Yes I know, it's all there in the pic, that's why I said:Quote:
Originally Posted by duploxxx
You don't have an answer, right?;)Quote:
feel free to post some more recent info
Printable View
Yes I know, it's all there in the pic, that's why I said:Quote:
Originally Posted by duploxxx
You don't have an answer, right?;)Quote:
feel free to post some more recent info
you know what they say... can't say I have can't say it is. :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by Mats
I can only say stop using the fake model lists and GHZ rumours.
I tried telling people to stop.Quote:
Originally Posted by duploxxx
Everybody's talking, nobody's listening, because it's more fun to discuss utter lies than waiting silently for the truth to show up.
We don't really know yet whether your statement is true or not. We can theorize that in certain situations it could be true. But in real world applications it might not happen. (Unless you have a source that has broken NDA?)Quote:
Originally Posted by eXa
PLUS: That kind of situation would probably happen much less often with the BD architecture than it would with the competition's architecture.
We'll all just have to wait and see.
I think it will be interesting to see what benchmarks that have been extremely important to the competition for the last few years might suddenly become much less important. (Or what older versions will stop being quoted.)
Franck Delattre has an 8 core FX CPU.
Obviously engineers have working production samples.
You know, everyone is assuming BD will launch in two weeks, but AMD said Q2, and that could mean at the end of June.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mats
They might show something in two weeks, but that could just be Llano. We just don't know. :shrug:
The difference between 2 weeks and the end of June is basically only two weeks anyways. 2, 4, whatever :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by Kobaltrock
--Matt
]Quote:
Originally Posted by demonkevy666
I know, my server feels dirty and ashamed:( I hate Intel with a passion! But what are you going to do when single socket AMD Server / Workstation solutions are gimped?
Agreed. I've put my interpretation (there are several possible) in my sig, just to repeat it (helps with some learning curves about POVs and interpretations) ;) Now I'm waiting for the first "news" popping up that AMD moved the 8130P and x110 models to September to give them higher turbo clock frequencies after deciding that 400 MHz would be too low ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Warwian
One thing I didn't understand was how one could put a "4" after the "+" (would mean +4.x GHz)... BTW, the "6" in "1.6" could also be a 0 and so on.
Hey Dresdenboy,Asus is officially saying the slide is not from them :D.May be that they are covering their asses ,now that it is out.. In any case , your prediction along with mAJORD's,is the closest I have seen.
AMD must have hired the FSB.
Yep, just read it:Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardwar...dozer-models/1
again FAKE- old bad info maybe on page 27 of this thread this slide will pop-up again as true info which again can be used by 25 news sites having all no clue.
only few sites are calm on the news.... guess what they have more info then the fakes, so they know its garbage and wont post it. :D
w0mbat got what he wants ... :p:
Me and DarthShader were debating that quite a bit in the other thread. (http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=271228)Quote:
Originally Posted by Dresdenboy
And I guess I'm to blame for the "4s", I tried to figure out an alternative to the "1s" in the turbo section of the slide because a turbo of +1.2GHz seemed unlikely. After all we were just speculating trying to figure them out.
Nice to see some more suggestions for the FX-4110 and FX-6110 though.
I don't personally believe FX-6110 has a potential turbo frequency of +1.6GHz; I believe it says +1.0GHz for both the FX-6110 and FX-4110.
For the stock frequency of the FX-4110 I also believe it says either 3.6 or 3.8GHz but that one is really hard to make out as nothing seems to match that group of pixels.
I guess the P in FX-8130P could potentially mean a more powerful and aggressive turbo (1.2GHz vs 1.0GHz for the others).
Those numbers Dresdenboy posted have been proposed by a number of people now, including me and DarthShader in the other thread on saturday. We didn't manage to figure out that the FX-8110 might be clocked at 3.0GHz though. That is until Hornet331 came with that suggestion.Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
Anyways, I believe everyone in this thread realize that the slide probably is fake and that the provided naming schemes probably aren't accurate. But it is still interesting to speculate in these things and I don't think we should just wait and see like some people seem to believe.
Yea, that's a good point. I didn't really consider the Turbo bonus any :\ Out of sight, out of mind; I have no Turbo, therefore I don't even factor it into situations hehQuote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
Yea, but John said it requires added programing or specific coding in order to take full advantage of the shared resources design :\ I had mentioned that earlier, where he went on to say that M$ was working on implementing that for future OSes. I figure it's going to be in Win8, but naturally I'm hoping for a Win7 patch to utilize it. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by eXa
See response above... :)Quote:
Originally Posted by keithlm
http://news.softpedia.com/news/AMD-s...t-202051.shtml
is this for real?
why there is always mobo maker who release the news on behalf of AMD?
That's from Sweclockers, already posted a couple of times.Quote:
Originally Posted by haylui
The 3.8/4.2 GHz for 8130P is based on speculation. The delay too. There was a list of 8150, 8100, 6100, 4100 models to be launched in September. What does that mean for 8130P, 8110, 6110, 4110?Quote:
Originally Posted by haylui
I prefer thinking using my own head ;)
anyway the base frequency really is that, a base frequency. It's as usefull(less?) as the base frequency of Core iX (since they almost always sit 1 bin over base even fully loaded)
By launching the BD in September, they will loose all the momentum ...
If that's true, fail.
Those who really need a system now will go with Sandy... and those w8 for a serious upgrade later this year, will w8 to see what intel will bring.
So... mega-major-ultra fail ...
With this decision AMD can start digging the hole of it's own grave... :x
If it was like... 1 month dealy ... but no ... can be 3 months if rumors are correct.
Mehhh... :x
:D classic. But what about those who need new PC in September? Or is everyone on earth are upgrading right now?
Muzi... frustration of waiting for something is sometimes stronger :)
I don't have a problem with it ... many will not have problem with it. But it's all about marketing and market momentum :)
Launching a solution in June-July would be perfect since you have some market space to grow a solution.
People know what SandyBridge is capable of. With the refresh it can only get better and users know it.
By launching the BD really near the launch of SB refresh will create the same situation that the launching of the BD is creating... many people that were thinking in going with Sandy Bridge decided to w8 a little longer to see what's the buzz about BD.
That's one of the problems. Other problem is the "mis-synced" information between motherboard manufactures and AMD.
But we should keep in mind that there's no official information about this and it can be a "destructive rumor" to cool down the buzz...
We'll see... but usually, these rumors end to be true ...
But what about people who need a new PC in JUNE, JULY and AUGUST, plus the ones that want an upgrade?Quote:
Originally Posted by muziqaz
AMD needs to make "cash" quick, a delay like that is really bad for them.
I hope the delay is somehow misunderstood and represents something else. I hope so :up:
Can we just stop the drama for a while?:rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Postmodum
Wait for something more reliable than these rumors, until then just relax.;)
If AMD will launch it three months later, it's for a good reason.
It's not a "bad decision", as in "Yeah we have this new CPU that's the greatest thing we've ever made, but let's postpone the launch, just to see how long we can survive on X6."
We don't need another TLB (or 1155 B2) failure.
I'm tired of waiting myself. All I could ask from AMD is to release specs and performance numbers in June. If the processors performance is what I'm hoping it will be, then I would wait to purchase one.
Serious, now with the "drama queen" aside... these are bad news if real. I'm talking about business opportunity and business plan... not just about frustration for the users.
You all know that a business, to be successful, has to be structured in 2 things: Offering a solution that the competition still didn't address ( in this case, my guess is the price/performance/multi-thread performance/cores ) in a profitable timeframe that will allow the solution to gain market share and be a clear choice for buyers.
If you keep the first part but you start messing with the timeframe where you are going to commercialize your solution, other variables will take place.
If June was a very good timeframe, because it was a "dead cluster" where the competition wouldn't annouce any new products and BD would have a big plus there to gain market... in September, there is going to be lots of buzz about the new products from Intel.
That's why i think, if true , it's not a good move.
Btw, as i said earlier... i think rumor is all about getting attentions off BD or creating more frustration:
http://www.brightsideofnews.com/news...lay2c-but.aspx
How detailed is the official launch date, seriously?
Is it 2011?
Q2 2011?
Or June 7, 2011?
Feel free to post a link, the roadmaps I've seen are old an can be changed, and I don't think they were official anyway.
Now all we need is just below:Quote:
Originally Posted by Postmodum
The "but..." from title means:Quote:
"Our public roadmap has not changed."
The above is a speculation by BSN.Quote:
The thing is though, that there is plenty of indication, that at least some things are going wrong.
The site give me an impression better than before. Bull:banana::banana::banana::banana:News has good at spreading fud since long time ago, but they do a good job this time.;)
Stop it, it's most likely not a deliberate "move".Quote:
Originally Posted by Postmodum
Exactly, that's my point.Quote:
Originally Posted by undone
Stop spreading the rumors, it just makes it worse. We can all start whining when we know for sure, but it's too early for that.
If you are talking in terms of buisness, then you have to realize enthusiasts like people visiting this board are of least concern for AMD right now. Servers and OEM boxes are where the most money is and where AMD has most chances for being competetive. Server BD is in Q3 and Llano is on track. And AMD needs money right now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Postmodum
The public and official launch date is Q2 2011.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mats
http://prohardver.hu/dl/upc/2010-11/...launchtime.jpg
It is a public slide from last year's Analyst Day.
Desktop was always Q2 as Oliverda wrote above.
BSN website links a response from AMD's PR representative who states that public roadmap remains unchanged for now.This means desktop is still Q2 and server Q3.Whole June is still Q2,so unless it launches in July or later, it is on track for Q2(June).
Mats are you that eager for the Bulldozer than you can't talk about rumors and "stuff" so you don't get frustrated? :P
Jeez, we're talking about "news", rumors ... whatever! If we think about it... we have been talking about rumors since the beginning, because there's no news what so ever about the chip ...
This is one more ...
No, it just that this negativity leads nowhere. ;) I've been reading so much exaggerations the last month.
"BD is delayed one month = AMD can start digging their own grave"
"I've been waiting for BD for 8 years now, but now when the rumors says it's delayed 13 days I can't take it any more, Intel here I come."
(yeah I made those up)
There's nothing wrong with discussing rumors, but there's no reason taking them too serious and getting all negative.
Judging by the comments, too many AMD fans act like they're Intel fanboys just because they're frustrated. The worst thing is that they don't seem to realize it themselves..
on the flipside when intel delays IB, its called a slowdown.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mats
double standards are quite entertaining when not taken too seriously.
To be honest, when I saw that BD schedule for when ES, production samples etc would be made I thought it looked very optimistic.
It looked like it could only happen in such short time period if absolutely nothing goes wrong with this new CPU on a new process. Yeah now I'm being negative.. :p
From a psychological point of view these discussions are interesting. There is an official roadmap launch window (Q2). Then we have leaked/faked (or rumoured) names for BD models (FX-8130P, FX-8110 etc.). Fine. Then we see other leaked/faked/rumoured model names for September (FX-8150, FX-8100 etc.).Quote:
Originally Posted by Postmodum
Some people interpret this list as a delay and seemingly begin to believe their own assumptions.
Very interesting... I'll continue watching it unfold :D
Dresdenboy: Misinterpretation of roadmaps is quite common, I'm waiting for:
"OMG, AMD have renamed Zambezi, it's now called Komodo and will show up next year!!"
JF said over and over Q2 .So if JF has any credence in AMD hes right.If things change, im sure JF would pop "Q3" post here and there.
And to bring that to perspective ,theres more than a month to end Q2.
The reason I think nobody really cares if Intel delays chips is the fact that they are still over half a year ahead of AMD in process nodes and a significant amount in performance. Its almost like Intel chips are so fast atm there is no desire to upgrade other than to get something else to play with.Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
If there is a delay, and that is still up in the air, (rumors are just that...), it could have been for very good reasons, perhaps they didn't want to have to do a recall like intel did with their chipset.Quote:
Originally Posted by nr4
Or, it could be they got so many orders for their other line of chips, they can afford to wait more...
Or they sold all their BD chips to OEMs, and they don't have capacity to do a hard launch...
Or...Or... We just don't know what is on their mind.
AMD cares about OEMs first, for obvious reasons, everyone else don't even make up 2% of sales I bet.
unless they showed math of expected savings by not pushing the node, vs the estimated margin increase IB would have, then they have no logical reason to make a real slowdown. right now the benefit of having a product with higher margins seems to be vastly more profitable due to their volume of sales, then it does to worry about a few months of R&D.Quote:
Originally Posted by BeepBeep2
3D transistors probably take more time to get prepared for than they anticipated. At least that's my guess.Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
I asked a friend (who has the G34 'Dozers) if there is a delay and he said he'll see if he can find out. BUT I told him I'm only asking out of my own curiosity, to try and figure out where I sit for budget. If it's going to be delayed, I can shift it and get a Xonar Xense now like I wanted to a few months ago, but if not... well you see where I'm going :P Unless he gives the OK though, I'm not going to go back on my word :\ I'll figure something out...
The delay is most problematic for the holiday shopping season. If they dont get the production stuff into the pipeling by say July, thell miss significant system penetration for the holidays.
AMD isn't 6 months behind, there a full 1.5yrs in node shrinks. Does anyone here think that AMD will have 22nM product in the next 2 years....I certainly don't. And, if INTC really has Tri-Gate in Q1 of '12, there a full 2 nodes behind at the least.
RussC
Ome thing you have to consider is that a launch isn't the same as products in stores. AMD can launch it now if they like even if production samples turn up in stores in august or september. They would still claim they launched it on time.
I'm guessing that Q3-Q4 2012 should be about right.Quote:
Originally Posted by RussC
Good job intel is screwing it up then.Quote:
Originally Posted by RussC
http://www.fudzilla.com/processors/i...h-/-april-2012
Uh oh, looks like that bridge won't have long on the market before it runs right into Komodo, Terramar and Sepang! :D (and Trinity). Krishna and Witchita should be a fair bit ahead of it.Quote:
Originally Posted by jimbo75
That's more Q2-Q3 2013 IMHO zalbard :Quote:
Originally Posted by zalbard
http://globalfoundries.com/newsroom/...1_Roadmap.aspxQuote:
With risk production set to begin in 2H 2012, GLOBALFOUNDRIES is well on its way to delivering 22/20nm technology to customers for product introduction in 2013. The 20nm technology offerings will come in two varieties: a High Performance (HP) technology designed for wired applications such as servers and media processors, and a 20nm Super Low Power (SLP) technology designed for power-sensitive mobile applications. GLOBALFOUNDRIES also will have access to a 22nm Super High Performance (SHP) technology designed for devices requiring the utmost in performance. The 22/20nm technologies are planned to be a full node shrink from 32/28nm, and will utilize next-generation HKMG technology and strain engineering to enable the area and die cost scaling the industry has come to expect with each technology generation. Test chip shuttles for customers will begin running in Fab 1 in 2H2011.
http://tof.canardpc.com/preview2/284...26c1ef6fad.jpg
No prototypes of 20nm till the end of 2012? This is like a year and a half ahead! Aren't they supposed to design things in advance? :eek:
And why 20nm and not 22nm? Are they going to bother releasing 28nm CPUs? I don't think this makes much sense (pretty close to 32nm)... Not a very good roadmap at all...
I'm guessing it's incomplete.
22/20nmQuote:
Originally Posted by zalbard
20nm low power 22nm high performance just like 28nm /32nm
Quote:
Originally Posted by zalbard
http://www.realworldtech.com/page.cf...0511195446&p=2Quote:
As it stands today, Intel is roughly 18 months ahead of IBM, Global Foundries, TSMC and Samsung on their process technology. Intel began shipping 32nm parts in late 2009, while AMD started shipping 32nm parts from Global Foundries in April, 2011.
The most likely scenario for 22nm is that Intel begins shipping at the end of 2011 or early 2012 and the foundries follow with 20nm products in 2013. Intel will have a ~18 month window with a twofold manufacturing edge over their competitors.
Im really skeptical of that AMD/GF roadmap. Well see.
RussC
I see no one paid attention to what the graph ACTUALLY said lol :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by zalbard
That is only for the APUs. So I would fully expect the desktop chips to have a similar roadmap for the 22nm process :)
EDIT: Seems there's a full-on preview of Gigabyte's GA-990FX-UD7 over at GDM.or.jp o_0 Even tossed in some SB950 SATA6 benchmarks with CDM against an ASRock 890FX Deluxe4, which sadly the SB950 didn't do very well on the big writes, though it was only the 50MB transfer test.
Google Translated
Original, Untranslated
I'm very pleased GB went with the black approach like with their new Intel board (most of, at least).
No need to be, GF has already shown a 20nm test wafer.Quote:
Originally Posted by RussC
http://www.brightsideofnews.com/Data...m_2012_689.jpg
Llano is APU, too, though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Formula350
Just wondering. Do we have any clue as to how BD is regarding memory?
Will it be just as "picky" as deneb/thuban, or do you think it will be more in line with Intel?
Nope, we don't have any clue yet.
Except that it does officially support 1833MHz memory and works fine with DIMMs clocked at least to 2130MHz+ ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by DarthShader
Showing a demo wafer(who knows what that really is?) at a show and actually having production ready chips are very different. And given AMD/GF track record, again Im real skeptical.
RussC
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimbo75
We know that? How do we know that? :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Lightman
A lot of boards already claim support for 2133 mhz memory. So should be safe to say that BD will handle it.Quote:
Originally Posted by DarthShader
Technically, couldn't AMD go to Intel to fab their chips? Intel opened their fabs to other companys, I don't see why AMD couldn't take part in that...would be interesting. Talk about sleeping with the Enemy :)
That would be outrageous from a PR point of view, though. And GloFo isn't that bad.
That will never happen.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheBlueChanell
AMD and intel will never let each other see their designs
besides GloFO only technically has 2 fabs ? Intel was to said to have 10 or more.
Intel opned their fabs to other companies in using The X86 cores as a base for anything it's not really opened at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by zalbard
for Intel it's more like sure we can make something like that as long as it uses Their X86 cores inside of it.
Pretty sure that, like the E350, any desktop motherboards are simply being made to take advantage of what is already available. Most of us wouldn't considering the Llano a desktop chip, especially considering it's still just Bobcat based :) What I meant by "desktop" is Bulldozer, but more specifically, AM3+ variants. I haven't looked at one in awhile, but I don't recall any server chips being mentioned in the same roadmap slides as the consumer desktop and mobile ones. So as the product lines become broader with available models, they'll likely start to give them their own *shrug*Quote:
Originally Posted by zalbard
Based on what I found in the AMD System Monitor file, I think the majority of the Crossfire options are going to be in mobile platforms. I'd have to look again, but I don't think any of the models are up on the desktop market save for 2. One of them was slightly different in name, but the other I believe was the HD6670.
While we're on the topic though... Was over at Sapphire's site looking to see if they had any 990-based motherboards available as well. While they didn't, I had hoped over there first to check out the BIOS availability for this E350 board I have. When going through the product selection process I noticed something strange available: "Socket FM1" o_0 Alas, there were no models available to pick, nor a page in the product's section, but it's something :D
Llano isn't bobcat based afaik.
Correct, Liano more so a Phenom based APU with better turbo and far better GPU.Quote:
Originally Posted by spicypixel
Quote:
Originally Posted by spicypixel
Correct. My apologies!Quote:
Originally Posted by charged3800z24
I never paid much attention to the Bobcat architecture, and thought that the Stars core was a higher-end one. Later info came out indicating it is K10.5, and that just hasn't set in :(
It's K10.5+. There should be improvements in performance here and there. Also Llano got only 1 memory controller, different to K10.5 wich got DDR2/DDR3 with his adv/dsadv.
It has been known to be based on Stars cores since well before bobcat was known. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Formula350
bobcat is single channelQuote:
Originally Posted by Nintendork
LIano is dual channel
This is not what he meant, he thinks that because Deneb can drive both DDR2 and 3 memory that it must have two different memory controllers he doesn't know or understand that the DDR3 spec for the memory controller allows for backward compatibility.Quote:
Originally Posted by duploxxx
little about boards AM3+, FM1 and some BD meanings
ANANDTECH COMPUTEX
It's delayed :(Quote:
Originally Posted by FlanK3r
"AMD originally wanted to launch Bulldozer at Computex but performance issues with its B0 and B1 stepping chips pushed back the launch. Now we're looking at a late July launch with B2 silicon, but performance today is a big unknown. Apparently the performance of B1 stepping silicon doesn't look too good."
^ those words are what you would expect from *ntels backyard :P
Bad news... almost 2 extra months of waiting and speculations...
good news, you can actually buy something for your kids and wife :DQuote:
Originally Posted by zalbard
I saw nothing called "news" here, but some frequently rumors just like 6970/5870 before.
I could have said the exact same thing myself by looking at all the rumour pictures of B0 and B1 on the internets. Anand trying to proactively announce something before it happens.
We can waiting and playing with Thubans. So...what about Maxx benchmarks and y-crunchers benchmark?:)
B1 screenshot hasn't been leaked yet.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dimitriman
Here is y-cruncher results for you: https://spreadsheets.google.com/spre...CLeCnsYK#gid=0 ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by FlanK3r
Anyone will head for Computex ?
Before the other thread gets flamed to bits - anyone mention 'no sign of AM3+ boards' yet? :p:
http://www.hardwareheaven.com/review...roduction.html
http://www.hitechlegion.com/reviews/motherboards/10339
We're getting there! :up:
JF, you there ? You remember when you said Q2 launch ? Would be a great time to say "Q2" or "Q3" ;-)
I've heard that he's travelling around the world. No spare time.Quote:
Originally Posted by XRL8
When we seriously need someone, he disappeared, well that's strange.:ROTF:
I doubt that traveling to europe cuts him off from the internet ;-) ,hes here, i feel his presence :PQuote:
Originally Posted by undone
What is strange? The guy is having a vacation in Europe. He was planning it long time ago, so leave him alone ;)
I'm still curious to find out of the single decoder on a module can process a single thread's decoded instructions across multiple pipelines
2nd that.Quote:
Originally Posted by wwilliam54
I'm more interested in single thread performance of this architecture than zillion of cores or modules or whatever. IMO it is more important for every day usual tasks which scale well only in numerous examples. Mega-multi-core is not the ultimate answer. Good balance is the key.
Everyday task run great on my dual core E350 APU and it is 1.6ghz. Everyday task benefit more from Disk I/O speeds. ;)
I haven't found any use in normal use for a fast single thread... but That is just me
way to go tom!
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...-am3,2953.htmlQuote:
I think that anyone who was hoping to see Bulldozer-based Zambezi processors hit store shelves in conjunction with this year's Computex show in Taipei is going to be disappointed by AMD’s 990FX platform.
To that end, I really don’t see a reason to buy 990FX right now. If your priority is top performance in multi-card configurations, you’re buying an Intel-based platform.
Sorry if already posted,
Charlie says...Bulldozer and Ivy Bridge both delayed a bit
:(
Theo is also jumping on the band wagon:
http://www.brightsideofnews.com/news...ce-issues.aspx