AMD presents "The Bulldozer Blog"

Printable View

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

08-06-2010, 01:50 PM
Sn0wm@n

Quote:

Originally Posted by Manicdan

we need to have a paypal setup gambling section of the forum. let the fanboys take some real risk with what they say. (this applies to all variations of fanboys)

LOLL some of them would go broke from day one .... LOLL
08-06-2010, 01:52 PM
Dresdenboy

Quote:

Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR

I'll take that bet. I can guarantee you right now that your processor won't be able to match my expectations.

Ouch.. and I was looking for a fair fight.. ;)
08-06-2010, 01:57 PM
STaRGaZeR

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dresdenboy

Ouch.. and I was looking for a fair fight.. ;)

He just said "my processor actually performs better at half load than anyone here would ever expect". Bad planned comment coming precisely from a marketing guy, isn't it? It's just asking for this kind of response ;)

By the way, SB won't match my expectations either. Guaranteed ;)
08-06-2010, 02:00 PM
informal

Quote:

Originally Posted by terrace215

So, what's your prediction for single-threaded performance of BD vs SB?

Well for one I won't claim this or that like you do.You know next to nothing about how each perform(bits and pieces in SB case) and you firmly claim one of them (BD) will be "particularly bad" in certain situations. I for one believe it won't be "particularly bad" in any type of workload,but whether it will be able to match SB depends on various things we have no clue about at this point in time(clock speeds,Turbo,memory performance,no clue on BD performance,little clues on SB performance etc.).
08-06-2010, 02:08 PM
WaterFlex

I wish i`ll try AMD platform someday :)
08-06-2010, 02:37 PM
YukonTrooper

Quote:

Originally Posted by WaterFlex

I wish i`ll try AMD platform someday :)

You missed the S939 days? :eek:

Best computing days ever. :)
08-06-2010, 02:52 PM
terrace215

Quote:

Originally Posted by informal

Well for one I won't claim this or that like you do.You know next to nothing about how each perform(bits and pieces in SB case) and you firmly claim one of them (BD) will be "particularly bad" in certain situations. I for one believe it won't be "particularly bad" in any type of workload,but whether it will be able to match SB depends on various things we have no clue about at this point in time(clock speeds,Turbo,memory performance,no clue on BD performance,little clues on SB performance etc.).

I see, so you just have NO OPINION on the relative single-threaded performance of BD and SB. Well, glad we cleared that up.
08-06-2010, 02:58 PM
madcho

Quote:

Originally Posted by YukonTrooper

You missed the S939 days? :eek:

Best computing days ever. :)

DDR1 600 was very hot :up:
08-06-2010, 03:43 PM
richierich

Love the Intel trolls stirring up trouble as always
08-06-2010, 04:44 PM
BatteryOperated

Quote:

Originally Posted by richierich

Love the Intel trolls stirring up trouble as always

Intel trolls. AMD trolls.

Seriously, if Intel and AMD respectively produced product as often as you guys talk, we'd have 16nm technology right now.

I feel right now a line from the movie "midnight run" by veteran actor Dennis Farina is called for.

*ring ring*

<Dirk Meyer> y'ello?
<Dennis Farina> Is this moron number 1? Put moron number 2 on the phone.
<Dirk Meyer> yeah, hes right here.
<JF-AMD> Yeah?
<Dennis Farina> I thought Bulldozer was going to be out this year.
<JF-AMD> That's the information we got.
<Dennis Farina> "thats the information we got." Listen to me very carefully. I want that uarch released and I want it released fast. You and that other dummy better start getting more involved with your work or I am going to strangle you with your bicycle helmet. *SLAMS PHONE RECEIVER*

...........

<dirk meyer> john, hes not mad at me, is he?
08-06-2010, 05:53 PM
Jowy Atreides

Quote:

Originally Posted by LesGrossman

Any word about running on AM3 or not?

Yes but in a nonspecific way.

Quote:

it will be backwards compatible so you won’t need to change anything to start using the processor"

Source - AMD
http://blogs.amd.com/work/2010/08/02...ulldozer-blog/

looks like AM3 compatibility confirmed
08-06-2010, 06:16 PM
cegras

Quote:

Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR

A good product sells itself, a bad one doesn't. Marketing is there to help the good products to sell even more and to help the bad ones to sell something. Marketing teams almost always tell the truth. The problem is not what they tell you, it's what they don't tell you. You, with emphasys in you, are fooling your potential customers just as much as any other marketing guy.

I'll say this one time only: let's have a clear and sincere conversation. Sincere doesn't mean sharing results. Don't try to fool me because it's not going to work. Don't take this as an offense, again I'm sure you know what I'm refering to, so please.

I'll take that bet. I can guarantee you right now that your processor won't be able to match my expectations.

And yes, it'll be very interesting. I'm looking forward to it.

You are beyond wrong.

Also, no one cares about your expectations, since they are arbitrarily set.
08-06-2010, 06:35 PM
Jowy Atreides

Fake?

Yes.
08-06-2010, 06:49 PM
Mechromancer

^^^HOLY CRAP THAT IS AN EPIC POST! Who made all those slides? It is pure AMD :banana::banana::banana::banana:. If only it were true.

EDIT: Taking a closer look at those numbers: If Zambezi has twice the cores of a Phenom II with around 1.8x the performance of one, those number could very well be realistic.
08-06-2010, 06:57 PM
slaveondope

:rofl: at the inflated GPU score for having more cores on Interlago:rolleyes:
08-06-2010, 07:02 PM
Mechromancer

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jowy Atreides

Fake?

Lots 'O Pics

Source?
08-06-2010, 07:07 PM
god_43

yes those are fake, it was from the botched april fools joke from amdzone, they almost got jf-amd in trouble with that one.
08-06-2010, 07:21 PM
Jowy Atreides

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mechromancer

Source?

chw.net

Google latest, references it is from information provided to the AMD forum, apparently not posted yet
08-06-2010, 07:21 PM
Jowy Atreides

Quote:

Originally Posted by god_43

yes those are fake, it was from the botched april fools joke from amdzone, they almost got jf-amd in trouble with that one.

Cheers for the update
08-06-2010, 09:56 PM
Shadov

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jowy Atreides

Yes but in a nonspecific way.

Source - AMD
http://blogs.amd.com/work/2010/08/02...ulldozer-blog/

looks like AM3 compatibility confirmed

They are talking about server sockets, not AM3. It seems youre reading to much into it. :)
08-06-2010, 10:48 PM
Mech0z

This slide anand showed some time ago lists Zambezi as AM3 but I am not sure if this is the most powerful version of BD havent followed it closely enough :/
http://images.anandtech.com/reviews/...toproadmap.jpg
08-06-2010, 11:44 PM
FlanK3r

think, next gen Bulldozer will totally new socket (this one but AM3+/AM3)
08-07-2010, 04:43 AM
JF-AMD

Quote:

Originally Posted by god_43

yes those are fake, it was from the botched april fools joke from amdzone, they almost got jf-amd in trouble with that one.

To all those that said I was over-reacting and that this would die down in a few days, you were all wrong.

I probably recieve an handful of emails a month still about this and I am pretty sure it will continue after the bulldozer launch. Stuff just lives forever on the internets.
08-07-2010, 04:49 AM
madcho

J-17d :horse:
08-07-2010, 04:56 AM
ajaidev

JF-AMD you have written in the blog that Bulldozer will be compatible with the older components "mobo, ram, etc" so there is no need to upgrade them did you mean only for server class or consumers version also?

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