Xdrive05 said:Please get on with bulldozer. My Phenom II X4 @ 3.6 Ghz is doing okay for now, but I would like to upgrade.
If the hype is true we should at least get a nice price shift downward for the sandy bridge chips. Or that mid range bulldozer could make the nut. Can't wait.
Code names for every last bit of minutiae is kinda overdone, though.[Nintex] said:AMD is really going all the way with all these chip codenames.
Yes. For that, they have dedicated products they'd like to sell you. Not to mention there would be issues with TDP, pricing, product planning, and so on.mAcOdIn said:Nor will they nor is AMD planning such a thing.[Nintex] said:... but I've yet to see an APU with graphics performance on par with an enthusiast standalone GPU.
Intel has been largely dictating what happens in the market, so for that to happen, BD would have to offer high level performance, and/or very aggressive pricing. We still need retail, or near-final silicon to figure out at least part of that equation.Xdrive05 said:Please get on with bulldozer. My Phenom II X4 @ 3.6 Ghz is doing okay for now, but I would like to upgrade.
If the hype is true we should at least get a nice price shift downward for the sandy bridge chips. Or that mid range bulldozer could make the nut. Can't wait.
Some MSI insider info again.
He tells that he can't share all details, but that he is worried about Bulldozer. Forecasts were given (to MSI -and I guess to all strategic partners- to 'predict' how much capacity to devote to certain mainboard lines) that AMD would supply the AM3+ segment with 'huge' numbers of Bulldozer CPU's. Last week(s) word was received that AMD only will supply the AM3+ segment with an 'alarming' small number of CPU's. Seems to point at yield/production problems.
Fact seems to be that:
AMD has drastically lowered forecasted available bulldozer CPU's
Rabid Wolverine said:Some new rumors. Not looking good.
AMD looking also to bundle CPU's with Liquid Cooling Solutions. Speculation the Processors heat like a bitch mimiking the launch or the original phenom processor.
Datschge said:AMD just won't become competitive out of thin air. It'd need support on numerous fronts it just doesn't have (financially, R&D, development of fabs, shrinking the dies which gives an efficiency advantage even when not changing the chip design etc.). Everyone thinking AMD is even in a position at all in forcing Intel's pricing are completely kidding themselves. Intel's only real worry is having its sole real competitor look too weak which would make Intel look like the monopoly it effectively already is and has been since ages.
That said AMD does an admirable job proposing product changes with what little material it has to work with. Overly positive outlooks just tend to come back to haunt one in this industry where schedules are tight and new designs more often than not just don't work as planned on the first couple tries.
That only worked because Intel bet on the wrong horse and failed big time with it. Unfortunately Intel still had tight control of the market so in the end it made zero difference anyway except Intel is now better at keeping itself just enough ahead of the curve.itsgreen said:It did with Athlon...
Datschge said:That only worked because Intel bet on the wrong horse and failed big time with it. Unfortunately Intel still had tight control of the market so in the end it made zero difference anyway except Intel is now better at keeping itself just enough ahead of the curve.
I don't think Athlon dominated that gen. The mainstream/casual folks would still normally ask "what Pentium is your computer? What's Athlon?". Intel also had this silly marketing advantage with Netburst since a lot of people still thought that more Ghz = faster.It did with Athlon...
The top consumer desktop part will have 5 execution units, composed of 10 cores.KKRT00 said:So desktops will have 16 cores in 2012?
Truly, if only to have some serious competition.Kyaw said:Fingers crossed this will be as good as or better than Sandy Bridge.
Press release; Jessie Shen, DIGITIMES [Tuesday 30 August 2011]
Globalfoundries has announced that it successfully taped out a 20nm test chip using flows from EDA partners Cadence Design Systems, Magma Design Automation, Mentor Graphics and Synopsys. The foundry said it is ready for customers to begin evaluating their 20nm designs.
All four EDA companies have demonstrated that their place-and-route (P&R) tools and tech files are capable of supporting the advanced rules associated with the 20nm process, Globalfoundries indicated. The flows include library preparation steps for double patterning technology. The 20nm test chip requires double patterning and was implemented with each EDA partner contributing a large placed and routed design.
In addition to demonstrating full support for all of the key steps in a 20nm P&R flow - including double patterning library preparation, placement, clock tree synthesis, hold fixing, routing and post route optimization - Globalfoundries worked with each of the EDA suppliers to include the necessary setup and support for technology and mapping files. The flow will also demonstrate foundry support for extraction, static timing analysis and physical verification.
Globalfoundries said it will make the design, libraries, and complete vendor flow scripts available to customers who wish to evaluate 20nm technology.
What is it?
"Bulldozer" is the codename for a whole new generation of CPUs/APUs from AMD, the most important after K8's launch in 2003. It comprises three variants, two for the server market ("Interlagos" dual-chip and "Valencia" single-chip) and one for the desktops ("Zambezi"). There are APU versions (that include a GPU) and CPU only versions.
AMD took a modular approach with Bulldozer based on "Compute Units" (CUs): a shared L2 cache (up to 2MB), two 128-bit FMA-capable FPUs (unified as one 256-bit FPU for AVX) along with two integer cores (featuring 4 pipelines-the fetch/decode stage is shared) with shared L3 cache. The shared FPU in 256-bit mode could be an issue in 256-bit mode when using AVX/FMA and future instruction sets: there may not be much of a gain - if any - to make the effort worthwhile.
The Bulldozer "CU" design resembles Intel's Hyper-Threading; the main advantage of Bulldozer is that provides each thread with dedicated schedulers and integer units though the FPU is shared in 256-bit mode. Note: Windows 7/Server 2008 R2 kernel does not schedule threads based on CU affinity yet - which is why Sandra uses "hard affinity" through its own scheduler.
It is a pity that the memory controller is only dual channel (PC3-15000 native support) for the desktop part, whereas Intel already has a tri-channel and aims for quad channel in future releases. However, Opteron will feature a quad channel memory controller with support for PC3-12800 DDR3 Reg RAM.
Standard Processing PerformanceHardware Specifications
We are comparing an AMD "Zambezi" chip against Intel's "Sandy Bridge".
Again, make of it what you will.Final Thoughts / Conclusions
Looking back at all the benchmarks of the new CPU, it is obvious that AMD is a generation behind Intel performance-wise. The "all new" design is better than the K8-variants and some results (e.g. Cryptography, Multi-Media) than the competition, but the other results are dissapointing. 256-bit performance (AVX/FMA) - what modern software will use - is "slow", most likely due to the shared FPU within a CU; the competition saw great gains from AVX, this is not the case here.
It will be challenging for AMD to compete in the "enthusiast market" with a CPU with (only) dual channel memory against tri-channel; maybe that's why Intel has not bothered to upgrade the 3-year old X58, but when it does (X79) the gap will widen even more.
For AMD fans the upgrade is definitely worth it, especially if they already use a socket AM3+ motherboard; for those that have a socket AM3 boards you'll need to check whether a BIOS update is enough to ensure compatibility. In any case, the CPU is much faster than the mainstream "Llano" (see AMD Desktop "Llano" APU (CPU+GPU)).
Pricing is currently the main unknown, but AMD has not been as hungry for cash - at least from an upgrade point of view (you still need a modern board).
·feist· said:[/IMG]http://i.imgur.com/P8VyA.jpg[/IMG]
IFA 2011: AMD's FX Bulldozer Up Close
http://videos.pc-max.de/video/4589/IFA-2011-AMDs-FXBulldozer-zum-Greifen-nah
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Vq5OS9T9Kw
SiSoftware accidentally published a Bulldozer vs Sandy Bridge comparison, and then pulled it. Two things to note here:
1. AMD has regularly stated that until NDA lifts, don't trust that anyone has final, or proper, turbo/microcode/BIOS/cache/stepping/silicon/etc. and we've seen benches reflect incorrectly functioning samples, and boards. This is even without including very early samples, meant only for validation.
2. This seemingly features a Xeon E3 against an Opteron 6200. If that's correct, though, the frequencies and/or threads are off. For one, the BD part doesn't match any of the previously leaked Opterons (which Gateway has since pulled).
So, make of this what you will. Hit the cache link for the complete write-up.
Original:
Benchmarks : High-End Desktop Performance: AMD "Bulldozer" CPU/APU
http://www.sisoftware.net/?d=qa&f=cpu_amd_bulldozer&l=en&a=
Google Cache:
http://webcache.googleusercontent.c...zer&cd=2&hl=de&ct=clnk&gl=de&client=firefox-a
Standard Processing Performance
[/IMG]http://i.imgur.com/3J7oA.jpg[/IMG]
Multi-Media Performance
[/IMG]http://i.imgur.com/B2rZL.jpg[/IMG]
Cryptographic Performance
[/IMG]http://i.imgur.com/0MEfu.jpg[/IMG]
Memory Bandwidth Performance
[/IMG]http://i.imgur.com/IzO3H.jpg[/IMG]
Transcoding Performance
[/IMG]http://i.imgur.com/14HnP.jpg[/IMG]
Cache and Memory Performance
[/IMG]http://i.imgur.com/a6QL7.jpg[/IMG]
Latency Performance
[/IMG]http://i.imgur.com/SoedA.jpg[/IMG]
Efficiencies
[/IMG]http://i.imgur.com/XfMLJ.jpg[/IMG]
[/IMG]http://i.imgur.com/WfSGi.jpg[/IMG]
Again, make of it what you will.
That's totally in the air currently. I mean, CPU wise Bulldozer should at least outperform the current Phenoms, surely AMD wouldn't regress and the fastest Phenoms are more or less fine with that task but I'm too lazy to compare the leaks. So Bulldozer leaks won't tell you what you really want to know.Kenka said:Wide gaps in these charts. I hope it is not a sign of times to come. Maybe it is too high of an expectation, but I would love to be able to play Dolphin with a Bulldozer APU without having to buy a discrete GPU.
But again, it's just one product of the upcoming line-up against the most sought-after Intel CPU. Benchmarks for other APU may put shed a betterlight on them.
·feist· said:
IFA 2011: AMD's FX Bulldozer Up Close
http://videos.pc-max.de/video/4589/IFA-2011-AMDs-FXBulldozer-zum-Greifen-nah
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Vq5OS9T9Kw
SiSoftware accidentally published a Bulldozer vs Sandy Bridge comparison, and then pulled it. Two things to note here:
1. AMD has regularly stated that until NDA lifts, don't trust that anyone has final, or proper, turbo/microcode/BIOS/cache/stepping/silicon/etc. and we've seen benches reflect incorrectly functioning samples, and boards. This is even without including very early samples, meant only for validation.
2. This seemingly features a Xeon E3 against an Opteron 6200. If that's correct, though, the frequencies and/or threads are off. For one, the BD part doesn't match any of the previously leaked Opterons (which Gateway has since pulled).
So, make of this what you will. Hit the cache link for the complete write-up.
Original:
Benchmarks : High-End Desktop Performance: AMD "Bulldozer" CPU/APU
http://www.sisoftware.net/?d=qa&f=cpu_amd_bulldozer&l=en&a=
Google Cache:
http://webcache.googleusercontent.c...zer&cd=2&hl=de&ct=clnk&gl=de&client=firefox-a
Standard Processing Performance
Multi-Media Performance
Cryptographic Performance
Memory Bandwidth Performance
Transcoding Performance
Cache and Memory Performance
Latency Performance
Efficiencies
Again, make of it what you will.
Advanced Micro Devices has once again redesigned the launch family of its FX-series microprocessors code-named Zambezi so that to make it broader and more competitive, a source with knowledge of the company's plans revealed. However, the company, as reported last week, delayed the launch of the new chips, which are based on highly-anticipated Bulldozer micro-architecture, to October, 2011.
But while it looks like AMD will offer more Bulldozer-based products this year than originally anticipated, it will start to roll them out only in mid-October, the same source indicated. The reason for the yet another delay of Bulldozer-based offerings is unclear, but AMD is set to begin production of the final versions of Zambezi in early September, which probably means low volumes of the products that will be available in the coming weeks.
A good news for AMD and its customers is that the company is on-track to refresh the lineup of its FX-series in mid-Q12011[2012], according to some indications. more...
Unknown Soldier said:Post #53:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=27379693&postcount=53
I told you guys in April not to believe in miracles. You guys should have listened. Well, the leaked SiSoftware thing is archived here:
http://webcache.googleusercontent.c...zer&cd=2&hl=de&ct=clnk&gl=de&client=firefox-a
Most people agree the Sandy Bridge numbers are accurate, as they are reproducible with desktop parts people have today. It's unlikely the Bulldozer numbers are fake, why would SiSoftware fake results?
You guys who have been waiting for so long can go and buy your Sandy Bridges now. AMD is finished in the enthusiast space, and probably the server space. Which means they are finished as a legitimate competitor to Intel in all but the lowest-margin Best Buy computers.
BD cores are different.shagg_187 said:Am I seeing this right? 8 cores?! (Octa-Core? lol) Good god!
DeFiBkIlLeR said:Those results are pretty shocking....30% slower clock for clock than a Sandybridge CPU.
Intel must be lol'ing....hard.
Ivy Bridge is coming in March which some may not be willing to wait for.hteng said:might as well wait for Intel's IvyBridge at this point >_>
Mr_Brit said:Ivy Bridge is coming in March which some may not be willing to wait for.
Well...Rabid Wolverine said:Not good.
But will wait for anandtech's review before deciding on purchase.
We'll see.Beware of any leaked Bulldozer benchmarks, unless you're running B2.G you're not looking at shipping performance
via TweetDeck
I'm not saying anything about absolute performance, just keep in mind that silicon that's older than ~2 weeks isn't production worthy
via TweetDeck
And I don't believe the final decision has been made to go to market (desktop) with B2.G either, will know for sure in the coming weeks
via TweetDeck
This is why we never did an early preview of Bulldozer on AT, no sense in putting out numbers that may not be representative
via TweetDeck
Hmm wat could it be, Xbox 720?Hanging out in San Francisco the week of September 12th? Not finding anything interesting?
AMD to the rescue. We'll be making an historic announcement, and want you to be a part of it.