ASUS pledges support for AM3+ both for current and future motherboards

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XRL8

I said you were not knowing everything AND/OR not being fully honest.
Cause i dont know.
You either didnt know,or you knew and said otherwise.

What it however strictly shows, is that you wont say anything that is not in line of current AMD policy on said subject.I understand that.Other people should too.

Well were you wrong ?It seems you clearly were wrong with statements that there is no way AM3+ cpu will work on AM3 board (and yes ,you said that).
You have to understand too, that when you say "AMD will not support AM3+ cpus on the AM3 socket" to everyone that isnt a cynic means it wont happen and is not possible.Its a gray area of telling the truth that isnt the whole story.Most of people here me included understood your statements as:
BD is so much different from our previous cpus we werent able to make it compatible with AM3 socket.

And that,is just not true as we have learned.
It means your every statement has to be looked at every angle to make sure it means what it looks like at first glance.Which means that most of it cant be taken "as is".

I dont like when companies treat me as a sheeple.Intel is doing it constantly, AMD less so.But in recent 2-3 years, its more secretive than the CIA.I cant plan ahead my purchases, cause i dont know anything until its DONE.Intel is much better at this,downside is that you mostly know that youre gonna be screwed, just in advance ;-).
If i would know for some time that i could buy Am3 board that will support BD , i would do so.Now i wont.I`l just wait and see ,cause i know that current SB mainboards will support ivybridge.AMD wont tell anyone anything about the future that AM3+ has (if any).
If asus produces mainboards compatible with am3+ for some time now.Everyone could.And thats a failure on AMD`s part.And we probably will never know as to "why".

---

Can you tell us some good reason why AMD has to lie about it. I mean if there is a full support for Bulldozer on AM3 board it would only sell many more Bulldozers, which is win situation for AMD since they need better market penetration. It would have also sell many more AMD Phenoms if there was such support and there was no need to wait for the AM3+ boards, so it would be pretty stupid for AMD to lie about it.

The ASUS BETA BIOS for some mobo is hack and nobody knows how well it will work.

So just maybe you should take it easy with your accusations about lying and the other speculations.

its not lie. AMD support AM3+ for Zambezi. Its hard to say, but AM3 Crosshair IV Formula is technically not the same as example AM3 board GA890FXA-UD5. Looks, its better now making boards with right AM3+ socket than modify AM3 in new revisions others board with +2 next activ pins in socket. Ths ASUS boards are only one exception of AM3 boards. So, Zambezi is still AM3+ CPU.

Am I the only one here who has gone through more motherboards than cpus over the years?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BababooeyHTJ

I'm I the only one here who has gone through more motherboards than cpus over the years?

---

Same here.

At any rate I'll be getting a new mobo for Bulldozer since I don't want to use DDR2 anymore.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BababooeyHTJ

I'm I the only one here who has gone through more motherboards than cpus over the years?

---

Asus M2A-VM (690G chipset AM2 socket) started with Athlon X2 3800+, now have Phenom X3 8450 and was thinking about upgrading soon to Athlon X4 640, but found out that DVI have problems with high res monitors, so probably will wait for Buldozer

Quote:

---

So just maybe you should take it easy with your accusations about lying and the other speculations.

---

Great to take things out of context right ?
JF said it isnt possible, but it is.So he didnt know it could be done.I said EITHER one or the other, and im pretty sure he just didnt knew.
On a side note, if its pin compatible with the socket, and runs on the same chipset.Its hardly "a hack".You would have to call AM2 compatibility with am2+ processors "a hack" also.
Only difference is last time it was offical AMD policy and now it isnt, which is a not so nice move from amd.
I guess if you see competitor doing it all the time and cashing huge amounts of money ,you think "why bother".

The most important thing to me is the fact that you dont need 9xx series chipset at all.From the point when electrical requirements for BD were set, we could be getting ALL AM3+ compatible boards.And we didnt, thats a fail.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XRL8

The most important thing to me is the fact that you dont need 9xx series chipset at all.From the point when electrical requirements for BD were set, we could be getting ALL AM3+ compatible boards.And we didnt, thats a fail.

---

Fail is putting it into very very nice way. I'd use much stronger words if my mobo wasn't in the asus compatibility list (worst case scenario it won't fall as badly in price as other am3 mobos).

Is it possible that this compatibility that most people won't take advantage of anyways come at the cost of progress?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BababooeyHTJ

Is it possible that this compatibility that most people won't take advantage of anyways come at the cost of progress?

---

No.Because AMD has not made any effort to do it.So nothing held them back.

wtf??? This is confusion now...
http://hothardware.com/News/Mud-In-T...M3-Compatible/

yep all we can do is play the waiting game :(

Seems pretty simple to me.. Asus has magic powers and can remove pins from processors with a bios flash Durh..


Seriously though the new revision may be with am3+ socket.. So therefore would fit... Ye it may run bulldozer cpus's.. It might even run them to a satisfactory standard. But 10000000000% that it will NOT run it to it's true potential performance levels due to being a new arch.

Seriously stop being cheap and get a new mobo and stop arguing over something so small. I really don't get this thread.

@Flanker: What is there to be confused about? We know the answer already. The 940 (or 941?) pin AM3+ cpu will physically fit in the 941 pinhole AM3 socket. However the extra 2 (or 3?) pinholes needed to be activated for it to work on the AM3 socket is only routed on the 6 models in Asus list, as all the others only have 938 (am3 cpu) pinholes activated (routed).
I can't understand how that website missed this...
And as stated many times before: Socket pinholes =/= cpu pins

Yeah, hothardware didn't really add any more info, just did some speculating. The six Asus boards supports AM3+ CPU's, that's not the same thing as they follow the AM3+ standard.

no, have right, buw why webistes changing it in stories :(...

socket=/= CPU pins
AM3 socket has 941pins CPU for it 938 (Phenoms II)
AM3+ socket has 942 pins download at "942 SOCKET User Guide_Rev A (NXPowerLite.pdf"
AM3+ CPU Zambezi has lower than 942 pins ,-)

This is very likely to be a situation where ASUS (and other) manufacturers are looking to boost sales of current stocks of motherboards. By claiming them to be compatible with future processors, they can get a number of earlier sales of the current high end boards and make a nice profit. AMD had no intention of moving that direction due to the trade offs, and by making announcements, ASUS may be trying to force AMD's hand in the matter to help them pull it off rather than face a marketing debacle.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Michaelius

Fail is putting it into very very nice way. I'd use much stronger words if my mobo wasn't in the asus compatibility list (worst case scenario it won't fall as badly in price as other am3 mobos).

---

Everyone's a critic :rolleyes:. I'd prefer my Crosshair IV formula to be compatible with a CPU 3 generations from now. They must have an idea of the requirements, right? Shouldn't they have anticipated this and built it into AM3? The exaggeration shows my point: schedules are schedules, and if specs are finalized allowing for appropriate changes to a socket, AMD might have been able to do what they did for C32 and G34. On the other hand, a delay wouldn't have been good for sales or the bottom line, so they did what they did. They delayed the server sockets for months to allow for the change, because it was absolutely necessary. 99% of the consumers won't be looking to drop in a new processor into their motherboard. They can't always cater to their small but increasingly vocal minority of people like us.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xVeinx

This is very likely to be a situation where ASUS (and other) manufacturers are looking to boost sales of current stocks of motherboards. By claiming them to be compatible with future processors, they can get a number of earlier sales of the current high end boards and make a nice profit. AMD had no intention of moving that direction due to the trade offs, and by making announcements, ASUS may be trying to force AMD's hand in the matter to help them pull it off rather than face a marketing debacle.



Everyone's a critic :rolleyes:. I'd prefer my Crosshair IV formula to be compatible with a CPU 3 generations from now. They must have an idea of the requirements, right? Shouldn't they have anticipated this and built it into AM3? The exaggeration shows my point: schedules are schedules, and if specs are finalized allowing for appropriate changes to a socket, AMD might have been able to do what they did for C32 and G34. On the other hand, a delay wouldn't have been good for sales or the bottom line, so they did what they did. They delayed the server sockets for months to allow for the change, because it was absolutely necessary. 99% of the consumers won't be looking to drop in a new processor into their motherboard. They can't always cater to their small but increasingly vocal minority of people like us.

---

Yes you do exaggerate, thats why it is of no relevance.
C32 Socket launched before the AM3.So i dont know what you tried to imply here.
New sockets will be LGA and will be using pcie on cpu.So thats why you cant expect them to have compatibility.DDR4 comes into play later on too.
Thats understandable then.
Again ,c32 launched before am3.So no delay.However were not even talking about whole AM3 lineup compatibility from the get go.But there was OBVIOUSLY a point in past when AMD knew exactly the specs needed for BD to operate.And instead upgrading spec reqs for mainboard makers.They went the "we need new chipset and socket thing" rhetoric.
Which was dubious from the start, as there was no real reason to go this way.AMD`s HTT links approach makes the socket kind of like pciexpress.
And moreover we learned that AM3+ doesnt use faster HT implementation.
9xx chipset seems to be pretty much the same as 8xx.
And ,just like most AMD processors for almost 10 years after the HTT implementation ,even older chipsets will work with BD (asus announcing Mainboards on 7xx series chipsets).
Only sensible difference between Phenom II`s and BD seems PLATFORM wise, seems to be what kinc said, BD`s use all of the pins on AM3, while PHII didnt.Thats a problem for older boards, and pretty much only reason why they wont work with BD.As someone already pointed out, it is connected (most probably) to the new turbocore 2.0.A nice feature, but not absolutely needed one.And has nothing to do with pure ipc of the cpu.
As to catering to the "small" number of people.I strongly believe that every enthusiast makes much bigger impact than he himself.I buy and recommend hardware for around 100 people.If your enthusiast which works in corporate IT, you manage thousands.
And even if were small ,that doesnt mean we shouldnt be trying to get whats good for us CONSUMERS.Defending speechless and gutless corporations seems absurd to me.
Im all for technology advancement.Im not for careless overproduction of goods.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XRL8

C32 Socket launched before the AM3.

---

It was the other way around, AM3 came first.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AM3
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socket_C32

AMD knew what was needed in the server sockets in order to make them support BD.
Their 800 chipsets was launched pretty much at the same time, in retrospect it looks they had a reason, and a chance, to launch AM3+ with the new chipsets last year.
But it seems like AMD realized the AM3+ needed even more changes a bit too late for a 2010 launch.

Yes youre right about socket launch dates, ive read an article on anandtech and read the date in wrong order.They were few months in between tho,and server side always needs more time.
It doesnt change the fact that AMD knew what it needed for a long time.And AM3+ boards (the official ones, not even the asus AM3) are almost exactly the same.
They use existing chipset ,on existing boards with just a new revision.It is not a big overhaul.Looks more like cosmetic change.And if what kinc said is true.
Not even that, just using properly the existing AM3 infrastructure.
If AMD would care, they could do infrastructure preview, on why and how.But they wont.
They could do a press release.They wont.
Well, until someone high up somewhere makes some comment.We wont know anything more.So there is no clear answer right now if or how much amd screwed up with this socket thing.
And if somebody thinks its all fine and dandy, quick recap.

AMD=AM3 will support BD
AMD=Unfortunately AM3 will not support BD because we want maximum performance, new socket and chipset with backwards compatibility.
JF-AMD=Theres no way BD could work on AM3 socket (no magic pixie dust)
Asus=Well, we have new bioses for Am3+ cpus for our recent boards.
JF-AMD=AMD doesnt support AM3+ cpus on AM3 socket
Asus=We`re gonna build BD boards even on 7xx chipsets
Gigabyte=Were using existing boards with new socket and adding 0.1 revision to support BD.
AMD users=confusion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XRL8

AMD=AM3 will support BD

---

I don't remember that, might be just missed it. What I saw in 2009 presentation - some mysterious AM3r2. Could somebody really point at that said by AMD?

For rest things - JUST WAIT... Two months left only ))

Well at the time there were many snippets about this.
Thats one:
http://tech.icrontic.com/files/2009/...op_roadmap.png

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AM3#Socket_AM3.2B

Quote:

---

...Contrary to initial design goals, "Zambezi" won't support AM3: AMD claims it's the only way to deliver its full potential...

---

I would say that the new socket is in wake of the fact that mobo manufacturers did not fully connect the whole grid for AM3. Leaving a vary large number of older generation AM3 boards incapable of running BD like they wanted. Because of this to lessen the "Why isn't it working" complaints they developed a new socket that would work off the bat so that we don't have those issues. I see this as a support minded change because the manufacturers saved money and did not fully connect the AM3 socket pin holes. Would you think if they went through with the AM3 plan it would be a logistical nightmare.

Just think, we still have ~80-120 days left of speculation. :rolleyes:

It is true that the motherboard makers know all about what they can & can't do with bulldozer. Some of those leaked out that their boards could support a AM3+ CPU.

AMD has said nothing officially, one way or the other about this in any press release that I can find, and I doubt they will until launch date.

JFAMD has made it very clear that he is NOT talking on behalf of AMD, and thus you can't infer that he is. Check his sig.

Did I mention we still have ~80-120 days left of speculation ? :rolleyes:
:shakes:

XRL8: this is so old! 2009, 1.5 year old info. ANd still, AM3+ is AM3 in revision 2 :), they dont say lie

@SOC Admiral

AM2/AM2+ Compatibility with AM3 chips wasnt a sure one either on many boards.But it went a lot better because AMD made it part of they policy,so mainboard makers knew they should do whats asked of them or face user rage.If asus could do it, everyone could.And probably with a lot more supported mainboards.
But you make a good point on one of the reasons why they chose not to.Its just that i see it as a bad move.

@Kobaltrock

I`ve never inferred JF AMD talks on behalf AMD, moreover he only talks what is official AMD policy so theres no problem really.He must have been badly informed by the desktop guys (because he works in servers) and that was the reason for such a strong comment (the pixie dust bit).He rarely goes into detail and more often uses not so precise wording.As in example "it isnt supported", can mean everything really, and informs only of the fact that AMD does not take into account such possibility as its not part of their policy.

@Flank3r

I know thats old old roadmap, i was showing it to SEA as he asked if AMD ever had plans for BD around AM3 socket.It had.It changed about a year/year and a half ago.

As for the speculation bit.If Asus delivered bios for BD`s.That means ES`s are in the wild now at last.And theres at least possibility of getting screenshots of BD working on for example crosshair IV :-), so maybe its gonna be less than 120days.