Do you really think Intel need to launch 2700K/2800K :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
I don't think so IMHO ...
Printable View
Do you really think Intel need to launch 2700K/2800K :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
I don't think so IMHO ...
I know what SKU is in it and I know the prices. Can't reveal obviously, but based on our 6100 series prices that could be ~$15-$97,000. Give or take a dollar here or a dollar there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
If it interests anyone there appears to be a complete CPUID dump for a quad core A1 stepping Zambezi engineering sample posted on this site. The site appears to have a fairly large collection of CPUID dumps for various CPUs. I can't link directly to the dump but its at the end of the AMD section and the model number of the cpu is "AMD Eng Sample, ZD302046W4K43_36/30/20_2/8_A". I believe this is the first known complete CPUID dump for a bulldozer chip. I checked a few of the registers, ie the processor specification registers Fx8000_0002 through 0004, and when decoded to ascii from hex, they agreed with the alleged processor specification. The CPUID Fn0000_0001_ECX register also indicates the CPU supports AES and AVX, so it isn't a blatant fake based off deneb or thuban or something. (Of course it could still be a very painstakingly created fake) I'm wondering if any further information can be gleaned using AMD's CPUID Guide.
When seeing the rumored prices of ~$250 for FX8150, people will probably assume one of three things:
* The performance is not better than SB 2500K and/or 2600K
* AMD is being aggressive on price to take away market share
* The rumored prices are fake
IIRC the 3.6Ghz quad core 3930 reach 130w tdp on X79 platform, if 2800k exist the tdp may out of range and current P67 lineup doesn't fit it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Olivon
I think many people only focus on price but miss some additional statement.Quote:
Originally Posted by xVeinx
Quote:
If, however, they are supply constrained, you can bet the farm that other stores will run the price sky high, and I won't.
not me,i just think sweet a 8 core 3.6Ghz for less than $300Quote:
Originally Posted by Apokalipse
that means i might be able to get the FX4170 for a very,very,very nice price:D
and thats all i think!!!!
I think they will! I also think Intel is going have to pull rabbits out of their hat after Zambezi launches, and I also don't think Intel 2700 or 2800 whatever is gonna cut it!Quote:
Originally Posted by Olivon
I expect the 4 core part to perform lesser than or equal to Deneb when 4 threads are utilized, CPC. Does that matter? Hell no, the CPU runs at 4.2 Ghz?
I expect the 8 core to go head to head with the 2600k in both single thread and multi thread at slightly lower cost. Why? Because that gives Intel two options...
1. Lower prices (will take a while)
2. Launch new CPUs ASAP (they might not right away, even though I bet they already manufactured some for the future such as 2x00k)
http://www.overclock.net/tankguys-pr...rder-info.html
Seen this? Gonna be cheaper at bigger stores too....damn.
Oh, that`s really one spectacular guess. You only gave or took some $82,000 here and there :-).Quote:
Originally Posted by JF-AMD
You think IPC will be lower than Deneb?Quote:
Originally Posted by BeepBeep2
If 4 core Llano-Stars based CPUs (3-5% IPC increase over previous) with 8MB L3 + cache optimizations ran at 4.2 Ghz stock (and overclocked near 5 Ghz) they would be at stock i5 2400 level and beat one (overclocked as much as possible with BCLK) by far while overclocked.Quote:
Originally Posted by Apokalipse
i5 2400 is selling for $190 right now.
I'm not saying single core or dual core IPC will be lower, I actually expect it to be much higher... but I believe that a 4.2 Ghz Deneb will be close to the X4 BD model in extensive multi-threading.
...I could be way off base, you never know. I just think that if AMD's only goal was "MOAR COARS" they would have stayed with the Stars architecture through 32nm and made 16 core parts based off of it. I believe Bulldozer will make headroom in single threaded apps compared to that architecture while saving space compared to a standard core design. While you can probably design something better than "Stars" for many threads, it actually performs quite well. BD gives them the ability with CMT to add in the single thread perf they really need and still put 16 (or 8) cores on the die.
Intel already has Xeon quads E3 1280 (3.5GHz LGA1155) and E3 1290 (3.6GHz LGA1155) since May within the 95w TDP, so your statement is wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by undone
His statement is not wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brice MJ
Yes it is, nothing stops Intel from releasing a desktop version of those chips if they need to.Quote:
Originally Posted by BeepBeep2
Server chips =/ desktop chips...Quote:
Originally Posted by Brice MJ
You really think they are binned alike? Server chips are low-power, desktop chips are not-so-much. E3 1280's TDP doesn't include IGP either I believe...
So are you comparing a 4.2GHz Deneb against a lower clocked Zambezi?Quote:
Originally Posted by BeepBeep2
The point of the BD 'module' is to give most of the performance of two full cores (hypothetical BD cores, not stars), with only a tiny increase in die area over one core. So they have more cores and multithreaded performance per die area, which gives them something better than HyperThreading.Quote:
Originally Posted by BeepBeep2
If they used 8 stars cores, the die area would be a lot larger, and probably have to sacrifice cache.
Of course the modules design is one aspect of BD, and there is far, far more to it than "MOAR CORES".
They are increasing multithreaded performance, increasing IPC, and increasing frequency all at the same time. Which is difficult, because they can often trade off each other.
I believe AMD measures TDP differently for server and desktop parts. I'm not sure if Intel does.Quote:
Originally Posted by BeepBeep2
I am now torn between what CPU to get. If these rumored clock speeds + prices come true, having a hard time deciding between a 4.2GHz quad vs a lower clocked 6 or 8 core. >_<
Obviously it would probably fold better, but I mostly just do gaming and media playback on my rig and of course fold when system is idle.
Yeap, 3.6GHz E3-1290 doesnt have an IGP. Not that many people buying a U$300 chip would care and maybe they could release a 3.6GHz version with IGP by the time BD arrives (months after E3-1290 launch). Either way, roadmaps point to a 95w TDP Core i7 2600K replacement later this year, let the time tell its frequency.Quote:
Originally Posted by BeepBeep2
Q4 launch for Zambezi,according to JF-AMD
from the Comments section
SourceQuote:
Interlagos is a server part, there is no desktop variant. The client version of Bulldozer is Zambezi and it will launch in Q4.
http://blogs.amd.com/work/2011/09/07...-of-a-new-era/
We have known BD will launch is Q4 for a LONG time now. We just dont know when.
No, TDP is exactly the same for server and client parts.Quote:
Originally Posted by Apokalipse
hmmm i think i'm going to buy 1055T to replace my B60
I knew it! This dashes OCer hopes. See what it says in that picture? "Beware of low headroom". </terrace215>Quote:
Originally Posted by radaja
:ROTF: :p:
Charlie D. has written an article on BD shipping(and delays). Pretty interesting read,especially the info on new revision in Q1 2012.