No, they just wanted to show the core architecture so they just show one 'block' of the core

Its not a risk, they MUST create new architecture to compete with Intel CPUs. Their desktop its pretty good but their mobile segment are pretty poor as compared to Intel counterparts, both in performance and battery life

The Bulldozer architecture is pretty radical, as it is not a 'true' dual core as it share fetch and decode blocks, FPU and L2 caches and claiming its '80% performance of true dual core' to reduce thermal and power envelope. I hope there is more to that.

Simulated are nothing compared to real life performance. At least I would like to see L2/L3 cache sizes and clockspeed. They delaying far too long, unless they have something good up their sleeve

Its better be late than never. I sure people don't want another TLB bug on earlier B2 stepping Phenoms

DNF stand for Did Not Finish but I guess he means Duke Nukem Forever, the most famous 'vaporware' ironically with the same acronym

That's the problem, when manufacturing process become smaller they just abusing it with more power instead of making it to be power efficient.

Having 12 cell battery + build in power brick inside a laptop is not what you call portable. Small netbook power brick might be small but incorporate it inside a 10 or 12 inch body will be a challenge. Have you seen the size of typical 12 cell battery? It usually protrude underneath the laptop and very heavy

You don't see the whole picture, lets put it like this: Imagine putting it into the laptop and have to carry it ALL the time even when not plugged in, for small netbook it might be 100-200 grams but for big laptop it such a nuisance. Plus when charging imagine the heat it produces. You don't want another heat source cooking your lap or your palm aren't you? Harddisk, GPU and CPU is put out enough heat already, you already pointed out the wattage of the CPU, that's not included other components, chipset, PWM on the mobo etc. All of this producing heat. Heat is number one problem in laptop and also could damage the battery in long run.

Having x86 and all its capability does have its drawback, its not as power saving as ARM CPU but then again those ARM processor is not comparable to laptop and desktop x86 CPU in terms of performance and functionality so it silly to compare its battery life. See that Intel do to Atom, the dropped OoO in favor of In order and the performance drops by a lot, whats the point of having long battery life if the task you gonna do take longer time as well? Gain something lose something. AMD has just started with low power CPU, and it is fruitful as compared to Atom, far better performance and comparable battery life. Its just the start, expect it to get better on next iteration.

Maybe he wanted this, a 32 hour battery life HP EliteBook 8460p with its 'portable' 120W docking station. Laptop weight in at 2.07kg if it uses standard 6-cell battery, the docking station itself weight at 'light' 1.637kg! There you are, power brick free laptop just for you. Mind you the rated 32-hour is with WiFi in OFF state, and presumably in lowest brightness and in idle



Seriously, unless there is a breakthrough in manufacturing process to reduce leakage in transistor or breakthrough battery technology such as carbon nanotube battery, he just asking the impossible.

Fusion concept IS the answer to your statement. Problem is consumer demand smooth Flash videos and Flash heavy site, 1080i capable video playback for home theater, capable GPU for mainstream games and multitasking and not just basic stuff. If not you just go back to Atom then, yes it is enough for your stuff, but do you do just that all the time? Do you just websurfing and spreadsheet all day without visiting flash site or playing games? AMD try to delivers good performance for day-to-day usage but with minimal power draw. But this is their first step, technology needs time to grow.

I don't know if this been posted before, I came upon this stating the real culprit could be the test kit motherboard, the Crosshair V Formula.

I don't like where AMD is heading, they had gone back to megahertz race. The common conception that 'AMD is hot' back during the Thunderbird era is going to be back because of this.

Although it doesn't matter much in desktop where you could put big cooler on them and reach very high speeds, but they won't appeal much for mobile gamer.

Just look at current AMD Sabine platform, with only 2.1GHz tops (with on our market it is usually have low based 1.4GHz clock quad core) it won't be able to perform in games because as we could see from similarly architectured desktop Deneb based Phenom II needs 3GHz and above to reach 25fps minimum, like for example Skyrim even with GTX 570 as per review here.

The only saving grace for AMD is because it based on k10 stars architecture people can use k10stats to overclock, some with modded cooling could reach 3GHz speeds as you could read here. Also Crossfire between integrated and dedicated GPU don't work in some games as well, lowering performance instead of increasing them.

I don't see how Trinity could be better than current Llano on laptop, the GPU could be faster, that's why its only 3D benchmark is been floating around, but what about the CPU? What are the clocks might be? With base clock of 3+GHz on desktop they better do something on mobile to make it appeal for gamers because high speed don't equal to low temperature or low power consumption.

AMD could do a lot of things with their Bobcat, really. Just put one in Ultrabook chassis and voila! Affordable Ultrabook.

IPC don't equal to fast clock, what it should do is to execute instruction in fewer cycle as possible and done more work per clock cycle thus reducing the needs of high clockspeed and lowering power consumption. The reason why Netburst fails because they were aimed squarely at high clock instead of high IPC. It was predicted to reach 10GHz but where does it stop? Not even half of that. Check Netburst Rapid Execution Engine, it runs twice the clock as the CPU runs, which means Arithmetic Logic Units runs at 6GHz if the CPU clock is 3GHz but does it prove faster than lower clocked K8? AMD really needs to do another K8 to really gives Intel a run for its money. The situation is reversed now. Like I said high clock have huge drawback, mainly power consumption and heat. Other comes in the form of bad yield due to difficulty of manufacturing complex core.

By the time Pliedriver is out, Intel already have Ivy Bridge ready. Remember Intel have process node advantage over AMD.

Unfortunately hope alone won't helps AMD by much. But time will tell whether an improved thread scheduling in Windows 8 will improve its performance as most people hoped or not.

For those who don't read thread scheduling advantages if it done correctly, read here

Well, the thread scheduling is done so to trigger higher Turbo Core clock because of it uses fewer modules. So it could simply be done by overclocking manually anyway.

But I like this quote in particular near the end of the article, it could be beneficial to AMD somewhat

It's not ironic, not sure if you serious but look back during Intel Pres-hott era, their mobile segment excels in both performance and power consumption, even beating desktop CPU despite having low clockspeed. Reason is simple, because its on different division

Don't be so sure, read this

It's not a fail product by a long shot. It's just there is several things that put in Intel favor, one being Intel compiler crippling AMD CPU when it detects one, and Bulldozer architecture are geared toward multi threading (workstation performance) while most software, including games, favors high IPC. Bulldozer is just a base for things to come from AMD, which to fuse GPU and CPU, the current APU is not the final product because it's not fully assist CPU in some task.

Intel got one advantages over AMD which is finer manufacturing process, but it too have limits. Look at Ivy Bridge, which it supposed to give better performance than SandyBridge but in fact only a few percent faster and runs hotter as well, even with IHS removed.

Don't know if it had been posted or not. Good news for someone who bought AM3+ mobo like me recently, looks like Steamroller coming to AM3+ after all. 5 years warranty mobo with support for upcoming CPU is big win, one of few reason I stick with AMD.

AMD sticks with Socket AM3+ for Steamroller.

All Trinity APU uses VLIW4 of previous HD 6k series cards, so you can only CF with VLIW4 based card of previous HD 6k series only, something like HD 6670. Wonder why they use HD 7k numbering, probably for marketing purposes.

True, but from the reviewer who tested this CPU claimed it could only be CF with HD 6k GPUs only, at least HD 7660D is.

You don't have to go Intel, all modern AMD CPU can use software called AMD PSCheck to control voltages and clockspeeds. You can simply achieve a lot lower than 35W you after. My Phenom II idles at 13W (according to HWMonitor) and 7W (according to extreme PSU calculator) as it idles 800MHz with very low 0.65V.