no, 1 SB core with SMT is ~18.4mm˛ while each bulldozer module is 30.9mm˛ ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by AKM
2x IB (22nm) cores with SMT should be smaller than a BD module (2x ~13-14mm˛)
Printable View
no, 1 SB core with SMT is ~18.4mm˛ while each bulldozer module is 30.9mm˛ ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by AKM
2x IB (22nm) cores with SMT should be smaller than a BD module (2x ~13-14mm˛)
One BD module has also 2MB of L2 while 1 SB core has only 256KB. So without L2 ,one bulldozer core(if possible to be viewed like that) would be around 7-8mm^2 and with 1MB of L2 it would be around 14mm^2. But aside of that,2 IB cores will probably just be slightly smaller than 1 BD module.How much performance you expect from 2 IB cores?It is basically SB shrank with probably same amount of L2 per core.Clock will be boosted probably,but at the expense of TDP. By that time AMD will have Terramar ,20/10 core server and 10 core desktop chip based on improved Orochi design. 25% more cores and 25% more TDP headroom for Turbo boost clock on improved GF 32nm SOI hk/mg process. That one module is just 30mm^2 more Vs Zambezi/Valencia and it brings 25% more performance. That's the beauty of Bulldozer design ;).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Olivon
now why would you say that
why take out L2, it doesnt belong to the bulldozer module? :)Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
if there is 2mb L2 it is because it probably needs that 2mb L2 to perform well and AMD has to pay for that extra space...
by the time AMD will have terramar intel will have IB-EP with 12c/14T (50% more cores) on a 22nm tri-gate process, possibly on higher stock clocks than SB-EP plus a more agressive turbo mode (yes, a lot more TDP headroom to play with too)...
and lets see if the beaty of that design is enough to match/beat a 4ghz+ IB 4C/8T (probably with minor IPC boost 0-5%) in daily desktop workloads, cause thats what consumers (even intel fans) want, to bring prices down...
When do you expect IB-E will launch? Terramar is scheduled for Q3 next year so let's see when is the IB-E scheduled to launch. Komodo for desktop(10 BD+ cores,no IGP) is Q2 2012.
IB mainstream will be a Fusion-type chip,so it will go against 2 module improved Orochi with improved Radeon cores(more SPs,improved IMC). Do you really think it is going to have hard time against IB+16EU GPU? It may be a bit slower in CPU tasks,but it will blow away that HD4000 to another world ;). Then you put a discrete Radeon card and get another 60% on top of that mountain of GPU advantage... So it's not AMD who will play catch up game in mainstream desktop segment. One thing intel will probably use as a marketing point and with a reason, is QuickSync. Great feature indeed but we shouldn't forget OpenCL and what GPGPU will be able to do one year from now.
we're talking about x86 CPU performance, fusion should have higher IGP performance and I dont expect that to change anytime soon.. it may surprise you but most people dont buy computers to player hardcore games and SB IGP is pretty fine for those, even casual gamers... telling intel will play catch up in mainstream desktop segment because of graphics performance deficit sounds a little desperate.. ;)
the openCL bennefit of those stream processors is yet to be seen by the average joe...
Average Joe has no idea how fast his CPU is ;). He just knows that when he or his son runs a Counter Strike or Half Life 3/4/whatever, he doesn't want a slide show,he wants a playable game.And don't tell me Average Joe will be able to see a difference in CPU performance between QC 3.5-4Ghz BD+ X4 and QC 4GHz IB because I highly doubt this ;).
well, thank god SB/IB IGP doesnt/wont run many popular games like a slide show... the same way you think BD+'s CPU performance might be more than enough to most consumers, I say the same about SB/IB IGP...Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
I'd also say that if the average joe ever notices a difference between them, it would be while doing CPU tasks, not watching his son play games at higher resolutions
I smell a contradiction here, you just told us terramar & komodo would launch in Q3 & Q2, so they will be out months after the first IB chips arrive (IB-EP is the one who comes later H2/2011) :)Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
The only problem is that average joe won't notice a few seconds here and there in CPU performance while he may notice 2-4x lower frame rates ;). Being 10-20% slower in CPU department is not bad and you know it,while being 2-4x slower in games and GPGPU is more than bad. It's plain awful when you think of it. With Fusion type of CPUs it's all about the complete package Joe gets,and he will get much better package with Bulldozer Fusion.
edit:
Where is the link for IB-E launch date?? As you can read my post,I never mention IB since we all know it's Q1 2012 or Q4 this year if stars align. IB-E news on the other hand are nowhere to be found.Quote:
I smell a contradiction here, you just told us terramar & komodo would launch in Q3 & Q2, so they will be out months after the first IB chips arrive (IB-EP is the one who comes later H2/2011) :)
wow, someone already has numbers comparing IB's IGP with the next gen fusion, could you share more with us informal? :p:
you could also point out why you think most people around the world care about hardcore gaming while buying a computer
(specially without discrete graphics card for those few % who actually really care)...
We know it's 16EU,it's been already posted in the news. How much better performance can it get? Ontario's weak CPU with 80SPs is posting fps numbers in the realm between HD2000 and HD3000.If IB matches Llano's 400SPs I would be hugely surprised ;). BD Fusion is going to ramp up Llano's SP count,so if that impossible task of matching Llano happens(which it won't since intel needs 2x-3x more GPU power to do that), BD Fusion will stomp it again.Quote:
Originally Posted by -Sweeper_
As for hardcore gaming comment,where did I mention HC gaming?? BD Fusion (and Llano) will have much better GPU,no matter what settings you use on both competing products.The point is it will give you either much better fps at any resolution used or much higher in-game image quality with similar fps (AF/AA on HD intel solution I won't even start mentioning). No matter how you turn it around ,with Fusion it's not only about CPU cores but about the whole hybrid chip.While IB may be a bit faster in CPU tasks(by how much and what is noticeable?),a huge difference in games and GPGPU will make BD Fusion much better product.
PS still waiting for your IB-E roadmap link and H2 '12 launch date ;)
Fusion (2012) will be a much more balanced package, offering fast BD cpu cores and good graphics... but will that make it a better product? what I'm saying is that it actually depends on your specific tasks.. IB should offer very fast cpu cores + decent graphics... if you rely on the cpu side (and a lot of people do) get IB or komodo... if you rely on graphics get fusion (or simply buy a discrete graphics card)... now the question is, if you rely on both, what chip to get?
I say its pretty soon to answer this...
ps: I saw it in one of those pcwatch roadmaps (sent you a PM with the link), but both of us know its no surprise that IB-EP is coming around 1 year after SB-EP and zambezi will have to fight LGA 1155 IB for some time before komodo arrives...
It's not about hardcore gaming, just play games at a decent level "similar to what i see on consoles".
SB/IB IGP can run modern and popular games "smoothly" at low details, HD6450 is twice as fast as HD3000 but it's also slow if they want to see that "wow factor" of pc games. In low they look more or less like a Wii/PS2.
Fusion Llano brings that "HD5570/5670" hall of famer gpu quality. Not expensive, no need of a quality PSU and can play any game with mid-high/high details as long as they don't force resolution (1366x768/1400x900/1600x900).
And no, SB IGP are not enough for gaming(low cost are HD2000 which is even worse). Now if Joe listens to what the store salesman says or just buy blindessly a brand pc, they'll probably be disappointed the moment they ask some friend or forum.
Don't forget not only cpu part can be alter to new arch, the gpu part could be, too.Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
In 2012 the HD6000 series will be replaced by the new HD7000 architecture, nobody can sure AMD won't do the same in its APU.
Well none of those products are available so we don't really know what will happen.But the fact is that a whole package will be judged and evaluated,that's all.
SB-E + 1 year should indeed equal launch date for IB-E,but there is no really data and SB-E will be a Q4(late or early Q4?).
@ undone
Yes,I expect them to use VLIW4 with Trinity Fusion,a move from present 5way SPs.
Does amd ever announced the Llano is VLIW5 based?Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
I think he's just trying to stir the pot :P No proof, or even link to speculation implies a hollow statement.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sn0wm@n
I smell an Intel troll trying to get a rise out of people, simply due to his own boredom :DQuote:
Originally Posted by -Sweeper_
Such high frequencies would indeed be very promising for Bulldozer performance if true. Though I am bit worried that the high frequencies will end being Bulldozer's only defense against higher IPC efficiency of SB.Quote:
Originally Posted by undone
What I'm saying is that I'm hoping Bulldozer is able to compete with SB in terms of IPC efficiency aswell and not just by having a very high frequency. But I have a feeling it might end up that way. But as always we'll have to wait and see.
Selling CPUs with a potential frequency of above 4GHz should be great from a marketing point of view though. 4GHz is after all something rather magically to be able to pass, especially from a processor in stock configuration.
probably what it isQuote:
Originally Posted by Formula350
Not really but they said,back in the day of HD5000 series, they will use current Radeon cores in their upcoming Llano device.That's why I concluded it will be vliw5.It may end up being something else :),we don't know. But a switch to vliw4 in BD Fusion will cut the GPU die area a bit(10% according to HD6800 available info) while maintaining same performance.Quote:
Originally Posted by undone
We don't know the IPC story in Bulldozer's case,yet.Quote:
Originally Posted by Warwian
Fusion LlanoQuote:
Originally Posted by undone
Redwood core (High End) HD5000, VLIW5
Caicos core (Low End), HD6000 VLIW5 (only HD6900 are VLIW4)
Yes, I realise this but it doesn't make me less worried.Quote:
Originally Posted by Warwian
Anyways, anyone else have any thoughts on my proposed frequencies? Do they even seem remotely likely?
3.7 Ghz stock on a 45nm node (although matured process) will make me think that AMD will do something ridiculous sometime soon Ghz wise :yepp:Quote:
Originally Posted by Warwian
Quad cores...i expect them to hit north of 4 Ghz on 32nm and anything less on launch means... higher speeds will follow just like with Phenom II... from 3 Ghz at the top end to 3.7 Ghz at the top end.
Six core processors... they started with 3Ghz and are at 3.3Ghz (and then some with turbo)... I'd expect them to launch with about 3.5 Ghz at the least with the TDP in mind.
So yes... if i'm looking forward optimistically towards this smaller node... i can't be faulted...
There's only one thing though... marketing may want to use some of the capability clocking wise for advertising turbo... :P
Nope. I'm really serious ...Quote:
Originally Posted by Sn0wm@n
But we will see ;)
give reason, its not reason...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Olivon
share your source
The clock rates for the 8 core BD are not that high, in part because you can't achieve Turbo Core 2.0 levels, as posted here:Quote:
Originally Posted by undone
http://blogs.amd.com/work/files/2011...t-for-John.jpg
...without setting the stock speeds to a more conservative level. The above is a good representation of what the FX-8130P will be able to achieve in terms of Turbo Core.
It will be that stupid unsubstantiated rumour by a guy from an English site who claims to have a Bulldozer.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sn0wm@n
He won't say anything either, funny about that.
I've been searching all day in an attempt to confirm this "rumour" and can't find a thing. I'm hardly surprised.
It originated here.
http://forums.aria.co.uk/showthread.php?t=26041&page=60
If AMD had a showstopper which is the only thing that would stop the launch now then they would be legally obliged to inform stock markets etc immediately.
It would be all over the internet like wildfire.
Sorry i can't understand what does this diagram stand for. Does turbo core affect the stock frequency? Maybe anybody tell us about the actual stock frequency & turbo core frequency would clear all doubt.:DQuote:
Originally Posted by perkam
I can't tell you the source but that's coming directly from one mobo maker.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aussie FX
What maker? EVGA? :D
Well if there is a delay then AMD will have to come out in a few days and tell the world. But I don't buy this at all.Sure it's possible but so close to the launch(2 weeks) and AMD hits a delay is not likely to happen.
Wait till Computex. I have a tingling suspicion that it's actually delayed (a bit) though, as Anand himself hints as such. Probably late June reviews?
Technically whole June is still Q2 so if it launches in June,even on the last day it fits with the roadmap :). Macadamia, did Anand hint in some article or in comments section?
Maybe they cannot iron out that 990 chipset bug they were talking about in one of the conference calls? As I doubt they would have CPUs in trouble.
Where did Anand hint at this?Quote:
Originally Posted by Macadamia
You mean Anand the site that is not pro intel at all?
http://twitter.com/#!/anandshimpi/st...66600668758016
Don't read too much into it (like the clockspeed slide omfg), just my speculation that they don't have FX chips yet, only Llano ones.
It does look like, AMD is not telling him anything, and he is just guessing as much as we are :D
But when you think of it, it is highly unlikely to have BD launched in two weeks, as we haven't heard anything from AMD about shipping. Unless they are doing paper launch.
better paperlaunch (for reviews) than nothing
I'm going to have to check my desktop computer (which is in sleep mode) to see for sure, but... I was pppretty darn certain I replied with my guesses on the ASUS slide about clock speeds >_> If I did, then for some reason it got deleted:confused::shrug:
Anyways, I came to talk about something else, but the talk on delays brings us something else I saw on the Wiki page too (yes, I take Wiki info with a grain of salt, don't worry haha).
First is all the Zambezi release dates are marked at June 20th, so that might be where the speculation is stemming from. Also after thinking about it, I guess I'm not totally sure if I ever read that AMD was releasing it on June 7th, but it may only have been said "debut". If that's the case then it could technically hit the market later on like said; not likely if you ask me.
The other part is where Wiki says, for Six and Quad cores, that they are "Native # core, with # cores disabled":confused: My understanding was "native" meant no compromises or whatnot have been made to make something. That would make VIA's latest Nano quad core "Native", when it has two physical dies on one chip (ala Intel Quad). So wouldn't that make it NOT a native design (for all three, AMD, VIA and Intel)? Or is my understanding of what Native implies not quite correct? :(
OH yea, and it's listing an HT of 3200MHz. I thought that the CPU-NB was running at 2600MHz on the desktop chips? While it generally doesn't work, I'm 95% sure (it was last year) I had my Athlon II X2 250u 1.6GHz running with a higher HT then NB speed, but it's pretty much common knowledge to not run the HT above NB speed due to the almost certain fact of instability. Anyways, more inaccuracies on the Wiki article's part, or more misunderstanding on my part? lol
Link to the Wiki
Now... time to go fire up the desktop and find my post that's MIA...
EDIT: Found my post, which I had posted, but still isn't here. I hit browser back and got it all (after taking a screenshot) and before I got around to submitting it my comp crashed haha Oh well, I got the screenshot at least! Still don't know why this got deleted or what have you (glitch in the Matrix?)
http://maxpain.lackeydom.net/MIA.png
Nothing says it must be the 8130P, maybe a lowe clocked model. With different stock frequencies, turbo mode is necessarily not 30% boost in freq on all models.Quote:
Originally Posted by perkam
Guys, may I interrupt your trash fanboy talk and ask when Interlagos is supposed to be released? (And is gonna hit retail market)
Soya
Q3 supposedly.Quote:
Originally Posted by soya_crack
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aussie FX
thanks for the info
I've always thought llano would come before bulldozer.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sn0wm@n
Quote:
Originally Posted by demonkevy666
was the post you quoted of mine linked in any direction towards that in any way???
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warwian
I've had a close look too.. I think the Top bin is 3.2Ghz
http://img571.imageshack.us/img571/2034/bd22.png
I pulled a 2 over from another part of the image. If you look at the areas i've circled, they match, and line up (also lines up on the x axis though I didn't show it)
^
quite possible, with TC it still would be 3,7ghz (if it is 500mhz).
edit: played around a bit with the TC freq. and it seems the first one is a 9... but its kinda strange 900mhz would make sense (its 4,1ghz for st apps), but then theres only space for 2 numbers and there a G at the end... and the last number seems to either be a 2 or 7...
9,2 or 9,7 ghz doesn't make much sense.... ;)
Attachment 114568
Charlies & JF-AMD hinted it was a fake.
http://semiaccurate.com/forums/showt...t=4695&page=94
http://semiaccurate.com/forums/showp...&postcount=938
http://semiaccurate.com/forums/showp...&postcount=940
So.......everybody pls keep calm & wait.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
Quote:
Originally Posted by undone
This will be my last post about this slide as some news sites are using our guesses as actual news. And the slide is probably fake anyways. But it's very fun to speculate and guess; especially since there isn't much other information to come by.
What you think is a 9 is most likely a 1. So on the FX-8130P it probably says TC + 1.2GHz and on the FX-8110 it seems to say TC + 1.0GHz.
The stock frequency looks to be 3.2GHz for the FX-8130P just like you guys posted and probably 3.0GHz for the FX-8110 (though it seems eiher a 3 or 6 could fit in the place of the 0).
I guess these are the most likely guesses of those that have been posted aswell.
Anyways, I figure it's time to stop over-analyzing this slide now and get back to the regular discussion.
1. its not a fake. but it doesnt show what u think it does.
2. yes, i like to make things up, just like charlie. i think hes mad at me cause of some earlier time :P
4. that doesnt mean i like faking things, just that i like to play with the media.
3. JF is a gr8 guy but when it comes to desktop, hes as reliable as a stone. i mean, at the time we had thuban already in testing he was still telling everyone there wont be a desktop 6-core cpu, evaaar! cause u know, it didnt exist at this time.
4. one day, when im tired of all this :banana::banana::banana::banana:, ill tell u my story and u can judge me.
I'm gonna trust wombat on this, he's been pretty accurate on the previous Rage3D and ATI stuff so. yeah...
I agree Macadamia ^^.
you can guess as much as you want on these versions, see my comment in LIano thread, these versions are made up so why bother trying to figure out what they will be capable off....Quote:
Originally Posted by Warwian
Are those versions not real? OK I will have no comment anymore about these if they're not.:eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by duploxxx
FX-8130P 3.2Ghz/4.4Ghz with Turbo Core.Quote:
Originally Posted by duploxxx
There you go. That is the information I have. So you're nearly spot on.
The reason I said why they will be surprised at the FX-4110 is because I have been told it has stock clocks of 3.6Ghz, which I find to be very impressive for a quad core on a new arc in its first revision.
If previous Phenom X4 and X6 clock scaling and process improvement is carried forward to BD, then at the very least we should see 4Ghz stock FX models by early next year. (Fingers crossed)
Herp derp, the subtle hints that BDZ was a speed demon...
If they did a 125W 4140P it could probably reach 4G default as the BD silicon core-gates itself. They should try doing a "E8400" along with the top-end, as 4 int modules will be all that most people need.
Those 1.0+ GHz Turbo Core speedups sound plausible because even Interlagos (2.3 GHz in Cray, maybe more at top bin frequencies) will have 500 MHz turbo on all cores. Remember ISSCC numbers, where average integer apps use ~65% of TDP ( http://regmedia.co.uk/2011/02/24/amd...ower_usage.jpg )Quote:
Originally Posted by perkam
So with turbo at active core counts<max core count there should be even more room than for loads with all cores active.
OMG, does it imply it would break 5ghz with only one integer core loaded?:eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by Dresdenboy
if they can get that high while still being in a safe voltage range, its plausible. but generally we can get a few hundred mhz higher clocks without touching volts, so its probably binned really well for a high temp range that us overclockers never see, which is why we can use that headroom.
Cool! Nice to get some semi-confirmation that we managed to figure out the slides in the end. Credit should go to DarthShader though as he was the first one to almost figure them out (with the help of me ;) )Quote:
Originally Posted by perkam
Let's just hope these numbers are accurate as they sure are extremely promising for Bulldozer's performance. Now we just need to figure out how they are going implement a turbo of this level. It's obvious that just the most active cores will get the boost. The question is how many of the cores that'll be allowed to reach 4.4GHz. Four perhaps? It seems like a reasonable number for most computing.
I got a theory:
The delay rumours come from Asus, they need to reevaluate Final BIOS support for their boards, cause they have been wrong 8130P numbers.
Makes sense? :rofl:
Could someone point ASUS to this thread? Because we have all the FX-8130P numbers they'll ever need right here! ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by DarthShader
pls stop posting those CPU types, bad info, you can geep guessing on the GHZ and turbo, final ES with final GHZ do exist but no one will confirm the latest cpu types and neither 8130P and 4110 will exist at launch ;).Quote:
Originally Posted by perkam
tell me the right ones and ill the them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Warwian
Final recovery (95% accuracy):
http://i.piccy.info/i5/58/05/1540558...overed_500.jpg
Empty spots can't be digitally recovered from original file... but I'm sure you can recover most of them logically ,)
PS what do you think w0mbat? :) Those "1"s after TC+ just don't fit nicely... that's why only 95% rating for this recovery. Is "1" a correct number there ???
lol. 95% accuracy? how did u get to that conclusion?
w0mbat pixels and edges gradient, 95% match. except those "1" - they are more logical match as nothing fits those left pixels except "1".
Point to mistakes plz and we'll look into it )))
I came across this article today:
SourceQuote:
Asus has leaked a few fresh tidbits of information on AMD’s upcoming Bulldozer processors. The company posted a few new specs in a BIOS evaluation chart for one of its new 990FX motherboards.
The list includes two eight-core parts, which were already leaked some time ago. The FX-8130P is a 3.8GHz part and it can overclock to 4.2GHz on turbo. It has a TDP of 125W and should sell for $320. The FX-8110 also packs eight cores and it’s clocked at 3.6GHz sans turbo, or 4.0GHz with turbo. The TDP stands at 95W and the price is $290.
In the six-core department, the FX-6110 will feature a 95W TDP and an MSRP of $240, but there is no word on clocks yet. The same goes for the quad-core FX-4110, with a 95W TDP and $190 price.
In any case, the prices look very competitive compared to Intel’s high end parts and Bulldozer should be on a par with current high-end Intel Core series parts.
id look into the stock FX4 clocks too.
w0mbat hmm... FX 4110 stock could also be 3.6Ghz. "6" fits the shape but does not fit the gradient. Only "8" fits both shape and gradient although not perfectly... any other number doesn't fit at all. SO I take it as 3.6Ghz stock clock then ) tnx
what is G28PH?
Maybe we'll get a sneak peak of Zamezi in AMD's Live Webcast From COMPUTEX 2011?
The live webcast will offer details on how AMD's 2011 VISION Technology refresh will better serve consumers in selecting the best next generation of computing experiences and offer sneak previews of new products planned for release in 2011.
Live Webcast From COMPUTEX 2011: AMD to Detail Plans to Continue Enabling the Next Generation of PC User Experiences
:up:
Lets wait and see , First event I will go at COMPUTEX :D:DQuote:
Originally Posted by ReKcOlNu
I hope I didn't sleep over-time that day ;)
I think they should make something like an FX 4130P (I assume P = Performance) that has 8 modules, but only uses 1/2 of each to take advantage of all the potential bandwidth heh (John mentioned that on the 20Q blog, that a thread on each module would yield more throughput then two threads pers, but would produce more heat since modules couldn't shut down.)Quote:
Originally Posted by Macadamia
I'd consider buying that, if they'd overclock into the 4.5GHz area almost guaranteed :)
I guess this maybe the world's first official information about the version name lol. So called 8130, 8110 maybe fake.
http://motherboardnews.com/wp-conten...bytefxleak.png
old old old.Quote:
Originally Posted by undone
this one is so old and its one of the reason i posted the ASUS slide - cause it was the first document that kinda confirmed the naming scheme.
Ahahah... AMD did a really good job of keeping everything "secret". People are going in circles, coming up with "news" that surfaced some months ago ... just to keep this "speculation" running :)
Good job AMD ;) People are freaking out! eheheh
Agreed. People have hard time trying to figure out if a model runs a 3.6 or 3.8 GHz from a pshopped slide, without knowing the actual performance at all - TWO WEEKS FROM LAUNCH.:rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by Postmodum
And before some smart guy once again says "NDA":
I know.
But still, impressive.
Guys you all forgot about HD4000 series launch and the 400SP news just a few days before the launch? Wasn't that "blogger"(now banned here and pretty much elsewhere) assuring the rest of us that 400SP is the correct SP count? Also don't forget the launch of HD6800 series and the "specifications" that were surfacing,none of which were true.
but its noice, because its the "Hype moment", more and more discussion in forums about BD last weeks
i remember quiet good. and i remember how everyone had proof that the slide nordichardware.com posted, stating 800sp + the right clks, was a fake. guess where that came from... :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
Not sure I like that, though, too much uncertainty and spam to go through...Quote:
Originally Posted by Postmodum
this might be a catch 22 though,Quote:
Originally Posted by Formula350
if you have 4 threads on 2 modules, you get 10% less perf, but you might get 15% better power savings compared to having 4 threads on 4 modules. that extra power savings turning into higher clocks and might get you 10% faster speeds, resulting in the same exact performance in the end.
so the question will be, does 4ghz on the FX-8110 equal 4.4ghz on the FX-4110, and which one will consume more power when running 4 threads
Where's AMD Bulldozer ? - Sweclockers
Quote:
Although the boards are ready for launch, the engineers have not access to real production samples of Bulldozer-based processors. Instead they use scaled-down and locked "engineering samples" and the older Phenom II to function test the new models.
The situation has even gone so far that motherboard manufacturers are reluctant to launch the new models in June and is considering cuts in supply. Although it is still using the old Phenom II socket AM3, but this combination is more difficult to market.
Without a precise planning from AMD's site now requires manufacturers to the new processors will take until August or even September. It is dangerously close to Intel's launch of Sandy Bridge-E which has the potential to steal the limelight, at least among enthusiasts who put performance first.
this is why I was forced to build a Intel System for my server, Hardware failure dictated that I could wait no more for these phantom processors. Let alone the fact that the server side of Bulldozer will no see the light of day until Dec...maybe!
What a shock, if true.
RussC
I'm pretty sure someone else has said it, but if AMD has to significantly delay the launch of BD, wouldn't they have to inform their shareholders? :shrug:
As far as I know, they have not issued any warnings of a delay to anyone, yet.
Sounds like AMD secrecy is bordering on paranoid. :CTF:
Frankly, I am dissapointed on the fact that I had to resort to a Intel Build for my server. But, considering the fact that I have been waiting 4 years for this Unicorn it was more of a reality decision versus a paranoia one, just could not wait any longer do to hardware failure:(
Nice to see on that article that "they use scaled-down and locked "engineering samples" " for testing... :x
Oh boy ... my i7 920 is still "alive and kicking" ... i can w8 ... but for those of you who are reaching your psychological brake point of sanity while waiting for the BD ... this is rough news :x
Still... i'm really looking forward and i truly believe that this is going to be an hell of a chip ...
Intel did re-schedule the Ivy Bridge too ... ahahah ... paper launch really sucks, even worst when that paper is written with "invisible ink" ;) ehehhe
you know but you still think we are 2 weeks from launch... now that is what I call FUNNY :ROTF::ROTF:Quote:
Originally Posted by Mats
Does anybody know which site that linked to another site that linked to another site that got a rumor written in a forum that there will be a launch of BD? :D
Enron Of cpu's....Quote:
Originally Posted by Brother Esau
IMO
it's because the boards aren't there is BS.
The board them self can take AM3 cpu's In fact they where slated to be out by March If I recall.
There isn't a problem with the cpus it's the licensing SLI doing it making boards late.
I'd like to also know why everyone is claiming the I7 2600K as high end ? When it's mid-range for intel. :/
So when is it? If AMD is serious with the Q2 statement I may be 3 weeks off at most, not a big deal.Quote:
Originally Posted by duploxxx
All I know is this, feel free to post some more recent info, I haven't seen anything.Quote:
Originally Posted by duploxxx
Dunno what rumor you're talking about?:rolleyes:
If we are to believe this slide then we're getting new revisions by years end:
http://img.donanimhaber.com//images/...1a_dh_fx57.jpg
Also, there is supposedly some situations where having the work done on 2 modules rather than 1 can hurt performance. Shared resources can be an advantage sometimes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
New models maybe, but I don't see anything about a new revision tho.:shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by halfwaythere
that is a slide from 2010Quote:
Originally Posted by Mats
the main thing is missing on the bottom :) * see footnotes at end of presentation: Production schedules and naming is preliminary and subject to change:D
also old presentation... see aboveQuote:
Originally Posted by halfwaythere