AMD Zambezi news, info, fans !

[demonkevy666]

Wow someone with common sense...........

Like i said before I discussed this face to face with engineers at AMD, BD is a native 4 core 8 thread part.

and then the lynch mob got mad..........

the shared L1 instruction cache is what comes to mind for me, ever time i read your comments.

[xdan]

new AMD tri-cores beats old hex-cores!!!! is it really possible!!! amd is f*ing awesome!!!!
lol

its all perspective, perf per dollar of 4 threads with a typical overclock is what i care about. that might mean a 4100 or 8100, not sure yet.

At an estimate die size of 315-330mm^ it's f*ing FAIL....
And i don't think that BD X6 - tricore whatsoever will be better than Thuban. Equal i quess .
Thuban X8 on 32nm with 8MB L3 cache would probably came in same die size. With a better IMC and faster L2 cache, i might wonder if that 8 true core design could do...

And now about crippled ES, in every industrys there are so called "prototypes", but for an example a car initialy designed to run with 300KM/H as a prototype wouldn't go with 140KM/H. May be 240-260KM/H.
BD ES are running just pathetic. If that initial true performance than no new revision can boost the performance with 50%.
And why let false rumours spread out.
It's not AMD a company craving for PROFIT?
It's this a good strategy?

AMD at least should make an official anouncement saying: "Folks, retail will have much more performance, don't trust anything on net."

[Manicdan]

At an estimate of 315-330mm^ it's f*ing FAIL....
And i don't think that BD X6 - tricore whatsoever will be better than Thuban. Equal i quess .
Thuban X8 on 32nm with 8MB L3 cache would probably came in same die size. With a better IMC and faster L2 cache, i might wonder if that 8 true core design could do...

thuban x8 would not get the same single threaded perf of current competition, a 2100 would still be a better choice for gamers. BD however should have much stronger IPC when a second thread isnt running on the core/module, and its being designed for very aggressive turbos which the old stars cores were not built for.

why dont you think BD will be able to beat thuban thread/core vs core? the architecture is stronger and the frequency is higher. the only real issue is when it comes to having those extra threads running will it bring average perf down to be less than the old stuff, which i dont think would be a problem. an x8 BD should be much more than 33% faster than thuban with 33% more cores/threads. its also smaller than thuban by a pretty noticeable amount, around a whole cores worth. so a thuban x5 would have similar mm2 and give us a basic idea on perf/mm2 increase AMD was able to get.