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

AMD to Redesign Memory Controller in Bulldozer Chips.

Discussion in 'General Hardware' started by Super XP, Sep 16, 2010.

  1. FordGT90Concept

    FordGT90Concept "I go fast!1!11!1!"

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2008
    Messages:
    14,125 (6.23/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,939
    Location:
    IA, USA
    It only discusses the server/workstation models. I'd certainly hope there is a desktop version with tri-channel capability and there might be one--it just isn't mentioned there.
     
    Crunching for Team TPU
  2. DigitalUK

    DigitalUK New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2009
    Messages:
    503 (0.26/day)
    Thanks Received:
    68
    Location:
    UK South
    amd have been on dual channel for ages now, i find it hard to believe that they would introduce a complete New arc based on old dual channel memory it would have to be triple or quad to carry them through.
     
  3. Chevalr1c

    Chevalr1c

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2010
    Messages:
    3,310 (2.10/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,491
    Location:
    NL, Europe
    AMD simply knows that most of their buyers are regular users who often don't need more than 4 GB of RAM. So, if that is the case, would those people actually need triple channel? I mean, for tc one needs 6 or 12 GB or so, thus what's the point? The high-end market simply belongs to Intel, so I guess AMD just tries to not waste on senseless R&D.
    Nontheless, AMD has to switch to triple/quad channel in the future once their position has improved. After bulldozer, I guess.
     
    Crunching for Team TPU
  4. DigitalUK

    DigitalUK New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2009
    Messages:
    503 (0.26/day)
    Thanks Received:
    68
    Location:
    UK South
    the high end market does not belong to intel, its only the last few years thats been the case and its not so much that normal users would even notice, intel had there ass handed to them with p4 and a64. we all need both companys to be competative, triple and quad channel is the way to go for future performance.
     
  5. cadaveca

    cadaveca My name is Dave

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2006
    Messages:
    14,152 (4.44/day)
    Thanks Received:
    7,358
    Location:
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Yeah...you know, I realized that previously, AMD chips had BETTER memory control, due to being first with IMC.

    So, after using Core2 for a while, going back to AMD has kinda been a shock. The performance I expected, just isn't there.

    AMD's cpu core itself is fast enough, I think. bulldozer will only increase performance there. So, what else could they do? Of course it's memory. Dealing with that alone could potentially fix the performance deficit.
     
  6. DigitalUK

    DigitalUK New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2009
    Messages:
    503 (0.26/day)
    Thanks Received:
    68
    Location:
    UK South
    bulldozer is a complete rebuild from the ground up so i dont think we can even compare any of the current Phenom 2's to whats going to come. triple or quad channel would be a great place to have the new arc to sit on, threads have to be upped minimum 8. the way the bulldozer is surposed to link 2 cores on a single thread sounds great. lets hope the cpu guys followed what the GPU guys did. the problem for us could be that bulldozer performs to well because if it does it will cost an arm and a leg.
    i also think that amd has only let out the bare minimum of information around these chips and nothing more. eg.. its square and heres a very basic map
     
  7. largon

    largon

    Joined:
    May 6, 2005
    Messages:
    2,782 (0.79/day)
    Thanks Received:
    433
    Location:
    Tre, Suomi Finland
    It's the other way around, one core has redundant parts (doubled 4-way integer executors) allowing two threads to be run simultaneously without sacrificing much performance. Single thread goes through just one group of the 4-way executors, the other 4-way group doesn't help there.
     
  8. nt300

    nt300

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2010
    Messages:
    868 (0.48/day)
    Thanks Received:
    159
    Location:
    Toronto, ON. Canada
    High end market belong to both AMD and Intel. AMD has no choice but to redesign memory controller to make sure Bulldozer chips fast and efficient. I don't see your logic here, there no point releasing Bulldozer if going to be a very slight performance increase from Phenom II as you sort of leed to with basic dual channel.
    Do a Quad-channel and let people deside if they want 4GB or 8GB or more. Ram companies will love AMD if do Quad-channel :)
    AMD has a big surprise for Intel once it release Bulldozer.
     
    Last edited: Sep 22, 2010
    Chevalr1c says thanks.
  9. DigitalUK

    DigitalUK New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2009
    Messages:
    503 (0.26/day)
    Thanks Received:
    68
    Location:
    UK South
    amen to that
     
  10. Chevalr1c

    Chevalr1c

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2010
    Messages:
    3,310 (2.10/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,491
    Location:
    NL, Europe
    With my remark of Intel and the high-end market, I meant that Intel is market leader there with their i7 CPUs. Of course it would be nice if AMD releases some nice performance-CPUs :)

    Though Bulldozer will probably not be quad-channel, I assume. At least it is more likely that it is either dual or triple channel. Or they will at one hand keep it on DC for the kind of people I described earlier, and at the other introduce a higher amount of channels to the chips that aim at performance (that have to give concurrence to the i5s and i7s). Though what they should do for all their chips is increasing the memory bus speed. I mean, the Core 2 Duo E8400 has got a 1333 MHz FSB, but for example the Athlon II X2 255 supports memory up to 533 MHz (i.e. DDR3-1066). That is a bit low in these times, especially when you consider the higher age of the Core 2 Duos.

    I hope that you are right about that surprise for Intel. Would be a very nice thing to happen. :)
     
    Crunching for Team TPU
  11. DigitalUK

    DigitalUK New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2009
    Messages:
    503 (0.26/day)
    Thanks Received:
    68
    Location:
    UK South
    higher mhz doesnt mean more performance.
     
  12. Chevalr1c

    Chevalr1c

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2010
    Messages:
    3,310 (2.10/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,491
    Location:
    NL, Europe
    DDr3-1333 is faster RAM than DDR3-1066, isn't it?
     
    Crunching for Team TPU
  13. DigitalUK

    DigitalUK New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2009
    Messages:
    503 (0.26/day)
    Thanks Received:
    68
    Location:
    UK South
    depending on the timings, also the Athlon II X2 255 will do ddr3 1333. that is a really cheap cpu as well about £50 the core 2 duos cost alot more.
     
  14. Chevalr1c

    Chevalr1c

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2010
    Messages:
    3,310 (2.10/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,491
    Location:
    NL, Europe
    I know they cost a lot more, yet I think more folks would consider AMD if there were a higher clocked mem controller.
    And how come do you think higher than 1333 MHZ is supported? On this page it is stated that the supported speed is nopt getting higher than DDR3-1066 (so I suppose DDR3-1333 will be clocked down to 1066 rating).
     
    Crunching for Team TPU
  15. DigitalUK

    DigitalUK New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2009
    Messages:
    503 (0.26/day)
    Thanks Received:
    68
    Location:
    UK South
    Chevalr1c says thanks.
  16. de.das.dude

    de.das.dude Pro Indian Modder

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    7,924 (4.77/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,122
    resigning the memory controller?? guess this must be incompatible with all sockets we know off now.
     
  17. cadaveca

    cadaveca My name is Dave

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2006
    Messages:
    14,152 (4.44/day)
    Thanks Received:
    7,358
    Location:
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Yeah, apparantly. AM3+, remember?

    :(

    Makes it hard to want to buy CH4E.
     
  18. Chevalr1c

    Chevalr1c

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2010
    Messages:
    3,310 (2.10/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,491
    Location:
    NL, Europe
    Crunching for Team TPU
  19. de.das.dude

    de.das.dude Pro Indian Modder

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    7,924 (4.77/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,122
    i think AMD will integrate the memory controller in their chipset.
    i wish instead of that they would have integrated an audio.
     
  20. cadaveca

    cadaveca My name is Dave

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2006
    Messages:
    14,152 (4.44/day)
    Thanks Received:
    7,358
    Location:
    Edmonton, Alberta
    1333 support "officially" requires 8-series chipset, but 7-series works fine.
     
    nt300 and Chevalr1c say thanks.
  21. largon

    largon

    Joined:
    May 6, 2005
    Messages:
    2,782 (0.79/day)
    Thanks Received:
    433
    Location:
    Tre, Suomi Finland
    Eh?
     
  22. btarunr

    btarunr Editor & Senior Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2007
    Messages:
    28,972 (10.98/day)
    Thanks Received:
    13,759
    Location:
    Hyderabad, India
    Apparently some did not understand what John was trying to say.

    [​IMG]

    Hope you get it, it's just that with this new IMC, a processor (on a socket) can address its neighbour's (on neighbouring socket) memory faster. So this is totally related to the Opteron multi-socket platform.
     
    Aquinus and cadaveca say thanks.
  23. nt300

    nt300

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2010
    Messages:
    868 (0.48/day)
    Thanks Received:
    159
    Location:
    Toronto, ON. Canada
    You make good point, though price/performance wins the day at the end. That is where AMD shines. Theres more average gamers then extreme.
    I hope not, that might slow down performance. I thought they will integrate memory controller and NB controller. Just look at the diagrams & pics from AMD.
     
  24. TheMailMan78

    TheMailMan78 Big Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2007
    Messages:
    21,317 (7.70/day)
    Thanks Received:
    7,795
    So this would have nothing to do with a single socket platform?
     
  25. cadaveca

    cadaveca My name is Dave

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2006
    Messages:
    14,152 (4.44/day)
    Thanks Received:
    7,358
    Location:
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Basically, but he was also talking between his teeth...he could have been talking just simply about the 16MB of cache info that is now out. BUt yeah, seems that way...:laugh:
     

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

Share This Page