http://www.tweaktown.com/pressreleas..._e3/index.html
hmmmm :)
Printable View
Oh men! If its real, is it awesome!
http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/8...46c800x600.jpg
I want this to be the retail Box :eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by FlanK3r
That is one funky box! Perfect for coffee storage.. :D
there are more picturesQuote:
Originally Posted by TheBreezyBB
http://gathering.tweakers.net/forum/...78456#36178456
also on the turbo
http://tweakimg.net/g/forum/template....com/Erqeq.jpg
if this is real that it would mean that turbo 2.0 can even have different GHZ and multipliers within a single module.
From Dresdenboy's blog ,a great question :)
So,at which clock all these parts run if both cores are having different clockspeeds? :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Dresdenboy
My guess is that all shared parts ,except FlexFP,run at the frequency of higher clocked integer core :). FlexFP is usually clock gated if no fp commands are scheduled,but if it is not clock gated it should also run at the frequency of higher clocked integer core.
http://i56.tinypic.com/jhemx3.jpg
BD in overdrive
chili sauce: http://www.4gamer.net/games/100/G010000/20110607029/
Every single core at diff frequency?
IDK, can SB also be tuned in this way??Quote:
Originally Posted by zalbard
no pun intended! don't flame me!
Every core at different frequencies is a bit strange when you consider the modules.
been dying to get a good side view of the new box ;) :D
I don't think so... It can have one fast core or two with the others being throttled, but nothing similar to this that I know of.Quote:
Originally Posted by haylui
It would make sense if frequency at least changed according to core's load... But look at the above screenshot: 2% load and 3.2GHz, 14% load and 1GHz? :confused: Maybe it's set manually this way...
Diamond: hehe , u change Avatar ,-). I try use it as my desktop in windows :), They wrote, this BOX is only for 8-cores (maybe only topmodel)
Quote:
Originally Posted by zalbard
Have you not seen Phenom II x6 in AOD?:p:Quote:
Originally Posted by -Boris-
I see the same result with my 1100t in AOD with turbo enable and CnQ. Even with out CnQ
What is strange is that every voltage is at 1.4V
What's even stranger is top half is VID and Bottum Half is Voltage....Quote:
Originally Posted by mrcmtl
What does he say at :05, " use the air spots controller"?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUIO7pLCCbE
But Phenom has cores that can be set individually. Can you set different parts of a module at different speeds? If you have core 0 at 1GHz and core 1 at 2GHz, what speed does the prefetchers, and schedulers work at?Quote:
Originally Posted by charged3800z24
My guess is at the clock of the faster core.Same goes for non clock-gated FlexFP.Quote:
Originally Posted by -Boris-
Quote:
Originally Posted by flippin_waffles
xbox controller ;)
If its marketed that way as an "ultimage gaming cpu" , it cant be worse than current SB in games as some people suggested.But thats probably due to the aggressive turbo.
wow those box is for candy?
ah yes, thanks.Quote:
Originally Posted by wez
http://img.donanimhaber.com//images/...3a_dh_fx57.jpg
I feel a new stepping coming for christmas.
And the other thing, current models look like are scheduled for start of Q3, so maybe theyre gonna show up in the summer itself and not in september.
Yes,late July seems to be the target now. Shouldn't be long now :D. Turbo is going to reach some new levels with Zambezi.
http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/9887/bd004.jpg
Like I said. Duplicating all functionality to allow AVX on both halves simultaneously would be a waste of die space and power. IMO, it's better this way.Quote:
128-bit dedicated FMAC per core
-OR-
256-bit AVX shared between 2 cores
Mmmm....I agree, if that slides true, a new spepping for late year as it would appear the rumors were true, the part isn't up to snuff. So release slow parts just to get somthing out. To me that means less performance than what we originaly led to believe.Quote:
Originally Posted by XRL8
RussC
AMD didnt anybody LED to believe in any performance numbers as it didnt state any, nor even implied them.Quote:
To me that means less performance than what we originaly led to believe.
All AMD officialy said is "AM3+ is a platform for our new bulldozer based cpus which will have up to 8 cores".Thats it :).
Recently we found out AMD plans to price first 8 core BD at around 300$ mark, so it thinks its gonna compete with 2600k.However its not official and isnt even verified to be true.
It doesn't have to be a new stepping,would be normal for AMD to have a roadmap with higher clocked parts to counter faster SB parts Intel might release and SB-E.
but really, new BOX for top models look impressive. The nicest from all history. Nice BOX and golden treasure inside :). Love it. Want it :).
Do has anyone picture of BOX in higher resolution? Its adept at my new windows desktop.
I didn't say AMD led us, just a general "led". Im thinking the intial release performance now will be more dissapointing than exciting.Quote:
Originally Posted by XRL8
RussC
Actually this slide makes the point even better:Quote:
Originally Posted by Solus Corvus
http://img11.imageshack.us/img11/9345/bd003.th.jpg
Basically the FP unit can process 2 128-bit instructions per cycle, whether they are FMA, SSE, or AVX (yes, there are some 128-bit AVX instructions). But a 256-bit instruction requires the whole module.
A glass half full or half empty, what a dilemma for fanbois around the globe, LOL. :ROTF:Quote:
Originally Posted by RussC
From what I heard, Fusion sales exploded much more than they expected (they shipped 5 million Zacate/Ontario chips and are now sold out). So they decided to change to prioritizing GF's manufacturing capacity for Llano first (more profitable). And at the same time do a new stepping for BD anyway (increasing clocks).Quote:
Originally Posted by RussC
CnQ is probably disabled/not working yet, I don't doubt idle voltages will be very low if the idle clocks are to be taken as valid.Quote:
Originally Posted by mrcmtl
i will have blueberry intel cookies there that I eat up :rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by FlanK3r
Buy an AMD 8 core cpu, get a FREE PENCIL CASE!
Thats a strange box, looks like a cookie/popcorn tin to me :D
Seems like everyone who buy Bulldozer will get candybox with it.
Wow i see my Thai language printed at the box
When you consider that few apps will take advantage of 256-bit AVX, why would you want lots of die space and power budget dedicated to 256-bit AVX? Especially in client applications.Quote:
Originally Posted by Solus Corvus
You'll see 256-bit AVX in some HPC apps, a few financial apps. Mostly they will be custom apps, not commercial apps.
128-bit AVX will be far more common because there is a greater likelihood of 128-bit pipes being filled. Today's 128-bit SSE is probably only partially filled on most cycles (when it is actually being utilized) so the thought that suddenly it can be filled with 256-bit on applications, especially on the consumer side, is a bit far-fetched.
90% of the processing that happens in most environments is integer today, not FP. That means a lot of empty cycles for the FP unit.
"Warranty subject to certain exceptions and waivers"
Seems reasonable.
Easy answer: I wouldn't, unless apps important to me use lots of 256-bit AVX.Quote:
Originally Posted by JF-AMD
How many apps important to me fit that description right now? Zero.
IMO, BD should have relatively similar power to SB in 256-bit AVX. But the flexibility of the FPU gives it significantly higher potential in traditional FP, SSE, 128-bit AVX, and FMAC. At least on paper.
I will buy lowest clocked 8 core anyway and overclock myself. Due to watercooling i think i can make up for the difference at lower initial cost. And if I dont get out the 4+ ghz at once i dont really care, but i want a bulli FAST :DQuote:
Originally Posted by RussC
anyway, to me it seems different with this slide: The first steppings are delayed (because of llano or whatever), but the second steppings to be released are not delayed, but just like on earlier slides.
That way they have lower lifetime, but
1.) the first steppings will be in store for 1 year (can be ordered by resellers for half a year, then shipping, then in shops.. At least a year) - not really unusual. Maybe they have to cease to make room for second step bulli, as it seems that production capacity is an issue, so dont compare that with intel..
2.) If the second stepping isnt delayed, it means there are no technical problems with performance or whatever, otherwise the second steppings chips would have been delayed also... But they arent...
Conclucion: All fine with the process and bulldozer...
iron BOX with CPU for me.....love...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQtmr...layer_embedded
he said: "I think, people will be very impressed about clock speeds"...
But clocks do not mean anything. People should have been impressed by Pentium 4 clocks and look what happened.
dont worry....,-)
I am not, just don't like when clocks are used for PR.Quote:
Originally Posted by FlanK3r
clocks are spec of architecture. Again:
If company A has product at 2GHz and TDP 95-125W and company B at 6 GHz chip with the same range of TDP, doesnt matter at clocks.
it doesn't. And That is my point. What matters is what that chip is able to do at those 6ghz ;)
or tearsQuote:
Originally Posted by El Gappo
we already know IPC will be higher than phenom, so if BD can reach 5ghz with overclocking, then it will be a significant increase over phenom (like 40% stronger per thread even though clocks are only 25% higher (4ghz vs 5ghz))Quote:
Originally Posted by muziqaz
most of us think that it will take about 5.5ghz stable on air/water for it to be thread vs thread competitive with a 5ghz SB
As I have said I am not worried, but BD is not going against phenoms.
So what if it has lower IPC than SB? Will it be a deal breaker if it is 15% slower at similar clock? What matters is a whole performance/power/price/OC headroom package. If it is able to clock 15% higher than SB than with 8 cores it will crush it in MT applications and equal it/come close in single threaded ones. Now factor in LN2 OCing and you will get a beast for 320$ that will probably break some 3dmark/whatever records when launches.Quote:
Originally Posted by muziqaz
Why is everyone think that I am suddenly talking about how BD will suck because it is designed to clock high? My point is, I do not like when someone says, oh those clocks will surprise everyone. Instead if I heard that performance will surprise everyone that is another deal.
Now 'surprise' for others might not be surprise for us here. Let's say top BD runs at 3.8ghz. That might surprise those who do not follow BD path to release or who do not know as much as we do about CPU arch. But for us those 3.8ghz is just given as logical outcome. We would be questioning AMD if they released BD at 3ghz or something of the kind. Today we have 3.6+ghz CPUs so BD clocks might not be that big of the surprise for us. And we have SB clocking like mad on air, so it is a big shoes to fill I would say in clock department.
^thanks for clearing that up
and your right, 3.8ghz does sound nice for some, but most of us are hoping to see 4.2ghz turbo on stock options
and for OCing, we would all love to see mid 5ghz, and anything less would probably also be kinda disapointing
but given that this is a new arch, on a new process, we have no clue how cold sensitive, or voltage sensitive it will be. so then begs the question, if we could pump in 1.4v and get 6ghz on water, but never break 6.5ghz even on LN2, some of us would be static, while others disappointed, but would that make it a failure? it all depends on who you ask. thats what makes these things so interesting and fun, and also personal, lol
To be honest, I would be glad if BD 8 core top bin came out at 3.8ghz. It wouldn't be surprise, but I would be glad.
Also did you guys noticed, that AMD BlackOps website has expired? I would have thought that if BD at least can clock like Phenom II on LN2 they would keep that domain in tact.
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpu...2012-roadmap/1
Looks like AM3+ will be obsolete in like another year?
Considering Llano is FM1, and both the APU and Komodo and Trinity say FMx, I would guess that means that these CPUs will spin off on a new "FM" socket, like FM2.Quote:
Originally Posted by mbevo
That doesn't make sense to me considering the fact that FM1 has less pins than AM3+, and that I would hope they transition to triple/quad channel on desktop.
Attachment 116250
looks, FMx (FM2????) and Komodo will be with integrated SB?
Integrated SB has already been discussed by AMD:Quote:
Originally Posted by FlanK3r
Attachment 116252
2015 looks exciting! :-D
DB: u right, thx.
Komodo will have integrated PCie.So a new socket is finally confirmed.Thats good in a way.
If we are to judge by Sepang's features,Komodo is going to have: 6-10 enhanced BD cores(25% more than 8C Zambezi),3ch. IMC,new socket,integrated PCIe. New socket may be compatible between two lines of CPUs: Komodo and Trinity. "Enhanced cores" my bring as little as 5% IPC or it could mean extended ISA support(new BMI,TBM and FMA3).
New socket, finlally AMD gets rid of old AM2/AM3 socket thats been allmost same since Socket 939 with just minor tweaks.
FM2 Socket, Dual/Quad Channel DDR3 or DDR4, no more limitations from this old AM socket, i smell awsomeness :)
The performance numbers in post 1, is close to correct and that is eather 6 or 8-core chip.
Exactly, different arch's mean different clock range. Even tough some people think "oh l33t, my chip has 6ghz stock clocks and your's have only 3ghz" while 3ghz chip can be faster if it has better design.Quote:
Originally Posted by FlanK3r
I read somewhere that the next Bulldozer socket and memory controller will add native 3channel support. What's interesting is that this could mean high end server MCM chips will add 6 channel memory support :shocked:
Now that would be awesome.
Terramar is the next iteration of Bulldozer on the "Opteron" side of the house. haven't seen MC specs yet but Interlagos is quad-channel.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dimitriman
Liking the 3ch potential for any FM2 CPU (aka you can upgrade from highend Trinity to Komodo), but more notably you can see AMD is shifting to a (bi)yearly cycle for motherboards. There's much less incentive to be backwards compatible nowadays, they just drag on the dev process and imply unnecessary concessions.
3ch will be great for the high-end, ~280mm (or so) Trinity, as the upgraded GPU desperately needs bandwidth; the smaller version with 2 cores and a cut down GPU can still work on FM1 and be enough for most notebooks/ITX setups.
But then you can see how AM3+/990X is a dead-end platform (they really want to get I/O on and remove HTT) that's gonna last about a year or so, maybe a bit more IF AMD releases any Komodos with AM3+ support- unlikely though.
I think it's 8 core performance projection(in 1st post).And it looks great :). What I want to know is whether the software partners will introduce the support for Bulldozer's ISA at launch?Think what FMA4 will do for HPC apps... 1.5x+ boost over legacy/AVX code is awesome potential speedup.Quote:
Originally Posted by rintamarotta
@Dimitriman
Terramar is going to have the same 4ch. memory controller.Sepang on the other hand will support 3ch. IMC.
so komodo is an apu now???
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dresdenboy
what's your opinion on the fabric like heterogeneous computing part in the long term part of that slide???
might it mean optical interconnect ?????
Komodo is a CPU,but seems to integrate PCIe so it needs a new socket that will in turn accept also the Fusion Trinity class of APUs.
thanks for the info
Interesting question and I often thought about that. Optical interconnect is just a tech but likely not meant by fabric (which IMO describes the way compute units are combined). Instead we might see something like EDGE/TRIPS (which Chuck Moore worked on in the past) and Larrabee. At least this slide suggests sth like that:Quote:
Originally Posted by Sn0wm@n
Attachment 116279
Some options: smaller GPU cores spread across the CPU cores (short communication, less "reprocessing" and preparation -> higher power efficiency), compute arrays, reconfigurable computing. General purpose cores might become a collaborating set of small cores, accompanied by some bigger units for special workloads. As someone said, it might become standard to have more units on a chip (trannies are cheap) than power budget would allow to be active at the same time. Maybe I will elaborate that in more detail on my blog. No promises ;)
Komodo FMx socket should not be equal to Trinity FMx socket.Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
We don't need another LGA 1156...
Why?Quote:
Originally Posted by doompc
FMx designation seems to suggest there will be few types of it.
And it makes sense, as trinity has different needs than komodo.
Interesting rumour... Fantastic if true.
Source: http://www.planet3dnow.de/cgi-bin/ne...?id=1308046369
Also, OBR is selling his 8 core BD for $420...Quote:
FX-8150P (C0) - 4.0 GHz, Max T.C 4.4 GHz, 125 W (?)
FX-8130P (B2) - 3.8 GHz, Max T.C 4.2 GHz, 125 W (320$)
FX-8110 (B2) - 3.6 GHz, Max T.C 4.0 GHz, 95 W (290$)
FX-8100 (C0) - 3.5 GHz, Max T.C 3.9 GHz, 95 W (?)
Wonder where he gets his chips since he seems to do whatever he wants to with them.
a C0 stepping thats slower than a B2 stepping sure sounds a little off
even if they can reach those specs (8110) with B2 there is no need for a lower model initial since they can earn more per chip, but why even introduce it later since prices will drive down over time anyway.
also a 30w increase for just 200mhz sounds pretty far off, going from 8110 to 8130P
based on that list i see no reason to buy anything other than the 8110 considering we know its not very power hungry and still a good solid 4ghz (and of coarse its unlocked)
There are certain 'steps' when it comes to TDP ranking, so this is plausible.Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
Yeah, but C0 might overclock better.Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
Anyway, just rumours. Thought I'd post.
If you take into account the TDP is not expected consumption, but a way to keep board makers from shipping VRMs that double as toasters, it's not so far fetched: the 8130P may just hover above 95W, but that forces AMD to bump it to 135W. (Maybe another intermediate step would be better? Who knows.)Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
I was under the impression P models are going to be unlocked, and the rest not.
How do you know all will be ?
the point was, why stop at just 200mhz more (5% really), for 30% more TDP.Quote:
Originally Posted by zalbard
so if they needed a voltage bump, then the lower model might actually have more headroom. or this is showing the upper limits of their clock rates. the first is meh, the second is really scary to hear. the truth is it could simply be 105w and they just dont have enough for multiple skus, even though they could give us a 4.4ghz version up front already (in limited quantity or something)
this is all just nonsense speculation, please dont read too much into what i say :)
from the many people who have preached that all FX models will be, although i never believed themQuote:
Originally Posted by XRL8
the P to me seemed related to 125W models from patterns i saw
This is the same many times regugitated rumour that started here on XS from the wrongly interpreted ASUS slide.Quote:
Originally Posted by zalbard
And it's already rubished by the fact max TC. is going to be +1Ghz (which was also evident from that slides).
As for OBR, that chip was supposedly 3ghz, yes?
I am pretty sure we will not see such frequencies at launch ;) Though I would be very very glad to be proven wrong.
Komodo is not an APU, what's the point on making it compatible with motherboards with video outputs?Quote:
Originally Posted by Oliverda
My guess is that Komodo will have 32+ PCIe lanes (if it does indeed have integrated PCIe) and HTT, kinda like LGA 2011.
That's what he says, yes.Quote:
Originally Posted by DarthShader
Id expect to see Komodo have 48 PCI-E 3.0 lines, SLI/Crossfire with 16x/16x configuration and Trifire/TriSLI configuration 16/16/8 and it would still leave 8 PCI-E lines for other hardware.
Its AMD's top of the line system so why not have 48 PCI-E 3.0 lines for multi card configurations.
I watch carefully on his ES chip, form the string I read seems it's still a B0 chip.Quote:
Originally Posted by zalbard
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-q6N2PlSDUC...s400/bull1.bmp
EDIT: the number in the string is looked like '2620', means it's a 2.6ghz chip.
If it run superpi1M@15s that's good however take turbo into account.
I think, this videospec is some fake....dont believe it.
That's weird because the performance is much superior to the 2 B0 chips CHH tested and the B0 on youtube. Also, iirc, B0s don't have turbo enabled.Quote:
Originally Posted by undone
Since few of those SKU will never exist i doubt that any information is accurate regarding GHZ and price.....Quote:
Originally Posted by zalbard
No, few types would be suggested by a different designation like FMx and FMy ;-)Quote:
Originally Posted by XRL8
I think it will be the same:
a) AMD has still less volume then Intel, a special enthusiast plattform like intel's 1366 does not make sense for them. Intel's 1366 had around 2-3% volume of the whole market. AMD has something between 20-30%, now calculate 2-3% for that numbers. That's not much.
b) Triple channel only helps in certain special cases. Anybody remebers significant performance differences between socket 1366 and 1156 ?
c) FMx will probably be sth like FM1+ and just get a DDR3-2133 and PCIe3 Update. Maybe also a bit more TDP, ~125W. That is ~+15% RAM bandwidth and +100% PCIe performance, no need for triple channel or lots of PCIe lanes.
Conclusion:
Yes, the die hard XS enthusiast wants Quad Channel and 100 PCIe lanes, but the far most of the people will buy price/performance. For that purpose, Komodo@FMx will provide a solide base.
maybe i missed somewhere.. when are opterons coming? I suppose that they coming earlier than desktop version?
If there would be only one FM type of socket, whats the point of putting "x" there ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Opteron146
It usually means "unknown number".
But i know what youre getting at.Keep in mind however, the while youre talking about small percentage of small percentage of market share, it doesnt stop amd from doing two different server sockets.
I just hope youre wrong :P
Well depending on how you guys do with yours I may just break down and build a new AMD box instead of waiting for the 22nm intels. Mainly im waiting on money to purchase. But these look extremely competitive and love the return of SLI.
http://i.zdnet.com/blogs/amd-fx-bull...essor-logo.pngQuote:
Originally Posted by XRL8