Printable View
http://news.softpedia.com/news/AMD-0...1-106194.shtml
“Our guidance for the Bulldozer CPU core was reset to expect test silicon in late 2010 and product in 2011,” said Damon Muzny, a spokesperson for AMD, as reported by X-bit labs.
If they only get test silicon in late 2010, it's going to be some ways into 2011 to get Bulldozer architecture products out. Maybe Q3 '11?
Also notice that the accompanying slide also shows no 32nm products (for client, anyhow) until early 2011.
So Bulldozer @ 32nm then? :eek:
Perkam
Yep. First AMD 32nm CPU. Deneb is in for about 2½ years more in the frontline fighting Yorkfield, Nehalem, Westmere and Sandy Bridge.Quote:
Originally Posted by perkam
Bulldozer is out about 3-6months before the first 22nm Intel CPU (Ivy Bridge).
Hasn't this been known for quite a while now? If I remember correctly, AMD mentioned this when they launched Shanghai in December.
is it just me or that does not sound good
yeah everything being delay because the recession. everyone wants to avoid the revenue loss sigh
This isn't anything we didn't already know but it definitely shows how hopeless AMD is going to be in the next 2 years or so. Deneb cannot compete with the Core 2 generation yet it is going to have to hold AMD's lineup for over 2 years, and compete against not only 32nm Nehalem parts but also a completely new architecture, Sandy Bridge.
On the server side they are in big trouble; their 6 & 12 core parts may be somewhat competitive but the clocks (especially on the Magny Cours CPU) will likely be low. And Intel will have 8-core Nehalems that should be able to beat the 12-core Magny Cours with its low clockspeeds. And that's not even considering the 32nm server parts that will eventually arrive and of course the Sandy Bridge server parts that will arrive by late 2010 or early 2011.
AMD is in for some very tough times and there is no reason, given their track record, that we can expect Bulldozer to be any kind of savior chip, either. Bulldozer was supposed to appear in 2009, now it is going to appear in 2011. Now perhaps the chip has been revised compared to what they were planning to release in '09, but regardless, it would take a substantial (sometimes 40-50%) improvement over K10 just for Bulldozer to compete with 45nm Nehalem. Meanwhile Bulldozer will compete with 32nm Sandy Bridge for a few months and then Intel's 22nm parts....
Actually, I just checked this out and if Bulldozer is delayed so is Deneb's successor:Quote:
Originally Posted by OutSider
http://www.tgdaily.com/html_tmp/cont...40186-135.htmlQuote:
Originally Posted by TGDaily
Seeing as Deneb is a native quad, I have my fingers crossed for 32nm shrinked Deneb sometime q4 2010 :(
Perkam
AMDs roadmaps says no 32nm K10. 32nm will only be a new arch.Quote:
Originally Posted by perkam
No such part is indicated here, at least:Quote:
Originally Posted by perkam
http://www.xbitlabs.com/images/news/..._2008_2011.png
Looks they are changing both process & architecture in one go, somewhat risky, but they'll be so behind they have to gamble on it.
They said they are going to build working Bulldozer cores on 45nm first. Engineering samples I'd imagine; before they go to 32nm production.Quote:
Originally Posted by terrace215
From the before mentioned article:
"The chip manufactured under the 32nm process node should come in 2011. Along with it, the company is also expected to release Ontario, with two general-purpose x86 cores, which would also feature integrated graphics, 1MB of cache and DDR3 memory support."
Does this indicate that R&D is setting a buffer for it's development by stating a 2011 rollout plan? 32 nm and below offers many new possibilities yet unexplored. I know many of us were thinking of the implications when AMD acquired ATI. Any thoughts?
I wonder why X-Bit is trying to make this news. They got the bloody slide from AMD's analyst day in Nov. The only difference is they cropped off the date from the bottom of the slide that says Nov. 8. It'll be curious to see who all on this forum try to take this 'news' and run with it...
Don't take AMD roadmaps to heart. After Barcelona fiasco they state in roadmaps only things that are fixed. If they loosened their plans on Bulldozer-core launch date, they still have time to start developing a 32nm shrink of K10 and it'll be ready for production in late 2010.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
Talking about AMD roadmaps there were no PhenomII faster than 3Ghz till Q42009 in AMD roadmaps and now we have a 3,2Ghz PhenomII in April (a half year earlier).
This is not news.
:shakes:
Exactly.Quote:
Originally Posted by sergiojr
Not exactly.Quote:
After Barcelona fiasco they state in roadmaps only things that are fixed. (...)
Quote from the same slideshow as the roadmap above:Quote:
DISCLAIMER
The information presented in this document is for informational purposes only and may contain technical inaccuracies, omissions and typographical errors. The information contained herein is subject to change and may be rendered inaccurate for many reasons, including but not limited to product and roadmap changes, component and motherboard version changes, new model and/or product releases
Exactly. It's vague and pounces on existing info which might perfectly indicate otherwise.Quote:
Originally Posted by largon
But it's AMD doom so it's okay. :down::shakes:
What now? AMDs own roadmap aint good enough anymore?
Where did 32nm K10 and 45nm Bulldozer come in?
2011 will be the death of IGPs (In favour of CPU+GPU package) and all nVidia chipsets I bet.
Stop crying, You will ruin this thread, It is news to many.
Quote:
Originally Posted by largon
If things are as you two claim, then why did an AMD spokesperson speak to X-Bit Labs about these issues on Thursday?Quote:
Originally Posted by Macadamia
First of all this is not news,like some of the users have stated. Xbit is just slow as a snail and likes to "produce" their own news. Orochi(a bulldozer based core) was pushed to 2011 a while back,and this has all to do with redesigning it and pushing it to a mature 32nm process as opposed to 45nm one. AMD said in Nov. that Orochi will not be a 2010 thing,but Xbit failed to grasp that one.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
Second ,AMD won't do the new design and new process launch at the same time.This brings a lot of risks to the table and AMD will never do this. AMD will probably ramp up 32nm production with a 32nm shrink of Deneb\Shanghai in Q3/Q4 2010 and make a 4/6 core parts on it first,before they touch Bulldozer with it.
So Xbitlabs just found out what many informed people already know from November time.Kudos to them :p:
AMD roadmaps are joke! They are promising and promising and promising....and when time comes they are postponing and postponing and postponing...
Do you remember when they were BS-ing us that Bulldozer was going to be released in 2009 and that it was going to have the fastest core for single and multi-threaded computing in computer history? :rolleyes:
Their roadmap looks more like this:
http://www.true-dubai.com/homepage-m...media-city.jpg :rofl:
Did you miss the part where the AMD spokesperson provided information to X-Bit Labs on Thursday?Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
1- You have Istanbul, Sao Paulo, Magny Cours until then. Some of them can or can not come to desktop.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
2- Orochi is set for Q1, Fusion for Q2.
Provided 'cos they asked them :rolleyes: .What should they do,don't answer the question,even a stupid one? :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad Boga
The fact is this "news" has been known since November 2008,period. Xbitlabs not knowing it and having to ask ,again,is not my problem :rolleyes:
Bulldozer is 2 to 3 months after Sandy Bridge.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
Help me out and point me these issues.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad Boga
No discernable difference to Meyer's statement, 5 days before:Quote:
“Our guidance for the Bulldozer CPU core was reset to expect test silicon in late 2010 and product in 2011,” said Damon Muzny, a spokesperson for AMD
Xbitlabs, 05/03/2009
"ramp up production of next-generation 32-nanometer processors in the middle of next year" = ES in late 2010. What's "late 2010"? 3Q10? 4Q10? Not hard to deduct, considering what their CEO said, mere days before.Quote:
Dirk Meyer, chief executive of Advanced Micro Devices, said Friday the chipmaker plans to "ramp up" production of next-generation 32-nanometer processors in the middle of next year with volume production starting in the fourth quarter.
InformationWeek, 27/02/2009
"volume production starting in the fourth quarter" = product in 2011. Just like the roadmap from AD08.
Attachment 95968 Attachment 95969
The last roadmap is pretty useless. Its the same type TSMC uses. In short we should have had 40nm GPUs over a one and a half year now then. You have to add atleast a year to those dates.
^You are saying Deneb will be available starting from 2Q09?
:stick:
Is the processorroadmap the last one in your post? Or is it the processnode one?Quote:
Originally Posted by largon
http://www.semiconductor.net/article...SMCRoadmap.jpg
Whats also worrying is that the Global Foundry Company will move to generic process nodes.
But I do hope we see 32nm GPUs and CPUs from them in early 2011.
What's wrong with that (TSMC) roadmap?
RH edge = complete, no?
this may not relate to bulldozer but i found a article that amd and partners are ahead against intel in creating the first 22nm chip
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd...ntel,6175.html
sandy and ivy bridge will be tuff to beat for amd until they get to 32nm
Complete=Start to install equipment. TSMCs roadmap is "adjusted" after end process development and node start. Issue is its when the factory is ready and you can make some chips etc. It would be like saying Intel would ship 32nm today. Yet its half a year away.Quote:
Originally Posted by mAJORD
45nm GS was completely abadoned underway due to problems for TSMC.
Its simply test runs and not what you would call full scale production. You can ofcourse make chips on it. Yield just aint pretty.
Thats an SRAM chip and pretty small too. Just like TSMC they made a few Mbit SRAM chip. Intel made a 291Mbit SRAM chip with 2 billion transistors to compare. Its more PR than production.Quote:
Originally Posted by ILikeCosmosS
I will say this again,for the Shintai and co :
AMD won't introduce the new design on a brand new process node.This just won't happen.Period.
Hence,32nm will be "trained" on a Shanghai derivatives,cheap small and fast 4 and 6 core products,probably in H2 2010.After this comes Bulldozer,first in desktop variant aka Orochi. Between now and Orochi,AMD will have Istanbul,Sao Paolo,Magny Cours and 32nm shrank variants.
That may be so, but there is absolutely no indication from AMD that that is the case. You can't just assume that AMD will do what you think it is logical. They can't suddenly decide today that they will shrink K10 CPUs to 32nm and do it. It would have had to be something planned for years. However, AMD planned that they would launch Bulldozer (Sandtiger core) at 45nm, then in 2010-2011 they would shrink to 32nm with Orochi. Now Sandtiger has been cancelled and Orochi is the first Bulldozer-gen chip AND the first AMD 32nm chip. So it is very unlikely that they had planned a 32nm shrink of K10.Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
None of these chips that you mention can compete with Core 2 Quad (2007 chip) based on per-clock/per-core performance. Istanbul may be capable of competing with Nehalem EP if it clocks very well..... but it will not be an easy fight and the pricing will have to be low. AMD will have zero competition for Beckton in the 4P market. San Paolo is just Istanbul on the G34 socket, Magny Cours is a 12 core MCM of San Paolo that will likely come at low enough clocks that it can be beaten by Beckton anyway.
On the desktop, a 6-core Istanbul doesn't make much sense (though it would be nice to one as a higher-end alternative to Deneb) and won't help AMD much in a market where not many apps utilize more than 4 threads. And once again, there is no indication that we will see 32nm chips from AMD until 2011. On the desktop AMD will be stuck with Deneb, which isn't a bad chip but not one that can last AMD 2 years and not a chip that can compete against Nehalem in any way.
Phenom II with DDR2 is on average around 3-6% slower than C2Q 45nm,and this is on desktop.. On servers Shanghai just kills it...
As for the 32nm comment and no K10.5 on that node comment from you,i disagree.They won't launch a new design on a new node,period.
Shanghai beats 45nm Yorkfield quads slightly in apps that access memory a lot. For 2P servers you can go either way really, both Intel/AMD offer good performance now. On 4P 6-core Dunnington beats AMD's offerings in general as it hides the memory latency with a large L3 cache.Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
The only reason AMD is competitive is because of the FSB/slow memory connection, however, both of which change with Nehalem EP/Beckton. On the server market Intel will pretty much have the market locked down once they get Nehalem parts out...
I don't disagree that AMD would like to have their first 32nm part with an existing architecture rather than a new one... I am disagreeing that such a part would have ever been planned. AMD expected Bulldozer to be out in 2009 @ 45nm... why would they plan K10 @ 32nm in 2010? And as I said, you can't just pull a 32nm shrink out of thin air....
Hmm... but their latest official roadmap indicates that they will.Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
Do you have any proof to back what you said?
@Extelleron
~20 men team was assigned for Brisbane shrink of Windsor core.They did the job fine and in record time.Granted G1 wasn't perf. braker due to L2 cache latency that was a bit higher than in F3,plus it had 512KB of L2 per core,but it was done quite easily and with very small R&D. Same think can happen with 32nm K10.5 shrink since AMD has already done it with Shanghai(they had 10 smaller teams all around the world designing and optimizing various parts of the MPU,thus cutting time considerably). As you can see from G2 and C2 examples,MPU shrink is not that hard thing to do,especially if it could help you a lot in understanding the node that you will use for your new generation uarchitecture. I hope you can see now how "Orochi" and "first 32nm CPU" doesn't go in the same sentence.
Their last roadmap is the vaguest of all.If you believe they will risk the company's future by launching a new design on a new process node,suit yourself.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vozer
Shanghai has been on AMD's roadmap since 2007, it is the natural shrink of Barcelona so of course it was planned. Now how long did it take for the design teams to take the Barcelona architecture and shrink it to 45nm? I don't know, perhaps not too long, but I am pretty sure it did not happen overnight. Same thing with Brisbane.Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
If AMD will launch a 32nm K10 part in 2010, the design work needs to be wrapping up right around now and be finished in a few months in order for the first parts to come back from fab by late 2009/early 2010. AMD received the first Shanghai parts in January 2008 I believe and showed working C0 chips in March. That allowed them to launch in 4Q 2008 with availability of desktop chips in 1Q 2009.
I just don't see AMD doing a shrink of a shrink and I don't see them having started design work on it earlier enough that the chip could be ready in time. And why would this part not appear on AMD's lineup if it existed?
What if they would test bulldozer on their 45 nm. node first, but never release it at that node and then produce it on 32 nm. Might be a viable option for them. A reason for doing to could be that their Bulldozer design won't be finished until about a year from now and by the time they have a working chip on 45 nm. their 32 nm. is ready to roll. With that in mind they first test the architecture on 45 nm. to then release it at 32 nm. May seem odd to some, but it could work out pretty well.
EDIT: @ Extelleron, Barcelona was designed with its shrink to 45 nm. in mind and was probably optimized for that node from the very beginning. This may have even made the shrink to 45 nm. considerably easier.
People are just predicting to much ;)
For now AMD have a good lineup and is picking up steam on the market. H1 2009 looks fine to AMD despite world crisis. For H2 it will depend on how AMD and Intel make their releases. (AMD will have "Congo" platform, Puma V2 platform with Phenom II dual core and 6-core Instanbul). Also AMD have RV740,RV790, the new HD 4000 mobile and the new RD8xx and SB8xx with RV8xx DX_11 part by end year.
Also is fundamental for AMD the HD dv2 to launch this/next month and other comparable notebooks from other manufactures.
Did you read the quote? Here it is again:Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
“Our guidance for the Bulldozer CPU core was reset to expect test silicon in late 2010 and product in 2011,” said Damon Muzny, a spokesperson for AMD, in a brief conversation with X-bit labs.
I trust you can look up the definition of "reset" yourself?
So, AMD thinks something just changed, even if its fans seek to pretend otherwise.
Who said anything about it being your problem? NOTHING revolves around you.Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
And as terrace215 states, why is AMD "resetting", if nothing has changed?
Additionally I think Paul DeMone of Real World Tech article fame also had an appropriate answer when facing a similar response as yours:
Quote:
http://aceshardware.freeforums.org/i...-t523-240.html
There is so much misfortune, f**kups, and general incompetence, both on the technical side and financial side, coming from AMD the last few
years it is hard for anyone but die hard fan-boys like yourself to keep it all straight. What are you going to do for a life when these clowns go
out of business?
Quote:
Originally Posted by terrace215
WAS reset a long time ago. Anounced at the November 2008 Analyst say.
Double confusion caused by Xbit labs. First they blunder by claiming that Bulldozer is near and coming in 2010:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/dis...s_in_2010.html
Instead of admitting their error they claim 3 days later that it's AMD which has rescheduled Bulldozer.....:confused:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/dis...s_to_2011.html
Both existing and new processor designs are being implemented on 32 nm
Regards, Hans
don't make me angry.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad Boga
Exactly,qft.This was similar response I would use to answer Chad's and terrace's posts.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hans de Vries
Oh and people don't use Paul's opinion as any credible source when it comes to amd vs intel debate.That dude is defending itanium(or anything made by intel) like it's his own chip design while it's obvious where that one is going to(same place where titanic went back in the day).
As ofr Xbit lab's blunders,this is not the first nor the last one they did. I expect many more in the years to come :p:
If it was obvious, then I doubt Intel would be bringing it to process parity with x86, nor have two teams working on future versions.Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
Let's wait and see where they take it :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad Boga
Itanium (Or rather VLIW/EPIC) is the long term future. Not x86/x64. Both Intel and MS agrees on it. And IA64 got a big momentum. 32nm IA64 might come before Gulftown aswell. (Itanium skipped 45nm).
Amount of software have exploded since 64bit came to the desktop. You can basicly get everything MS makes as IA64. Plus when you download regular software here and there you also usually see IA64 when you see x64 ports.
Its not taking over tomorrow. But its a winner in the long run.
Itanium will also now be platform compatible with Xeons.
I was talking about specific Itanium design,not vliw architectures in general...
Itanium is the dominant VLIW design. Itanium keeps its revenue growth. Hardly sinking...Sparc however might be sinking soon.Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
x86/x64 is simply too limited for the long term. We can barely go beyond 3 issue wide. We basicly need things like SMT not to have the execution units to sit idle.
The basic point is that we won't be seeing much from AMD for the next 2 years. A die shrink with associated tweaks could increase performance more, but the roadmap is pretty quiet, and I imagine that AMD will continue in that until Bulldozer. There is only so much "left" in an architecture in terms of optimization, so for AMD to focus on a new architecture makes sense. AMD needs a new architecture and a new paradigm.
What if in 2011 AMD postpones Bulldozer to 2013+? :D
What if we keep the spam at minimum :DQuote:
Originally Posted by gOJDO
How did itanium get dragged into this? :confused:
Screw itanium, has nothing to do with the subject :p:
And from the looks of things, nothing has gotten "pushed out" just some are jumping on this "news" for some weird reason :shrug:
A clueless attempt to slag off Intel.Quote:
Originally Posted by SparkyJJO
It is no big deal to have raised this as a news item and I would say that the "jumping" was done by the usual suspects who demand nothing less than completely gushing, never critical assessments/comments about AMD.Quote:
And from the looks of things, nothing has gotten "pushed out" just some are jumping on this "news" for some weird reason :shrug:
It's a little less one sided then that. It's no mistake that bad AMD "news" was posted by terrace or that Shintai/Informal are tied for the highest number of posts in this thread. Both sides of the AMD/Intel spectrum have made themselves look pretty bad with this thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad Boga
And seriously, it's not news. Anyone who was paying attention knew this back in november.
Do u know all about Deneb chip and potencial Denebs? And x6 based on Istanbul, hm? Just waiting man and u will see...Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
Orochi come in 4Q 2010 or 1Q 2011 to shop
Intel tick tock?Hm?....
Westmere 32nm 4Q 2009
SandyBridge 32nm same quartal as AMD Orochi
Ivy Bridge not at 2Q 2011;)
Orochi will apparently sample in late 2010, actual product launch cannot be expected until mid-2011. And that is AMD's current projection....given their track record it is not impossible that Bulldozer will not appear at retail until late 2011. Bulldozer will compete with Sandy Bridge for a little while but it will compete with 22nm Ivy Bridge for most of its lifespan, assuming a 22nm shrink from AMD sometime in late 2012.Quote:
Originally Posted by FlanK3r
AMD has nothing faster than Deneb planned for the desktop market, until Bulldozer (approx 2.5 years). A six-core Istanbul part may appear on the desktop but I doubt it will ever be a mainstream part. Anyway it will do nothing once Intel has Gulftown out, much less Sandy Bridge.
AMD's product portfolio for the next 2 years is going to be the low end. I would expect that Propus will be the focus of much of AMD's lineup with 1-2 Deneb SKUs at the top end ($150-200), with Regor and Propus-based tri-cores forming the <$100 market. Deneb's die size is too large for it to really be worth it on the desktop IMO at least, considering the kind of ASP AMD is going to be getting by 2010-2011. It is going to be a rough two years, that's for sure.
Some people here need a time machine. Live the present not the future :D
At least we have hardware.info making fools out of themselves today....
Or, perhaps it is Xbitlabs who is making a fool of themselves.
No, really, these sites are only reporting what people are saying. Some (sites and people) are just more informed than others...
And considering the timetable of these statements and positions of the persons giving them, one would think the CEO (Meyer) has a better understanding what the company will be doing and when, compared to a random PR person.
But, hey, let's just all keep on bashing... It has worked this far.
:ROTF:Quote:
Originally Posted by gOJDO
I think !
K6+K7+K10--> K11 Bulldozer.:clap:
itanium is the future... in some distant parallel universe maybe... come on, i know that some people at intel still think itanium will take over one day, but thats ridiculous...
they are pulling graphics back ont cpus by building an x86-64 based gpu emulator that will then later be merged with the cpu to then run on itanium? that doesnt make sense..
build a x86-64 cpu to emulate a gpu
build a itanium cpu to emulate a x86-64 cpu?
thats just silly... when is still supposed to happen anyways? 2025?
intel thinkis it has itanium as a backdoor option to take over the market, and it was a great plan back then but it just never worked, and it will never work for the same reasons... companies are run to make money, anybody at intel trying to steer them towards blowing even more billions to shift away from x86-64 to itanium with is completely unecessary would lose support so quickly hed be replaced within months.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vietthanhpro
K10=K5 x 2;)
yeah, sure :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by savantu
Skew their brains with a 2yr delay:p:Quote:
Originally Posted by v_rr
:woot:, stupid post.Quote:
Originally Posted by savantu
Im quite curious for Bulldozer, but well, anything could happen which might delay or advance it for a quarter. Im looking forward to it but comparing it to a possible release from its competitor, come on:rolleyes: We cant even predict on a solid base what's going to happen in 6 months, let alone end '10/ start '11,
Maybe they have lowered the priority for bulldozer because AMD has seen that they can improve Phenom much more. I think this is a good thing because it will mean that the AM2 socket will last longer. Also the need for bulldozer performance isn't needed for most PC users. Spending a lot of money that isn't going to sell that well, how smart is that? Better to wait as long as you can and build bulldozer as with the best possible design.
I have been using Phenom II 940 in vmware. Phenom II is a huge improvement in speed. It is almost as you don't notice that you work in a virtual machine compared to work on the main machine. Maybe this speed improvement is because RVI.
It is more likely that they blundered the development process and had to either start again or do a substantial redesign, necessitating the mooted timeline.Quote:
Originally Posted by gosh
Yep.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad Boga
Part of that might have been related to the performance numbers of EP and EX Nehalem. Those being so strong, design #1 might have been a non-starter performance-wise, especially projecting out another couple years.
I don't care, really.
1 take more time to design new core. it can still use L3 cache and connect them like a K10. refinement in latency's in other parts too.
2 make sure it works right, not too hot, not power sucking, no tlb errors.
3 do not get pushed into a rushed product again, work with there schedules and not others schedules.
Clearly you have little experience with the AMD executive habit of making positive-spin statements that get misinterpreted (by design), but then, when the misinterpretation gets too broadly published, AMD execs get a little nervous about the whole lying-to-investors thing, and send out a minion to clarify.Quote:
Originally Posted by largon
Happened all the time on their investor CCs. They deliberately confuse "profits!" with "operating profit", or try to confuse "starting production ramp" with "product shipments" or "availability".
And here we had Dirk spinning the 32nm schedule in the usual AMD way, but when several folks ran with it and talked about AMD 32nm *products* in H2 10 (not what Dirk said, just what he wanted you to think), a week later, the PR spokesman is dispatched to say, "uh, no, we mean, um, products in 2011, thanks!"
Why AMD execs can never help themselves from overpromising/underdelivering is beyond me. They might try it the other way around for a change, though I guess that is easier to do when you're ahead.
Moving good solutions from bulldozer design to Phenom and extendending lifespan seems more logical. Don’t think that AMD has the economic margins to "play" with new technologies. They need to be in control.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad Boga
Logical? More like highly improbable.Quote:
Originally Posted by gosh
When has such a thing happened previously?
Recovering from a misstep isn't "playing".Quote:
Don’t think that AMD has the economic margins to "play" with new technologies. They need to be in control.
If I am right that is what AMD has always done. They make small enhancements all the time (think it is called new "revisions" that get new tweaks). Maybe we soon will se six core Phenoms that fits in the AM2 socket.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad Boga
"misstep" was your conclusion. You have no clue what or why they do things. There are a lot of things that decides how a company will advance.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad Boga
Selling at what price? AMD would set new records for losses if they did.Quote:
Originally Posted by gosh
You mean like they did with K8 when it was being slaughtered by Conroe and Barcelona's release was constantly being pushed back?Quote:
Originally Posted by gosh
Yeah I agree, at this point Bulldozer's current trajectory is eerily reminiscent of Barcelona.
Or maybe we won't or we will see how useless for the overwhelming majority of homeusers six cores(over 4 cores clocked higher) are in the 2009/10 timeframe.Quote:
Maybe we soon will se six core Phenoms that fits in the AM2 socket.
And a quite reasonable one when a company is behind and announces delays to a product that it much needs.Quote:
"misstep" was your conclusion.
Nor do you, but unlike you, I don't let bias cloud my judgements in assessing likely outcomes.Quote:
You have no clue what or why they do things.
The horse...she is dead...why do you continue to flog it? :horse:
Perkam