AMD to Start Production of Desktop "Bulldozer" Microprocessors in April.

Printable View

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

11-06-2010, 05:38 AM
Mats

Quote:

Originally Posted by blindbox

And you decided so that we calculate cache size per core instead of total cache size.

What's the alternative?
Don't you think it's logical add more cache when cores are added?
With your reasoning, we can stay at 8 MB in total forever.

Quote:

Originally Posted by blindbox

What's up with my attitude?

I was referring to your rolling eyes, when the discussions so far have been about size only.
11-06-2010, 05:45 AM
Mats

Quote:

Originally Posted by xdan

If Bulldozer it's really a "wonder" Amd should make a preview of performance on 15 january at SB lauch....If Bulldozer it's better than SB than Intel sales will be hurt , people will wait for Bulldozer or for Intel price cuts.
But if Amd will show nothing in january-february than Intel will continue to gain market share, and Amd i expect to have 1-2 quarter's very negatives because i expect i3's SB to be equal to an actual Phenom II X4, and i5's if they start at 179$ they will kill X6's.

In the long run, maybe it's better for AMD to keep BDs performance secret until launch and letting Intel know as little as possible,
than recruiting possible BD buyers in January.
Just maybe.
11-06-2010, 05:53 AM
Dimitriman

lets also say it is not in amd's interest to cause an early release of socket 2011 sb based on expected performance of bd disclosed in january.
11-06-2010, 06:11 AM
hatter

I believe the reason why people want a glimpse of BD and its performance (only if a sneak peak) because AMD doesn't really have a stellar record in keeping promises and meeting deadlines on CPU side of things.

With Intel, I am sure SB is gonna be rock solid. The chips are already out there in the wild. we all know how they are performing. Enthusiasts usually get to know about what is in store for them when it comes to Intel CPUs. If Intel says SB is going to come in January and if I am waiting for the chip for new build, I can go out and get it in January. There is assurance in waiting here.

With AMD it's not so. I can wait till Q3 next year for BD and (I sincerely hope it's otherwise) may end up disappointed. This is the reason why people are clamoring for some info on AMD CPU.
11-06-2010, 06:22 AM
Sn0wm@n

Quote:

Originally Posted by ubuntu83

That would be a massive marketing failure.

Yup Desktop will get the first priopity because magnycours is doing good in server market.

how come ???
11-06-2010, 07:24 AM
Tomasis

Quote:

Originally Posted by hatter

I believe the reason why people want a glimpse of BD and its performance (only if a sneak peak) because AMD doesn't really have a stellar record in keeping promises and meeting deadlines on CPU side of things.

With Intel, I am sure SB is gonna be rock solid. The chips are already out there in the wild. we all know how they are performing. Enthusiasts usually get to know about what is in store for them when it comes to Intel CPUs. If Intel says SB is going to come in January and if I am waiting for the chip for new build, I can go out and get it in January. There is assurance in waiting here.

With AMD it's not so. I can wait till Q3 next year for BD and (I sincerely hope it's otherwise) may end up disappointed. This is the reason why people are clamoring for some info on AMD CPU.

yeah. thats why amd and intel are so different.

this is the reason that amd doesnt reveal info. Intel could know from january and already build new architecture for next generation when amd are busy to produce. I dont think early info of bulldozer will ever affect intel sales much due brand recognition for large base of people who buys computers. enthusiasts are not deciding factor for sales though.

imagine scenario for nvidia vs ati. it would be huge advantage over one if another gets performance data early.

building fabs for lower nm is another thing.
11-06-2010, 07:43 AM
blindbox

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mats

What's the alternative?
Don't you think it's logical add more cache when cores are added?
With your reasoning, we can stay at 8 MB in total forever.

I was referring to your rolling eyes, when the discussions so far have been about size only.

Like I said, L3 cache are shared. Unless it's some heavily threaded software, other cores can use it.

I'm not saying we're going to stay with 8 MB forever. Look at AMD anyway, Thuban has 6MB L3, Deneb has 6 MB L3 as well. Just following the ratio indefinitely is going to be a waste after a time.
11-06-2010, 08:03 AM
flippin_waffles

Quote:

Originally Posted by saaya

lots of cache... sigh... doesnt sound very promising...
whenever somebody put lots of cache on a chip in the past it was done to boost performance when tweaking the core wasnt possible or too much of a hassle...
this is THE new architecture and it comes with lots of cache instead of using as much die space for logic as possible... idk, to me this sounds like bad news...
then again, this is a server part anyways and not aimed at desktops, so i guess there lots of cores with lots of cache is good news and fp perf and ipc doesnt matter than much... i guess itll do well for servers... doesnt sound like itll do well in the desktop area at all though :/

So now you are critisizing performance is poor based on the amount of cache? You sure you're not trolling? Because I don't see how anyone could say that with a straight face. Ohhhhh wait, maybe you're just trying to start a flame war! I see what you're up to. :)
11-06-2010, 08:15 AM
Mats

Quote:

Originally Posted by blindbox

Like I said, L3 cache are shared. Unless it's some heavily threaded software, other cores can use it.

Well you're the only one caring about if it's shared in this thread, I'll leave you to it.:D

Quote:

Originally Posted by blindbox

I'm not saying we're going to stay with 8 MB forever.

So what's wrong with talking about cache per core?

Quote:

Originally Posted by blindbox

Look at AMD anyway, Thuban has 6MB L3, Deneb has 6 MB L3 as well.

Yeah, you managed to pick one of the few exceptions, but you fail to see the reason why.
X6 would have more cache if the die wasn't so huge to begin with (or, possibly due to latency issues).
Breaking 400 mm^2 wouldn't have made much sense, don't you think?
11-06-2010, 08:59 AM
Mav451

Quote:

Originally Posted by hatter

I believe the reason why people want a glimpse of BD and its performance (only if a sneak peak) because AMD doesn't really have a stellar record in keeping promises and meeting deadlines on CPU side of things.

With Intel, I am sure SB is gonna be rock solid. The chips are already out there in the wild. we all know how they are performing. Enthusiasts usually get to know about what is in store for them when it comes to Intel CPUs. If Intel says SB is going to come in January and if I am waiting for the chip for new build, I can go out and get it in January. There is assurance in waiting here.

With AMD it's not so. I can wait till Q3 next year for BD and (I sincerely hope it's otherwise) may end up disappointed. This is the reason why people are clamoring for some info on AMD CPU.

Agreed. All this talk about AMD holding its cards close to the chest is having the opposite effect on me. The more secretive they are, the less confident I am in AMD. You need to give enthusiasts SOMETHING to look at. It's half a year until next April.

*edit* - Yeah I know he's reiterated in the [H] thread that there's not gonna be any indication, at all, for performance until launch.
11-06-2010, 09:28 AM
Sn0wm@n

cache doesnt mean anything by itself .. its an overglorified buffer on the cpu ... that's it .... without knowing its implication with the rest of the architecture we wont know too much .. and since we barely know anything about the architecture .. how can anyone even comment on how much cache is too much or not
11-06-2010, 09:28 AM
informal

Just in:
http://www.semiaccurate.com/2010/11/...zer-next-week/

Quote:

AMD to demo Bulldozer next week
And they pulled it in a bit
by Charlie Demerjian

November 6, 2010

THERE HAVE BEEN rumblings of AMD's Bulldozer core being pulled in, and some very wild dates are floating. It is true that they are pulling it in, but not nearly as much as some speculate.

Short story, Llano is set for a late Q2 introduction. Orochi, the first Bulldozer part was coming in Q3. This latest adjustment puts Orochi in Q2, we hear April or May for the first few units, likely before Llano. This is probably going to be announced at analyst day next week when Orochi will be publicly demoed. That is the big surprise for attendees.

The rest is at the link.And I guess the surprise is now spoiled :( .The good news is BD is coming sooner,ready to stomp over certain structures over rivers :D
11-06-2010, 09:35 AM
-Sweeper_

You will very likely see it later in Q2 in low volume form, and Q3 will bring real volume.

http://www.semiaccurate.com/2010/11/...zer-next-week/
11-06-2010, 09:37 AM
informal

Wow you are fast /sarcasm
:D :D :D
11-06-2010, 09:42 AM
god_43

Quote:

Originally Posted by flippin_waffles

So now you are critisizing performance is poor based on the amount of cache? You sure you're not trolling? Because I don't see how anyone could say that with a straight face. Ohhhhh wait, maybe you're just trying to start a flame war! I see what you're up to. :)

dude, thats not saaya.
11-06-2010, 09:55 AM
Lightman

Good news then! Thanks for info Informal!

I'm looking forward to AMD's Analyst Day even more now :up:
11-06-2010, 11:27 AM
Stukov

Quote:

Originally Posted by god_43

dude, thats not sayaa.

lol i didnt quite catch that either
11-06-2010, 11:52 AM
Mats

Quote:

Originally Posted by god_43

dude, thats not sayaa.

What do you mean?:confused:
11-06-2010, 12:33 PM
radaja

Quote:

Originally Posted by flippin_waffles

So now you are critisizing performance is poor based on the amount of cache? You sure you're not trolling? Because I don't see how anyone could say that with a straight face. Ohhhhh wait, maybe you're just trying to start a flame war! I see what you're up to. :)

come on?saaya trolling or trying to start a flame war?ridiculous
he just stated his opinion.
perhaps your defender pants are on too tight:shrug:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mats

What do you mean?:confused:

what i said above,just ridiculous
11-06-2010, 01:15 PM
god_43

Quote:

Originally Posted by radaja

come on?saaya trolling or trying to start a flame war?ridiculous
he just stated his opinion.
perhaps your defender pants are on too tight:shrug:

what i said above,just ridiculous

^this
11-06-2010, 02:48 PM
flippin_waffles

Quote:

Originally Posted by radaja

come on?saaya trolling or trying to start a flame war?ridiculous
he just stated his opinion.
perhaps your defender pants are on too tight:shrug:

what i said above,just ridiculous

Yeah, I read that after and it didn't really sound like I intended. Should have deleted it. :p: Time for a break! :D Apologies saaya.
11-06-2010, 02:54 PM
freeloader

Quote:

Originally Posted by JF-AMD

I can think of a lot of things that they do/did that we do not.

Just because someone else does it doesn't mean it's right.

It means their proud of what they've accomplished. I guess AMD is not.

That's the message you send to people when you're unwilling to share any sort of performance data.
11-06-2010, 03:05 PM
Dimitriman

Quote:

Originally Posted by freeloader

It means their proud of what they've accomplished. I guess AMD is not.

That's the message you send to people when you're unwilling to share any sort of performance data.

youre not looking at it the right way. what can amd do if intel releases early benches? nothing as they are trying hard to beat their own schedule. now what can intel do with 5 month early info on bulldozer? a lot.
11-06-2010, 04:56 PM
freeloader

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dimitriman

youre not looking at it the right way. what can amd do if intel releases early benches? nothing as they are trying hard to beat their own schedule. now what can intel do with 5 month early info on bulldozer? a lot.

Nothing. Intel is set with Sandy Bridge and can't change it now. Sure they could change Ivy Bridge for more performance, but by then, AMD should also be working on a second generation BD part.
11-06-2010, 05:32 PM
Sn0wm@n

Quote:

Originally Posted by freeloader

Nothing. Intel is set with Sandy Bridge and can't change it now. Sure they could change Ivy Bridge for more performance, but by then, AMD should also be working on a second generation BD part.

but if intel could get ivy bridge or get a new stepping or a small change to sandy bridge midway through the platform integration roadmap .... and that small change would boost their advantage over the market by 10% would you call that nothing???

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page