Hey guys
I am at Computex right now
Here is some of the board I saw in the show (4/F Nangang)
ASUS A75
MSI A75
ECS A75 board
ASRock A75 Board
I will upload the picture to webhosting before posting
stay tuned !
Printable View
Hey guys
I am at Computex right now
Here is some of the board I saw in the show (4/F Nangang)
ASUS A75
MSI A75
ECS A75 board
ASRock A75 Board
I will upload the picture to webhosting before posting
stay tuned !
TFS the pics
any BD Demo over there? they say Asus would have one
keep us updated
remove pci and add more pcie- 1x slots cmon :/
The front end uses vertical multithreading. One thread per cycle.Quote:
Originally Posted by wwilliam54
This is how it could work from cycle to cycle:
Decode 4 instructions of thread 0
Decode 4 instructions of thread 1
Decode 3 instructions of thread 0 (some suboptimal instruction mix)
Decode 4 instructions of thread 1
Decode 4 instructions of thread 0
Decode 4 instructions of thread 0 (core 1 has to wait for memory)
Decode 3 instructions of thread 0 (suboptimal instructions)
Thanks for pics imamage :up:
I like what I see for Llano there!
Plenty of choice, different form factors, CF support, lots of SATA :clap:
PS. One more thing I noticed on Asus A75 board is feature called GPU Boost! I wonder how much it can overclock and of that means we will have BIOS access to tweak CPU and GPU frequencies independently of each other? Anyway seems to be the case :)
BULLDOZER?
http://chzgifs.files.wordpress.com/2...backtimep1.gif
performance lower than expected?
http://item.taobao.com/item.htm?id=10582582718Quote:
Originally Posted by duron
Hmnnn? System with 至尊8核电脑主机AMD FX-8110+M5A87+蓝宝石6950 2G显卡+8G/1600 .
I can smell the bull:banana::banana::banana::banana: but I can't tell where it is coming from; the site quoted or AMD, where they are laughing their heads off. :shrug:
I found this article to be interesting. If bulldozer is struggling with floats, then we have trouble ahead. Integer workloads are incredibly important for many tasks, but floating point can't be ignored. Sticking these into a Cray won't be very useful with poor float performance ;). Any ideas why this might be the case? Mostly I'm curious as to whether this is the performance issue or the bug (or both) that they talk about. My guess is that the performance is lacking in floats due to heat. The FMAC is shared, and probably gets crispy in large workloads while integer units are more evenly distributed about the core...Quote:
Originally Posted by JumpingJack
Tempting to chance heh Though if the performance issue is indeed true and it's being delayed till B2, that's reason not to given the fact you wouldn't be able to exactly exchange it lolQuote:
Originally Posted by duron
*sigh* It'll be interesting to see what the Llano offers for performance compared to the Phenom IIs.
As for the new board pictures, it irks me that ASRock had the gall to do that -_- Rebadging the Deluxe5 as the 990FX Extreme4 is one thing, but passing it off as a Fatal1ty w/o even as much as a color change is bull :\ There is barely even a design change to the board either! STILL are using that same blasted NB heatsink that prevents the usage of the first PCIe x1 slot, with anything except a very short USB card or NIC at least! >_<
I doubt that this is a temperature problem.Quote:
Originally Posted by xVeinx
Have a look at the module:
http://regmedia.co.uk/2011/02/24/amd...ore-module.jpg
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/02...er_core_isscc/
The module's two 128b FMAC units (each actually consisting of two 64b/80b FMAC units) are sitting on the left and right ends of the FPU area. You can see the split register file (bright rectangles).
So those possible hot spots are as far apart from eachother as possible in the given area - about as far as the integer execution units of both cores (in the upper parts of the int cores):
http://regmedia.co.uk/2011/02/24/amd...odule_zoom.jpg
That BSN article smells of BS without the N. AMD banks on GPGPU next year,in BD+? Yeah right. BD's FPU is not weak.There may be some bug,but unless AMD totally screwed the performance estimates in their design process,there is no way the new flexfp is going to be subpar to Thuban. Also the article claims that BD is superior clock per clock than SB in integer,which is fishy to say the least.It's not impossible of course,but one would expect that 30+% IPC improvement by just going 4wide and improving prefecth is a bit on a far fetched side.
All in all,we should know more on Wednesday. AMD must correct their public roadmap if they hit a delay,there is no way around it. They did contact BSN 1 week ago and said no delay to Q2 roadmap.Now ,all of a sudden,few weeks from launch ,there are some major issues with production silicon and they need a respin.If this really was the case,AMD would have known all of this back in March or April,not 2-3 weeks before launch which is the time when product is being shipped to major resellers worldwide.
Frankly, the only weight I give to it is that he mimics that BD will be pushed out, the rest of his analysis/commentary is, at most, questionable.Quote:
Originally Posted by xVeinx
Theo is not the most technically astute journalist on the net. In fact, is more often wrong than he is right. He is looking at the technical disclosures of BD and extrapolating a conclusion relative to SB based on his understanding of compute architectures of which he knows little to nothing about.
EDIT: There are really 3 tech sites that give good analysis of compute architectures -- Arstechnica, Jon Stokes -- Realworld Tech, David Kanter -- and Anandtech, Anand Shrimpi. All 3 have educational backgrounds on the subject -- as I understand it, Stokes and Kanter actually roomed together in college. I would not trust much of what Theo has to say regarding this topic.
Do you know if they account for the Vss gating footing as part of the module area? I would suspect so since it is part of each module.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dresdenboy
@Theo:
IIRC he and Anton both believed to see an eight-core in the first schematics of a BD module (4 int pipelines on each side -> 8 cores ;))
I don't know that but would assume the same.Quote:
Originally Posted by JumpingJack
Well, if that is true that puts the total die size at about 285 mm^2, which is a healthy die size (economically) for the markets it will target.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dresdenboy
Also, the relative size of the L1 cache to L2, I recall reading they went to an 8T bit in L1 which makes sense in the die shot. Interesting.
Damn, it's painfully obvious how closely related K7 and BD really are. BD is one heavily modified K7, but it's not completely ground up. One BD core (not module) is pretty similar to a Phenom core.Quote:
Originally Posted by JumpingJack
I'm calling myself out on uber-FAIL :rofl: *sigh* I didn't even notice that the motherboard doesn't show any signs of "Fatal1ty" silk screening :\ Seems as though the label board above it was misplaced OR the wrong motherboard was accidentally put there instead. hehQuote:
Originally Posted by Formula350
Thar be hope off the starboard bow, ya-har!
I think the article explained it pretty well.Quote:
Originally Posted by xVeinx
Quote:
The interesting bit to us is that while K8/10 generation of Opterons lagged behind Intel in integer and pummeled them in Floating Point tests, the result right now is exactly the opposite: clock-by-clock, Bulldozer will walk all over Sandy Bridge in integer and get hammered in Floating Point tests. The reason for this is the fact that second generation Bulldozer (so called Bulldozer Enhanced) will unite the Bulldozer cores with Radeon HD graphics which will take over the floating point operations as much as possible through OpenCL and other GPU Computing APIs.
See I just can't see AMD making that move. There wouldn't be a huge reason for companies to use a 'Dozer in their current C32/G34 systems if they won't be an all'round upgrade for them... My understanding was the 2nd Gen chips would move over to a new socket, meaning that there really would be little reason to upgrade now when a future upgrade wouldn't even be able to utilize the same socket anymore. I mean maybe the C32 equivelant chips could move over to G34 when they get a GPU, and that'd be pretty cool, but how likely is it really? :\
And that would be the part which hints the article is BS, without the "N".Quote:
Originally Posted by zalbard
Next generation, there will be enhanced BD cores + GPU in the form of an APU, codenamed Trinity. Total replacment of FPU with a shader array is still far away, 2013 the earliest I'd say.
While I can see the issues with FP code BD might have due to having only one FP scheduelr per module and with 256bit code, it shouldn't be that bad if Cray chose them for their blades...
Phoenix Technology News May 31 News, in today's Taipei computer show, AMD senior vice president of Products Group and general manager of RickBergman dialogue with the Phoenix Science and Technology, said, Fusion will be released tomorrow in the product for the Tablet PC;
对于备受关注的Bulldozer（推土机）产品，RickBergman向凤凰网科技频道表示，该款产品 将可以在今年夏季看到。 The concern Bulldozer (Bulldozer) products, RickBergman Technology Channel to Phoenix, said a product that will be able to see this summer.
http://tech.ifeng.com/digi/special/2...744615_0.shtml
Rick Bergman, this guy already said bulldozer is an early summer product.Quote:
Originally Posted by FlanK3r
New server sockets are planned for next year, and the roadmaps shows Komodo having integrated graphics.
Look for Sepang and Terramar:
http://blogs.amd.com/work/fadcodenames/
Not that hard to put together this: even the relatively legacy free G34 can't handle the next generation CPU's, so how can anyone expect AM3+ to do it?
Why should Komodo stay with PCIe on on a separate NB? To please AM3+ owners?
http://translate.google.com/translat...545%2F&act=url
Still no one wants to believe it. "Komodo is not an APU blablabla.."
And even if there's no integrated graphics, there will be integrated PCIe for sure, which means a new socket.
I can imagine all the whining when the roadmaps for Komodo shows a new socket.
I know I'm repeating myself..
Hate to say it, but I told you so.
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...5&postcount=45
I was under the impression everyone knew this, bd ver 2 will have a new socket.There was a slide about it last year, cant find it now tho.
It showed "current" BD and in middle of the 2012 it was "BD ver 2" with some new socket.
And it showed integrated pcie .
BTW,
from this AMD BLOG, besides it says H1 2011 for bulldozer (may be obsolote by now).
What i find interesting is that sepang has triple channel memory ,and thats a single die socket, kind of intel 1366.Maybe theres gonna be desktopish version of that.
No IGP.Quote:
“Komodo”
Market: Server and Performance Desktops
What is it? “Komodo” is AMD’s next generation CPU and is primarily intended for servers and high-performance desktops. “Komodo” will feature next-generation “Bulldozer” CPU cores and, in desktop PC platforms, is designed to couple with DirectX® 11 GPUs to provide enthusiast-level system performance.
Planned for introduction: 2012
Thanks for the response. Granted, it was an idle musing, but very unlikely nonetheless :). Do you have any hypothesis? Again, I was putting some stock into the original article, which may be my issue in the first place...Quote:
Originally Posted by Dresdenboy
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...1&d=1289398170Quote:
Originally Posted by XRL8
Because it isn't. It's listed as a CPU in the codenames list you provided.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mats
And the APU bulldozer that AMD representative is talking about is Trinity, also listed in the codnames list, as an APU. It might fit into the FM1 socket Llano will be sitting in, but nothing is sure. Certainly not adding a PCIe controller into Komodo next year, so hold on a bit till you say "told you so". :p:
Meanwhile, Anand has some fresh news: http://www.anandtech.com/show/4389/c...o-motherboards
LOL, Anand fell for the Turbo too. But at least this could explain the leaks we have seen, they were all at 3.8Ghz in CPUZ, not an idle state... cause they were overclocked! So if they were true, then it's not looking bad. :)Quote:
The other thing I did hear at the show floor regarding Bulldozer was about its clock speed. Current B1 stepping parts are easily hitting 3.8GHz which is what the high end SKU may actually ship at (with turbo support up to 4.2GHz). I'm waiting for more confirmation but it sounds like Bulldozer will at least clock very high.
BTW. notice how that article mentions Llano boards in the title, but there's none of it in the Article itself? :rolleyes: Just two Intel boards, the Llano ones are in the gallery...
It can have integrated graphics and still be called a CPU.
It doesn't make sense to call it an APU if the graphics doesn't match the CPU in terms of performance.
Why do you think so? That makes no sense.Quote:
Originally Posted by DarthShader
Why do you think Komodo will be that radically different (no PCIe) from Sepang and Terramar?
AMD have already done it with Llano, and the competition have used it for almost two years.
You took it ou of context. I said it's not certain they are going to do it, we have no info about that. But it's definitely a possibility, altough they might opt for more backwards compatibility.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mats
Because those are server chips, for a very different socket too. AMD server chips already had 4-channel memory and it's still unknown when AMD is going to depart from 2-channel on dektops. So what happens in servers, is no indication of what is going on in desktops.Quote:
Why do you think Komodo will be that radically different (no PCIe 3.0) from Sepang and Terramar?
skimming trough anand`s front page news: 3 ssd articles, 1 power supply, 2 asus stuff, and all the rest are intel related -- most of them directly, some about mobos on intel platforms.
amd and nvidia got the same treatment. both shared a humble last paragraph on some piece that had intel on them.
actually amd got 2 paragraphs (on the brazos tablet and on the msi`s x79 and llano)
:down:
edit:
btw, this post of mine isn`t off topic. it reiterates the LACK of news about "AMD Zambezi news, info, [and] FANS !" =p
I didn't think certainly not could mean not certain in any context, but this isn't my native language so what do I know.:confused:
There's no chance AMD would go for backwards compatibility with Komodo, the AM socket series needs a replacement (and it has very little or nothing to do with DDR4).
AMD didn't go for maximum backwards compatibility with Zambezi because it would hamper the performance potential, and I seriously doubt AMD will be so much ahead of the competition a year from now, that they don't need every performance improvement they can get.
Todays server chips aren't that different from desktop, the channels are two from each die = 4 (something that will most likely change in the future).Quote:
Originally Posted by DarthShader
C32, G34 and AM3 all uses quite similar chips, although not identical.
YOu have to look at the sentence before, at the "nothing is sure" part. It isn't my native language either, so I might have goofed up myself. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Mats
Of course it needs a replacement, that's because every desktop chip will once become an APU so it will need the display interface and PCIe controller outs. The question is, do we do both at once, or do we divide it into two new sockets to earn more money and piss people off, like Intel does. Since Komodo will most liekly not be an APU, there can be many solutions. Either adding the PCIe controller at a later point, or introduce a new socket that's going already have the pins ready for the future, or make Komodo fit into the FM1 (maybe FM2) socket, without an IGP.Quote:
There's no chance AMD would go for backwards compatibility with Komodo, the AM socket series needs a replacement (and it has very little or nothing to do with DDR4).
Anand now saying B1 "easily hits 3.8 Ghz"
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4389/c...o-motherboards
So if speed is not the problem then what is keeping performance down? That's a rhetorical ???Quote:
Originally Posted by jimbo75
Thermals and TDP. It sounds like it has to be OCed to reach those clocks.
So it "easily hits 3.8Ghz" but only when OC'd. If true then it sounds like a leaky process.
Anandtech said bulls**ts for some days ago. It was wrong. He is still life in this performance B0 revision http://i309.photobucket.com/albums/k...labobby/53.jpg
AMD show us Trinity sample!Trinity from Computex
lol, do u cant read it corectly? For you again "he other thing I did hear at the show floor regarding Bulldozer was about its clock speed. Current B1 stepping parts are easily hitting 3.8GHz which is what the high end SKU may actually ship at (with turbo support up to 4.2GHz). I'm waiting for more confirmation but it sounds like Bulldozer will at least clock very high."Quote:
Originally Posted by qurious63ss
AMD corrected that slide since then.Now Komodo is listed as "6-10 improved Bulldozer cores". No DX11 listed anymore,since Komodo is not an APU,it's "just" and x86 chip,like Zambezi.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mats
In AMD`s blog its said to be PAIRED with dx11 gpu, as they sell platforms, its easy to see why they might have slipped a slide like that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mats
Anyhow, it will be pcie integrated, so its almost certain that they wont make am3+ version of it.
And informal above me told you the rest.
For komodo to have integrated GPU, CURRENT and OFFICIAL AMD blog would have to be plain wrong.Possilble, but i doubt that.
No IGP in Komodo,Trinity is the APU based on Bulldozer and next gen Radeon cores. Komodo should be AM3+ compatible.
So Trinity is next Llano. I am hearing that it will be compatible with FM1 socket.
I want to know whether the GPU would be new arch or not.Quote:
Originally Posted by muziqaz
I think it will be based at least on 69xx shaders.Quote:
Originally Posted by undone
Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
Komodo is a codename for the whole lineup of next gen BD cores,both server and desktop ones.Quote:
“Komodo”
Market: Server and Performance Desktops
What is it? “Komodo” is AMD’s next generation CPU and is primarily intended for servers and high-performance desktops. “Komodo” will feature next-generation “Bulldozer” CPU cores and, in desktop PC platforms, is designed to couple with DirectX® 11 GPUs to provide enthusiast-level system performance.
On the server side, there will be two versions, like now, with two NEW sockets.
AMD pretty much always uses the same silicon for its high end desktop and both server sockets.
Its confirmed on this blog that both new server chips ,sepang and terramar will have pcie 3.0 on die and require new socket.
So logic dictates it will be the same with desktop variant.
Trinity is new APU, no Llano. Llano core is redesing of K10 core. Trinity has base at Bulldozer core. It will be FM1 or maybe FM2 socket.Quote:
Originally Posted by muziqaz
That is what I meant ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by FlanK3r
so a non-available cpu(BD) "easily" hits 3.8mhz...on the other hand a widely available cpu(2600K) easily hits 4.5ghz...this is great new info update about the current state of affairs at AMD,combined with the nice timeline pictures of Llano/Buldozer it makes it even greater.
anandtech doesn't mean 3.8ghz is overclock, that's a stock freq.Quote:
Originally Posted by AAbenson
Wow, only 8 cores for Komodo? Was "up to 10" before.Quote:
Originally Posted by nex_73
No mention of cores.Quote:
“Komodo”
Market: Server and Performance Desktops
What is it? “Komodo” is AMD’s next generation CPU and is primarily intended for servers and high-performance desktops. “Komodo” will feature next-generation “Bulldozer” CPU cores and, in desktop PC platforms, is designed to couple with DirectX® 11 GPUs to provide enthusiast-level system performance.
Planned for introduction: 2012
Sepang is a server variant of Orochi+.If Komodo is a desktop variation then it will be up to 10 cores with a socket change ,again.Quote:
“Sepang”
Market: Server
What is it: Server CPU with up to 10 next-generation “Bulldozer” CPU cores targeting 2-way highly energy efficient and cost optimized Socket C2012 platforms. Complete with three-channel DDR3 memory and integrated PCIe Gen3 I/O.
Planned for introduction: 2012
maybe Komodo will be in 10 cores variante too...
There is another slide from an AMD blog in November:
http://blogs.amd.com/fusion/files/20...h-footnote.jpg
No IGP, but 6-10 cores.
nice Komodo CPU, m looking forward at it :)
Trinity looks to be AM3+ by the size, unless the FM1 is the same size, minus a few inner pins, but I was thinking it was between S754 and S939/AM3 size (not really paid close attention to Llano heh).
http://pcper.com/files/news/2011-06-01/amd01.jpg
And an updated Roadmap (from Computex)
http://pcper.com/files/imagecache/ar...6-01/amd02.jpg
Source: http://pcper.com/news/Processors/AMD...er-APU-Tablets
EDIT: OK, scratch that... looks like FM1 is basically AM3 - center pins! I thought my math was wrong a few weeks ago when I figured the FM1 to be something like 905pin, but that small amount of missing center pins does appear as though it could be the size of 35pins (roughly, just rounding AM3 to 940).
http://pcper.com/files/imagecache/ar...06-02/gb01.jpg
I got one more official (AMD) link about Komodo and number of cores :).
http://ir.amd.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=74...197&highlight=
Quote:
AMD Public Roadmap Updates
AMD also announced several notable updates to its 2012 roadmaps including:
-- "Krishna" and "Wichita": Two and four-core 28nm APUs based on the
next-generation sub-one watt "Bobcat" CPU cores and a DirectX
11-capable GPU, designed for the tablet, notebook, HD netbook, and
desktop form-factors;
-- "Trinity": a 32nm APU based on AMD's next-generation "Bulldozer" CPU
cores and a DirectX 11-capable GPU, designed for mainstream and
high-performance desktops and notebooks;
-- "Komodo": a 32nm CPU featuring up to 10 AMD "Bulldozer" CPU cores
designed for high-performance and enthusiast desktops;
-- "Terramar" and "Sepang": Two new 32nm CPUs for the server market based
on AMD's "Bulldozer" CPU core. Targeted for the enterprise, mainstream
market "Terramar" will scale up to 20 cores while "Sepang" is designed
for the cost-optimized, energy efficient market and will scale up to
Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
So...
Interlagos and Orochi are based on the same Bulldozer core. Or better: Bulldozer cores (desktop and server) are basically the same microarchitecture.
That seems to change a little more for Komodo (desktop) and Terramar (server) - BDv2
What is reasonable because almost everyone says BDv1 is server oriented.
Dude, c'mon now lolQuote:
Originally Posted by informal
"SUNNYVALE, CA, Nov 09, 2010 (MARKETWIRE via COMTEX) --"
Its quite simple.Quote:
Originally Posted by memmem
Bulldozer=
BDv1=Orochi
Interlagos/valencia =server same chips different packaging 8 cores internally 16 mcm
Zambezi = desktop same chip, will be cut down to 4/6 cores on some models, 8 flagship
Am3+ and current server sockets
BDv2=Komodo
Sepang=Server BDv2 single die
Terramar=Server Bdv2 dual die (MCM)
For the time being i didnt seen strictly desktop komodo codename or its just "komodo".
Thing about this chips is they have pcie 3.0 integrated,also, sepang features 3 channel memory.Would be good thing for amd to move desktop to it.
For the people that dont know.
Both AMD and Intel (AMD more) use EXACTLY the same die as desktop product for the server product!The difference can be in microcode and packaging.
Don't you mean Interlagos/Valencia are the same, but Interlagos = MCM up to 16core (8 module) on Socket G34, and Valencia = up to 8core (4 module) on Socket C32?Quote:
Originally Posted by XRL8
I suspect desktop is basically Valencia, minus the segment for SMP (among other things I don't know about lol)
MCM variant is just two single ones on one packaging, chips are the same.And desktop chip is the same also.AMD produces one chip, and they go to both socket C and G server wise and for AM3+.Same will be probably with komodo,because thats how it always have been with amd.Quote:
Originally Posted by Formula350
I see what you mean now after re-reading it, sorry about that :)Quote:
Originally Posted by XRL8
Here is the corrected slide. Note the blurb in the notes at the bottom about the previous slide being wrong. Straight from the horses mouth.Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
http://blogs.amd.com/fusion/2010/11/...with-footnote/
Looks like the old AMD slide, only the false DX11 information is missing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dresdenboy
Somebody probably didnt know about the new slide and photoshoped the old one.
As long as there is no amd.com in the roadmap's URL, I wouldt believe it.
By Kyle Bennett from HardOCPQuote:
Mark your calendars for July 16th! AMD and HardOCP are teaming up to deliver the community a GamExperience! Tourneys will be played. Raffles and tons of free stuff will be had. Free-for-all headshots will be made. Winners will be crowned. Losers will be chastised! VIP lounge for Tourney players, plenty of Fusion, Eyefinity, and Big Screen demo stations. And yes, we will give the HardOCP community their first hands-on GamExperience with AMD's next generation unannounced hardware. This event will be open to the public in Dallas, Texas. More details coming soon.
Either BD or R1000 :)
I doubt it's R1000.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lightman
AMD Fusion Developer Summit June 13-16, 2011
Eric Demers, AMD Corporate Vice President and CTO, Graphics Division, will chronicle the evolution of AMD’s graphics cores and discuss next-generation AMD graphics cores under development in his keynote, “Evolution of AMD’s Graphics Core, and Preview of Graphics Core Next.”
http://semiaccurate.com/2011/05/12/a...-summit-links/
Unannounced...Quote:
Originally Posted by Lightman
60% HD7000 series
40% Khrisna&Wichita / Trinity Demo
today some webs writing about this tabs (spec of 8150)
http://diybbs.zol.com.cn/10/11_98816.html
but from my side its fake...It is not possible
fakeQuote:
Originally Posted by FlanK3r
Why?Quote:
Originally Posted by duploxxx
maybe, at web wrote, its from 1.4. ...
I don't know why it is fake or even if it is fake, but everyone can make a picture like that with anything written in it.
When you see cpu z shot fake or real you have some relevance to the data you are looking at. Here with those box charts, you just open up a word processor and punch in whatever you want in it and post it on the internet saying this will be released in q4.
It is impossible for it to launch on June 7th at Computex as Computex was over on June 4th.Quote:
Originally Posted by Oliverda
He posted that because of the specs of the 8150P and not because of the launch date. The launch will be in August. It's official now.Quote:
Originally Posted by JumpingJack
My mistake, I thought you were wondering why he thought the slide was fake. To me, most major companies (board makers) would know the dates for Computex. Whoever made this slide obviously did not know Computex ended on the 4th.Quote:
Originally Posted by Oliverda
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...icroprocessors
Wondering why those volunteers be fond of making up spec. I'd prefer to believe the spec havent been finalized yet.
Ok however let's estimated those are true, then we'll get two stepping(B2,C0) when Zambezi is launched.
No way they are going to make two different steppings at the same time... When both use the same fab equipment and one is obviously superior to the other.
Because max. Turbo will be at least 1Ghz. It's also doubtfull it will be 140W TDP. The person creating that "leak" took all the knowledge available to him, missing a few things , like the turbo, which is quite a recent thing. Previously all we knew is +500mhz to all cores. And that's what you have on the slide.Quote:
Originally Posted by Oliverda
That was an April's fool made by Nordic HW... Chinese just picked it up now,2 months after the original post.Maybe they thought people will forget or something lol.
http://www.nordichardware.se/nyheter...k-edition.html
Quote:
Originally Posted by gtranslate
lol, u right, I forgot at original source :)
because the specs don't match the official docs... enough info ???Quote:
Originally Posted by Oliverda
because you know all about BD turbo specs ????? turbo 2.0 for BD is burried very deep within AMD and few board makers, only LIano turbo info for Mobile and Desktop is fully available.Quote:
Originally Posted by DarthShader
http://www.pcworld.fr/article/materi...france/513545/
There, second question, google translate might be needed.
I think JF also mentioned that somewhere, but I cannot remember where.
Tried posting this yesterday but apparently it didn't work. Hope this isn't true :(
Source: http://xtreview.com/addcomment-id-16...r-in-July.htmlQuote:
We recently spoke about the reasons for delay in the announcement of desktop processors with bulldozer architecture . The existing processors socket AM3+ do not arrange AMD from the speed side. As explained associates , AMD company decided to increase speed by increasing the clock frequencies, and for this the processors has to move to a new stepping. The existing models work at frequencies from 2.5 to 3.5 GHz, but this can be insufficient for the successful competition with intel proposals, which in the fourth quarter will be supplemented by the processors sandy Bridge- E LGA 2011 with cache volume up to 15 mb. AMD decided to transfer the announcement of desktop processors zambezi on September present year. AMD representatives at the press conference recognized that the deliveries of box processors zambezi will begin only to the end of year.
I think xtrreview just reshashed all the info that floats for some time and added sandyE part :-/.Anyhow, with 60-90 timeframe on computex 4th, the last day of it is sep 4th.So i doubt thats the case.Also it would mean respin, new info tells us otherwise.
AMD still makes C2 CPUs.Quote:
Originally Posted by zalbard
I have stang's week 1038 Athlon II in my hand that is stepping C2 :rolleyes:
C3 was out Q4 09, just shy a year before.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Formula350
If this were true, wouldn't it be a good thing though? For AMD to hold back and rearrange things to compete with SB-E is a great leap in a positive direction for all the theories that are behind BD at the moment. If AMD can release a processor that can compete with Intels latest offering, it means that they have gained massive ground from the position they were in with Thuban / Daneb, these processors (which I own / owned) were awesome for price over performance but always a generation behind Intel, if they reach a point where they are head to head even if they dont quite beat Intel, they would have made up a very respectable bit of ground since last year. :)
Well it's already officially delayed till August, which sucked from my standpoint since I was going to be upgrading to a Bulldozer, and I could've used it for review testing :\ Boards coming out, but not BD, means I had to spend 1/2 my BD budget on a Thuban :( I mean yea you're right if delaying it means boosting performance in order to compete, but there are two things about that: First is if it really IS delayed until September, or the translation to English resulted in some confusion. Second, unless they are doing some sort of core-architecture tweaks, my understanding was they were just boosting clocks on the chips to get a bit more oomph out of them (be that by tweaking or just raising multipliers). If that's the case, assuming they had a large batch of the current revision, I think they should've released what they had and sold those to make up some profits. Then in August they could release the enhanced models for people who have no problem with waiting (or forking out cash to upgrade again lol), and show more of the true performance of BD :\Quote:
Originally Posted by james333
Just my 2 cents.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Formula350
I agree in some respects but I also think about the feeling people must have had when they bought a Phenom I chip. Its almost like people were fooled by marketing (i'm talking about the average non forum using Joe) to buy these great new chips and get great performance when in reality they were a bit crappy. I didn't have one myself but i know someone who did and they were very disappointed, do you think as someone forking out £200 on a chip you would feel short changed by AMD if you got the early chip and within a month and a half they came out with a chip that rubbished the one you just paid for? I know the feeling of buying the best in the world then reading reviews 2 months later about something that demotes your hardware, im sure everyone here knows it too because we are enthusiasts and thats the nature of the speed of development that takes place in the field of our hobby.I was gutted when I spent £330 on my 5870, the fastest GPU ever and learned that soon there will be large improvements. Maybe I have gone off on a tangent here, sorry, my point is, do you really want something right now when you know its not quite as good as it could be? Would you buy a 5870 1 day before the release of the 6970?
I think we are all annoyed at AMD for being so quiet though, im watching markets as I hope to invest money in the near future so my questions consist of are AMD trying to improve something they know is sub standard and need to do all they can to increase stock performance, I mean, they sell a 1090t at 3.2ghz but they know they are all stable at 3.4, maybe 3.6, so are they making it so for instance a 3.2 BD will be sold at 3.4 to gain stock points on a SB chip? Or are they playing a game of wow factor where they are optimizing a stunning new method of calculations and needed a few more days to perfect it and the knock on effect is this delay:shrug:
Are AMD clever in business or ashamed of what they can offer??
(I don't think they should be ashamed either way because I still look at the tube television and think - how the hell did they get a coaxial copper cable to translate a basic pulse into all that colour picture and sound!!!?? Amazing)
james what you describe at the end of your post is what I like to call the Athlon 64 X2 effect.
Remember 6400+'s?...there were a lot of 5200/5600/6000 that wouldnt do 3.2 Ghz like the 6400+ at less than 1.5v even though the 6400+ often came with a low VID like 1.4v. Highest binned chips with almost no OC headroom.
It happened also with Phenom which was a disaster, but hasn't happened really with Phenom II (other than maybe the X4 980 as my 965 needed 1.4v for exactly 3.7 Ghz on the edge) and I doubt we will see it with Bulldozer.
That's a good point and valid. Though the difference here, how I would like to see it happen at least (again assuming they already produced a lot of BD chips with intention to release), would be offer the lower performance parts at a discount. That way they can perhaps recoupe some costs, and we still get BD :PQuote:
Originally Posted by james333
And no, I wouldn't buy a 5870 when 6000 was to be released, which is why I'm a bit bummed about getting a 1090T. Mind you, I'm not bummed that I'm getting one, I'm excited... just I wish it was for all the right reasons lol The saving grace is that I got it for a good price ($159, shipped on eBay, before dude changed it to $189), but I'd rather have a Bulldozer! :yepp::p:
Yea I wonder about chips sometimes too heh My S939 Toledo core X2 3800+ (2GHz) easily did 2800MHz for it's entire life, which was all the way up until my upgrade to AM3 when 890GX was released in early 2010. My power supply, which was about 3 or so years older, might have taken it out though since it seems like both motherboards are toast :( Back to the point, seems chips are always able to OC pretty well, but there are always duds in the mix as well. My 555BE is one (got last year from cdawall), which just won't clock stably past 3.6GHz core and 2400MHz CPU-NB, despite being told it did 4GHz stable :( (same results on 890GPA-UD3H and 890FX Deluxe3) I'm pretty sure the L3 is to blame for a lot of it too as I know the 890GX board overclocks very well with chips that don't have L3. But, oh well :) Nothing I can do about it and it is why I'm donating the chip to my neighbor to upgrade his system, since he'll only need it to run stock speeds :DQuote:
I think we are all annoyed at AMD for being so quiet though, im watching markets as I hope to invest money in the near future so my questions consist of are AMD trying to improve something they know is sub standard and need to do all they can to increase stock performance, I mean, they sell a 1090t at 3.2ghz but they know they are all stable at 3.4, maybe 3.6, so are they making it so for instance a 3.2 BD will be sold at 3.4 to gain stock points on a SB chip? Or are they playing a game of wow factor where they are optimizing a stunning new method of calculations and needed a few more days to perfect it and the knock on effect is this delay:shrug:
It'd be nice to see the envelope pushed a bit more for stock clocks, especially with releasing the 1100T and it only being 100MHz more :rolleyes:
No, I don't think they are ashamed, at least not with Bulldozer. But I also think they don't want to let us down, and give us the most bang for our buck! Maybe in part because they do feel bad for Phenom I? :rofl: AMD has the potential to kick ass and take names, they've shown it in the past! I'm hoping BD is a repeat :D:clap:Quote:
Are AMD clever in business or ashamed of what they can offer??
(I don't think they should be ashamed either way because I still look at the tube television and think - how the hell did they get a coaxial copper cable to translate a basic pulse into all that colour picture and sound!!!?? Amazing)
phenom I was really big and on 65nm, which seemed to be capped around 3ghz anyway, and the arch didnt change much, so why would overclocking change much.
5870 was out for a LONG time before 6xxx was even being shown, and the prices for that gpu stayed flat for a while thanks to nvidia, people who bought it early were really happy, people who bought it late should have known something else was right around the corner, since their cycle is almost always 1 year
and thuban is quite temperature limited (meaning crashes at higher temps). good luck getting near 4ghz within 125w and stable up to 80C, the sweet spot for all 45nm amd chips is mid 3ghz
I dissagree completely...except for the 5870 bit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
New X4s such as 975-980 will do 4 Ghz on the stock cooler at stock volts I bet.
Thuban is a bit different, but even Turbo Core is at 3.7 on 1100T's, I bet you can clock a thuban CPU up around 3.8-3.9 on the stock cooler easily as well.
Thuban is less temp limited than Deneb afaik.
i think were mixing conversation. i was talking about why we dont see higher skus from amd, not the overclocking limits.Quote:
Originally Posted by BeepBeep2
Boy, how'd we miss this? :\ 4d old...
The creator of CPU-Z released some basic specs and a screen shot on Zambezi. The site says it thinks the clock might be due to the clock gating, but I suspect it's done to still keep us in the dark for CPU speed before AMD releases it.
http://wccftech.com/wp-content/uploa...IMG0032131.png
Source: http://www.overclock.net/hardware-ne...ambezi-fx.htmlQuote:
- Support 2 Module 4-core (FX-4110), 3 Module 6-core (FX-6110) and 4 Module 8-core (FX-8110 8130P) Zambezi processor
– Support for Socket AM3 +
– 32-nm SOI HKMG Technology
– 213 million transistors per module
– Support HTT 3.1 bus (3.2GHz, 25.6GB / s, 16bit bi-directional transmission)
– Supports up to 8M L3
– Fundamental frequency of 3.2GHz (may be higher?)
– Turbo Core (up 1GHz, load up all the core 500MHz)
– Supports a maximum TDP 95W and 125W
– Support voltage VID 0.8V-1.3V
– Support for Advanced Power Management (Power Gating / Clock Gating / Sectored L3)
The original source was mentioned here and was posted around 3 weeks ago.
Yea that one was listed in the link I gave too. I just must have forgotten. I've read every page, but that's a lot of posts to try and mentally keep track of hahaQuote:
Originally Posted by zalbard
Yeah when I saw that thread at OC.net I laughed pretty hard. A bunch of people babling mindlessly over really old news in which much of it is incorrect and what people say didnt make sense.
Those info are true, but the detailed spec about freq & turbo core are for engineering sample at tdp 95w. At least those info are better than nothing.
i personaly prefer a 5870 over a 6k anything. "shrugs"
A 6870 is roughly as fast as a 5870 in games.
Some applications can make use of more of the 5870's shaders than games do though.