1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

AMD FM1 and FM2 Packages Pictured Side-by-Side, Incompatible

Discussion in 'News' started by btarunr, Nov 13, 2011.

  1. btarunr

    btarunr Editor & Senior Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2007
    Messages:
    28,864 (11.08/day)
    Thanks Received:
    13,716
    Location:
    Hyderabad, India
    Here is the first picture of AMD accelerated processing units in the existing FM1 package and future FM2 package on which the next-generation Trinity APU will be based on. Both packages are very similar, follow AMD's favourite yet archaic PGA design. The pins are physically arranged in a mostly similar fashion, though we don't have a pin map at hand. The difference comes with some of the blanked pins in the sub-central portion of the pin array. The FM2 package has 904 pins, compared to 905 on FM1. One pin is blanked, while a pair of blanked pins are arranged further away from the central cutout.

    This makes FM1 and FM2 clearly incompatible. Neither will you be able to use today's A-Series APUs in the FM1 package on future socket FM2 motherboards, nor will you be able to run future FM2 APUs on today's FM1 motherboards. Yet, AMD will port the A75 FCH chipset to the next-generation "Virgo" platform. The FCH or Fusion Controller Hub, like Intel's PCH (Platform Controller Hub), is not much more than a glorified southbridge, and is portable between Fusion platforms as it's essentially a PCI-Express 2.0 x4 device. In the picture below, "Llano" FM1 APU is on the left, and "Trinity" FM2 on the right.

    [​IMG]

    Source: ChipHell
     
    Damn_Smooth, Jstn7477 and Super XP say thanks.
  2. Jstn7477

    Jstn7477

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2009
    Messages:
    3,917 (2.05/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,598
    Location:
    Sarasota, Florida, USA
    Well, hopefully like Intel's transition from 1156 to 1155, it means that the chip has been reorganized and is *hopefully* going to be even better than the current APUs. We don't really want Bulldozer (in its current state) with graphics slapped on, do we?
     
    Jizzler says thanks.
    Crunching for Team TPU More than 25k PPD
  3. Super XP

    Super XP

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Messages:
    2,773 (0.78/day)
    Thanks Received:
    539
    Location:
    Ancient Greece, Acropolis
    If FM2 only has 904 pins, then wouldn't Socket AM3+ having more pins be better? AMD wanted a 10-Core Piledriver in the FM2 package, but that doesn't make sense, there's not enough pins NO?
     
  4. Nesters New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2010
    Messages:
    121 (0.08/day)
    Thanks Received:
    27
    ****,I was going to get an Athlon X4 631 and OC the shit out of it and then drop similar kind of FM2 CPU/APU on the same board.
    On second thought, I might still get that Athlon because I have no idea how much better is Bulldozer going to perform on FM2/win8.
     
    Last edited: Nov 13, 2011
  5. TheLostSwede

    TheLostSwede

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2004
    Messages:
    933 (0.25/day)
    Thanks Received:
    164
    Unexpected... NOT!

    Also, don't forget the A85X FCH which should launch alongside the FM2 APUs
     
  6. qubit

    qubit Overclocked quantum bit

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2007
    Messages:
    9,873 (3.87/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,503
    Location:
    Quantum well (UK)
    It looks like AMD are taking a leaf out of Intel's book and concentrating less on socket compatibility and more on improving performance. The right move, in my opinion.
     
  7. btarunr

    btarunr Editor & Senior Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2007
    Messages:
    28,864 (11.08/day)
    Thanks Received:
    13,716
    Location:
    Hyderabad, India
    Lolz where did you hear that? Trinity has two Piledriver modules (4 cores).
     
  8. mixa New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2005
    Messages:
    120 (0.03/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3
    Location:
    Aden Castle Town
    And which package/design is not archaic?That's sounds way too ala fanboy you know.
    And yes it makes sense these to be incompatible, there are going to be changes in the new APUs force AMD to make them incompatible, so ppl don't start to make experiments and end up with dead CPUs or MBs and then go QQ to AMD :D
     
    NC37 says thanks.
  9. btarunr

    btarunr Editor & Senior Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2007
    Messages:
    28,864 (11.08/day)
    Thanks Received:
    13,716
    Location:
    Hyderabad, India
    lga775.
     
  10. Jizzler

    Jizzler

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2007
    Messages:
    3,454 (1.30/day)
    Thanks Received:
    645
    Location:
    Geneva, FL, USA
    Good! Make less compromises for compatibility and more improvements for performance.
     
  11. NC37

    NC37

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2008
    Messages:
    1,203 (0.54/day)
    Thanks Received:
    268

    Agreed. I happen to not mind PGA or ZIF socket designs. Rather like them.
     
  12. Damn_Smooth

    Damn_Smooth New Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2011
    Messages:
    1,435 (1.11/day)
    Thanks Received:
    478
    Location:
    A frozen turdberg.
    I wonder if switching to piledriver cores will hurt trinity. Throwing 4 BD cores in there as they are now would be a definite downgrade from Llano.
     
  13. qubit

    qubit Overclocked quantum bit

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2007
    Messages:
    9,873 (3.87/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,503
    Location:
    Quantum well (UK)
    Ok, just read the article properly and seen that AMD is porting over the A75 FCH chipset to the new socket. So, doesn't that suggest that the improvements are incremental and therefore the socket didn't have to change? Definitely need more info on this one to say for sure.
     
    Last edited: Nov 14, 2011
  14. Damn_Smooth

    Damn_Smooth New Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2011
    Messages:
    1,435 (1.11/day)
    Thanks Received:
    478
    Location:
    A frozen turdberg.
    It was rumored that enhanced BD was going to be on FM2, and that there would be 10 core chips before we heard anything about Vishera. Not that it matters, I'm not too optimistic about it's performance anyway.
     
  15. devguy

    devguy

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2007
    Messages:
    1,239 (0.44/day)
    Thanks Received:
    171
    Location:
    SoCal
    With so much of the chipset built into the APU, overclocking via the reference clock on APUs will not garner you much benefit. It's like trying to overclock an Intel 2500 (not k). I'd be interested to see how much the upcoming black edition Llano chips will overclock, though.
     
  16. Mussels

    Mussels Moderprator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    42,487 (11.47/day)
    Thanks Received:
    9,767
    i'm curious about FM2, to be honest. could make some fantastic portable/LAN systems, as well as HTPC's.


    as long as its faster than FM1, everyone is happy.
     
  17. Inceptor

    Inceptor

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2011
    Messages:
    497 (0.43/day)
    Thanks Received:
    119
    I doubt FM2 will be more than, say, 10% faster than FM1 -- on the cpu side (IF, a big IF, those two Piledriver modules perform reasonably well). The big improvement will be in the iGPU.

    HTPC and extreme budget system territory, like FM1.
     
  18. btarunr

    btarunr Editor & Senior Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2007
    Messages:
    28,864 (11.08/day)
    Thanks Received:
    13,716
    Location:
    Hyderabad, India
    No, those 8(+) core Piledriver chips will continue using AM3+. FM2 is a feature-limited socket for commercial desktops, home PCs, and HTPCs. You can't have more than 16 PEG lines using it.
     
    Mussels and Damn_Smooth say thanks.
  19. wahdangun

    wahdangun New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2008
    Messages:
    1,512 (0.67/day)
    Thanks Received:
    114
    Location:
    indonesia ku tercinta
    no, using same chipset doesn't mean the improvement is minor, its just seems the design in the cpu it self was not compatible with current motherboard implementation, maybe AMD will use triple or quad channel in trinity so it would not bottlenecked.
     
  20. Jizzler

    Jizzler

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2007
    Messages:
    3,454 (1.30/day)
    Thanks Received:
    645
    Location:
    Geneva, FL, USA
    And HPC :)

    ^ There's someone who wishes FM2 was compatible. Drop-in 104 Trinity CPUs next year for a nice boost.
     
    Inceptor says thanks.
  21. Damn_Smooth

    Damn_Smooth New Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2011
    Messages:
    1,435 (1.11/day)
    Thanks Received:
    478
    Location:
    A frozen turdberg.
    Thanks. I was getting FM2 mixed up with FMx. If they still plan on going that route sometime.
     
  22. Cuzza

    Cuzza New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2007
    Messages:
    1,318 (0.49/day)
    Thanks Received:
    207
    Location:
    New Zealand
    phew, glad I didn't buy FM1.

    +1 to the PGA ZIF is NOT archaic argument. There is nothing wrong with it.
     
  23. Wile E

    Wile E Power User

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Messages:
    24,324 (8.17/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,778
    I much prefer PGA over LGA. Bent/broken pins on a cpu are easier to fix than bent or broken pins in a socket. I wish Intel would go back to it.
     
  24. btarunr

    btarunr Editor & Senior Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2007
    Messages:
    28,864 (11.08/day)
    Thanks Received:
    13,716
    Location:
    Hyderabad, India
    Socket pins can be made much more compact than package pins, and hence higher pin-counts can be achieved using LGA. For the same reason, AMD uses LGA and not PGA for all its packages with over 1000 pins. Intel switched to LGA from PGA because it wanted to maintain a package size similar to s478 package, while making room for 775 pins. LGA775 packages ended up being more compact than AMD's PGAs.

    AMD has LGA1207 and LGA1974 (G32), which are both LGA, Opteron processors use them.

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    So the debate between PGA and LGA cannot be reduced to Intel vs. AMD by angry AMD fankids. PGA is archaic whichever way you look at it. It poses pin-density limitations, in turn pin-count limitations if you don't want to enlarge your package dimensions like no tomorrow.

    If AMD wants more pins, for more memory channels, more PCIe lanes from the CPU, or simply more HyperTransport links, the transition to LGA is inevitable. Opteron products already made that switch five years ago.
     
    Last edited: Nov 14, 2011
    Suhidu, Damn_Smooth, HTC and 1 other person say thanks.
  25. Xajel

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2008
    Messages:
    31 (0.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2
    I was hoping AMD will make the next Bulldozer socket compatible with both Bulldozer and it's APU's but not the other way, it can make the Bulldozer socket larger but the central pins in both CPU's are identical so the APU can be used on Bulldozer socket without problem... it's hard I know its hard but it will be nice

    The problem is both CPU's are targeted to different segmentation, Bulldozer is a high-end with high power and normally big packaging, and Trinity ( or what ever comes later ) is mid-end with medium power + the video things...

    having a small CPU package on large CPU socket will result in excessive physical stress on both an might damage the socket, unless it was designed for such purpose !!
     

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page