CPU/Mobo AMD Bulldozer Discussion Thread

Thats perfect alpha...spot on

ALPHA17 said:
^^ I hope you realize Sire that you are using unacceptable language.

And secondly for your information, most of Intel's so called home-grown technology is re-badged AMD technology that they have reverse engineered.

a) do you know Intel has something called Quick Path Interconnect right now (since Bloomfield days), do you know where they stole this idea from --> AMD's HyperTransport, before QPI Intel processors had a massive bottle-neck called FSB or have you Intel lovers forgotten that.

b) AMD --> True Dual Core design, flash-back 2003 AMD releases the first dual core Athlon-FX, Intel Prescott's are literally at their peak envelope for TDP because the Net-burst architecture on a 90nm fabrication was being pushed for the break through 3.8 GHz mark, AMD-FX processors beat Intel on all counts, Intel returns with the Pentium D -- unleashes a viral marketing drive for its Hyper Threading technology -- end of the day people buy that very Intel stuff because the industry exhorts them too, plus the Pentium D's suffice to say are no match for the AMD-FX architecture.

c) Intel presses false charges against every competing company so that no company has the might to challenge them head-to-head, dollar-for-dollar, AMD has won each of these litigation's since 1992 [founding days] to as recent as 2010 where Intel has to pay it damages upto 1.5 billion USD for false marketing plus blocking other companies from selling AMD products.

Learn something from history Zloyd, the people who control the past control the future, those who control the future control the present and finally those who have the present have the past. Intel lives because it has the money to live, lets see how it fares when things come to a head and every company worth its salt pushes them back and there is a long list I assure you, starting from

-- AMD, VIA, ARM conglomerate, nVidia [made a flimsy peace for now], IBM... I assure you the list is endless.

The only thing Intel has created for itself is the tic-toc rhythm of changing architecture then changing fabrication process, finally marrying them on the third tic. This has made sure we upgrade time and again and they keep getting their money back. I'm not flaming you but know this --

"History is written by the victorious, the vanquished are confined to the texts."
Click to expand...
 
Ya alpha you sound like a priest preaching to a non believer. Im just scepticle about bulldozer seeing past releases thats all. Its going to be decent chip for multicore apps but thats bout it I feel unless it shows big improvements in per core performance. I really hope it does because intel has released slides showing an estimated 20% improvement in performance. The gap is just getting bigger and I really hope bulldozer and close the gap some but its not looking likely.
 
Zloyd said:
Ya alpha you sound like a priest preaching to a non believer. Im just scepticle about bulldozer seeing past releases thats all. Its going to be decent chip for multicore apps but thats bout it I feel unless it shows big improvements in per core performance. I really hope it does because intel has released slides showing an estimated 20% improvement in performance. The gap is just getting bigger and I really hope bulldozer and close the gap some but its not looking likely.
Click to expand...

You really hope so, by the language you use. It doesn't feel so.

Thanks for calling me a priest, if that what you feel I'm Sire, though even I have plenty of skeletons in my cupboard. Enough sparring lets get down to the matter,

1) tell me a purely single threaded application, in today's environment [and I don't mean benchmarks, give me day-to-day applications like VLC which must be purely single-threaded].

2) give me one reason why AMD processors suck apart from their old architecture based of the original Athlon-FX K8 design, currently in its most refined state the -- K10.5 (Thuban).

3) what do you use your computer for, benchmark scalping OR actually working, because I'm an animation student and I didn't find a great margin of difference between my system (Phenom IIx4 Deneb + 785G) and a Core i7 930 / i5 760, though I felt a great chasm with the release of sandy-bridge. That chip is a gold flake.

Answer these three question, honestly, lets see.
 
You are taking some moral high ground on a tech forum.

AMD sucks because their modern quad core fails against older quad cores. X4 955 rocks now and is my recommendation for a VFM rig because nothing else is as VFM I may prefer intel and all that but I wouldnt recommend a i3 over a 955(and its funny now that I think about it maybe i3 is ALSO better than 955 for games and typical usage).

I consider Intel more VFM because I have friends who spend a lot on Q9550 E7200 etc etc older intel setups and they are still running strong ... for EVERYTHING I cant say the same for people who invested in AMD in the same period.

Unless their daily typical usage requires more than 2/4 cores a X6 will give no benefit. So no reason to upgrade. If I had a lot of money I would look to change 920 to something faster its a 3 year old chip almost. There is no option from AMD to do so.

Lets for a seccond totally forget about intel. Just look at AMD's performance as compared to AMD chips only. Say you bought a X4 955 when it was new .... 10k. There isnt a chip from AMD that will improve performance unless you are into hardcore rendering etc. Whats AMD's excuse for not making their cores more efficient as compared to chips they only made 2-3 years ago ?

I totally understand the underdog mentality and supporting them. I too would like to see the underdog beat the bigger company and show that passion counts more than money and all that. But blindly supporting a tech company that is not showing improvements and then taking a moral high ground and expecting others to follow, which essentially means spending money on an inferior product.

You keep deflecting saying im rude mind your language intel is writing history its the winner bla bla bla. All im saying since this is bulldozer thread is that remember AMD's transition from X2 to X4 then to much hyped VFM X6 supposedly and now X8. "X" is your single core and AMD's hasnt changed. AMD has taken the easy route just fitting more cores when a die shrink happens. Intel is constantly refining and innovating its architecture AND increasing its cores. Of course then AMD will be cheaper lol they are selling you 3 old dual cores calling it X6 and now they are going to sell you more of the same.

Simple maths man in ALL applications how many ever threads they can use.

Perfomance = Core performance X no of cores

Intel is improving both sides so when they multiply the performance increase is more, AMD has little and negligible improvement in the first part and so their performance increase with adding more cores suffer.

So now that you have read what you already knew but ofc you want god approved company that did everything by the book bla bla bla I will answer your questions.

1) Does not matter if its single threaded it will benefit from intel , if its multi threaded it will benefit from having superior intel threads. AMD sucks.

2) What do you mean give you another reason ? You are saying it your self ... its still based on K8 design .... what they haven't realized it sucks YET ???!!!??? Oh well there you go another reason. AMD sucks.

3) Same ans as 1 and can you please tell me what answer were you expecting so that you could justify AMD performance ?

You are talking out of your ass saying you felt a great chasm with sandy bridge. Sandy bridge has had hype built into it , its no reason to upgrade from older i5,i7 stuff. Its just that their marketing for sandybridge has been much better ... and you have bought into it without any technological reasons. Same like noobs going on and on about overpriced crap Apple cinema displays ( oh boy thats another one for another day) Speaking of chasms thats what AMD's behind looks like now from guess what .... oh wait thats rude to say totally ok to say remember Athlon days amd raping intel.

You want to see chasm you see intel's Q9xxx series improvements over their older Q6xxx quads. You see 920 performance compared to Q9xxx quads. You see good improvements all through and only if your work needs stuff rendered faster etc etc would you feel the need to upgrade from older intel quads. And now Ivy bridge is coming and they are going to make it again 10-20% faster per core which means their newer quad cores will be faster than their older ones. Which means now finally their will be substantial improvement in their new 4c/8t chip which will be an upgrade for me should I have the money which is how it should be since 4c/8t chip is now going to be 3 years old. I wont NEED to upgrade since programmers and game developers have to make sure their stuff runs nicely on older tech new box amd quad cores as well.

AMD before sold you K8 x 2 then 4 then 6 now 8 /yawn AMD sucks.

AMD needs lots of grease.
 
I enjoyed reading your anti-AMD rant, except you fail to recognize that Bulldozer is a new architecture with IPC improvements and aggressive turbo as well as core-count improvement. Yes, pretty much what Intel is doing.

Zloyd said:
ROFL yes yes of-course it does

AnandTech - Bench - CPU

And in games phailoms dont beat Q9x5x ..... .
Click to expand...
I said Phenom II X4.

AnandTech - Bench - CPU

Where's the facepalm smilie when you need it?
 
Sub said:
I enjoyed reading your anti-AMD rant, except you fail to recognize that Bulldozer is a new architecture with IPC improvements and aggressive turbo as well as core-count improvement. Yes, pretty much what Intel is doing.
I said Phenom II X4.

AnandTech - Bench - CPU

Where's the facepalm smilie when you need it?
Click to expand...

^^ :facepalm: : facepalm :

Forget it bruv, don't feed the troll(s).
 
Oh yes im the troll lol because you dont have a tech argument on your side. Oh but you are right ofc because I am wrong because you are siding the holy and righteous company.

@ Sub you compare 3.7 ghz bench to 3 ghz .... then 3.7 ghz (amd) barely wins over older arch(and still managing to lose in some places) .... umm :facepalm: Do you want to know what happens if both were same clockspeed ofcourse not because that would mean molestation for amd. Oh shit I am being rude again sorry.

You should also look into how Q9xxx oced as compared to amd offerings and take that into account. Ofc that would not be convenient as an AMD fanboi because you need to post a bench with 700 mhz more to even stand a chance against 4 year old intel chip.

BD new arch new ipc bla bla bla ..... I have my reservations about believing how much that will translate to real world usage benchmarks. I will reserve my judgment on X8 bulldozer till we see it. Till now we have read that the samples ppl have dont oc well and run like crap, they have had issues and delays because of poor yields and now official launch is sep. But I get the feeling you ppl will have to see me laughing at it and hear "Told you so"

It may be hard for you to believe that I want AMD to do well because of how I post. My ridicule and rudeness is not directed to amd but people blindly posting nonsense on tech forums and encouraging blind fanboism without any tech data to back it up. Just some gibberish about intel and their underhanded dealings, which for all you know is amd stories since even they dont have a tech argument that wins against intel.

Before I had a PC and I was in school who couldnt afford one I used to play Quake 3 , CS , NFS MW all on athlon systems of my friends. They used to oc pretty nicely when my friends would put aftermarket heatsinks on them with fans that sounded like jets. Great memories for me. I even remember how early amd chips came in a simple cardboard box because it wasnt available in india or something back then (2001-2003) I remember my friend got some Thunderbird chip and everone was looking at it in envy. It was all about the small company taking on the giant and winning and it was cool. It would be really cool if it would happen again but that is not a tech argument.

But I have something perfect for you amd fanbabies ‪CRY SOME MORE!‬‏ - YouTube

Yes ive been playing TF2 :p
 
AMD Plans 10-Core Processor for 2012 Launch

Source : AMD Plans 10-Core Processor for 2012 Launch - Softpedia

Even though there is still some time left until AMD launches its first desktop processors based on the Bulldozer architecture, the company already has ambitious plans for the following year, as 2012 will mark the introduction of its first 10-core processor.

This will be part of the Corona platform, which is supposed to replace Scorpius as the company's high-end solution in the enthusiast desktop space.

From the information that is available at this point in time, Komodo will be built using the Piledriver CPU core, which should come as an upgraded version of Bulldozer, and will feature a similar feature set with that of its predecessors.

This includes an on-board DDR3 memory controller as well as support for the Turbo Core technology, which will get to the 3.0 version.

AMD's next-generation Bulldozer processors will also arrive with a new socket design, that goes by the name of FM2 and that will also be used by the 2012 Trinity APUs.

Together with the new processor, AMD pals to introduce a new family of motherboard chipsets, which will update the specifications of the company's current controllers.

According to the leaked slide, the biggest change to be introduced with these new chipsets, will be the move to an FCH (Fusion controller hub) design, which means that the PCI Express controller will be integrated inside the Komodo processors.

In addition, the Hydson D4 chipset will also bring native support for USB 3.0 (up to four such ports), eight SATA 6Gbps ports, RAID 0/1/5/10 support as well as 10 USB 2.0 ports.

The leaked AMD slide also goes on to detail the company's Virgo and Deccan platforms, which are expected to replace the current Lynx and Brazos solutions.

From what we know at this point, AMD's first desktop processors based on the Bulldozer architecture are expected to launch on September 19.
Click to expand...

2nqqiw3.jpg
 
AMD Plans 10-Core Processor for 2012 Launch

AMD Plans 10-Core Processor for 2012 Launch - Softpedia
Even though there is still some time left until AMD launches its first desktop processors based on the Bulldozer architecture, the company already has ambitious plans for the following year, as 2012 will mark the introduction of its first 10-core processor.

This will be part of the Corona platform, which is supposed to replace Scorpius as the company's high-end solution in the enthusiast desktop space.

From the information that is available at this point in time, Komodo will be built using the Piledriver CPU core, which should come as an upgraded version of Bulldozer, and will feature a similar feature set with that of its predecessors.

This includes an on-board DDR3 memory controller as well as support for the Turbo Core technology, which will get to the 3.0 version.

AMD's next-generation Bulldozer processors will also arrive with a new socket design, that goes by the name of FM2 and that will also be used by the 2012 Trinity APUs.

Together with the new processor, AMD pals to introduce a new family of motherboard chipsets, which will update the specifications of the company's current controllers.
According to the leaked slide, the biggest change to be introduced with these new chipsets, will be the move to an FCH (Fusion controller hub) design, which means that the PCI Express controller will be integrated inside the Komodo processors.

In addition, the Hydson D4 chipset will also bring native support for USB 3.0 (up to four such ports), eight SATA 6Gbps ports, RAID 0/1/5/10 support as well as 10 USB 2.0 ports.

The leaked AMD slide also goes on to detail the company's Virgo and Deccan platforms, which are expected to replace the current Lynx and Brazos solutions.

From what we know at this point, AMD's first desktop processors based on the Bulldozer architecture are expected to launch on September 19
Click to expand...
 
Source: AMD FX-Series CPUs Ready, Launch Planned for September ? Report - Softpedia

AMD has reportedly finalized its high-performance desktop processors based on the Bulldozer architecture and is now considering a September launch for its first FX-Series CPUs that target enthusiast users and gamers.

According to the information uncovered by a Chinese website, the Sunnyvale-based company is planning to release the chips in the 37th or 38th week of 2011, which spans between September 12 and 23.

This interval fits right well with the alleged September 19 release date that we talked about in a previous article.

Outside of the details regarding the FX-Series processor launch, the publication also found out that AMD's flagship FX-8150P CPU will retail for $269, which makes it $48 cheaper than the Intel Core i7-2600K and $58 more expensive than the Core i5-2500K.

From what we do know at this point in time, the FX-8150P features four Bulldozer processor modules for a total of eight computing cores, 8MB of Level 2 cache as well as 8MB of Level 3 cache.

The chip will sport a base frequency of 3.6GHz, which can be increased up to 4.2GHz thanks to the Turbo Core technology, and its TDP is set at 125W.

AMD plans to launch this processor together with three other chips, including another eight-core model that is known as the FX-8100 and packs similar specifications with the FX-8150P

However, the FX-8100 will feature lower clocks speeds, 2.8GHz base and 3.7GHz maximum Turbo, to allow AMD to drop its TDP at 95W.

The two other AMD Bulldozer CPUs expected in mid-September are the FX-6100 and FX-4100, which sport six and four processing cores, respectively.

Both of these include 8MB of L3 cache as their older siblings, but feature less L2 cache and lower clock speeds. No details regarding the pricing of the three latter processors are known at this point in time.
Click to expand...
 
^^Nice FX Comicbook :p

==================================================

AMD FX-Series Processor Launch Date Still Uncertain

Source : http://news.softpedia.com/news/AMD-FX-Series-Processor-Launch-Date-Still-Uncertain-213717.shtml

After just yesterday we reported that AMD's FX-Series processors would almost certainly launch on September 19, newly uncovered information has come to question this date and points yet again to an October launch.

The date is taken from what appears to be an internal AMD document that is entitled “Desktop CPU/APU production schedule,” and that includes not only FX-Series processors, but also Llano and Brazos parts.

According to this slide, all the five CPUs that AMD plans to introduce in October have been completed and are expected to enter mass production in August, while availability is scheduled for October 2011.

The five Bulldozer chips included in the document are the FX-8150, FX-8120, FX-8100, FX-6100 and FX-4100.

All of these are based on the Bulldozer architecture, feature 8MB of shared Level 3 cache memory, and an integrated DDR3 dual-channel memory controller that officially supports speeds up to 1866MHz.

Just as we previously detailed, the fastest CPU of the bunch is the FX-8150P which packs four Bulldozer processor modules for a total of eight computing cores.

The chip will sport a base frequency of 3.6GHz, which can be increased up to 4.2GHz thanks to the Turbo Core technology, and its TDP is set at 125W.

Since the start of this year, all sort of rumors regarding the availability of these Bulldozer-based desktop processors emerged on the Web.

At the start of June, however, AMD came out and announced that the first Zambezi FX processors, based on the Bulldozer architecture, aren't expected to arrive until August or September of 2011.

No other official statements regarding the release date emerged since then, but recently AMD unveiled an FX-Series advertising movie that led many to believe the unveiling will take place on September 19.

Nonetheless, if the information in this latest document is true, it seems like AMD's only chance to get FX-Series processors out in September is to go for a paper launch. (via Donanim Haber)
Click to expand...

s16s1u.jpg
 
Back
Top