# AMD's Bulldozer to use new AM3+ socket



## MicroUnC (Aug 27, 2010)

I thought i share this, Not sure where to post though 


"The existing G34 and C32 server infrastructure will support the new Bulldozer-based server products. In order for AMD’s desktop offering to fully leverage the capabilities of Bulldozer, an enhanced AM3+ socket will be introduced that supports Bulldozer and is backward-compatible with our existing AM3 CPU offerings."


    "When we initially set out on the path to Bulldozer we were hoping for AM3 compatibility, but further along the process we realized that we had a choice to make based on some of the features that we wanted to bring with Bulldozer. We could either provide AM3 support and lose some of the capabilities of the new Bulldozer architecture or, we could choose the AM3+ socket which would allow the Bulldozer-base Zambezi to have greater performance and capability.

    The majority of the computer buying public will not upgrade their processors, but enthusiasts do. When we did the analysis it was clear that the customers who were most likely to upgrade an AM3 motherboard to a Bulldozer would want the features and capability that would only be delivered in the new AM3+ sockets. A classic Catch-22.

    Why not do both you ask? Just make a second model that only works in AM3? First, because that would greatly increase the cost and infrastructure of bringing the product to market, which would drive up the cost of the product (for both AMD and its partners). Secondly, adding an additional product would double the time involved in many of the development steps.

    So in the end, delivering an AM3 capability would bring you a less featured product that was more expensive and later to market. Instead we chose the path of the AM3+ socket, which is a path that we hope will bring you a better priced product, with greater performance and more features - on time.

    When we looked at the market for AM3 upgrades, it was clear that the folks most interested in an AM3-based product were the enthusiasts. This is one set of customers that we know are not willing to settle for second best when it comes to performance, so we definitely needed to ensure that our new architecture would meet their demanding needs, for both high performance and overclockability. We believe they will see that in AM3+."


----------



## digibucc (Aug 27, 2010)

nice  anyone know anything about AM4 then? any plans for it yet? sounds like they just made AM3+ as an afterthought, so idk... my next build will have to be one of the two though


----------



## Kantastic (Aug 27, 2010)

That's fine with me! It really isn't that big of a deal that Bulldozer isn't compatible with current motherboards since that's how things should be, AMD simply spoiled us the past few years. On the plus side, AM3+ will support Phenom II's.


----------



## MicroUnC (Aug 27, 2010)

Uughh:shadedshu i was really hoping for a completely different socket, since AM3+ will be able to shelter the current phenoms, That's not likely to happen.


----------



## erocker (Aug 27, 2010)

Where is this information from? I heard this a while ago, but more recent reports have Bulldozer using a new socket that is not backwards compatible.



			
				TPU News said:
			
		

> Because of this design change, Bulldozer processors will come in totally new packages that are not backwards compatible with older AMD sockets such as AM3 or AM2(+).



Link to article: http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/showthread.php?t=129392


----------



## ebolamonkey3 (Aug 27, 2010)

Waiting for AM4 then


----------



## largon (Aug 27, 2010)

Oh crap. This is bad. 
It's still only dual-channel DDR3 and _no more_. I was hoping tri-channel just that I'd get 6 RAM slots. 

That is, if the news piece is accurate.


----------



## MicroUnC (Aug 27, 2010)

erocker said:


> Where is this information from? I heard this a while ago, but more recent reports have Bulldozer using a new socket that is not backwards compatible.
> 
> 
> 
> Link to article: http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/showthread.php?t=129392



oh!!! sorry my bad

Here is the source: http://www.planet3dnow.de/cgi-bin/newspub/viewnews.cgi?id=1282840508


----------



## CDdude55 (Aug 27, 2010)

Old news is old.

But ya, i personally don't see a problem with them moving onto a new socket. It's about time imo.


----------



## btarunr (Aug 27, 2010)

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/di...rocessors_Will_Require_New_Platforms_AMD.html


----------



## Deleted member 67555 (Aug 27, 2010)

So the Boards can take AM3 cpu's but AM3 boards will not take the new CPU's?


----------



## $immond$ (Aug 27, 2010)

I am sure AMD will offer people chips for the AM3 socket or at least for 890 FX/GX chipset. Its not like AMD to completely can a chipset and socket as soon as they offer new processors. 

I am certain they will offer an 8 core for the 890fx/gx chipset for the very least.


----------



## CDdude55 (Aug 27, 2010)

jmcslob said:


> So the Boards can take AM3 cpu's but AM3 boards will not take the new CPU's?



I would expect the new boards to have more pins on the socket, so if that's the case then no they wouldn't be able to use the older AM3 CPU's. But yes AM3 boards will not be able to take the new CPU's according to what AMD has been saying.


----------



## $immond$ (Aug 27, 2010)

We will have to wait for an actual release, some sites are providing info that is hypocritical to another sites info.


----------



## CDdude55 (Aug 27, 2010)

$immond$ said:


> We will have to wait for an actual release, some sites are providing info that is hypocritical to another sites info.



Im seeing that to, a lot of sites are saying different things. It's best to just wait and see what happens.

I just hope they show some specs soon!!


----------



## Deleted member 67555 (Aug 27, 2010)

Eh... Well at least my last 2 AM3 boards were free...

Maybe that should have been a sign to me...

Like why Stores like Microcenter are so willing to simply give away AM3 boards or sell really nice 8xx series boards for $10-$20 with the purchase of a AM3 cpu


----------



## $immond$ (Aug 27, 2010)

jmcslob said:


> Eh... Well at least my last 2 AM3 boards were free...
> 
> Maybe that should have been a sign to me...
> 
> Like why Stores like Microcenter so willing to simply give away AM3 boards or sell really nice 8xx series boards for $10-$20 with the purchase of a AM3 cpu



I wish we had deals like that an ASUS crosshair IV for $20 would be a dream.



CDdude55 said:


> Im seeing that to, a lot of sites are saying different things. It's best to just wait and see what happens.
> 
> I just hope they show some specs soon!!



Yea some sites are claiming they are going to "bulldoze" i7's other say it will be bulldozed by the i7's who knows.... I have always been a fan of Intel and AMD hence why I usually own both in my rigs but I am certain AMD might make a comeback and still offer great chips to the existing platforms.


----------



## Super XP (Aug 28, 2010)

I don't mind buying a new mobo with the new chipset for Bulldozer. I really can't see i7 standing in Bulldozer's way.


----------



## CDdude55 (Aug 28, 2010)

Super XP said:


> I don't mind buying a new mobo with the new chipset for Bulldozer. I really can't see i7 standing in Bulldozer's way.



It shouldn't, i mean in the past two years they failed to beat the i7's, so i definitely expect this to exceed the i7's. Especially if it's 8 core with there own version of HT. Then again it could turn out where Intel releases something better a few months after Bulldozer, but who knows..


----------



## fullinfusion (Aug 28, 2010)

Bring it on!!! Bulldozer is going to crush Intel (I hope  )

Amd indeed has spoiled us for sure with no socket changes in some time, unlike Intel changing there socket every cpu build lol.... 

Hello!!!     PPL hate changing boards for new chips...

But I welcome the change from AMD and hope the bulldozer breaks all the expectations that many of us are hoping for....


----------



## erocker (Aug 28, 2010)

Intel will meet/beat anything AMD comes out with. They have the money to do it and AMD certainly does not.


----------



## fullinfusion (Aug 28, 2010)

CDdude55 said:


> It shouldn't, i mean in the past two years they failed to beat the i7's, so i definitely expect this to exceed the i7's. Especially if it's 8 core with there own version of HT. Then again it could turn out where Intel releases something better a few months after Bulldozer, but who knows..


I really wouldnt say amd failed to beat I7 bro.

In some marks amd beat i7's 

Ask Mussels, He loves the speed his X6 encodes video compared to his buddies I7


----------



## fullinfusion (Aug 28, 2010)

erocker said:


> Intel will meet/beat anything AMD comes out with. They have the money to do it and AMD certainly does not.



   Shut up Erocker!


----------



## CDdude55 (Aug 28, 2010)

fullinfusion said:


> Bring it on!!! Bulldozer is going to crush Intel (I hope  )
> 
> Amd indeed has spoiled us for sure with no socket changes in some time, unlike Intel changing there socket every cpu build lol....
> 
> ...



I do hate the socket changes Intel does every two minutes. lol, But it's for the better, the i7's are powerhouse CPU's and i always welcome a new chipset in the ever changing world that is technology.

I to hope Bulldozer does comes out with good reviews and reception. And i hope Intel comes out with some great to. That way, the prices will be low for all, and we will have two manufacturers making some fast chips for us consumers.


----------



## CDdude55 (Aug 28, 2010)

fullinfusion said:


> I really wouldnt say amd failed to beat I7 bro.
> 
> In some marks amd beat i7's
> 
> Ask Mussels, He loves the speed his X6 encodes video compared to his buddies I7



It's Mussels cough amd fanboy cough lol, his not exactly the most un-bias person. lol(not in a mean way)

The i7's have proven to beat the AMD 6 core CPU's in the majority of tasks. Encoding video is one task that utilizes the 6 cores within the X6, im definitely not surprised it caught up with his friends i7. It has already been benched in a verity of games and benchmarks and have proven to be slower the majority of the time compared to the i7's.

Though they are cheaper and are still great chips to run with.


----------



## fullinfusion (Aug 28, 2010)

CDdude55 said:


> I do hate the socket changes Intel does every two minutes. lol, But it's for the better, the i7's are powerhouse CPU's and i always welcome a new chipset in the ever changing world that is technology.
> 
> I to hope Bulldozer does comes out with good reviews and reception. And i hope Intel comes out with some great to. That way, the prices will be low for all, and we will have two manufacturers making some fast chips for us consumers.


Dam CDdude, when I seen you post to my coment I thought Ah hear we go!!! lol

But I couldn't have said that any better...

All i know is it's a great time to be here to watch technology change right before our eyes...

If I had a wish... It be to be born in 2200... or a time machine to look forward in time to see what man has created... Unless we blow ourselves off the face of the earth first


----------



## WarEagleAU (Aug 28, 2010)

I think a new socket is just what AMD needs though I am not too sure keeping the AM3+ backwards compatible is such a good idea. I would prefer a totally new socket myself.


----------



## Athlon2K15 (Aug 28, 2010)

do AMD cpu's still use pins?


----------



## Super XP (Aug 28, 2010)

I read somewhere AMD had to change sockets because they didn't want to be stuck with Dual-Channel. It would be a big bottleneck to have a Dual-Channel IMC feeding  8 cores.


----------



## fullinfusion (Aug 28, 2010)

AthlonX2 said:


> do AMD cpu's still use pins?


Yup, im not sure on the x6 optron chip though... I do know its socket looks like Intel thou


----------



## erocker (Aug 28, 2010)

Socket 775, 1156 and 1366 have their pins in the socket. I much prefer the pins being on the CPU.


----------



## Super XP (Aug 28, 2010)

erocker said:


> Socket 775, 1156 and 1366 have their pins in the socket. I much prefer the pins being on the CPU.


Interesting, didn't know that. I wonder, it must look sort of funny to see pins sticking out of the socket. I wonder if it's cheaper to just fuse them on the CPU instead of the socket?


----------



## erocker (Aug 28, 2010)

Super XP said:


> Interesting, didn't know that. I wonder, it must look sort of funny to see pins sticking out of the socket. I wonder if it's cheaper to just fuse them on the CPU instead of the socket?



The pins are a different design in the socket. They kind of lay flat with little balls at the end to make contact with the pads on the CPU. If you bend a pin on the CPU you can easily bend it back. If you bend a pin in the socket it is not very easy to get it back into place at all. Not sure why they do it one way or the other though. Perhaps when you have many pins it may be safer to put them in the socket..


----------



## fullinfusion (Aug 28, 2010)

erocker said:


> The pins are a different design in the socket. They kind of lay flat with little balls at the end to make contact with the pads on the CPU. If you bend a pin on the CPU you can easily bend it back. If you bend a pin in the socket it is not very easy to get it back into place at all. Not sure why they do it one way or the other though. Perhaps when you have many pins it may be safer to put them in the socket..


It may be that the heat to solder the pins to the cpu itself may be a manufacturing thing.

Who knows for sure why the do it the way they do.
There's probably a good reason behind it.


----------



## MicroUnC (Aug 28, 2010)

Super XP said:


> Interesting, didn't know that. I wonder, it must look sort of funny to see pins sticking out of the socket. I wonder if it's cheaper to just fuse them on the CPU instead of the socket?



No! The opposite, more expensive!

I'am sure that intel's pins are on the socket for a reason! Core i7 is a pinless chip. Removing the vulnerable and delicate interface pins from the bottom of a CPU make possible increasing pin densities that complex CPUs need. It also increases the complexity and risk involved in installing one of the new socket LGA1366 cpu's into a motherboard.

Touching these pins, or heaven forbid, dropping a CPU accidentally onto the exposed socket can easily damage it beyond repair. Another words, they are too thin & easily bend. That would be an a bad idea to place them on the CPU!


----------



## MicroUnC (Aug 28, 2010)

The question is, How complex the bulldozer chips will be?! If they are that good as AMD says, Then should they have a more advanced socket?!


----------



## CDdude55 (Aug 28, 2010)

MicroUnC said:


> No! The opposite, more expensive!
> 
> I'am sure that intel's pins are on the socket for a reason! Core i7 is a pinless chip. Removing the vulnerable and delicate interface pins from the bottom of a CPU make possible increasing pin densities that complex CPUs need. It also increases the complexity and risk involved in installing one of the new socket LGA1366 cpu's into a motherboard.
> 
> Touching these pins, or heaven forbid, dropping a CPU accidentally onto the exposed socket can easily damage it beyond repair. Another words, they are too thin & easily bend. That would be an a bad idea to place them on the CPU!



I agree.

Though it's rare to have someone with experience bend or break a pin, they should know how delicate the chips are.


----------



## Ketchup (Aug 28, 2010)

In response to the whole AM3+ socket thing;

I just clicked the buy button on an Asus Crosshair IV Formula motherboard.
I'm really hoping that some high-end motherboards come quickly with the AM3+ release. I don't want to be waiting around for a nice board to be released just to get a Bulldozer.


----------



## Super XP (Aug 28, 2010)

Good Point.


----------



## $immond$ (Aug 28, 2010)

I am certain AMD wont kill the AM3 socket just yet, but I hope they dont introduce some stupid low voltage proprietary ram format like what intel did with their socket 1366. Id rather keep my 8Gb of DDR3 2000Mhz without having to rebuy ram for a new proc and motherboard.


----------



## Super XP (Aug 28, 2010)

$immond$ said:


> I am certain AMD wont kill the AM3 socket just yet, but I hope they dont introduce some stupid low voltage proprietary ram format like what intel did with their socket 1366. Id rather keep my 8Gb of DDR3 2000Mhz without having to rebuy ram for a new proc and motherboard.


Your RAM should be fine with Buldozer. Sometimes it makes you think the Ram, CPU & Mobo companies get together to come up with ways to make us buy stuff over & over again.


----------

