should be ashamed either way because I still look at the tube television and think - how the hell did they get a coaxial copper cable to translate a basic pulse into all that colour picture and sound!!!?? Amazing)
james what you describe at the end of your post is what I like to call the Athlon 64 X2 effect.
Remember 6400+'s?...there were a lot of 5200/5600/6000 that wouldnt do 3.2 Ghz like the 6400+ at less than 1.5v even though the 6400+ often came with a low VID like 1.4v. Highest binned chips with almost no OC headroom.
It happened also with Phenom which was a disaster, but hasn't happened really with Phenom II (other than maybe the X4 980 as my 965 needed 1.4v for exactly 3.7 Ghz on the edge) and I doubt we will see it with Bulldozer.
That's a good point and valid. Though the difference here, how I would like to see it happen at least (again assuming they already produced a lot of BD chips with intention to release), would be offer the lower performance parts at a discount. That way they can perhaps recoupe some costs, and we still get BD :PQuote:
Originally Posted by james333
And no, I wouldn't buy a 5870 when 6000 was to be released, which is why I'm a bit bummed about getting a 1090T. Mind you, I'm not bummed that I'm getting one, I'm excited... just I wish it was for all the right reasons lol The saving grace is that I got it for a good price ($159, shipped on eBay, before dude changed it to $189), but I'd rather have a Bulldozer! :yepp::p:
Yea I wonder about chips sometimes too heh My S939 Toledo core X2 3800+ (2GHz) easily did 2800MHz for it's entire life, which was all the way up until my upgrade to AM3 when 890GX was released in early 2010. My power supply, which was about 3 or so years older, might have taken it out though since it seems like both motherboards are toast :( Back to the point, seems chips are always able to OC pretty well, but there are always duds in the mix as well. My 555BE is one (got last year from cdawall), which just won't clock stably past 3.6GHz core and 2400MHz CPU-NB, despite being told it did 4GHz stable :( (same results on 890GPA-UD3H and 890FX Deluxe3) I'm pretty sure the L3 is to blame for a lot of it too as I know the 890GX board overclocks very well with chips that don't have L3. But, oh well :) Nothing I can do about it and it is why I'm donating the chip to my neighbor to upgrade his system, since he'll only need it to run stock speeds :DQuote:
I think we are all annoyed at AMD for being so quiet though, im watching markets as I hope to invest money in the near future so my questions consist of are AMD trying to improve something they know is sub standard and need to do all they can to increase stock performance, I mean, they sell a 1090t at 3.2ghz but they know they are all stable at 3.4, maybe 3.6, so are they making it so for instance a 3.2 BD will be sold at 3.4 to gain stock points on a SB chip? Or are they playing a game of wow factor where they are optimizing a stunning new method of calculations and needed a few more days to perfect it and the knock on effect is this delay:shrug:
It'd be nice to see the envelope pushed a bit more for stock clocks, especially with releasing the 1100T and it only being 100MHz more :rolleyes:
No, I don't think they are ashamed, at least not with Bulldozer. But I also think they don't want to let us down, and give us the most bang for our buck! Maybe in part because they do feel bad for Phenom I? :rofl: AMD has the potential to kick ass and take names, they've shown it in the past! I'm hoping BD is a repeat :D:clap:Quote:
Are AMD clever in business or ashamed of what they can offer??
(I don't think they should be ashamed either way because I still look at the tube television and think - how the hell did they get a coaxial copper cable to translate a basic pulse into all that colour picture and sound!!!?? Amazing)
phenom I was really big and on 65nm, which seemed to be capped around 3ghz anyway, and the arch didnt change much, so why would overclocking change much.
5870 was out for a LONG time before 6xxx was even being shown, and the prices for that gpu stayed flat for a while thanks to nvidia, people who bought it early were really happy, people who bought it late should have known something else was right around the corner, since their cycle is almost always 1 year
and thuban is quite temperature limited (meaning crashes at higher temps). good luck getting near 4ghz within 125w and stable up to 80C, the sweet spot for all 45nm amd chips is mid 3ghz
I dissagree completely...except for the 5870 bit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
New X4s such as 975-980 will do 4 Ghz on the stock cooler at stock volts I bet.
Thuban is a bit different, but even Turbo Core is at 3.7 on 1100T's, I bet you can clock a thuban CPU up around 3.8-3.9 on the stock cooler easily as well.
Thuban is less temp limited than Deneb afaik.
i think were mixing conversation. i was talking about why we dont see higher skus from amd, not the overclocking limits.Quote:
Originally Posted by BeepBeep2
Boy, how'd we miss this? :\ 4d old...
The creator of CPU-Z released some basic specs and a screen shot on Zambezi. The site says it thinks the clock might be due to the clock gating, but I suspect it's done to still keep us in the dark for CPU speed before AMD releases it.
http://wccftech.com/wp-content/uploa...IMG0032131.png
Source: http://www.overclock.net/hardware-ne...ambezi-fx.htmlQuote:
- Support 2 Module 4-core (FX-4110), 3 Module 6-core (FX-6110) and 4 Module 8-core (FX-8110 8130P) Zambezi processor
– Support for Socket AM3 +
– 32-nm SOI HKMG Technology
– 213 million transistors per module
– Support HTT 3.1 bus (3.2GHz, 25.6GB / s, 16bit bi-directional transmission)
– Supports up to 8M L3
– Fundamental frequency of 3.2GHz (may be higher?)
– Turbo Core (up 1GHz, load up all the core 500MHz)
– Supports a maximum TDP 95W and 125W
– Support voltage VID 0.8V-1.3V
– Support for Advanced Power Management (Power Gating / Clock Gating / Sectored L3)
The original source was mentioned here and was posted around 3 weeks ago.
Yea that one was listed in the link I gave too. I just must have forgotten. I've read every page, but that's a lot of posts to try and mentally keep track of hahaQuote:
Originally Posted by zalbard
Yeah when I saw that thread at OC.net I laughed pretty hard. A bunch of people babling mindlessly over really old news in which much of it is incorrect and what people say didnt make sense.
Those info are true, but the detailed spec about freq & turbo core are for engineering sample at tdp 95w. At least those info are better than nothing.
i personaly prefer a 5870 over a 6k anything. "shrugs"
A 6870 is roughly as fast as a 5870 in games.
Some applications can make use of more of the 5870's shaders than games do though.