AMD tapes out its Bulldozer CPU architecture

[CDdude55]

Originally Posted by twilyth

CD: I love AMD - 2 of 3 rigs now and the Intel one is getting ditched.

I have no problems with you or anyone else having a preference towards AMD or any other company, but for legitimate reasons.

[crazyeyesreaper]

amd actually was bleeding money faster then they could ever make it currently there in the green it might stay that way it might not but fact remains if amd was profitable they wouldnt have sold there Fabs etc which they did for obvious reasons. The point being the settlement and ATI 4 series and 5 series sales to oems and soon to be Macs should help keep AMD afloat but this spin stuff off and hope to recoup later shit wont last forever.

at the end of the day i went amd for price to performance when i7 came out a Phenom II 940 8gigs DDR2 and 4870x2 combined cost me less then the DDR3 i7 920 and mobo without a gpu as a gamer ill go the route that gives me the best option at the time it was AMD if intels cpus werent so heavily overpriced in most situations along with motherboards when i tend to upgrade id be more willing to buy Intel, just seems most of the time im up to getting a new rig Intel is pricing way to high to even be remotely affordable

[CDdude55]

Originally Posted by crazyeyesreaper

at the end of the day i went amd for price to performance when i7 came out a Phenom II 940 8gigs DDR2 and 4870x2 combined cost me less then the DDR3 i7 920 and mobo without a gpu as a gamer ill go the route that gives me the best option at the time it was AMD if intels cpus werent so heavily overpriced in most situations along with motherboards when i tend to upgrade id be more willing to buy Intel, just seems most of the time im up to getting a new rig Intel is pricing way to high to even be remotely affordable

Perfectly legitimate reason, if i didn't have the money at the time to go i7, i would have went straight for an AMD system.

But i usually go where performance goes.(if i can afford it)

[erocker]

What AMD needs to do is release Bulldozer. Their stock is tumbling yet again.

[CDdude55]

Originally Posted by erocker

Their stock is tumbling yet again.

Same with intel.

[erocker]

Intel market cap = 115 billion

AMD market cap = 5 billion

Just a drop in a very large bucket for Intel. You need 23 AMD's to equal one Intel.

[Super XP]

Originally Posted by CDdude55

I see what your saying and i agree to a certain degree(that AMD brought DDR3 to the masses).
I don't see AMD as the underdog at all(maybe to a certain extent),they just chose not to spend there billions of dollars on things like marketing and advertising as apposed to Intel. Does Intel have more money?, probably so. But AMD definitely isn't struggling. It is all fair competition, if AMD wants to one up Intel, they can. It just a matter of pushing out great architectures and trying to one up there competitors by doing so, just because they can't do that doesn't make them the underdog. It's not like they're operating outside there grandma's basement... they have loads of cash backed behind them. It's just a matter of picking where to spend it and whats more beneficial to the company. Just because you see an Intel sticker on every computer in the room, doesn't mean the other companies aren't doing well.

It all depends want the company whats to gamble on. and just because one has more money to do so, doesn't mean the others would have died out.

AMD is a major underdog. Anyway we all know about Intel bribing companies to not carry AMD products. The truth all came out with that law suit AMD won and quite deservingly.

Intel made 2.9Billion in profit Q2 2010 and AMD made $83 million in profit.

But now it seems Intel is playing nice, and now we can have strong FAIR Competition. One this is for sure, I can’t wait for Intel’s Light Peak to gain traction and AMD’s Bulldozer’s release date.

Originally Posted by erocker

Intel market cap = 115 billion

AMD market cap = 5 billion

Just a drop in a very large bucket for Intel. You need 23 AMD's to equal one Intel.

Just my point,

[CDdude55]

Originally Posted by Super XP

AMD is a major underdog. Anyway we all know about Intel bribing companies to not carry AMD products. The truth all came out with that law suit AMD won and quite deservingly.

Intel made 2.9Billion in profit Q2 2010 and AMD made $83 million in profit.

But now it seems Intel is playing nice, and now we can have strong FAIR Competition. One this is for sure, I can’t wait for Intel’s Light Peak to gain traction and AMD’s Bulldozer’s release date.

Just my point,

I'm just gonna stop, i have already addressed the AMD being the underdog BS maybe times and still have yet to pull any concrete information from you as to why that is.

I really think fanboyism is strong on this one, and that's something i can never change, no matter what the facts are.

Originally Posted by cissy

Yes, I currently encounter problems Xpower900

What?

Start a new thread if you're having problems with something...unless you're trying to troll.

[Super XP]

Intel has manufacturing power & billions in R&D something AMD cannot compete with at the moment. I believe erocker summed it up quite nice in his last post.
I think I understand what you mean when you say AMD is not an underdog anymore.
I would agree that AMD used to be a major underdog just shadowing Intel but yes of course they've made an extremely strong recognisable name for themselves ever since the Opteron / Athlon 64 release in 2003 when AMD’s stock eventually grew in excess of $40 per share. Nevertheless, they are 2nd to Intel and will most likely remain 2nd place for eternity IMO.

I’ll stop too.

Let's get back to the topic's purpose, AMD's Bulldozer. I can't wait for AMD to release more information.

[largon]

Had to bump this;
it just occur to me that there will definitely be no quad channel RAM for Bulldozer in "socket AM3r2". No matter what wikipedia says... But it's possible some high-end desktop Bulldozers would land as socket C32 parts with quad channel RAM and as such, C32 Bulldozers would become AMD's counterpart to Intel LGA1366 i7s while dual channel "AM3r2" 'dozers would counter LGA1156 (i5).

[Super XP]

Originally Posted by largon

Had to bump this;
it just occur to me that there will definitely be no quad channel RAM for Bulldozer in "socket AM3r2". No matter what wikipedia says... But it's possible some high-end desktop Bulldozers would land as socket C32 parts with quad channel RAM and as such, C32 Bulldozers would become AMD's counterpart to Intel LGA1366 i7s while dual channel "AM3r2" 'dozers would counter LGA1156 (i5).

What makes you think there will be no Quad-Channel ram inside Bulldozer? Intel went from Dual-Channel to Tri-Channel, it's only logical AMD would move to Quad-Channel. You should refer to Wiki's external links which states Quad-Channel for Bulldozer

But we should get more info after Aug 24, 2010

[DrPepper]

Originally Posted by Super XP

What makes you think there will be no Quad-Channel ram inside Bulldozer? Intel went from Dual-Channel to Tri-Channel, it's only logical AMD would move to Quad-Channel. You should refer to Wiki's external links which states Quad-Channel for Bulldozer

But we should get more info after Aug 24, 2010

Tri-Channel doesn't offer a big enough benefit. Thier trying to keep die space down I guess.

[largon]

Originally Posted by Super XP

What makes you think there will be no Quad-Channel ram inside Bulldozer? Intel went from Dual-Channel to Tri-Channel, it's only logical AMD would move to Quad-Channel. You should refer to Wiki's external links which states Quad-Channel for Bulldozer

Not saying Bulldozer won't have a quad channel IMC. Only that the AM3 version will be just dual channel. QC would require way too many RAM I/O pins for a socket anything like AM3. On socket C32 they should be able to pull it off, though.

[crazyeyesreaper]

it will most likely be quad channel it dosent effect much over all its sort of like 3 way dual channel on amd boards use to be that would force single threading its not the case today.. maybe AMDs boards might only be 4 DIMMs but maybe if all 4 are used it offers quad channel and if not filled its dual channel ever think of that possibility? we dont have the hardware so all we can make is assumptions and if quad or triple channel mattered why do current 1156 socket i7s keep up and in many situations beat the 1336 socket I7s in many tests aka i7 860 vs i7 920 etc basically making a mountain out of a mole hill on the ram channels

[dir_d]

This is a noob question but if the IMC is Quad channel on bulldozer why couldnt an AM3 board do Quad channel. Wouldnt it just need a bios update for bulldozer and thats it? or am i missing alot?

[largon]

Originally Posted by crazyeyesreaper

maybe AMDs boards might only be 4 DIMMs but maybe if all 4 are used it offers quad channel and if not filled its dual channel ever think of that possibility?

Erm.
That would be the obvious configuration.
But simply put, anything plugged in a socket with as limited amount of pins as AM3 features, will be limited to dual channel. Socket AM3 doesn't even have enough pins to route tri channel RAM I/O through it.

[btarunr]

We all have embargoes, some desperate people break it. Anyway, expect a detailed article from TPU on this date:

[crazyeyesreaper]

id like links to source info largon after all it wasnt to long ago ppl said you couldnt do dual channel with 3 sticks of ram but obviously its now doable its just a wait and see situation

[btarunr]

Originally Posted by crazyeyesreaper

id like links to source info largon after all it wasnt to long ago ppl said you couldnt do dual channel with 3 sticks of ram but obviously its now doable its just a wait and see situation

Each memory channel takes hundreds of pins. 939~941 pin AM2(+)/AM3 don't have enough pins to connect to more than two channels. When you install more than one module per channel, you're simply piggy-backing them. So those modules talk to the memory controller over the same narrow path.

By installing 3 modules in dual-channel, all you're doing is piggy backing two modules to share one of the two channels. You don't end up with any higher memory bandwidth.

[Steevo]

Originally Posted by btarunr

We all have embargoes, some desperate people break it. Anyway, expect a detailed article from TPU on this date:

http://img.techpowerup.org/100822/bta9345.jpg

If I had more energy I wold find that with Google search in multiple languages and filters. Or some other places.

[crazyeyesreaper]

true BTA but its still faster and offers better bandwidth then 3 sticks in single channel and thats my key point u get more ram but without the single channel performance hit

[btarunr]

Originally Posted by crazyeyesreaper

true BTA but its still faster and offers better bandwidth then 3 sticks in single channel and thats my key point u get more ram but without the single channel performance hit

Huh?! 3 sticks in dual-channel does not offer any higher bandwidth than two sticks in dual-channel.

[TheMailMan78]

So you think DDR2 would be a bottleneck for these chips?......(waits for half of TPU to kick me in the face through the monitor)

[de.das.dude]

amd.... give us bulldozer please...

[TheMailMan78]

So Bobcat is consumer class and Bulldozer is server class to start with? Am I correct?