About the cebit bit, didnt JF told us to dont expect anything about BD at cebit ? Maybe its about Liano, current amd solutions (zacate withstanding) are kind of sub par so maybe that how theyve come with the 50% bit![]()
From where im standing he said to us that there isnt going to be any new information on CEBIT about bulldozer.Theres no way to intepret this sentence differentlyOriginally Posted by JF-AMD
![]()
It would be great tho, to atleast see the machines working.
Any comparison vs. MC would come from my blog. Period.
old architecture is 3 ALU/AGU pipelines which are shared. New architecture is 2 ALU + 2 AGU, all dedicated.
Don't expect much, this is not a luanch.
yes, that was a typo, we corrected it since then
yes, but launch plans are shared between divisions, and I was having a beer with the desktop BD guy last monday, we stay in contact.
numerically 4,6,8 sounds faster than 3,5,7 without even knowing anything other than the part number.
2500k @ 4900mhz - Asus Maxiums IV Gene Z - Swiftech Apogee LP
GTX 680 @ +170 (1267mhz) / +300 (3305mhz) - EK 680 FC EN/Acteal
Swiftech MCR320 Drive @ 1300rpms - 3x GT 1850s @ 1150rpms
XS Build Log for: My Latest Custom Case
But the whole FX-XXXX is a bad idea. People will learn that FX is a processor but they won't learn which one to get. Where I work, when people talk about processors they just say i3, i5 or i7. People really don't care which i5 it is as long it's an i5. Cause they know that an i5 is good enough. Calling all bulldozers for just FX will make people confused.
i3 vs FX
i5 vs FX
i7 vs FX
See the difference?
The four digit numbers is nothing people care about. As I said, when people talk about intel CPUs the usually just say i5 or i7. Customers understand that i7 is the best one and so on. If you start talking about FX 4650 vs. FX 6450 people will be confused. People care about series, like i5, Core 2, Phenom II, Sempron. Not about modelnumbers like 940BE or E6400.
A4 and A8 is simple.
+1 with Boris
most people are not intuitive enough to realizing that the first number for the 4 number string have a pattern about the basic performance of the chip. unless someone is familiar with the entire LINE they will not be able to know whats high and low, end up getting pissed off cause they feel stupid, and never care to learn how the numbers work.
i would rather see FX8-xxx, FX4-xxx
and based on what weve seen sofar with E and C numbers, maybe AMD is sticking with 3 numbers after the character label.
2500k @ 4900mhz - Asus Maxiums IV Gene Z - Swiftech Apogee LP
GTX 680 @ +170 (1267mhz) / +300 (3305mhz) - EK 680 FC EN/Acteal
Swiftech MCR320 Drive @ 1300rpms - 3x GT 1850s @ 1150rpms
XS Build Log for: My Latest Custom Case
So the possibility of:
FX4-xx
FX6-xx
FX8-xx
is out of your world and can never exsist?
And again i5 is stupid as it both holds quad and dual cores, and i dont think amd will be any better tho. We've already seen the naming of the first fuzion parts brazos, wich are: C30/50 and E-240/350 in wich both series contains single and dual cores wich is just stupid. The E-series should have both been dual cores and C single core.
CPU: Intel i5 2500K + Antec Khuler 620 Memory: 4GB DDR3 Corsair DHX @ 1600MHz CL7 GPU: Nvidia GTX 560Ti + Antec Khuler 620
Motherboard: Zotac Z68ITX-A-E HDD: Crucial M4 128GB + 2TB Samsung F4EG Chassi: Lian Li Q11B PSU: Cooler Master Silent Pro 850W OS: Windows 7 x64
Welcome to my home theater! | mattBLACK Gallery | Minima "H20" Gallery
that would be true if AMD only called it FX. but they will have # afterwards to show the difference. Say for example we were talking CPUs and you told me the new i8 will spank the new FX 8000's. You wouldn't need to state FX 8123
unless I am missing something on the naming..
First off, english isn't my native language and im pretty drunk at the moment. Please have some understanding for my unusually bad english.
But people outside the enthusiast community just say i7 or i5, the numbers afterwards are to complex or to confusing. So it would be i7 vs. FX. People won't care enough to realize the difference between FX 4800 and FX 6400. People don't memorize 4 digit numbers. The last three numbers will take the focus away from the first one enough to make people not memorize the series.
As I said earlier. People remember series, like i7, i5n A8 and A6. Not modelnumbers like FX 6450.
That wasn't one of the alternatives that I was arguing against.
It looks like there will be 2, 3 and 4 module Bulldozers, maybe even one single module.
People will miss the first digit in the 8123 number. People won't remember if the 8 is part of a more complex number. Do you think ordinary people would remember ior even realize the difference between intels series if they were named Core i 5560 or Core i 7990X. Core i5 and Core i7 is much simpler and easier to remember.
I once again apologize for any spelling errors. English isn't my native language, it's late friday evening and Im drunk.![]()
Last edited by -Boris-; 02-25-2011 at 04:00 PM.
Even most mobile i7s are dual core.
I remember when Intel introduced it, it was confusing, but now it seems everyone is use to it.
I am sure the same thing will happen with AMDs FX / A / E line, the nice outcome for AMD is that you can (hopefully) easily tell if its a 2/3/4/6/8 core, whereas for Intel you sometimes have to look it up on some spec table.
Originally Posted by Movieman
Main Rig: Phenom II 550 (x4) @3.9Ghz - Gigabyte 6950@6970 - Asus M4A-785D M Pro - Samsung HDs 2x2TB,1x1.5TB,2x1TB - Season X-650 | OpenCL mining rigs: 2x Phenom II 555(x4) - 1xMSI 890FXA-GD70 - 1xGB 990FXA-UD7 (SICKOriginally Posted by Movieman
) - 1xHD6990 - 1x6950@70 - 6x5850 - 2xCooler Master Silent Pro Gold 1kW
HMm no ...
If you mean "shared" in the sense like Bulldozer's Decoder is shared between two INT clusters, then your statement ist wrong.
These pipelines are there since the good old AMD K7 days, they consist of a pair: one AGU for adress generation and one ALU for any other, normal INT calculations.
Nothing is shared between those two pipeline. Some may count the scheduler, but that one is shared even to a higher degree in Bulldozer, too.
However, sharing in that context is a good thing, the unified scheduler is more flexible in assigning ALU and AGU Ops to the ALU/AGU pipelines. Nevertheless the theoretical, maximum throughput of Bulldozer is only 2AGU+2ALU ops per clock, whereas a K10 could issue 3+3 in the best case.
Because of the better efficiency, Bulldozer might still have the higher throughput in reality, but the 3 against 4 pipeline picture is still wrong from a technically point of view.
See also here:
http://www.chip-architect.org/news/O...teger_Core.jpg
http://chip-architect.com/news/2003_...it_Core.html#1
(ALUs 0,1,2 and AGUs 0,1,2 are clearly visible, they are not one big shared entity)
*sorry i was wrong*
Last edited by generics_user; 02-27-2011 at 09:11 AM.
Core i7 2600k|HD 6950|8GB RipJawsX|2x 128gb Samsung SSD 830 Raid0|Asus Sabertooth P67
Seasonic X-560|Corsair 650D|2x WD Red 3TB Raid1|WD Green 3TB|Asus Xonar Essence STX
Core i3 2100|HD 7770|8GB RipJawsX|128gb Samsung SSD 830|Asrock Z77 Pro4-M
Bequiet! E9 400W|Fractal Design Arc Mini|3x Hitachi 7k1000.C|Asus Xonar DX
Dell Latitude E6410|Core i7 620m|8gb DDR3|WXGA+ Screen|Nvidia Quadro NVS3100
256gb Samsung PB22-J|Intel Wireless 6300|Sierra Aircard MC8781|WD Scorpio Blue 1TB
Harman Kardon HK1200|Vienna Acoustics Brandnew|AKG K240 Monitor 600ohm|Sony CDP 228ESD
Bookmarks