| Wednesday, July 16 2008 |
AMD wants to leave the Barcelona (rather K10) debacle behind it as it moves closer to a newer processor architecture. This paves way for AMD to incorporate strong memory and system interface links. The G34 socket though touted to be a successor for the current socket 1207, is believed to be a standard socket for both enterprise and PC processors. AMD is working on a new CPU architecture codenamed 'Bulldozer'. Derivatives include monolithic 8-core and 12-core processors. The 12-core processor is now codenamed Magny-Cours, the 8-core part is called Sao Paulo. These processors could feature four parallel HyperTransport 3.0 interconnects, upto 12 MB of L3 cache and 512 KB L2 cache per core. It's known that AMD could be working on quad-channel DDR3 (both registered DDR3 under G3MX and unregistered). Socket G34 seems to have 1,974 pins.
The provision of four independent HyperTransport interconnects means that the fourth interconnect can be dedicated as a peer-to-peer interconnect between two sockets in a dual-socket setup, or its bandwidth split to form daisy-chains with multiple sockets. A prelude to AMD's Torrenza enterprise platform, which would allow use of several co-processors of different architectures including ClearSpeed to be embedded in workstations.
Source: DailyTech
The provision of four independent HyperTransport interconnects means that the fourth interconnect can be dedicated as a peer-to-peer interconnect between two sockets in a dual-socket setup, or its bandwidth split to form daisy-chains with multiple sockets. A prelude to AMD's Torrenza enterprise platform, which would allow use of several co-processors of different architectures including ClearSpeed to be embedded in workstations.
Source: DailyTech
User comments
odd shape for a socket...
I don't necessarily think more cores is better, but it would be kinda cool to have up to 12 cores in my rig to be honest! If modern OS and software can be patched to use it, then good, but otherwise from a gamer perspective, going beyond 2 or even 4 just doesn't make too much sense...I could be really wrong here, and I'm sure AMD won't leave the dual and quad core arenas alone, I'm sure they have some goodies up their sleeves, which I hope to see. I've been mostly Intel in my rigs, but AMD is a good company with good chips, and I think they'll hit hard and give Intel a serious run for their money.
Damn, its a rectangle c2q with 4 c-indentations instead of 2. Its original yet its not :rolleyes:
So you think the 8-threaded Bloomfield is ok? Don't count cores, count the number of threads it can crunch simultaneously. With Intel working on a 6-core part, obviously they're going to weld two of them into a 12-core (24 thread) part.
In other words, its either gonna rock or its gonna flop - no middle ground, just how we like it.
i say we go back to card-based cpus, lol... heatsinks were great back then...
Hope AMD will strike with this one like in the past
Nice, can't wait to see some scores from these. They look nice, as long as they improve their architecture speed enough, these should be rockin along side nehalem.
Isn't G34 compatible with whatever IBM's next processor is too? I remember reading an article about it a few months ago.
Odd not seeing a square core, but those are sweet names for them imo. Formula 1 inspired names (Magny-Cours, Sao Paulo). :rockout: :toast: :respect: :pimp: :cool:
So its not K10... but a new and vague architecture that AMD as usual is keeping a tight lip on.
Good luck....
Good luck....
by: GLD;889113The architecture code-named Bulldozer is what made me go "boing!"
Odd not seeing a square core, but those are sweet names for them imo. Formula 1 inspired names (Magny-Cours, Sao Paulo). :rockout: :toast: :respect: :pimp: :cool:
lol, it will be tough to get many 12 core monolithic CPU on a single wafer
but i heard that this CPU should solve the problem where software is not programmed for multi-core CPUs, if that is true, then it could prove to be a big thing!
but i heard that this CPU should solve the problem where software is not programmed for multi-core CPUs, if that is true, then it could prove to be a big thing!
My hunch is that this is the equivalent of K8 vs Netburst. Intel is just going along boosting clocks and dropping their process.... then AMD comes along with an architecture which totally rapes.
Lets hope that is true.
Lets hope that is true.
Just from the name, high expectations have been made! Bulldozer; either it smashes down Intel's castle, or the Bull part of the name comes into play...
I hope the former happens, AMD needs some good chips and Intel needs the competition!
(On a side note, the Pentium Pro was rectangular, and that was an awesome chip :D)
I hope the former happens, AMD needs some good chips and Intel needs the competition!
(On a side note, the Pentium Pro was rectangular, and that was an awesome chip :D)
"These processors could feature four parallel HyperTransport 3.0 interconnects, upto 12 MB of L3 cache and 512 KB L2 cache per core."
C'mon AMD, can't you better than this?? I know that this will be a 12 core processor but even still...
C'mon AMD, can't you better than this?? I know that this will be a 12 core processor but even still...
by: Dark_Webster;889233How much L2 cache does a Nehalem carry per core?
"These processors could feature four parallel HyperTransport 3.0 interconnects, upto 12 MB of L3 cache and 512 KB L2 cache per core."
C'mon AMD, can't you better than this?? I know that this will be a 12 core processor but even still...
by: btarunr;889242If what I saw was correct, Nehalem only has 256KB of L2 cache. Yeah I know that Nehalem has less L2 cache but perhaps it will be better optimized than AMD's counterparts.
How much L2 cache does a Nehalem carry per core?
Let's wait and see... I hope that AMD can compete with Intel with this new architecture.
I can totally see case stickers saying something like "mine's longer" when this chip comes out. :shadedshu
by: Dark_Webster;889251Considering their current architecture, it appears that AMD has been working on this thing for a long time. I wouldn't look to the past phenoms when comparing this CPU, it looks like AMD is trying to make some sort of statement with those supposed specs.
If what I saw was correct, Nehalem only has 256KB of L2 cache. Yeah I know that Nehalem has less L2 cache but perhaps it will be better optimized than AMD's counterparts.
Let's wait and see... I hope that AMD can compete with Intel with this new architecture.
That's pretty wild lookin. I guess it's safe to say AMD users won't be able to reuse their heatsinks
- So this is replacing AM3? I have seen stuff around the internet about AM3, but never nothing I saw has come to pass.
- Won't a 12 core CPU generate tons of heats?
- Is this a platform that Fusion will be on?
Seems like an awesome chip, but Im not ready for anything past 4 cores ;p
AMD has been working on Socket G34 code name ":respect:Bulldozer" Micro-Architecture ever since the beginning of 2003. The K10 and K10.5 is just an upgrade from its former brother the K8. This has been AMD's intention all along to prolong and upgrade the K8 as much as possible before moving to something completely new.
The Bulldozer design is said to be a completely different architecture built from the ground up as AMD likes to put it (Nothing to do with K8). The K8 served its time quite nicely but it was time to move to something new and faster.
It's also said to be more than 2 to 4 times faster in a clock-4-clock environment.
Also AMD's other design called Fusion will have nothing to do with Bulldozer. Both are different in design and meant for a different purpose from what I've found out.
The Bulldozer design is said to be a completely different architecture built from the ground up as AMD likes to put it (Nothing to do with K8). The K8 served its time quite nicely but it was time to move to something new and faster.
It's also said to be more than 2 to 4 times faster in a clock-4-clock environment.
Also AMD's other design called Fusion will have nothing to do with Bulldozer. Both are different in design and meant for a different purpose from what I've found out.
Damn it, I just upgraded to Quad-core and 8 and 12 cores are already in the horizon?
Hopefully this gives AMD a fighting chance.
Hopefully this gives AMD a fighting chance.
by: Super XP;889506which one will people be using for games?
[COLOR="DarkRed"]
Also AMD's other design called Fusion will have nothing to do with Bulldozer. Both are different in design and meant for a different purpose from what I've found out.
by: suraswami;889523If the new architecture is good, it will give a good fight against Intel's Nelahem.
Damn it, I just upgraded to Quad-core and 8 and 12 cores are already in the horizon?
Hopefully this gives AMD a fighting chance.
Let's hope that the price is also good :).
So AMDs R&D is slowly catching up to Intels. Intel took a couple years ( I think maybe 3) to finally counteract Athlon 64. AMD took about the same time maybe 1 year longer ( I think 4 to 4.5 years) to counter that. Im still not ready for that many cores. OCing those things should be a pain in the rear.
pity, as now a heatsink will only work on amd and vice versa... and what about performance heatsinks?
by: chron;889684
which one will people be using for games?
Fusion will mostly be for notebooks and general low to mid powered PC's where as the Meat and Potatoes will be Bulldozer.
yay! no more cpus that are squares!
by: panchoman;889969
yay! no more cpus that are squares!
I think their is nothing wrong with AMD's upcoming CPU shape. Their is always options and addons to make sure heatsinks work on a large number of different CPU's...
by: Super XP;890487yeah but changing the actual physical shape so that it dosent fit the bottom plate of any currect heatsink will need more than an add-on to be effective.
I think their is nothing wrong with AMD's upcoming CPU shape. Their is always options and addons to make sure heatsinks work on a large number of different CPU's...
you cant just put a piece of metal between it and expect that to be very effective
I see your point. But by the time these new CPU's are released, there is going to be so many more new heat sinks in the market. Who knows, maybe AMD might do a last minute change with the socket shape.
I am sure they have a logical explanation in why they've chosen such a peculiar shape.
I am sure they have a logical explanation in why they've chosen such a peculiar shape.
by: Super XP;891124lol, you try fitting 12 cores (in a similar scale that you already use) on a chip & see what happens. I would rather have a funny looking smaller rectangle than a huge square :wtf:
I see your point. But by the time these new CPU's are released, there is going to be so many more new heat sinks in the market. Who knows, maybe AMD might do a last minute change with the socket shape.
I am sure they have a logical explanation in why they've chosen such a peculiar shape.
wouldnt it make sense for dual and quad cores to be focused on one side of the rectangle, where current heatsinks would still cover them? if you have the cash for 12 cores, I'm sure you can throw in a heatsink.
Bla, bla, bla. When can I buy one!?!
