Quote Originally Posted by xVeinx View Post
This is very likely to be a situation where ASUS (and other) manufacturers are looking to boost sales of current stocks of motherboards. By claiming them to be compatible with future processors, they can get a number of earlier sales of the current high end boards and make a nice profit. AMD had no intention of moving that direction due to the trade offs, and by making announcements, ASUS may be trying to force AMD's hand in the matter to help them pull it off rather than face a marketing debacle.



Everyone's a critic . I'd prefer my Crosshair IV formula to be compatible with a CPU 3 generations from now. They must have an idea of the requirements, right? Shouldn't they have anticipated this and built it into AM3? The exaggeration shows my point: schedules are schedules, and if specs are finalized allowing for appropriate changes to a socket, AMD might have been able to do what they did for C32 and G34. On the other hand, a delay wouldn't have been good for sales or the bottom line, so they did what they did. They delayed the server sockets for months to allow for the change, because it was absolutely necessary. 99% of the consumers won't be looking to drop in a new processor into their motherboard. They can't always cater to their small but increasingly vocal minority of people like us.
Yes you do exaggerate, thats why it is of no relevance.
C32 Socket launched before the AM3.So i dont know what you tried to imply here.
New sockets will be LGA and will be using pcie on cpu.So thats why you cant expect them to have compatibility.DDR4 comes into play later on too.
Thats understandable then.
Again ,c32 launched before am3.So no delay.However were not even talking about whole AM3 lineup compatibility from the get go.But there was OBVIOUSLY a point in past when AMD knew exactly the specs needed for BD to operate.And instead upgrading spec reqs for mainboard makers.They went the "we need new chipset and socket thing" rhetoric.
Which was dubious from the start, as there was no real reason to go this way.AMD`s HTT links approach makes the socket kind of like pciexpress.
And moreover we learned that AM3+ doesnt use faster HT implementation.
9xx chipset seems to be pretty much the same as 8xx.
And ,just like most AMD processors for almost 10 years after the HTT implementation ,even older chipsets will work with BD (asus announcing Mainboards on 7xx series chipsets).
Only sensible difference between Phenom II`s and BD seems PLATFORM wise, seems to be what kinc said, BD`s use all of the pins on AM3, while PHII didnt.Thats a problem for older boards, and pretty much only reason why they wont work with BD.As someone already pointed out, it is connected (most probably) to the new turbocore 2.0.A nice feature, but not absolutely needed one.And has nothing to do with pure ipc of the cpu.
As to catering to the "small" number of people.I strongly believe that every enthusiast makes much bigger impact than he himself.I buy and recommend hardware for around 100 people.If your enthusiast which works in corporate IT, you manage thousands.
And even if were small ,that doesnt mean we shouldnt be trying to get whats good for us CONSUMERS.Defending speechless and gutless corporations seems absurd to me.
Im all for technology advancement.Im not for careless overproduction of goods.