CPU/Mobo AMD Bulldozer Discussion Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
:clap:cranky dude you are my new AMD god!!!:clap:

Finally somebody who gets it!!!! All I've seen today is people posting FAIL again and again without one ounce of introspection!!

By using 32nm process they could have produced Phenom II x8... See by producing it using 32nm process they not only would have been able to lower the power consumption but they also would have been able to squeeze in extra cores (extra capacitors)... For eg Gulf town processor (980x/990x)... Intel managed to not only produce a beast chip by using 32nm process but also added whopping 12MB cache which takes a lot of die area and HT technology and managed to keep the TDP of the chip to 130w... See if AMD would have been able to lower the power consumption of per core from 20 watts to 15 to 16 watts (x8 = 120/128) by using 32nm process then they would have been easily be able to produce a Phenom II x8 of 130w TDP... Plus IINM Phenom processors cores share L3 cache... They dont require independent L3 cache... the two core per module thing (Intel Hyper Threading Like Technology) really didn't help AMD in increasing the performance... Not even per clock performance... last generation Phenom processor performs better... IMO even if they would have slightly tweaked the old k10 architecture to improve per clock performance then they would have been able to produce a 6 core processor which would have ended up faster than Intel quadcore offering with Hyper threading technology...
Click to expand...

Dude you have to understand that they could fit 8 cores basically because they got rid of all the extras in phenom.. the 6-core phenom saturated the die.. no more cores were possible.. hence the new architecture.. however per-core performance could have been increased to lead to better performance overall
 
Actually, I'm sure they could have added more cores and created a Phenom II X8 at 32nm. But they'd still lag in performance, and the die would still be oversized, and they'd have to sell the processors for a minimal profit, if not a loss.

The Bulldozer architecture, while outdated and outperformed, is smaller (in comparison to the Phenom II) and modular. I'm sure AMD will dump the L3 cache at some point, and produce processors with 1, 2 and 3 modules soon, instead of just disabling modules on their defective 4 module processors. Then we'll start seeing some degree of energy efficiency. The smaller die would allow AMD the luxury of selling processors for the price they want, instead of just discounting Intel to make sure their processors remain competitive. AMD will earn more per mm^2 of silicon, letting them plough more cash into R&D.
And hopefully then, they'll starting talking about doubling performance every couple of years instead of the 10-15% yearly increases they're talking about now.

--- Updated Post - Automerged ---

CHIP DESIGNER AMD has posted a small profit for its second quarter, while its graphics division showed a loss.

AMD, which recently launched its Fusion A series of chips, revealed that for the three months ending 2 July the firm took in $1.57bn resulting in a profit of $61m. Compared to the second quarter last year when the company posted a $43m loss the figures look good, and there's hope that the next few quarters will start to see its Fusion A series chips help the firm's bottom line.

Amd's cpu division posts profits but gpu arm suffers- The Inquirer

AMD needs to become more profitable. If it can't make any money, it can't stay in the business. They need to make CPU's and GPU's they can sell at a profit. That's where Bulldozer will help them. I think AMD needed to get it out now because I don't think they're going to be able to sell Athlon II's and Phenom II's at a profit for much longer.
 
Seems to me as if the BD was version 1, with bugs like excess power consumption, lower speeds etc. maybe version 2, ie E-BD could be the answer. But its a long shot, and TBH, we will need to be too optimistic.

Also, how can the GPU arm be losing money? Seems there is some heavy investment into 7 series, lets w8 and watch for that. If AMD cannot make good CPUs, at least they do make good GPUs.

Also, another worry is pricing on IB. Will Intel go back to its arm twisting policies again? Also, will they mark up the price of IB? These are some points to ponder upon.
 
Actually, I'm sure they could have added more cores and created a Phenom II X8 at 32nm. But they'd still lag in performance, and the die would still be oversized, and they'd have to sell the processors for a minimal profit, if not a loss.
Click to expand...

isn't that what i mean by saturation of die???no more place on die??:) its a new architecture and they need a few more revisions so give them time.. they will come through
 
I think AMD made a good choice in moving to the BD architecture even if knowing if a PII X8 was made compromising on power consumption and die size will be better than the first gen BD, as the future is with the newer design thus making a path to the future, where they can accommodate more cores, and theres more room to tweak as well, even though they havnt tapped into in as of now.
 
I still think an optimized Phenom II X4 and Phenom II X6 would have done a great job. Say optimization brought in about 5% performance improvement.

With 32nm die shrink, we would have seen a ~200 mm^2 Phenom II X6 die size, and with smaller die and hopefully lesser leakage on the 32nm process, higher clocks at lower voltage would have been possible.

I would bet AMD engineers over 2 Quarters would have sapped out a 95W 4GHz Phenom II X6. And I'm also betting, that 4GHz Phenom II X6 would have beaten the current Bulldozer 4 module/8 core black and blue.
 
moksh4u2 said:
i dont mean to troll this thread but you have to watch this vid

Hitler finds out about the AMD Bulldozer benchmarks - YouTube
Click to expand...

Extremely well interpreted :) and subtitled, but I'm sure with terrible sadness and anger at the same time. That's how I feel too after being an AMD fanboy for the past 12 years or so.

Glad I did not go ahead & buy my rig as yet [with the 990FX sabertooth] - so I am not yet ready to give up as yet on AMD [none of us must] - these are terrible moments for all at AMD. I am sure they would spend many sleepless nights before they pull themselves out of this mess.

I can see Intel & the megalomaniacs laughing all their way to their banks ......... at whose cost ?????
 
Quote Originally Posted by moksh4u2 View Post

i dont mean to troll this thread but you have to watch this vid

Hitler finds out about the AMD Bulldozer benchmarks - YouTube

exactly what i felt after reading the reviews:@ bd not even better than i5 after waiting so long for it :@

damn shld have never waited for it what a dissapointment:no:

--- Updated Post - Automerged ---

wnder what the pricing is going o be like??????????
 
terence_fdes said:
Extremely well interpreted :) and subtitled, but I'm sure with terrible sadness and anger at the same time. That's how I feel too after being an AMD fanboy for the past 12 years or so.

Glad I did not go ahead & buy my rig as yet [with the 990FX sabertooth] - so I am not yet ready to give up as yet on AMD [none of us must] - these are terrible moments for all at AMD. I am sure they would spend many sleepless nights before they pull themselves out of this mess.

I can see Intel & the megalomaniacs laughing all their way to their banks ......... at whose cost ?????
Click to expand...

Same here. I feel it will be the return of marked up pricing on intel products. Also I am glad i did not w8 for BD, rather settled for the Athlon for HTPC duties.
 
hey guys !!! just read the review on guru3d ,was wondering should i go fx series or already proven sandybridge series

coz the review says not so many applications to tap the potentional

the pc will be built for gaming and general purpose ,thats too for my friend
 
BoRNTeRRI3T said:
hey guys !!! just read the review on guru3d ,was wondering should i go fx series or already proven sandybridge series

coz the review says not so many applications to tap the potentional

the pc will be built for gaming and general purpose ,thats too for my friend
Click to expand...

go with SB for gaming!

i am also switching to Intel....now waiting for IB to release!!!
 
The problem here is for a gaming rig even my unlocked Athlon X3 440 (phenom X4 B40) with a 6850 gives the exact same frames rates similar to the higher processor models do. Its totally dependent on the end user how he is going to utilize the power of a processor. BD infact has a totally new architecture with very less softwares able to understand the working of a BD module as a whole. I think in future BD will be useful, but it was a wrong decision from AMD in launching BD at a time when no softwares are updated to use its architecture to full extent.
 
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom