AMD Zambezi news, info, fans !

**Mats** · 09-07-2011, 02:46 AM

Originally Posted by Chrono Detector

So we have two different articles saying Bulldozer will be shipped this month and another one is delayed, again. So which one is accurate?

BOTH?

Server is being shipped, desktop will come later, that's obvious, right?

**Mechanical Man** · 09-07-2011, 02:47 AM

Originally Posted by Chrono Detector

So we have two different articles saying Bulldozer will be shipped this month and another one is delayed, again. So which one is accurate? Getting really annoyed with all these neverending delays and speculation.

Server is shipping, desktop might very well be delayed.

**FlanK3r** · 09-07-2011, 03:25 AM

Im still thinking, we will see launch (reviews) soon!

**Dresdenboy** · 09-07-2011, 03:26 AM

Originally Posted by jimbo75

Why would anyone pick out the 0.1 GHz turbo for fault before praising the high 4.2 GHz base clock?

I'm thinking "gamer CPU" here. Full 8 MB of L3 and 4 cores with a high base clock (so no worries about lower P-state just kicking in while the gamer tried to aim

).

Originally Posted by Manicdan

lets think logically for a second here

an 8 core chip with just 4 cores running gets up to 4.2ghz
a 4 core chip with all 4 cores running also gets 4.2ghz, when its just 2 less its able to get an extra 100mhz due to not having to power additional L3 and crap

so i think the numbers do make sense (when thinking about peak power draw for different chips) and we have seen amd offer really fast lower clocked cpus, but i dont think they would want to hurt their higher chips sales by making the cheaper ones win in some/alot of benchmarks.

The low turbo step could mean that voltage could stay the same -> might not exceed any AM3+ or even AM3 specs then.

Originally Posted by freeloader

The L3 cache is 8MB for all chips, so no additional power needed for that. I'm starting to think it's a process restriction (over 4.2 GHz, GloFo's 32nm might consume too much power or require high voltages, both situations affecting the chips TDP) but we will know that when we can actually overclock them. Can't wait to get an eight core in my grubby mits!

It's not the process which consumes power. First there is a design for pipeline depth X and transistor count Y (affecting power consumption). GF produces the chips and as usual there will be kind of a normal distribution regarding power consumption. The chips with 8 working cores and relatively low power consumption/leakage become FX-8xxx, the ones with either less working cores or higher power consumption (exceeding the 95W/125W TDPs for 8 cores) and those needed due to demand become FX-6xxx and FX-4xxx. But if you have an 8 core chip at 3.6GHz base and 125W I'm sure that two of the same chip's modules could get more than a 20% performance boost (4.3 GHz) while the other modules are power gated and voltages adjusted accordingly.

For further possible reasons see above.

**v0dka** · 09-07-2011, 03:50 AM

Thanks for the link, so it's underway and we get news on the 17th.

Originally Posted by freeloader

Because it's pointless, that's why.

You are ignoring his argument. Fact is that 4.2Ghz stock is insane. No matter what your understanding of turbo is based on other cpu's.

**Mats** · 09-07-2011, 04:16 AM

Originally Posted by v0dka

You are ignoring his argument. Fact is that 4.2Ghz stock is insane. No matter what your understanding of turbo is based on other cpu's.

+1
4.2 GHz is insane, no point in whining about the turbo.

**Manicdan** · 09-07-2011, 05:21 AM

quick dumb question here

whats the second turbo speed though, is the base clock really the max all core turbo, and turbo is the half module turbo?
amd has constantly shown slides referencing 2 speed boosts, and that table does not show anything about an all core boost. im inclined to think that the base speeds they listed were actually the all core boost, and true base clocks are a little lower

**Evantaur** · 09-07-2011, 06:03 AM

they should release in this month and ship later(when they can) while having the priority on server chips... i want to see dem supercomputers using BDs

**radaja** · 09-07-2011, 06:16 AM

this looks sweet,over at ocn Tankguys posted Pre-orders are now being taken

So, here's the current vicious rumor:

ESTIMATED availability:

Early October. Not at all a guarantee

Models / Pricing:

FX6100 X6 - $204.99
FX8120 x8 - $236.99
FX8150 x8 - $259.99

Source
http://www.overclock.net/tankguys-pr...rder-info.html

Isbre · 09-07-2011, 06:20 AM

Only 100MHz turbo yes, but one can configure the p-state and use it to squeeze out the remaining performance of that particular chip which of course varies from one to another.

**AKM** · 09-07-2011, 07:03 AM

Originally Posted by radaja

this looks sweet,over at ocn Tankguys posted Pre-orders are now being taken

Source
http://www.overclock.net/tankguys-pr...rder-info.html

260 bucks for AMDs desktop flagship? that's between the 2500k and the 2600k, I guess that's how it will perform then.

**Olivon** · 09-07-2011, 07:09 AM

260$ for the top notch AMD 8 core processor at launch ?
2600K and 990X are frightened, for sure ...

**undone** · 09-07-2011, 07:17 AM

That guy sold 1090T at 219.99$
http://www.tankguys.com/amd-processo...90t-b-acl.html

**Manicdan** · 09-07-2011, 07:25 AM

Originally Posted by undone

That guy sold 1090T at 219.99$
http://www.tankguys.com/amd-processo...90t-b-acl.html

so this guy is advertising the new x6 at a price close to the old x6 chips,
also he mentions he constantly does not overprice things in the thread, which might be true if he admits hes selling things at launch price and never lowers them.

**undone** · 09-07-2011, 07:42 AM

Originally Posted by Manicdan

so this guy is advertising the new x6 at a price close to the old x6 chips,

Considering retail i5 750 and 2500k are same price but 2500k get higher frequency and IPC. Everything is cost sensitive.

also he mentions he constantly does not overprice things in the thread, which might be true if he admits hes selling things at launch price and never lowers them.

IMO He sold chips at per-1000-chip price.

**blaH** · 09-07-2011, 07:47 AM

Originally Posted by AKM

260 bucks for AMDs desktop flagship? that's between the 2500k and the 2600k, I guess that's how it will perform then.

My guess faster than 2600K, but AMD expects intel to intro faster revision at current 2600K price which will be faster than FX?

**Manicdan** · 09-07-2011, 07:57 AM

Originally Posted by undone

Considering retail i5 750 and 2500k are same price but 2500k get higher frequency and IPC. Everything is cost sensitive.

IMO He sold chips at per-1000-chip price.

im comparing his prices to what alternatives are selling them for currently, in which case he is actually HIGHER
so for him to state that he does do lower prices i dont see how, unless he sets his price at launch and then never touches them again, which would make sense since thuban was more expensive at launch than what he has them for currently, but also currently his price is way too high.
make sense?

**xVeinx** · 09-07-2011, 08:46 AM

Realize, he doesn't get special pricing from the distributor since he doesn't sell in the volume that other places do. As well, if he orders stock and then they don't sell quickly enough although the price changes, then he doesn't have the ability to arbitrarily lower prices just because the channel price decreases. He's not making a ton of profit off of each processor/part. Having run the same type of operation before many moons ago, this is more of a hobby for him than anything I imagine. He has been in business a long time though, and does right by people, which says something.

**imamage** · 09-07-2011, 09:00 AM

Originally Posted by radaja

this looks sweet,over at ocn Tankguys posted Pre-orders are now being taken
Source
http://www.overclock.net/tankguys-pr...rder-info.html

From the pricing ........I don't feel good with Bulldozer Performance.......asking for price lower than 2600/2600K
Of course , I should wait and see

**xVeinx** · 09-07-2011, 09:02 AM

Depends on whether the distributors have the final pricing correct. It is subject to change

.

**Formula350** · 09-07-2011, 09:20 AM

Originally Posted by Chrono Detector

So we have two different articles saying Bulldozer will be shipped this month and another one is delayed, again. So which one is accurate? Getting really annoyed with all these neverending delays and speculation.

Originally Posted by Mats

BOTH?

I think it's one being misunderstood. I'm not saying I know, or couldn't have misunderstood, but what I thought was it was being announced (launched) on something like Sept 19th and then available to purchase the 1st 1/2 of October

Sure, I hate it being delayed, but there isn't much we can do about it I guess. I think there is a silver lining to all of this though: Look at Llano on 32nm, it's doing rather well I think. The silver lining to that is Llano runs off a matured design that has been around for a couple years now, so it's fair to say that maybe even middle of next year we'll have parts that are more than we had hoped for BD to be like :P

We'll make it through, we always do

**LightSpeed** · 09-07-2011, 10:14 AM

Well, considering its priced above 2500K atleast it will be faster than that one. I think it will actually beat 2600K since they might expect intel to cut prices when BD launches or maybe release a faster chip. I expected them to atleast sell it for $300 though.

**informal** · 09-07-2011, 10:35 AM

Intel will most likely cut prices after Zambezi launches,so why should AMD launch at 300$ and then be forced to lower the price immediately after the launch? This way they cover any immediate 2700K/2800K launch and its price.