lol.. at last Bulldozer coming...
can't wait to see how it fare againts SB...
AMD Bulldozer & Bobcat
AMD Bulldozer & Bobcat
|
|
Mar 9 2011, 04:11 PM
Return to original view | Post
#1
|
|
Elite
1,157 posts Joined: Jul 2008 From: Petaling Jaya |
lol.. at last Bulldozer coming...
can't wait to see how it fare againts SB... |
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 9 2011, 10:45 PM
Return to original view | Post
#2
|
|
Elite
1,157 posts Joined: Jul 2008 From: Petaling Jaya |
|
|
|
May 30 2011, 03:59 PM
Return to original view | Post
#3
|
|
Elite
1,157 posts Joined: Jul 2008 From: Petaling Jaya |
QUOTE(Racerx @ May 30 2011, 03:50 PM) Bulldozer got pushed back...again... It seem like they can't get desirable performance...?? Late July launch... http://www.anandtech.com/show/4365/compute...68-motherboards It this another DNF?? QUOTE AMD originally wanted to launch Bulldozer at Computex but performance issues with its B0 and B1 stepping chips pushed back the launch. Now we're looking at a late July launch with B2 silicon, but performance today is a big unknown. Apparently the performance of B1 stepping silicon doesn't look too good. This post has been edited by yinchet: May 30 2011, 04:19 PM |
|
|
Jun 7 2011, 04:48 AM
Return to original view | Post
#4
|
|
Elite
1,157 posts Joined: Jul 2008 From: Petaling Jaya |
QUOTE AMD BullDozer delay is Strategic decision By Hilbert Hagedoorn, June 6, 2011 - 7:46 PM N/A Well that's what AMD says, and of course any decision could be labeled as strategic but the Bulldozer processors (Zambezi FX series) have been delayed alright. guru3D was able to confirm that it will take 60 to 90 days from this week before the new processors will see the light of day. Meanwhile there of course will be Llano. Guido Lohmann, AMD PR Manager Northern Europe, "The very gratifying success of the C-and E-series APUs has led to the decision to go ahead first in the desktop area with an APU, and then to follow with the Bulldozer processors,” concluded the company's rep." Before the word was out reports and indications from Asia suggested that AMD is problems with the performance of its Bulldozer architecture, the first chip revisions functioned at lower than expected frequencies hence they already are working and producing on a new B2 stepping. Now this is just a rumor, but it was expected that Zambesi would be able to run 3.5 GHz, whereas the B0 and B1 revision halted at 2.5 GHz. The new B2 stepping should (hopefully) solve this. Zambezi is targeting the high-end desktop space and come with an unlocked multiplier, support for AMD's Turbo Core 2.0 technology and an integrated dual-channel DDR3-1866MHz controller. sosej guru3d |
|
|
Jul 18 2011, 11:36 PM
Return to original view | Post
#5
|
|
Elite
1,157 posts Joined: Jul 2008 From: Petaling Jaya |
^ all PCI-E 2.0??
hope they come up with PCI-E 3.0 for more future proof. |
|
|
Jul 25 2011, 11:10 PM
Return to original view | Post
#6
|
|
Elite
1,157 posts Joined: Jul 2008 From: Petaling Jaya |
QUOTE(kingkingyyk @ Jul 25 2011, 10:03 PM) ![]() Highlights : 10 cores flagship? Piledriver Architecture(Improved Bulldozer, most likely) TurboCore 3.0 (Ultra dynamic clock speed? FM2 (Hope it can support FM1 processors) Hudson D4 FCH Southbridge (4xUSB3.0 + 8xSATA3.0) Trinity APU. (Piledriver architecture) Wichita APU (Quad Core low power APU awaiting intel to counter it.. 8core/16thread... |
|
|
|
|
|
Jul 28 2011, 03:42 AM
Return to original view | Post
#7
|
|
Elite
1,157 posts Joined: Jul 2008 From: Petaling Jaya |
QUOTE(saturn85 @ Jul 28 2011, 03:36 AM) USD269 = RM795 hehe nice pricing indeed..wow, interesting if this is true. not sure when komodo apu will come out. hopefully am3+ socket can last longer. hope they hit intel performance benchmark push the pricing slightly backward. This post has been edited by yinchet: Jul 28 2011, 03:42 AM |
|
|
Jul 29 2011, 01:05 PM
Return to original view | Post
#8
|
|
Elite
1,157 posts Joined: Jul 2008 From: Petaling Jaya |
|
|
|
Jul 31 2011, 03:31 PM
Return to original view | Post
#9
|
|
Elite
1,157 posts Joined: Jul 2008 From: Petaling Jaya |
QUOTE(billytong @ Jul 31 2011, 02:22 PM) Dont forget that Intel SB can run on stock volt @ 4GHz-4.2GHz easily. That means Intel can come out faster model up to 3.6-3.8GHz. another question will they launch new SB models if bulldozer really beat SB?or will they change the plans for early release of IB? |
|
|
Sep 7 2011, 01:43 AM
Return to original view | Post
#10
|
|
Elite
1,157 posts Joined: Jul 2008 From: Petaling Jaya |
another delay??
Playing delay games again?? Mayb they are waiting for LGA2011 to launch?? |
|
|
Sep 7 2011, 11:35 PM
Return to original view | Post
#11
|
|
Elite
1,157 posts Joined: Jul 2008 From: Petaling Jaya |
Perhaps they still can't meet the performance they wanted it to be...
or perhaps another waiting games strategy. Intel is on an enjoyable position... sigh |
|
|
Nov 14 2011, 03:31 PM
Return to original view | Post
#12
|
|
Elite
1,157 posts Joined: Jul 2008 From: Petaling Jaya |
|
|
|
Nov 14 2011, 06:14 PM
Return to original view | Post
#13
|
|
Elite
1,157 posts Joined: Jul 2008 From: Petaling Jaya |
hmm.... from what I heard there is tons of flaws in the 1st few batch not until it released C2 stepping perhaps we will see improvement in those part.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 25 2011, 01:31 PM
Return to original view | Post
#14
|
|
Elite
1,157 posts Joined: Jul 2008 From: Petaling Jaya |
QUOTE It’s all down to TSMC now AMD has pulled that plug on Deccan, the low voltage APU that was scheduled to succeed the highly successful Brazos platform next year. According to several sources, AMD was unable to reach a satisfactory agreement with Globalfoundries. The foundry was apparently unable to provide volume 28nm production by mid-2012, which would give Deccan a relatively short lifespan. Going back to TSMC, the makers of AMD’s 40nm APUs, would entail redesigning the chips, which was and a practical option this late in development. The mess left AMD in a rather awkward situation and not it seems the outfit will have to come up with entirely new 28nm designs for TSMC. Some punters believe AMD simply won’t have time to design entirely new chips and it will have to resort to die shrinking Brazos generation chips. This would basically mean sticking with a derivative of the 8-year-old K8 architecture, which originally started out as a 130nm design. Next generation APUs, including Trinity and probably Deccan successor will use Bulldozer derived cores. In case AMD chooses to redesign existing chips, it still might be able to introduce 28nm APUs in 2012. However, it would take it about 18 months to design a true replacement for cancelled Krishna and Wichita chips. This would give Intel ample time to catch up and seize much of the market with its 32nm Atoms. sosej |
|
|
Dec 1 2011, 01:39 PM
Return to original view | Post
#15
|
|
Elite
1,157 posts Joined: Jul 2008 From: Petaling Jaya |
It going to take them awhile to go back to the game head to head with intel.
BD no matter what they can hardly win intel SB and IB is coming in. Even if BD went through some fine tuning, I doubt they will be able to come make a good return for now. TBH, AMD are too arrogant with their marketing "example BD comic |
|
|
Dec 2 2011, 12:32 PM
Return to original view | Post
#16
|
|
Elite
1,157 posts Joined: Jul 2008 From: Petaling Jaya |
^haha...
They even mock intel with their comic however they phailed badly. Sigh their comic even giving me some hope that they will drive down the intel prices. » Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... « This post has been edited by yinchet: Dec 2 2011, 12:35 PM |
|
|
Dec 3 2011, 01:14 PM
Return to original view | Post
#17
|
|
Elite
1,157 posts Joined: Jul 2008 From: Petaling Jaya |
QUOTE(tech3910 @ Dec 2 2011, 09:19 PM) according to latest benchmark on ivy bridge, it seems that it dint offer much improvement on CPU. I think there is a huge improvement on the CPU just that Intel held back. IB is running on 77 TDP "could be largely factor by its IGP power consumption" and still performance slightly higher than SB.most of the improvement actually found in graphic. with the disappointment on BD performance and power consumption and also not to overshadow SB-E probably the reason y Intel held back. Intel could make a 95 TDP IB but it would seriously destroy SB-E. Anyway it just my opinion. Regardless it is interesting to see Intel put more effort on its IGP and it just matter of times for intel to catch up with red camp and green camp. |
| Change to: | 0.0225sec
0.94
7 queries
GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 27th November 2025 - 12:36 PM |