# FX-Series Processors Clock Speeds 'Revealed'



## btarunr (Jul 14, 2011)

On several earlier articles like this one, we were versed with the model numbers and even possible prices of AMD's next-generation FX series desktop processors, but the clock speeds stayed under the wraps, that's until a table listing them out was leaked. AMD's FX-series consists of eight-core FX-81xx parts, six-core FX-61xx, and quad-core FX-41xx parts, probably harvested out of the Zambezi silicon by disabling modules (groups of two cores closely interconnected with some shared resources). Most, if not all, FX series chips have unlocked multipliers, making it a breeze to overclock them. All chips come in the AM3+ package, feature 8 MB of L3 cache, and 2 MB L2 cache per module. 

Leading the pack is FX-8150, with a clock speed of 3.6 GHz, and TurboCore speed of 4.2 GHz, a 500 MHz boost. The next chip, FX-8120, has a boost of close to a GHz, it has a clock speed of 3.1 GHz, that goes all the way up to 4 GHz with TurboCore. This will be available in 125W and 95W TDP variants. Next up is the FX-8100, with 2.8 GHz clock speed, that goes up to 3.7 GHz, another 900 MHz boost. The scene shifts to 6-core chips, with FX-6120, no clock speed numbers were given out for this one. FX-6100, on the other hand, is clocked at 3.3 GHz, with 3.9 GHz Turbo. The FX-4100 is the only quad-core part with clock speeds given out by this source: 3.6 GHz, with a tiny 200 MHz boost to 3.8 GHz. You can see that there is no pattern in the turbo speed amounts specific to models, and hence we ask you to take these with a pinch of salt. 





*View at TechPowerUp Main Site*


----------



## 1Kurgan1 (Jul 14, 2011)

3.6 out of the box, interesting that they are starting with the clocks so high.

Also there is a typo here


> Next up is the FX-8100, with 2.8 GHz clock speed, that goes up to *3.8 GHz*, another 900 MHz boost.



I believe thats suppose to be 3.7 as the chart and your final 900mhz gap show.


----------



## ThomasK (Jul 14, 2011)

I'm really curious about the FX-6xxx perfomance, since it's basically 3 "Bulldozer" Modules with 2 cores each.


----------



## _JP_ (Jul 14, 2011)

These speeds look good. But if this is accurate, I would jump right to a FX-8120 instead of a 8150. The clocks are close and the gap can be eliminated by OC.
C'mon AMD! I'm almost changing my mind and about to consider Intel. Launch the CPUs. DO EEEEEET!


----------



## Widjaja (Jul 14, 2011)

As we have seen in the past clock speeds mean nothing if the architecture of the CPU isn't performing.
I remain skeptic until the final product is released.


----------



## repman244 (Jul 14, 2011)

I know it's the same news, but look at the PS message about another delay: http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?273239-Bulldozer-FX-Clock-Speeds-Revealed

I bet that the yields are horrible (my guess: f one of the cores in a module isn't good, then the whole module is "dead"), IF this is true.


----------



## Thassodar (Jul 14, 2011)

It's all about the cash money for me; will it be worth getting it brand new to replace my current processor? As an AMD fan for MANY, MANY years I held off of going to The Dark Side JUST so I could see how these stack up to Intel. If I can get better/comparable performance than my current processor _and_ reach or exceed the performance of a i5/i7 for slightly (or significantly) cheaper I am all down for it. Maybe I'm oversimplifying a little but that's how I see things.


----------



## Benetanegia (Jul 14, 2011)

So I was mostly right when I said we could expect around 10% better clocks at most than on the engineering sample. And it's pretty clear they are doing some very tight binning to do so, if we consider the second and 3rd chips are clocked so low, even below the ES, 500 Mhz difference with the top one is a very big difference. Yield issues can almost be taken as granted too.

Sorry to sound negative, but I'm just being realistic. AMD will have some solid products at good prices with these, but in no way capable to compete with Intel head on, if Intel does not want to, at least. And of course, like in the past few years the reality is that Intel will continue to price their CPUs too high (compared to what they could or should be "fair") because they have no competition. Only as low as required to be or look like a better deal than AMD's.

Sigh. Let's hope that AMD can at least fix it in a few months, kind of like Nvidia did with GF110 or if AMD manages an improvement akin to what they did with Phenom II, there's at least some hope. BD is not right there (quite far yet), but it's closer to compete with Intel's best than Phenom and P2 ever were.

PS: I'm going to buy some popcorn. Need to be prepared before seronx joins in and starts his own damage control campaign.


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 14, 2011)

Thassodar said:


> It's all about the cash money for me; will it be worth getting it brand new to replace my current processor? As an AMD fan for MANY, MANY years I held off of going to The Dark Side JUST so I could see how these stack up to Intel. If I can get better/comparable performance than my current processor _and_ reach or exceed the performance of a i5/i7 for slightly (or significantly) cheaper I am all down for it. Maybe I'm oversimplifying a little but that's how I see things.



Why does everyone assume BD os going to be dirt cheap? 

Top 8 Core BD - 330 dollars
Top 6 Core BD - 230 dollars

Thuban and denab were so cheap because they were shit compared to Bloomfield.


----------



## Dent1 (Jul 14, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> Thuban and denab were so cheap because they were shit compared to Bloomfield.



No Thuban and Deneb only_ seemed _cheap compared to Intel's bloated prices.



Benetanegia said:


> if Intel does not want to, at least. And of course, like in the past few years the reality is that Intel will continue to price their CPUs too high (compared to what they could or should be "fair") because they have no competition.



Intel will price their CPU high with or without competition. Intel are not concerned about what AMD are doing. Intel care only about Intel and will charge whatever they want regardless of how well or not-so-well Bulldozer performs.


----------



## repman244 (Jul 14, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> Thuban and denab were so cheap because they were shit compared to Bloomfield.



I got my 1090T for ~290€ when it came out, i7-930 was around ~280€ at that time, they weren't cheap then.
And if 4 module Zambezi will be ~$330, I don't think that is expensive, it's 8 cores we are talking about here.


----------



## TheLaughingMan (Jul 14, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> Why does everyone assume BD os going to be dirt cheap?
> 
> Top 8 Core BD - 330 dollars
> Top 6 Core BD - 230 dollars
> ...



That is pretty cheap considering Intel has several desktop models at $500+.

These are a lot higher clocks than I expected. If these are accurate, OC may actually be pointless depending on how well turbo works. If it works like AMD claims, all you will need to do is put a big fat cooler over the CPU. You turn on something CPU intensive, it notes the low temp, and boosts all 4, 6, or 8 cores to max.

Still want real performance figures, but I can wait.


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 14, 2011)

Dent1 said:


> No Thuban and Deneb only_ seemed _cheap compared to Intel's bloated prices.



Intel was priced higher because Amd couldn't compete clock for clock. 

Examples : 

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/100?vs=80

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/100?vs=185


----------



## Thefumigator (Jul 14, 2011)

.Tk said:


> I'm really curious about the FX-6xxx perfomance, since it's basically 3 "Bulldozer" Modules with 2 cores each.



I'm really curious about how bulldozer performs, since it's a completely new microarch. (not sure about the E.Sample)


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 14, 2011)

TheLaughingMan said:


> That is pretty cheap considering Intel has several desktop models at $500+.



The 1366 Chips are an absolute waste of money ever since Sandy Bridge was released. The ONLY reason to even consider a 970/980/990X is if you really need 6 cores.


----------



## happita (Jul 14, 2011)

I always had this urge to get an AMD processor because of a few things:
1. Price/Performance
2. Upgrade paths
3. Help support the underdog

#1 and #3 are no longer a factor for me and haven't been for a long time. My E8400 has been flying, spanking PII's for years and I haven't looked back. Also, the underdog argument...I'm starting to care less and less about AMD's processor lineups because they haven't shown ANYTHING worthwhile to me, at least in relation to competing with similar Intel processors in terms of performance. So the only thing left for me to root them on in is the fact that they don't change their sockets every 6 months or so like Intel does. And that alone will not get me to go to AMD's side. I'm starting to lose faith more and more as time goes on in this never-ending struggle to see who is going to be on top (because we all know Intel will always be on top with enthusiasts, other segments are up for debate though).



Benetanegia said:


> PS: I'm going to buy some popcorn. Need to be prepared before seronx joins in and starts his own damage control campaign.



Was thinking the same thing


----------



## Dent1 (Jul 14, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> Intel was priced higher because Amd couldn't compete clock for clock.
> 
> Examples :
> 
> ...



Those examples don't dismiss what I'm saying.

We all know the Phenom IIs are slower so those benchmarks are irrelevant.

Hypothetically even if the Phenom Is performed better than the Core 2 Duos or the Phenom IIs better than the I7s, Intel wouldn't care. They have a big name, big marketing campaigns and will still charge you more for a slower processor. Why because they're Intel, look back in history back when AMD was on top, Intel couldn’t care less and charged ridiculous prices still and the customers still bought it!


----------



## devguy (Jul 14, 2011)

I purchased my 1055T on launch date from TigerDirect for $150 - $25 MIR with free shipping.  The rebate came quickly too!  Maybe I just got lucky (as TD sold out in like 30 mins), but nothing else from AMD or Intel has ever come close to that kind of value on launch date (hell, even months afterwards).

Edit: You guys see this?  If you cannot wait and B1 is good enough, throw down some dough!


----------



## TheLaughingMan (Jul 14, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> Intel was priced higher because Amd couldn't compete clock for clock.
> 
> Examples :
> 
> ...



You do realize that Intel's prices were that high before the Phenom II's came out right? They didn't lower the price due to lack of competition in the highest performance market. They didn't raise it because of it. Hell, those chips are cheaper now than when they first came out and they are still over prices to me.



Pestilence said:


> The 1366 Chips are an absolute waste of money ever since Sandy Bridge was released. The ONLY reason to even consider a 970/980/990X is if you really need 6 cores.



They have been a waste of money to me for quite some time. And while you are correct about the 2600K competing well against the 1366 chips, it often required 4 Ghz+ OC  to do well against them at stock. Just saying.


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 14, 2011)

TheLaughingMan said:


> They have been a waste of money to me for quite some time. And while you are correct about the 2600K competing well against the 1366 chips, it often required 4 Ghz+ OC  to do well against them at stock. Just saying.



Sandy Bridge Decimates all the 4 core 1366 chips at stock speeds and only loses a few tests to the 6 cores. Where did you read it needs to be overclocked to compete?


----------



## TheLaughingMan (Jul 14, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> Sandy Bridge Decimates all the 4 core 1366 chips at stock speeds and only loses a few tests to the 6 cores. Where did you read it needs to be overclocked to compete?



Thats nice as I was only talking about the 6-core chips. And pretty much every review that included figures from the 980X. Which is a little unfair, but whatever. It beat it out in a few test, by a little. Everything else was often not even close. Granted the 2600K put a nice gap between it and everything else on the market, but the 980X hill is just monsterous.


----------



## GSquadron (Jul 14, 2011)

They were shown a day before in fudzilla


----------



## repman244 (Jul 14, 2011)

Found this on OBR's blog: 





> all DH results were Fakes ... you will see tomorrow here!



Tomorrow means today, since that was written yesterday. So I'm guessing more masked numbers from OBR


----------



## btarunr (Jul 14, 2011)

repman244 said:


> Found this on OBR's blog:
> 
> Tomorrow means today, since that was written yesterday. So I'm guessing more masked numbers from OBR



Here you go. it's looking good so far: http://img.techpowerup.org/110714/bta8763nhd.jpg


----------



## devguy (Jul 14, 2011)

btarunr said:


> Here you go. it's looking good so far: http://img.techpowerup.org/110714/bta8763nhd.jpg



I'm calling fake on that one.


----------



## repman244 (Jul 14, 2011)

btarunr said:


> Here you go. it's looking good so far: http://img.techpowerup.org/110714/bta8763nhd.jpg



IT'S FAKE, AMD has MMX(+) 

Thanks for that btarunr, had a laugh 

I think this should wrap up all the results, and they aren't fake: http://img.techpowerup.org/110714/Untitled.jpg


----------



## btarunr (Jul 14, 2011)

devguy said:


> I'm calling fake on that one.



No way! It's AMD's sacred duty to send me free samples before anyone else, and without a shred of NDA to sign.


----------



## LAN_deRf_HA (Jul 14, 2011)

TheLaughingMan said:


> Thats nice as I was only talking about the 6-core chips. And pretty much every review that included figures from the 980X. Which is a little unfair, but whatever. It beat it out in a few test, by a little. Everything else was often not even close. Granted the 2600K put a nice gap between it and everything else on the market, but the 980X hill is just monsterous.



The 2600k wins more than it loses all at stock, and it overclocks better to boot. Unless you exclusively use one of the programs that does better with 6 cores for some professional purpose, even a 6 core 1366 is a total waste. http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/287?vs=142


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 14, 2011)

btarunr said:


> Here you go. it's looking good so far: http://img.techpowerup.org/110714/bta8763nhd.jpg



That DEFINITELY looks like a post from OBR 



btarunr said:


> No way! It's AMD's sacred duty to send me free samples before anyone else, and without a shred of NDA to sign.



I'm actually surprised that none of the ES BD samples have hit Ebay like the ES Gulftown ones did.


----------



## CDdude55 (Jul 14, 2011)

Very nice clocks speeds, though it means nothing if the chips aren't designed well. Still waiting for official word of performance from sites to come out. I have a feeling Sandy Bridge will still come out on top but Bulldozer will trail closely behind.

Still gonna keep my 1055T for a while though, i'd rather do a video card upgrade.


----------



## btarunr (Jul 14, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> That DEFINITELY looks like a post from OBR



Oh thank god more was revealed this time around:


----------



## theeldest (Jul 14, 2011)

OBRovsky finally posted: http://obrovsky.blogspot.com/2011/07/you-were-punkd.html

Any translations? I'm at work and can't access google translate.


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 14, 2011)

theeldest said:


> OBRovsky finally posted: http://obrovsky.blogspot.com/2011/07/you-were-punkd.html
> 
> Any translations? I'm at work and can't access google translate.



Yields are Bad.. Release date is now October?


----------



## CDdude55 (Jul 14, 2011)

theeldest said:


> OBRovsky finally posted: http://obrovsky.blogspot.com/2011/07/you-were-punkd.html
> 
> Any translations? I'm at work and can't access google translate.



Translated:



> I quote: "With the Internet, finally appeared proper tests, truly functional sample of the new AMD processor."
> 
> After my earlier tests Stach condemned, says of those at the Turks, they are finally proper and real. Thanks Stachy for recognition, the Turks I had made me ...
> 
> ...


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 14, 2011)

Ouch Amd if that's accurate.

No wonder Intel pushed back IB and SB-E 3 months. It knew.....


----------



## theeldest (Jul 14, 2011)

Man, reading OBR on AMD is like trying to get nVidia news from Charlie D.


----------



## Thatguy (Jul 14, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> Ouch Amd if that's accurate.
> 
> No wonder Intel pushed back IB and SB-E 3 months. It knew.....



What a bunch of crap, october is q4 not q3. so its totally discreditable right there.


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 14, 2011)

Thatguy said:


> What a bunch of crap, october is q4 not q3. so its totally discreditable right there.



These chips were supposed to be out in June.. Now October. What an absolute mess.


----------



## fullinfusion (Jul 14, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> Why does everyone assume BD os going to be dirt cheap?
> 
> Top 8 Core BD - 330 dollars
> Top 6 Core BD - 230 dollars
> ...


Because it IS


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 14, 2011)

fullinfusion said:


> Because it IS



Looking more and more everyday that the 8 Core BD is going to be 220 dollars. Hell i'll buy one for that price.


----------



## erocker (Jul 14, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> These chips were supposed to be out in June.. Now October. What an absolute mess.



Yes, we need to get the UN involved. NATO too. Nothing cleans up a mess better than a nice task force. I just hope Intel just buys out AMD so we have one superior CPU. The New World Order of CPU's cometh. This is very important.


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 14, 2011)

erocker said:


> Yes, we need to get the UN involved. NATO too. Nothing cleans up a mess better than a nice task force. I just hope Intel just buys out AMD so we have one superior CPU. The New World Order of CPU's cometh. This is very important.



E,

Could you imagine how amazing BD would be with Intel's engineering prowess?


----------



## theeldest (Jul 14, 2011)

erocker said:


> Yes, we need to get the UN involved. NATO too. Nothing cleans up a mess better than a nice task force. I just hope Intel just buys out AMD so we have one superior CPU. The New World Order of CPU's cometh. This is very important.



I've been spending too much time on Google+, I was looking for the +1 button ...

Seriously, though. I have doubts as to the accuracy of OBR's statements. I could see Oct for volume to appear, but I'd still be money on an actual release and benchies in August.

Ugh. Too much weird stuff going on with this launch.


----------



## erocker (Jul 14, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> E,
> 
> Could you imagine how amazing BD would be with Intel's engineering prowess?



Yeah, it wold be totally awesome. I can't wait until Intel has zero competition again. I loved paying a lot of money for horrible performance back in the day. God, that was awesome.


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 14, 2011)

erocker said:


> Yeah, it wold be totally awesome. I can't wait until Intel has zero competition again. I loved paying a lot of money for horrible performance back in the day. God, that was awesome.



In this economy i don't see intel raising prices to the old ways ever again.


----------



## repman244 (Jul 14, 2011)

OBR is full of shit, that's all I can say.

IPC decreased? JF-AMD said that IPC is higher compared to Phenom II


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 14, 2011)

repman244 said:


> OBR is full of shit, that's all I can say.
> 
> IPC decreased? JF-AMD said that IPC is higher compared to Phenom II



JF works for Amd. Do you really want to take every statement from him as absolute truth?


----------



## repman244 (Jul 14, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> JF works for Amd. Do you really want to take every statement from him as absolute truth?



Would you rather want me to take OBR's statements as truth?
I don't see any reason why JF-AMD would lie about anything.


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 14, 2011)

repman244 said:


> Would you rather want me to take OBR's statements as truth?
> I don't see any reason why JF-AMD would lie about anything.



You can gladly form your own opinions based on whatever you choose to believe.

For myself tho.. Amd has been working on this processor for 2 years now and they still continue to delay and have issues getting it out. That's a major red flag to me. I'd love BD to succeed but it's just not looking like it's going to happen.


----------



## seronx (Jul 14, 2011)

This is a leaked internal road map after the Llano switch was announced, internally
Notice that little small space between each CPU that is a month
Llano June Launch with a June-July Release
Zambezi July Launch with a July-August Release
Server August Launch with a August-September Release



Pestilence said:


> You can gladly form your own opinions based on whatever you choose to believe.
> 
> For myself tho.. Amd has been working on this processor for 2 years now and they still continue to delay and have issues getting it out. That's a major red flag to me. I'd love BD to succeed but it's just not looking like it's going to happen.



It wasn't delayed because of issues

45nm HKMG was no longer a viable fabrication process so they had to rewrite everything for 32nm HKMG and that took up to 1 year

Bulldozer taped out last year same time July 2010


----------



## repman244 (Jul 14, 2011)

We missed you seronx 

Well AMD said in June 60-90 days on Idon'tknowwhichevent (which means around August I guess)


----------



## creativeusername (Jul 14, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> You can gladly form your own opinions based on whatever you choose to believe.
> 
> For myself tho.. Amd has been working on this processor for 2 years now and they still continue to delay and have issues getting it out. That's a major red flag to me. I'd love BD to succeed but it's just not looking like it's going to happen.



I think they don't want to release a phenom 1 or a toaster oven I mean nvidia fermi and that's why there are so many delays.


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Jul 14, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> JF works for Amd. Do you really want to take every statement from him as absolute truth?



Can you show me the Bulldozer benchmarks that JF-AMD has photoshopped again?

That would be great.


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 14, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> Can you show me the Bulldozer benchmarks that JF-AMD has photoshopped again?
> 
> That would be great.



You've never worked for Corporate America have you?


----------



## seronx (Jul 14, 2011)

repman244 said:


> We missed you seronx
> 
> Well AMD said in June 60-90 days on Idon'tknowwhichevent (which means around August I guess)



Computex, in Taipei

That is when we should be expected to purchase Zambezi PIBs







They aren't announcing the Launch in this they are announcing when Zambezi will be available for consumers 

But, there is some leniency in these times
60 Days = July Launch
90 Days = August Launch
But, since the Llano launch was successful, I don't hear anyone complaining about the 32nm fab process on Llano, I guess it was okay

July Launch has the higher percentage of launch over August
June E3/July AMD HardOCP GamExperience



Damn_Smooth said:


> Can you show me the Bulldozer benchmarks that JF-AMD has photoshopped again?
> 
> That would be great.



He didn't release benchmarks

He inferred results Valencia/Interlagos will have over Magny-Cours and Shanghai


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Jul 14, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> You've never worked for Corporate America have you?



I'm still waiting. Corporate America has nothing to do with photoshopped benchmarks posted from JF-AMD.



seronx said:


> He didn't release benchmarks
> 
> He inferred results Valencia/Interlagos will have over Magny-Cours and Shanghai



Your sarcasm detector is off today.


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 14, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> I'm still waiting. Corporate America has nothing to do with photoshopped benchmarks posted from JF-AMD.



When did i ever say JF posted benchmarks? All i alluded too is that his statements should be taken with a grain of salt as he works for Amd.


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Jul 14, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> When did i ever say JF posted benchmarks? All i alluded too is that his statements should be taken with a grain of salt as he works for Amd.



So that makes his word less valid than a known shopper?

If he was in the business of overhyping Bulldozer, he would make concrete statements about Bulldozer being the be-all end-all of CPUs and telling us that it destroys anything Intel has released.

His lack of information adds more fuel to your trolling than to mine. I'm very surprised you haven't caught on to that and ran with it yet.


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 14, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> So that makes his word less valid than a known shopper?
> 
> If he was in the business of overhyping Bulldozer, he would make concrete statements about Bulldozer being the be-all end-all of CPUs and telling us that it destroys anything Intel has released.
> 
> His lack of information adds more fuel to your trolling than to mine. I'm very surprised you haven't caught on to that and ran with it yet.



So now i'm a troll because i don't take the words of an Amd employee at face value?


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Jul 14, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> So now i'm a troll because i don't take the words of an Amd employee at face value?



No, you're a troll because you look for the absolute worst things to say about Bulldozer in every Bulldozer thread there is. 

Your lack of belief in what JF says has nothing to do with that.

As far as Bulldozer goes, The small amount of info that JF gives is far more credible than OBR or Donanimhaber. He has not overhyped it once, and he has not shown concrete evidence of anything good or bad.


----------



## brandonwh64 (Jul 14, 2011)

JF-AMD has said in other threads that he works in the server department and does not no what goes on in other sections of AMD. I would assume AMD is like all other high name companys that usually don't let every employee know of specific information so they can retain the surprise/marketing effect. He may get the "scuttlebutt" around the water fountain but He may not be giving good info as well.

as I have said before... UNTIL THEY ARE RELEASE AND BENCHED BY A CREDIBLE SITE/PERSON THEN ITS JUST HEARSAY!


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 14, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> No, you're a troll because you look for the absolute worst things to say about Bulldozer in every Bulldozer thread there is.



My opinions are based on the information that is available and given by multiple sources. Now if those sources are accurate is another story but it's still the only available information out there about BD and i will comment about it as i see forth. If you don't care for my opinion you're SOL  but i'll still give it as i see fit.


----------



## brandonwh64 (Jul 14, 2011)




----------



## Damn_Smooth (Jul 14, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> My opinions are based on the information that is available and given by multiple sources. Now if those sources are accurate is another story but it's still the only available information out there about BD and i will comment about it as i see forth. If you don't care for my opinion you're SOL  but i'll still give it as i see fit.



Never once did I question your right to post. I didn't say you should stop posting either. I just know trolling when I see it.


----------



## seronx (Jul 14, 2011)

I'm going back on topic

If Zambezi has the same launch to release time as Llano

It would need to Launch between

Tomorrow(July 15th) to July 19th

And we will be able to buy it 22-28 days after that

Don't believe any benchmarks from people who have Engineer Samples....Both OBR and Donanimhaber are both good with photo editing


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Jul 14, 2011)

seronx said:


> I'm going back on topic
> 
> If Zambezi has the same launch to release time as Llano
> 
> ...



Does a special event the day after tomorrow sound about right to you?


----------



## fochkoph (Jul 14, 2011)

FX-4120, yeah, I'm looking at you...


----------



## seronx (Jul 14, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> Does a special event the day after tomorrow sound about right to you?



Well since the end of E3 was the original date for Zambezi's Launch,

It might launch before or after the HardOCP event

Zambezi could have a faster launch to release schedule so the launch could be faster than that
(Key word is could but other than that it should be exactly like the Llano launch)



fochkoph said:


> FX-4120, yeah, I'm looking at you...



The fact these clock speeds are engineer sample clock speeds and a mixture of possible rumored clock speeds debunks this

Do not trust OBR or Donanimhaber

OBR/Donanimhaber are both closer to Dresden than us, though


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 14, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> Never once did I question your right to post. I didn't say you should stop posting either. I just know trolling when I see it.



Come on Bro. This site would be boring if everyone agreed all the time. I just like to get the creative juices flowing in threads but introducing some wild opinions. If BD rocks i'll be the first to trade up before i trade up for 2011.


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 14, 2011)

seronx said:


> Tomorrow(July 15th) to July 19th
> 
> And we will be able to buy it 22-28 days after that



I don't see it happening at all this week ser but i would love to be proven wrong. I'm still thinking 1st week of September


----------



## seronx (Jul 14, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> I don't see it happening at all this week ser but i would love to be proven wrong. I'm still thinking 1st week of September



You don't know what will be happening nor do I
The only people who do know
are AMD(Not going to talk) and GloFo(Under NDA)
anyone else should be taken with a grain of salt

My dates are speculation on the great success of the Llano series if that 32nm works Bulldozer will work as well


----------



## repman244 (Jul 14, 2011)

seronx said:


> anyone else should be taken with a grain of salt



I usually take them with this much of salt:


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Jul 14, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> Come on Bro. This site would be boring if everyone agreed all the time. I just like to get the creative juices flowing in threads but introducing some wild opinions. If BD rocks i'll be the first to trade up before i trade up for 2011.



Of course, that's why I would never ask you to stop posting.


----------



## seronx (Jul 14, 2011)

repman244 said:


> I usually take them with this much of salt:
> http://s6photos.tradeholding.com/attach/hash254/164862/roadsaltimage_254100833_std.jpg



That is alot of salt

But, the official word of Zambezi is in the 2nd Half of 2011

So, a December launch @ worst


----------



## [H]@RD5TUFF (Jul 14, 2011)

I get the feeling some of these prices will be closer to $400 than sub $300.


----------



## seronx (Jul 14, 2011)

[H]@RD5TUFF said:


> I get the feeling some of these prices will be closer to $400 than sub $300.



I get the feeling it's going to be lower

Athlon II X4 635 = $100(Old)
ATi 5570 = $50(Old)

Llano with the same specs or better specs: $140 while brand spanking new

If we follow the same price scheme

2 x Phenom II X4 955 BE = $240
2 x Phenom II X4 980 BE = $380
is the range

$240-$380 is a big range


----------



## happita (Jul 14, 2011)

[H]@RD5TUFF said:


> I get the feeling some of these prices will be closer to $400 than sub $300.



It's going to be purely based on how well it is going to perform in relation to the 2500k/2600k....that and if there's a significant amount of demand or lack thereof.


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 14, 2011)

[H]@RD5TUFF said:


> I get the feeling some of these prices will be closer to $400 than sub $300.



All depends on how it perform's. If it perform's as OBR says the 8 core wll be around the same price as the 2500K


----------



## [H]@RD5TUFF (Jul 14, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> All depends on how it perform's. If it perform's as OBR says the 8 core wll be around the same price as the 2500K



I dun know I have a hunch the top of the line will be the better part of $400.


----------



## seronx (Jul 14, 2011)

If I told you guys a 16-core Interlagos has a higher clock speed to that of a 6180 SE 12 core Opteron?
http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/K10/AMD-Opteron 6180 SE - OS6180YETCEGO.html

Would you believe me?

So, seeing that 8100s Clock Speed is complete BULLDOODOO
(Whole chart is bulldoo doo)

The Bulldozer architecture is refereed to being a Speed Demon Architecture

High Clocks/Low Latency



> The Bulldozer 2-core CPU module contains 213M transistors in an 11-metal layer 32nm high-k metalgate
> SOI CMOS process and is designed to operate from 0.8 to 1.3V. This micro-architecture improves
> performance and frequency while reducing area and power over a previous AMD x86-64 CPU in the
> same process. The design reduces the number of gates/cycle relative to prior designs, achieving
> 3.5GHz+ operation in an area (including 2MB L2 cache) of 30.9mm2.



http://isscc.org/doc/2011/isscc2011.advanceprogrambooklet_abstracts.pdf

How over time we forget things....


----------



## NC37 (Jul 14, 2011)

happita said:


> I always had this urge to get an AMD processor because of a few things:
> 1. Price/Performance
> 2. Upgrade paths
> 3. Help support the underdog
> ...



Aye, I like the same. But I add a reason to go AMD is also because general cost of other things is less too. Boards themselves I've noticed are cheaper. When I did a build comparison for a friend...going Intel raised the price by $300 at least. That is counting Intel premium on the CPU and also the cost of the board. For the performance he needed, Phenom II was plenty and saved $300.

When I think of it for mine. What would I rather have...better CPU or save money and get better GPU? I pick GPU. AMD keeping to the same sockets longer then means I can upgrade later on the CPU. Overall life of the system extends a couple years before I absolutely have to change all the parts out.

Heck, current build is from 06 and I don't forsee a full part out for another year at least. Probably will once the next gen consoles launch.


----------



## Benetanegia (Jul 14, 2011)

@seronx

Netburst was a speed demon too. When they designed it (and for quite some time after that) Intel thought it would eventually hit 10 Ghz with new processes, and according to the roadmap it should have reached 5Ghz+ by the time it was phased out. Well that was the plan. Instead, reality hit them hard.

You should really stop believing every PR paper or statement you come across and looking at what happens around you.

Oh well, time will reveal everyhing, whatever it is.


----------



## seronx (Jul 14, 2011)

Benetanegia said:


> Netburst was a speed demon too. When they designed it (and for quite some time after that) Intel thought it would eventually hit 10 Ghz with new processes, and according to the roadmap it should have reached 5Ghz+ by the time it was phased out. Well that was the plan. Instead, reality hit them hard.



Bulldozer isn't Netburst
Bulldozer doesn't have the outrageous goal of going beyond 10GHz or 5GHz
It only needs to be 3.5+GHz which is rather a lot easier now than in the past



Benetanegia said:


> Oh well, time will reveal everyhing, whatever it is.



Time always reveals everything


----------



## _JP_ (Jul 14, 2011)

seronx said:


> Time always reveals everything


Well, IMO, time is being such a troll, regarding to this.


----------



## seronx (Jul 14, 2011)

_JP_ said:


> Well, IMO, time is being such a troll, regarding to this.



Well we can't base Zambezi's performance on OBR's Benchmarks ever or those tricked by OBR 

Like anyone would do that to begin with, lol



> i can post here, emails ... differently edited pictures and more and more proofs, i manipulated scores and sent them to DH ... STOP dreaming kids, Bulldozer was, is and will be CRAP!
> 
> OF Course, all results was FAKEs, i know it, ive faked them  No real numbers before NDA
> 
> ...



Coming from the Intel Evangelist himself OBR

Once a Liar always a Liar

Time is a troll


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Jul 15, 2011)

seronx said:


> Well we can't base Zambezi's performance on OBR's Benchmarks ever or those tricked by OBR
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I'm glad I never trusted his crap in the first place.


----------



## seronx (Jul 15, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> I'm glad I never trusted his crap in the first place.



Don't trust anything, lol  until it's released

The only word so far is

That the clock rates will be "acceptable"<-- E3 and it will outperform the older generation<-- A given


----------



## [H]@RD5TUFF (Jul 15, 2011)

seronx said:


> Don't trust anything, lol  until it's released
> 
> The only word so far is
> 
> That the clock rates will be "acceptable"<-- E3 and it will outperform the older generation<-- A given



This is how I see it.


----------



## seronx (Jul 15, 2011)

[H]@RD5TUFF said:


> This is how I see it.



And if you want to see some new stuff here you guys go this came out yesterday











Take it with a grain of salt


----------



## Thatguy (Jul 15, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> These chips were supposed to be out in June.. Now October. What an absolute mess.



What part of APU orders sucking the fabs dry do you not understand ?


----------



## Thefumigator (Jul 15, 2011)

I'm much more interested in Valencia now...
I didn't know socket C32 was going to be bulldozer-ready as the G34
dual socket C32 mobos are so cheap that I would like to build a full workstation with 6 or 8 cores per socket. I could still do this with actual 6 core (deneb-like) opterons, those are relatively cheap too.


----------



## seronx (Jul 15, 2011)

Thatguy said:


> What part of APU orders sucking the fabs dry do you not understand ?





			
				JF-AMD said:
			
		

> Everybody calm down. It is a few weeks difference in schedules. We are shipping server in Q3 like we said.
> 
> That schedule delay pushed the launch of client into Q3. Nothing sinister. But keep in mind that launches align around events and partners, not production schedules.
> 
> The rumors of isssues aren't worth the time to address, they aren't true. Too much conspiracy theory going around.





			
				JF-AMD said:
			
		

> I am not making any comments about client products. Because server and client are using the same architecture I was trying to be helpful in the past. I get slammed in forums, called a liar (and worse), I have obscenities posted to my blog. Sorry, done with that world. I don't have time for the hassle. Let the enthusiasts battle it out, I don't care to get involved in that any more.





			
				JF-AMD said:
			
		

> I would bother to respond if people would actually read what I say. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to match their reality. Perhaps if you go back to my statement about engineering samples not designed for performance you'd understand that you are beating a horse that is no longer alive.



The point is....

The Fabs aren't sucked dry



> notable posts by JF-AMD
> 
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/10213459-post1.html
> ...



At overclock.net I found all of the notable quotes from JF-AMD

Since JF-AMD doesn't come here well 

This is all the quotes on the overclock.net there is more at toms Hardware, AMDZone, HardOCP and other places

Only AMD knows and the only one talking about Bulldozer is this guy JF-AMD

John Fruehe AMD Employee


----------



## Disparia (Jul 15, 2011)

Bah, didn't grep anything of importance from that. Only want to know when I can buy one.


----------



## seronx (Jul 15, 2011)

Jizzler said:


> Bah, didn't grep anything of importance from that. Only want to know when I can buy one.



When you get to buy one

Very Soon <----> Soon <----> Don't hold your breath

Q3 unless a delay which is highly unlikely


----------



## Disparia (Jul 15, 2011)

That's about as precise as Pi to only 3 decimal places!


----------



## seronx (Jul 15, 2011)

Jizzler said:


> That's about as precise as Pi to only 3 decimal places!



Well we are in Q3 right now

2H = Q3 and Q4

Q3 = July, August, September

We are half way through July, and you only have two months and 1 half-month left before Q4

AMD has told us we will receive this in Q3 which is from a span from now to Q4

is 11 Weeks that is 77 days, 55 days for business


----------



## Disparia (Jul 15, 2011)

That didn't help narrow down the possibilities, it's still only as precise as it has been - "Q3".

How does one induce a coma? Need to wait it out until BD hits.


----------



## cadaveca (Jul 15, 2011)

seronx said:


> Since JF-AMD doesn't come here well


JF-AMD posts here too, FYI.


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 15, 2011)

seronx said:


> And if you want to see some new stuff here you guys go this came out yesterday
> 
> 
> 
> ...



1. Doesn't show what kind of cooling it has. Could be air like he says.. Could be LN2. 
2. Overclocking in windows? Are you kidding me? 
3. It's unstable as shit. Notice when he starts up the computer windows is asking him if he wants to boot into safe mode? Why is that. Because it's crashing 
4. 2 core overclocking? Who cares


----------



## erocker (Jul 15, 2011)

cadaveca said:


> JF-AMD posts here too, FYI.



Not for quite a while. I don't blame him either, many of the threads that he posted in were filled with immaturity, "grain of salt" posts and FUD from other websites. I would stay away as well.


----------



## cadaveca (Jul 15, 2011)

erocker said:


> Not for quite a while. I don't blame him either, many of the threads that he posted in were filled with immaturity, "grain of salt" posts and FUD from other websites. I would stay away as well.



True enough. I know for a fact that he was running into the smae on other forums, and stopped as well.

For all we know, he's SeronX.


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 15, 2011)




----------



## seronx (Jul 15, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> 1. Doesn't show what kind of cooling it has. Could be air like he says.. Could be LN2.
> 2. Overclocking in windows? Are you kidding me?
> 3. It's unstable as shit. Notice when he starts up the computer windows is asking him if he wants to boot into safe mode? Why is that. Because it's crashing
> 4. 2 core overclocking? Who cares



I know don't shoot the messenger
I did give a Grain of Salt message
and SunnyKFC and OBR did have a huge major fight at the Xtreme System forums



cadaveca said:


> True enough. I know for a fact that he was running into the smae on other forums, and stopped as well.
> 
> For all we know, he's SeronX.



It is just Seronx short for Seronxolitus 
I am not him trust me look up Seronx, lol


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 15, 2011)

seronx said:


> and SunnyKFC and OBR did have a huge major fight at the Xtreme System forums
> l



LINK???????????? Must See Bitch Fight


----------



## laszlo (Jul 15, 2011)

news like this always transform in a endless posting with nothing good to read in ...


----------



## Zubasa (Jul 15, 2011)

laszlo said:


> news like this always transform in a endless posting with nothing good to read in ...


Especially now we have 2 guys with too much time to spends going back and forth with each other. respect:


----------



## _JP_ (Jul 15, 2011)

*Since there is nothing else useful to add here...*

Screw you guys, I'm going to buy a VIA QC. 
But seriously, these guys should be supported, so that they can enter the race as well.


----------



## YautjaLord (Jul 15, 2011)

FX-8120? Where's then FX-8130P? Nevermind: as long as this 8120 Turbo Boosts from 3.1 to 4.0GHz it's going to be one hell of OC'er; only thing left is the figures/tables showing how it performes vs Sandy/Ivy Bridge & Westmere. Hope you will make new "Dozer OC'ers Club" thread after it launches.  And bta, you always deliver. 

P.S. Typo: from 3.6GHz to 4.2GHz it's not 500MHz, it's 600MHz turbo boost. Everything else is ace. Keep 'em coming, bta.


----------



## Hayder_Master (Jul 15, 2011)

Ohhhh, AMD they did it


----------



## Disparia (Jul 15, 2011)

_JP_ said:


> Screw you guys, I'm going to buy a VIA QC.
> But seriously, these guys should be supported, so that they can enter the race as well.



Any products out that we can look at? A quick search didn't turn up anything besides VIA's websites and some PR releases.


----------



## Steevo (Jul 15, 2011)

Bla bla bla. I want hard numbers not this fanboi bullshit.


----------



## heky (Jul 15, 2011)

^Exactly^


----------



## YautjaLord (Jul 15, 2011)

I'm with Steevo plus one more question, bta: what revision these CPUs are? B2? C0?


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 15, 2011)

YautjaLord said:


> I'm with Steevo plus one more question, bta: what revision these CPUs are? B2? C0?



The ones tested? B1. B2 is the new revision that will be released to consumers


----------



## Thatguy (Jul 15, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> The ones tested? B1. B2 is the new revision that will be released to consumers



no the ones tested " or claimed" are ES


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 15, 2011)

Thatguy said:


> no the ones tested " or claimed" are ES



They are all ES but with a B1 stepping. Amd delayed releasing the B1's to consumers because they were performing like shit.


----------



## Thatguy (Jul 15, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> They are all ES but with a B1 stepping. Amd delayed releasing the B1's to consumers because they were performing like shit.



Says who ? none of this is even properly documented. ES is ES, its nothing more. Its all FUD so stop railing on about it already, your just making yourself look like a dumbass doing so.


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 15, 2011)

Thatguy said:


> Its all FUD so stop railing on about it already, your just making yourself look like a dumbass doing so.





Why do company's produce different stepping processors? To fix issues with a prior stepping. Want an Example?

Phenom II X4 955 C2 :

Had issues going over 3.6Ghz, Memory Controller hated anything over 1333

Phenom II X4 955 C3 :

Over 4Ghz without much issue, Much better memory performance with 1600

Amd had to revise the processor because it was having issues.


----------



## Thatguy (Jul 15, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> Why do company's produce different stepping processors? To fix issues with a prior stepping. Want an Example?
> 
> Phenom II X4 955 C2 :
> 
> ...



     Regardless you have NO IDEA what exactly these folks may or may not have had, so stop with the shit talking. seriously you come like a Intel shill and its tiring. 

  Heres exactly what we do know in totallity

 New design

  Everything else is Bullshit.


----------



## erocker (Jul 15, 2011)

Thatguy said:


> Regardless you have NO IDEA what exactly these folks may or may not have had, so stop with the shit talking. seriously you come like a Intel shill and its tiring.
> 
> Heres exactly what we do know in totallity
> 
> ...



Indeed. Since we now know that all of these "leaks" were nothing but fakes. So as it stands we have nothing to base speculation upon other than a leaked blurry photo of a Bulldozer die that may or may not be real.


----------



## YautjaLord (Jul 15, 2011)

I beleive B1 & Engineering Sample are the same thing; need to wait for info where it says that rev. B2 or C0 are hitting launch date; any info that says when those revisions are out will be more than sufficient.


----------



## Thatguy (Jul 15, 2011)

erocker said:


> Indeed. Since we now know that all of these "leaks" were nothing but fakes. So as it stands we have nothing to base speculation upon other than a leaked blurry photo of a Bulldozer die that may or may not be real.



Definately some ares ass's and definately they are talking.


----------



## Disruptor4 (Jul 16, 2011)

May I ask, can anyone speculate what the difference between the 125W TDP varient and the 95W TDB variant of the FX-8120 will be?
(besides temperature being lower)

Thanks.


----------



## YautjaLord (Jul 16, 2011)

2Disruptor4:

What you just said plus a bit more room to OC compared to 125W; same as 125W CPU compared to 140W TDP CPU.  Though that's not the only thing you should worry: look what revision the CPU is - if it's rev. B2 95W TDP & the other is rev. C0 125W TDP, go for rev. C0 one even though it's 125W. Tends to OC better then lower (B2) revision.


----------



## Disruptor4 (Jul 16, 2011)

Thanks YautjaLord.


----------



## lashton (Jul 16, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> 1. Doesn't show what kind of cooling it has. Could be air like he says.. Could be LN2.
> 2. Overclocking in windows? Are you kidding me?
> 3. It's unstable as shit. Notice when he starts up the computer windows is asking him if he wants to boot into safe mode? Why is that. Because it's crashing
> 4. 2 core overclocking? Who cares



you are a fool
your point about 3 is the same as what i do, I never shut windows down and it says "safe mode" and shit, you are an intel fanboy and worried that AMD may take back the performance crown
he uses windows because it easier, notice how cpu-z reflects this doesn't matter the CPU clocks higher and is faster (by a margin) than the 2600k 
<---this people know


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 16, 2011)

lashton said:


> you are a fool
> your point about 3 is the same as what i do, I never shut windows down and it says "safe mode" and shit, you are an intel fanboy and worried that AMD may take back the performance crown
> he uses windows because it easier, notice how cpu-z reflects this doesn't matter the CPU clocks higher and is faster (by a margin) than the 2600k
> <---this people know





I've had both intel and Amd so im no fanboy


----------



## Fatal (Jul 16, 2011)

brandonwh64 said:


> http://troll.me/images/only-1-day-4...ed/its-about-to-get-real-up-in-here-thumb.jpg



I was just going over the thread that had me  Brandon. As for the delay on FX it sucks but there is nothing any of us can do about it.


----------



## seronx (Jul 16, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> Why do company's produce different stepping processors? To fix issues with a prior stepping. Want an Example?
> 
> Phenom II X4 955 C2 :
> 
> ...



Well at least they are doing that while the CPU isn't being *SOLD*!!!

You know how pissed I was getting a B2 9950 when the B3 9950 came out the day after I was like Fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu

But, then I upgraded to the C3 965BE and everything was alleviated after 1 year of living with a overheating cpu



Pestilence said:


> I've had both intel and Amd so im no fanboy



You're still a fanboy...You never owned VIA

Which of course BEATS *Intel* and *AMD*

I'm joking ofcourse lol


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 16, 2011)

seronx said:


> Well at least they are doing that while the CPU isn't being *SOLD*!!!
> 
> You know how pissed I was getting a B2 9950 when the B3 9950 came out the day after I was like Fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu
> 
> ...



I had an X3 Toilman that overclocked like mad on water. Still miss that processor. I was happy with my Amd rig till i saw that Fry's had a special on a P45 UD3 and an E8500 combo so i sold my X3 and went Intel and holy shit did that processor kick fucking ass. 4.8Ghz on water was amazing back in 08.


----------



## seronx (Jul 16, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> I had an X3 Toilman that overclocked like mad on water. Still miss that processor. I was happy with my Amd rig till i saw that Fry's had a special on a P45 UD3 and an E8500 combo so i sold my X3 and went Intel and holy shit did that processor kick fucking ass. 4.8Ghz on water was amazing back in 08.



I'm not going to provide any sources:

Get the lowest TDP model @ release of the FX 8-Cores

Plug it into a Crosshair V Formula or wait for the Crosshair V Extreme

Now get a PSU that has 2 8pin EPS preferable 1200 Watts+with atleast 100+ Amps on a single 12 volt line

Now get the Corsair H100, get 4 fans with pretty extreme static pressure for 120x120x25mm

Set FSB/PEG/whatever from 200 to 300
Turn off CNQ/Turbocore/other features that throttle
Set Multiplier from stock to 20x to 21.5x
Enjoy 6.45GHz

450-500 Watts Power Consumption







Now take this with a grain of salt though but it is completely feasible


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 16, 2011)

seronx said:


> I'm not going to provide any sources:
> 
> Get the lowest TDP model @ release of the FX 8-Cores
> 
> ...



If an 8 Core can hit 6Ghz with an H100 i'll post pictures of my hot fiance naked. 

**** Offer Voided if the jackass testing puts his rad in a window or lives in Canada ****


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Jul 16, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> If an 8 Core can hit 6Ghz with an H100 i'll post pictures of my hot fiance naked.
> 
> **** Offer Voided if the jackass testing puts his rad in a window or lives in Canada ****



I'm saving this for later. Post a pic of that hot fiance clothed so I can make sure it's worth the save.


----------



## seronx (Jul 16, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> If an 8 Core can hit 6Ghz with an H100 i'll post pictures of my hot fiance naked.
> 
> **** Offer Voided if the jackass testing puts his rad in a window or lives in Canada ****



Early September NDA ends, so we will find out if it can do it on high-end air or AIO Water Coolers or custom rigs



Damn_Smooth said:


> I'm saving this for later. Post a pic of that hot fiance clothed so I can make sure it's worth the save.



LOL


----------



## HammerON (Jul 16, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> If an 8 Core can hit 6Ghz with an H100 i'll post pictures of my hot fiance naked.
> 
> **** Offer Voided if the jackass testing puts his rad in a window or lives in Canada ****



So does this offer exclude those of us living in Alaska as well


----------



## AphexDreamer (Jul 16, 2011)

HammerON said:


> So does this offer exclude those of us living in Alaska as well



 Dear lord how are you not an overclocking champ. 

I'd stick my whole comp in the snow and freeze my ass just to see those clocks rise.


----------



## YautjaLord (Jul 16, 2011)

Disruptor4 said:


> Thanks YautjaLord.



Like Pred would say (in '87 classic): Any time.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Jul 16, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> If an 8 Core can hit 6Ghz with an H100 i'll post pictures of my hot fiance naked.
> 
> **** Offer Voided if the jackass testing puts his rad in a window or lives in Canada ****



Ahh some light at the end of the tunnel,I dont think its impossible despite being unlikely, you m(well your misses) may regret that 

tho prob not

does anyone have the slightest clue about bulldozer/990x chipset compatabillity with pciex 3??

as pciex3 mobos are starting to get mentioned and this might further delay my concern with BD ie might wait even longer then release etc.


----------



## devguy (Jul 16, 2011)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> Ahh some light at the end of the tunnel,I dont think its impossible despite being unlikely, you m(well your misses) may regret that
> 
> tho prob not
> 
> ...



Looks like even Intel is having some problems getting on the PCIe 3.0 bandwagon.  In order to get the x79 chipset out this year, they might have to compromise on that feature.  But, there's still motherboard manufacturers adding that functionality themselves, like AsRock.

But I must say, who cares about PCIe 3.0 right now, anyway?


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Jul 16, 2011)

people who plan on using their next pc for 3 years plus, may need pciex 3 by the end of its life,though i agree their will still be pciex 2 cards then, they will no longer be the fastest and for example my x38 mobo can still do more with a new gpu(hence prolonged life) itll have recent gpus folding in it till it dies


----------



## cadaveca (Jul 16, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> **** Offer Voided if the jackass testing puts his rad in a window or lives in Canada ****



Bugger. Was gonna hook up the H100 and show a screenie!






J/K.


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 16, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> I'm saving this for later. Post a pic of that hot fiance clothed so I can make sure it's worth the save.



And ruin all the fun? I guarantee that she's very attractive, skinny and with a huge rack. 

Ohh and she's only 21


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Jul 16, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> And ruin all the fun? I guarantee that she's very attractive, skinny and with a huge rack.
> 
> Ohh and she's only 21



This is the interweb, my friend. Pics or it didn't happen.


----------



## cadaveca (Jul 16, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> And ruin all the fun? I guarantee that she's very attractive, skinny and with a huge rack.
> 
> Ohh and she's only 21



Ah, jail bait. Young enough to be my own kid. But I would be a jackass in Canada...oh well. I think my wife's more interested in the pics than I am, anyway.


I find it interesting how the title of this thread has "revealed" in quotes.

So, uh, this is more AMD BS?


----------



## fullinfusion (Jul 16, 2011)

cadaveca said:


> Ah, jail bait. Young enough to be my own kid. But I would be a jackass in Canada...oh well. I think my wife's more interested in the pics than I am, anyway.
> 
> 
> I find it interesting how the title of this thread has "revealed" in quotes.
> ...


Yeah us jackasses that live in Canada dont need to place a rad in the window, we just need to open the window 

but today can be a challenge, 32c atm


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Jul 16, 2011)

cadaveca said:


> I find it interesting how the title of this thread has "revealed" in quotes.
> 
> So, uh, this is more AMD BS?



I believe so. If you want some real FUD though, translate this article and read about how Intel confirmed that Bulldozer would be released 60-90 days from computex. 

On an AMD forum no less.

http://www.amdforum.se/artikel/oforandrat-lanseringsdatum-for-bulldozer-1108/


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 16, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> I believe so. If you want some real FUD though, translate this article and read about how Intel confirmed that Bulldozer would be released 60-90 days from computex.
> 
> On an AMD forum no less.
> 
> http://www.amdforum.se/artikel/oforandrat-lanseringsdatum-for-bulldozer-1108/



Intel knows all. I bet they have spy's in Amd. 

I want to hear about the yield's and what % they're at for B2


----------



## Benetanegia (Jul 16, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> I believe so. If you want some real FUD though, translate this article and read about how Intel confirmed that Bulldozer would be released 60-90 days from computex.
> 
> On an AMD forum no less.
> 
> http://www.amdforum.se/artikel/oforandrat-lanseringsdatum-for-bulldozer-1108/



I don't get it. Google translate is not doing a good job to begin with, so understanding anything is difficult. Anyway I cannot see what's the relation between what's posted there and Intel. Intel is not mentioned at all. 

EDIT: Nevermind. The autodetect language failed and told me to use norwegian in the first place, it seems it swedish... Aaannd LOL! Hahaha. Intel appears out of nowhere then. I guess the original article says "intel" as in saying "sources".

EDIT2: And no. It seems that google translates AMD as Intel, when the source is swedish at least, no matter the target language.


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Jul 16, 2011)

Benetanegia said:


> I don't get it. Google translate is not doing a good job to begin with, so understanding anything is difficult. Anyway I cannot see what's the relation between what's posted there and Intel. Intel is not mentioned at all.
> 
> EDIT: Nevermind. The autodetect language failed and told me to use norwegian in the first place, it seems it swedish... Aaannd LOL! Hahaha. Intel appears out of nowhere then. I guess the original article says "intel" as in saying "sources".
> 
> EDIT2: And no. It seems that google translates AMD as Intel, when the source is swedish at least, no matter the target language.



AMD is mentioned in the article as well though. How do you translate? I just let the site load until the translate page bar comes up on top.


----------



## Benetanegia (Jul 16, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> How do you translate? I just let the site load until the translate page bar comes up on top.



I just go to http://translate.google.es/?hl=es&tab=wT and enter the text, select language (usually the suggested one) and go.



> AMD is mentioned in the article as well though.



Yeah, that's the funny thing. In the original article AMD is mentioned throughout the article, but in the last paragraph I don't know what it says before being translated, but no matter which target language I select, from the ones that I can understand (spanish, english, french, portuguese, italian, basque/euskera) all of them replace AMD by Intel in that last paragraph.


----------



## scaminatrix (Jul 16, 2011)

I've sigged you Pest, no getting out of it now!!


----------



## seronx (Jul 16, 2011)

I think people misread the Computex June 1st thing

It doesn't say launch it says when you can expect to buy them







It doesn't say launch trust me read it

It says Zambezi Particles in Boxes Available by Late Summer

That isn't a launch that is when we can buy them, so the launch has to happen before that

So between the last AM3+ Motherboard and the beginning of Zambezi PIBs

30 days to 60 days the launch has to happen


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Jul 16, 2011)

seronx said:


> I think people misread the Computex June 1st thing
> 
> It doesn't say launch it says when you can expect to buy them
> 
> ...



Or we get a delay.


----------



## seronx (Jul 16, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> Or we get a delay.



Not likely


----------



## repman244 (Jul 16, 2011)

seronx said:


> Not likely



But it's possible.


----------



## seronx (Jul 16, 2011)

repman244 said:


> But it's possible.



It would still be in Q3 wouldn't it

30-60 days launch 1 *cancelled* will go to
60-90 days launch 2

They have set the final NDA end date to be September...
So, by absolute measure

We will get the CPUs by September
Which is Q3


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 16, 2011)

seronx said:


> It would still be in Q3 wouldn't it
> 
> 30-60 days launch 1 *cancelled* will go to
> 60-90 days launch 2
> ...



I called the first week of September and the NDA doesn't end till then so that means....


I WAS RIGHT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Neuromancer (Jul 17, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> I called the first week of September and the NDA doesn't end till then so that means....
> 
> 
> I WAS RIGHT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!




You can't claim you were right until they actually come up. 

NDA usually coincides with product availability, although sometimes at launch. So whatever that date (NDA) is sounds about right


----------



## seronx (Jul 17, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> I called the first week of September and the NDA doesn't end till then so that means....
> 
> 
> I WAS RIGHT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



No, you can still be wrong because, the NDA wares out in September

AMD can cancel the NDA at anytime they want



Neuromancer said:


> You can't claim you were right until they actually come up.
> 
> NDA usually coincides with product availability, very few times at launch. So whatever that date is sounds about right



Exactly but it can still come out earlier


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 17, 2011)

seronx said:


> No, you can still be wrong because, the NDA wares out in September
> 
> AMD can cancel the NDA at anytime they want
> 
> ...



Ser I love your optimism but these chips wont be out till September at the earliest and late october if the yields are as horrible as reported.


----------



## Thatguy (Jul 17, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> Ser I love your optimism but these chips wont be out till September at the earliest and late october if the yields are as horrible as reported.



 Do you have confrimiation of the yields from glofo or amd ? 

without that, well its just rampant speculation. October is Q4 and no server announcements regarding Q3 have changed. Looking at shipments and order for APU chips, its likely they just don't have the capacity and as those chips are high profit, they are making those in quantity. It is likely that they aren't happy with silicone right now and are getting it where they want, but its not likely a yield problem as they have made no statements about delays for APU's on the same process. 

  whatever the case, its all speculation so best not to go spreading FUD.


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 17, 2011)

Thatguy said:


> Do you have confrimiation of the yields from glofo or amd ?
> 
> without that, well its just rampant speculation. October is Q4 and no server announcements regarding Q3 have changed. Looking at shipments and order for APU chips, its likely they just don't have the capacity and as those chips are high profit, they are making those in quantity. It is likely that they aren't happy with silicone right now and are getting it where they want, but its not likely a yield problem as they have made no statements about delays for APU's on the same process.
> 
> whatever the case, its all speculation so best not to go spreading FUD.



All we have is speculation as there have been no leaks from amd. Guys remember 6 months before Sandy bridge came out when Intel gave Anandtech a 2500K and 2600K to play with and publish results? Why do you think Amd never did something like that?


----------



## Benetanegia (Jul 17, 2011)

Thatguy said:


> but its not likely a yield problem as they have made no statements about delays for APU's on the same process.



You can have very good yields with one design and very bad yields with another one, specially if one is based on old Athlon tech and the other is a completely new design.


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 17, 2011)

Thatguy said:


> Do you have confrimiation of the yields from glofo or amd ?
> 
> without that, well its just rampant speculation. October is Q4 and no server announcements regarding Q3 have changed. Looking at shipments and order for APU chips, its likely they just don't have the capacity and as those chips are high profit, they are making those in quantity. It is likely that they aren't happy with silicone right now and are getting it where they want, but its not likely a yield problem as they have made no statements about delays for APU's on the same process.
> 
> whatever the case, its all speculation so best not to go spreading FUD.



Llano is simply an Phenom II core on a 32nm process. Can't screw that up too much


----------



## seronx (Jul 17, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> Ser I love your optimism but these chips wont be out till September at the earliest and late october if the yields are as horrible as reported.



The chips have been out...

Did you miss E3?
Did you miss the AMD HardOCP we have "Bulldozer"(Bulldozer is the architecture not the CPU the CPUs name is Zambezi, donkeybutts)

Yields aren't bad




Pestilence said:


> All we have is speculation as there have been no leaks from amd. Guys remember 6 months before Sandy bridge came out when Intel gave Anandtech a 2500K and 2600K to play with and publish results? Why do you think Amd never did something like that?



There has been tons of leaks but you need to read up on something


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osborne_effect

When does Phenom II EOL? in relationship to Zambezi's launch?

Do not source donanimhaber



Benetanegia said:


> You can have very good yields with one design and very bad yields with another one, specially if one is based on old Athlon tech and the other is a completely new design.



False, for Global Foundries



Pestilence said:


> Llano is simply an Phenom II core on a 32nm process. Can't screw that up too much



Llano isn't a Phenom II core it is a Athlon III core
Athlon III is 6%-9% faster than Phenom II with a more powerful IMC
1600MHz on Phenom II is hard business while you can go up to 2200MHz on Llano rather easily

GlobalFoundries' 32nm SOI is more advanced than Intel's 32nm Bulk SOI


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 17, 2011)

Gf process better then Intels? Highly doubtful


----------



## seronx (Jul 17, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> Gf process better then Intels? Highly doubtful



It is and it is completely true

You will see

I can already show it but...

FM1 vs LGA1155 which one is bigger?

We have a 
1.45 BILLION Transistor APU
having comparable power consumption to a
995 Million Transistor APU(i5 2500k)





Awkward this is the only the IGP rofl
280GTX my arse lul

Zambezi will be even less power hungry than the Llano

Trinity here we come =.=
(Even lower power consumption than Zambezi)

When you have a 995 Million Transistor APU with a 95 Watt TDP compare to a CPU with a 100 Watt TDP with 1.45 Billion Transistors APU and get relatively similar temps and power consumption you know something is wrong on the competitions side

------------
AMD Zambezi in an Eyefinity Setup, supposedly at HardOCP Gam Experience 










Why does no one today have functional cameras?


----------



## Thatguy (Jul 17, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> All we have is speculation as there have been no leaks from amd. Guys remember 6 months before Sandy bridge came out when Intel gave Anandtech a 2500K and 2600K to play with and publish results? Why do you think Amd never did something like that?



So what ? AMD is not Intel. for some reason they are playing this close to the vest, much like the new release of 6xxx graphics cards. 

WTF are you blathering about now ?AMD does what AMD thinks is in AMD's best interest. why people don't get that is beyond me. I know they certainly don't care about rabid fanboys from either side commenting on unreleased hardware. I expect benchs in the next 2-4 weeks and shipping soon. But thats just based on what they have been saying for months.


----------



## Thatguy (Jul 17, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> Gf process better then Intels? Highly doubtful



it could result in a better performing chip, but with more irregularitys


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Jul 17, 2011)

So our big HardOCP showed us a setup that probably wouldn't bottleneck a Phenom I?

I guess I'll sit here and wait for something concrete. I'm gonna quit holding my breath though, this lack of oxygen is fucking with my mind.


----------



## seronx (Jul 17, 2011)

Thatguy said:


> it could result in a better performing chip, but with more irregularitys



Alot of the problems for 32nm were in 2009 and 2010

GloFo made 32nm Bulk SOI in 2009
GloFo in 2010 ended that and started 32nm HKMG SOI
AMD Taped out Zambezi, Valencia, Interlagos and the yields were very bad
By 2011 January the yields started to increase and by April 2011 the yield problems were gone

The deal between AMD and GlobalFoundries is
32nm HKMG for 2011 per chip(a moot point because Yields are running exceptionally well it was an insurance plan if the bad yields in 2010 would crossover to 2011 but it didn't)
32nm HKMG for 2012 per wafer(by that time 32nm would be mature and EOL, since the lower end AMD stuff will be on 28nm Bulk from 40nm Bulk)

Leading to Zambezi not having yield issues(Cheap CPUs)

Google: GlobalFoundries 32nm

ARM, AMD GPUs, AMD Low-end products will all be using 28nm Bulk SOI HKMG and 28nm SOI HKMG
by 2012

To get indepth is....

Yields only affect the price of the CPU

Not the launch of the CPU

Low Yields isn't a problem people will still buy AMD Zambezi if it is going to overclock like a beast, they might be paying $1000 for it

The problems aren't in yields but in something else

The things that can effect the launch:
Partners/OEMs
AMD
Technical Achievements
Consumers
Previous Products



Damn_Smooth said:


> So our big HardOCP showed us a setup that probably wouldn't bottleneck a Phenom I?
> 
> I guess I'll sit here and wait for something concrete. I'm gonna quit holding my breath though, this lack of oxygen is fucking with my mind.



I lol'ed don't hold your breath yeesh


----------



## Thatguy (Jul 17, 2011)

or it could be that the raving reception of the apu's "subsequent OEM orders" and out of stock condition is pushing fab capacity to the limit, might that be why newyork got a Huge time table bump recently.

me bets its due to a lack of capacity and has been for a while. Plus TSMC just keeps douching up the process node while glofo seems to be getting its rythm together and they service more then just amd to so glofo could be really tight on fab space.


----------



## seronx (Jul 17, 2011)

Thatguy said:


> or it could be that the raving reception of the apu's "subsequent OEM orders" and out of stock condition is pushing fab capacity to the limit, might that be why newyork got a Huge time table bump recently.
> 
> me bets its due to a lack of capacity and has been for a while. Plus TSMC just keeps douching up the process node while glofo seems to be getting its rythm together and they service more then just amd to so glofo could be really tight on fab space.



We haven't ended the month yet and to are saying out of stock?

Highly doubt it

 PCs & Laptops, Laptops / Notebooks, AMD A-Series

 Computer Hardware, CPUs / Processors, Processors ...

I don't see out of stock


----------



## Thatguy (Jul 17, 2011)

seronx said:


> We haven't ended the month yet and to are saying out of stock?
> 
> Highly doubt it
> 
> ...



AMD sold every chip they made IIRC in the APU lineup, they are EOL'ing some products, which means they need warranty stock. Alo they have other products and glofo has more then one customer. 

  There is no other reasonable explination as to why glofo would push a fab open 2-3 months earlier then scheduled. 

 think about that, this is a HUGE cost to hurry up a fab.


----------



## seronx (Jul 17, 2011)

Thatguy said:


> AMD sold every chip they made IIRC in the APU lineup, they are EOL'ing some products, which means they need warranty stock. Alo they have other products and glofo has more then one customer.
> 
> There is no other reasonable explination as to why glofo would push a fab open 2-3 months earlier then scheduled.
> 
> think about that, this is a HUGE cost to hurry up a fab.



Fab 8 is for 28nm and below (ARM and other consumers+AMD Bulk)

Fab 1 is for 32nm and below (AMD alone non bulk)

32nm production will not affect 28nm production by next year, vice versa

45nm is getting EOL because there is no need for 45nm(why continue to produce 45nm when you can go 32nm and 28nm)

Global Foundries is backed by a very and I mean a very rich government technology investor
It isn't high cost to AMD


----------



## Thatguy (Jul 17, 2011)

seronx said:


> Fab 8 is for 28nm and below (ARM and other consumers+AMD Bulk)
> 
> Fab 1 is for 32nm and below (AMD alone non bulk)
> 
> ...



  Thats true, but capcity will get short when demand goes up and they are putting alot of demand on glofo currently. IIRC some other chip manu's recently either talked or did move from tsmc to glofo. 

  Its likely just a culmination of things but my bet is on production capcity on 32nm just not being there.You always push your big sellers out first and if they can't allot the proper production time for the chips and keep quantity on the apu's plus all the other products, plus the other customers products, yeah its going to cuase delays. 

 there also been speculation and some confrimation by amd that they are considering glofo for gpus sooner or later. So its hard to say whats going on when they are being quiet, but I think its a capacity issue. It happens.


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 17, 2011)

Christ guys. Its Saturday night and your home in front of the computer? Just got back from watching midget wrestling. Was hilarious.


----------



## seronx (Jul 17, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> Christ guys. Its Saturday night and your home in front of the computer? Just got back from watching midget wrestling. Was hilarious.









Midget wrestling not my thing


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 17, 2011)

seronx said:


> http://www.davidkiger.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/not_sure_if_want.jpg
> 
> Midget wrestling not my thing



It was out at the bar i was at. Its just something fun to watch while you drink overpriced liquor.


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Jul 17, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> Christ guys. Its Saturday night and your home in front of the computer? Just got back from watching midget wrestling. Was hilarious.



I'm jealous. I have my 3 year old and my girlfriend is out of town, so no drinking for me tonight.



seronx said:


> http://www.davidkiger.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/not_sure_if_want.jpg
> 
> Midget wrestling not my thing



I am stealing that pic from you. That's awesome.


----------



## seronx (Jul 17, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> It was out at the bar i was at. Its just something fun to watch while you drink overpriced liquor.



I stumbled upon something :O

I never noticed it before!!!






Did you guys see in the Zambezi pin side has two extra pins

I totally blew over it just wanted to tell everyone JUST NOW did I notice there are two extra pins


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Jul 17, 2011)

seronx said:


> I stumbled upon something :O
> 
> I never noticed it before!!!
> 
> ...



Where did you get that pic of Zambezi?

Edit: Never mind, you can read it when you expand the pic.


----------



## Thatguy (Jul 17, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> Where did you get that pic of Zambezi?



techiser.com according to the picture.


----------



## Thatguy (Jul 17, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> Christ guys. Its Saturday night and your home in front of the computer? Just got back from watching midget wrestling. Was hilarious.



17 years of marriage, I'm over it. Plus I am doing other stuff.


----------



## seronx (Jul 17, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> Where did you get that pic of Zambezi?



Donanimhaber April 2011

It was leaked by some person called "Pink Pig" lol


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Jul 17, 2011)

seronx said:


> Donanimhaber April 2011
> 
> It was leaked by some person called "Pink Pig" lol



That was a nice find. How long did it take you to notice?


----------



## seronx (Jul 17, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> That was a nice find. How long did it take you to notice?



Well I looked at an Phenom II OEM at Newegg I was like wait a minute.....

Because, I remember in OBRs video and he took a picture of the back as well

and AMD is the only one that still use the PGA design, Llano has a huge hole in it

OBR/Pink Pig/SunnyKFC all have Engineer Samples but they aren't showing benchmarks

OBR took it to himself to smudge benchmarks for teh LULZ

They have a CPU and it is a Engineer Sample

Pink Pigs is an A1
OBR has B0/B1s
SunnyKFC has B0s


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Jul 17, 2011)

seronx said:


> Well I looked at an Phenom II OEM at Newegg I was like wait a minute.....
> 
> Because, I remember in OBRs video and he took a picture of the back as well
> 
> ...



I have to commend your attention to detail. You could have posted the pics side by side and told us to spot the difference and I would probably still be sitting here staring at them.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jul 17, 2011)

seronx said:


> Well I looked at an Phenom II OEM at Newegg I was like wait a minute.....
> 
> Because, I remember in OBRs video and he took a picture of the back as well
> 
> ...



Or the newegg pic is a generic one from the other AMD's they sell.


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Jul 17, 2011)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Or the newegg pic is a generic one from the other AMD's they sell.



I never thought of that. What do the Athlons look like.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jul 17, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> I never thought of that. What do the Athlons look like.


----------



## seronx (Jul 17, 2011)

TheMailMan78 said:


> http://img.tomshardware.com/us/2007/10/22/budget_overclocker/3-athlon_64_back.jpg



that is an Athlon 64, LOL





















They are all basically the same rofl


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jul 17, 2011)

seronx said:


> that is an Athlon 64, LOL
> 
> http://www.legitreviews.com/images/reviews/1199/amd_athlon_ii_635_pins.jpg



Which happens to match up to your "Bullshitdozer" pic.

So is it a bulldozer or an Athlon X2?


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 17, 2011)

seronx said:


> I stumbled upon something :O
> 
> I never noticed it before!!!
> 
> ...



Yeah. This is why they went to the new black or grey socket in AM3+ boards.


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 17, 2011)

seronx said:


> that is an Athlon 64, LOL
> 
> http://www.legitreviews.com/images/reviews/1199/amd_athlon_ii_635_pins.jpg
> 
> ...



Bottom left of the AM3B socket.. Extra pin is utilized. Only is covering 1 pin instead of two like the others


Edit - I'm drunk so i might not be


----------



## seronx (Jul 17, 2011)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Which happens to match up to your "Bullshitdozer" pic.
> 
> So is it a bulldozer or an Athlon X2?



Athlon 64 X2* or a Bulldozer




Pestilence said:


> Bottom left of the AM3B socket.. Extra pin is utilized. Only is covering 1 pin instead of two like the others



that 1 pin isn't used supposedly

If it was all these people buy the AM3 White Socket with BIOs upgrades are screwed


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Jul 17, 2011)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Which happens to match up to your "Bullshitdozer" pic.
> 
> So is it a bulldozer or an Athlon X2?



It doesn't match up exactly though. If you go to the top right space and count the pins up, the shitdozer has 9 pins and the Athlon has 10.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jul 17, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> It doesn't match up exactly though. If you go to the top right space and count the pins up, the shitdozer has 9 pins and the Athlon has 10.



Nice catch


----------



## seronx (Jul 17, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> It doesn't match up exactly though. If you go to the top right space and count the pins up, the shitdozer has 9 pins and the Athlon has 10.



Can you take a screenshot, I am blind as a bat here, xD'

I see it never mind


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Jul 17, 2011)

So *if* OBR has an engineering sample, Why would he post false benches?

Am I correct that he was always an Intel fanboy? If I'm not, disregard the following statement.

If so (Deal with me here for a moment, I've been watching a lot of Scooby Doo today.) the only reason he would post false benchmarks would be to protect Intel. If they were worse, he could show them for a laugh. We already know that he is not under NDA.

Now I just need to find someone to unmask.


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 17, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> So *if* OBR has an engineering sample, Why would he post false benches?
> 
> Am I correct that he was always an Intel fanboy? If I'm not, disregard the following statement.
> 
> ...



But what is he trying to protect intel from? Sandy Bridge is Mainstream. Intel still has Sandy Bridge E up its sleeve and we all know that SB-E with it's 6 cores and quad memory is going to obliterate ALL


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jul 17, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> So *if* OBR has an engineering sample, Why would he post false benches?
> 
> Am I correct that he was always an Intel fanboy? If I'm not, disregard the following statement.
> 
> ...



All engineering sample are "false" as they do not reflect the final product. Its like looking at an unfinished painting. The only reason anyone has a engineering sample is to see how the painting will fit on the wall (or motherboard). Not until the artist (AMD) is done painting will we see the full picture (Properly performing CPU).


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Jul 17, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> But what is he trying to protect intel from? Sandy Bridge is Mainstream. Intel still has Sandy Bridge E and Ivy Bridge up its sleeve.



SB-E will be priced out of competition and Ivy won't be out for a year. SB and Bulldozer are direct competitors. 

And, he doesn't have ES chips of SB-E or Ivy.


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 17, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> SB-E will be priced out of competition and Ivy won't be out for a year. SB and Bulldozer are direct competitors.
> 
> And, he doesn't have ES chips of SB-E or Ivy.



Dominator or whatever his name is has SB-E ES and IB ES chips.


----------



## seronx (Jul 17, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> So *if* OBR has an engineering sample, Why would he post false benches?
> 
> *For the Lulz*
> 
> ...



I typed in your posts deal with it!


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Jul 17, 2011)

TheMailMan78 said:


> All engineering sample are "false" as they do not reflect the final product. Its like looking at an unfinished painting. The only reason anyone has a engineering sample is to see how the painting will fit on the wall (or motherboard). Not until the artist (AMD) is done painting will we see the full picture (Properly performing CPU).



I agree with you 100% on that. But if that ES beats the competitions product already, The finished painting is going to be beautiful.

Of course, I'm just speculating here and I really don't believe my own bullshit, but it's something to think about.


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 17, 2011)

Shit i'm too drunk to find screenshots right now BUT 2011 pricing is not set in stone. If BD kills SB intel can drop prices OR just speed up IB


----------



## Thatguy (Jul 17, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> Shit i'm too drunk to find screenshots right now BUT 2011 pricing is not set in stone. If BD kills SB intel can drop prices OR just speed up IB



Its all about getting that ninja like drop on your enemy.

Stealth.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jul 17, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> I agree with you 100% on that. But if that ES beats the competitions product already, The finished painting is going to be beautiful.
> 
> Of course, I'm just speculating here and I really don't believe my own bullshit, but it's something to think about.



Better or worse its all FUD until I see a bench on TPU.


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Jul 17, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> Shit i'm too drunk to find screenshots right now BUT 2011 pricing is not set in stone. If BD kills SB intel can drop prices OR just speed up IB



If BD kills SB, whats to say it won't compete performance-wise with SB-E? And how do you know that they can speed Ivy up? Maybe the delay was because they were having problems?


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 17, 2011)

Thatguy said:


> Its all about getting that ninja like drop on your enemy.
> 
> Stealth.



Intel knows its going to be on top one way or another. It also domnimates the market right now with SB. If you had a 2600K and BD beat it in multithreaded apps by 5% but got killed in things like gaming. Would you trade your SB or an BD rig? I sure wouldn't.


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Jul 17, 2011)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Better or worse its all FUD until I see a bench on TPU.



I couldn't agree more, good Sir.

I'm just letting myself get carried away.


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 17, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> If BD kills SB, whats to say it won't compete performance-wise with SB-E? And how do you know that they can speed Ivy up? Maybe the delay was because they were having problems?



Performance estimates show SB-E being alittle faster then SB clock for clock because of the increased memory bandwidth thanks to quad channel memory. We know Amd can't compete with IPC so i don't see it beating up on SB-E especially the 6 core.

Night boys. I'm going to gets some pussy from the lady.


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Jul 17, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> Performance estimates show SB-E being alittle faster then SB clock for clock because of the increased memory bandwidth thanks to quad channel memory. We know Amd can't compete with IPC so i don't see it beating up on SB-E especially the 6 core.



But we don't really know that AMD can't compete with IPC, because we don't know anything at all.


----------



## seronx (Jul 17, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> Performance estimates show SB-E being alittle faster then SB clock for clock because of the increased memory bandwidth thanks to quad channel memory. We know Amd can't compete with IPC so i don't see it beating up on SB-E especially the 6 core.
> 
> Night boys. I'm going to gets some pussy from the lady.



AMD Zambezi has more IPC per module compared to Intel IPC per core

and AMD Zambezi mimics Tri-channel simply do to how many predictors the IMC has


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jul 17, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> I couldn't agree more, good Sir.
> 
> I'm just letting myself get carried away.



It all relies on the MC. IF they left it alone then BD will be a failure. IF they souped it up then BD will be competitive.

As its stands now my 8 ball says they tweaked it but didn't really replace it. So if I were a betting man I would say about 20% maybe 30% better then the Phenom II. Not a Sandy killer but not bad ether if the price stays low.


----------



## seronx (Jul 17, 2011)

TheMailMan78 said:


> It all relies on the MC. IF they left it alone then BD will be a failure. IF they souped it up then BD will be competitive.
> 
> As its stands now my 8 ball says they tweaked it but didn't really replace it. So if I were a betting man I would say about 20% maybe 30% better then the Phenom II. Not a Sandy killer but not bad ether if the price stays low.



They didn't leave it alone though look at Llano which has a retweaked IMC it can handle 2100+MHz stock

Zambezi is a brand new IMC
30% higher IMC performance + 20% higher memory clock


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jul 17, 2011)

seronx said:


> They didn't leave it alone though look at Llano which has a retweaked IMC it can handle 2100+MHz stock
> 
> Zambezi is 30% IMC performance + 20% higher memory clock



Like I said they tweaked it. They didn't really change it however. As far as I know Llano loves the tight timings just like the Phenom II. Now who's to say BD will have a different controller then Llano? Could be? Maybe? Who knows.

Like I said maybe 20% or 30% faster over all then the Phenom II. Maybe.


----------



## seronx (Jul 17, 2011)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Like I said they tweaked it. They didn't really change it however. As far as I know Llano loves the tight timings just like the Phenom II. Now who's to say BD will have a different controller then Llano? Could be? Maybe? Who knows.
> 
> Like I said maybe 20% or 30% faster over all then the Phenom II. Maybe.



JF-AMD said it will use a new IMC(Valencia/Interlagos)

Not the one in Magny Cours or Istanbul

Instead of beating the dead horse from K7 they finally are getting off that design


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jul 17, 2011)

seronx said:


> JF-AMD said it will use a new IMC(Valencia/Interlagos)
> 
> Not the one in Magny Cours or Istanbul
> 
> Instead of beating the dead horse from K7 they finally are getting off that design



That doesn't really mean anything. Like I said the Liano still handles memory pretty much the same as the Phenom II. Its no where near on par with Intel.


----------



## seronx (Jul 17, 2011)

TheMailMan78 said:


> That doesn't really mean anything. Like I said the Liano still handles memory pretty much the same as the Phenom II. Its no where near on par with Intel.



http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums...improved-IMC&p=4635932&viewfull=1#post4635932



			
				JF-AMD said:
			
		

> Don't you think that if the memory controller could not keep the cores fed that they would caught and addressed that issue?
> 
> You should not use the knowledge of existing architectures to try to express how this new one will work.



What he said


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Jul 17, 2011)

What I want to know is if Bulldozer will split threads between modules, or if it will fill a module first.

What I mean is, if you have a 4 threaded application, will it use 1 core from each module, or will it use 2 modules?

Does anybody know the answer?


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jul 17, 2011)

seronx said:


> http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums...improved-IMC&p=4635932&viewfull=1#post4635932
> 
> 
> 
> What he said



Liano is the new tech and it doesn't really do that very well. Thats my point. Unless BD has a different MC then Liano then well.......failsauce.



Damn_Smooth said:


> What I want to know is if Bulldozer will split threads between modules, or if it will fill a module first.
> 
> What I mean is, if you have a 4 threaded application, will it use 1 core from each module, or will it use 2 modules?
> 
> Does anybody know the answer?



You mean like HT?


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Jul 17, 2011)

TheMailMan78 said:


> You mean like HT?



No, I mean if a game uses 3 threads, will that use 1 module and a core from the next module, or will it use 3 cores from 3 separate modules.


----------



## seronx (Jul 17, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> What I want to know is if Bulldozer will split threads between modules, or if it will fill a module first.
> 
> What I mean is, if you have a 4 threaded application, will it use 1 core from each module, or will it use 2 modules?
> 
> Does anybody know the answer?



If you have a 4 thread application it will use 4 cores



TheMailMan78 said:


> Liano is the new tech and it doesn't really do that very well. Thats my point. Unless BD has a different MC then Liano then well.......failsauce



Zambezi does have a different IMC

Llano's IMC is Phenom IIs tweaked for CPU/GPU

The GPU has leeway






But, there was a improvement regardless



Damn_Smooth said:


> No, I mean if a game uses 3 threads, will that use 1 module and a core from the next module, or will it use 3 cores from 3 separate modules.



Modules don't play a part, so ignore them

it will use 3 cores


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Jul 17, 2011)

seronx said:


> If you have a 4 thread application it will use 4 cores



Yes, I know that. But which cores will it use?


----------



## seronx (Jul 17, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> Yes, I know that. But which cores will it use?



It will use all that they need

The Windows OS will schedule the threads not the software or the cpu

If it a 4 core app you will see any 2 modules being used

If it is a 3 core app you will see any 1 module being used + any 1 half-utilized module


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Jul 17, 2011)

seronx said:


> It will use all that they need
> 
> The Windows OS will schedule the threads not the software or the cpu
> 
> ...



So there is no way to make it use 1 core per module? That would make more sense so that all 4 threads are getting 100% of the resources.

In a 4 threaded application.


----------



## seronx (Jul 17, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> So there is no way to make it use 1 core per module? That would make more sense so that all 4 threads are getting 100% of the resources.
> 
> In a 4 threaded application.



In real world tasks there will be no differences between 1 core used to 2 cores used

1 core in a module has access to 100% of the resources
2 cores in a module has access to 100% of the resources

The idea of CMT is to make 2 cores use the same resources to increase throughput/speed

1 module provides 2x the resources 1 core needs

4 cores being used in any pattern or setup will have 100% access to all the resources it needs

Simply put you do not need to worry about the module as a whole

Everything that needs to be dedicated is dedicated and everything that needs to be shared is shared


----------



## Wile E (Jul 17, 2011)

seronx said:


> *AMD Zambezi has more IPC per module compared to Intel IPC per core*
> 
> and AMD Zambezi mimics Tri-channel simply do to how many predictors the IMC has



I'll believe it when I see it.





seronx said:


> In real world tasks there will be no differences between 1 core used to 2 cores used
> 
> 1 core in a module has access to 100% of the resources
> 2 cores in a module has access to 100% of the resources *only half of the time.*
> ...


Fixed.


----------



## seronx (Jul 17, 2011)

False


----------



## Wile E (Jul 17, 2011)

seronx said:


> False



Fabrication


----------



## seronx (Jul 17, 2011)

Wile E said:


> Fabrication



You got it backwards

There is 800% resources

1 core can only access 100% of those resources

It is a hardware limitation

2 cores will use 200% of those

So, 1 core will completely use the stuff dedicated to it and only half the stuff shared with it there is only so much 1 core can do

The floating point is a dedicated entity shared between both cores, so it does not follow what we think of a normal FPU

That is why it is call a Flex FPU

1 core in a module has access to 100% of the resources in 1 module
2 cores in a module has access to 200% of the resources in 1 module

Module holds all the resources needed for 2 cores to run in it
There is no performance hit in this design

Performance to Resources used
100% -> 200% -> 300% -> 400% -> 500% -> 600% -> 700% -> 800%
{50% -> 100%} -> {150% -> 200%} -> {250% -> 300%} -> {350% -> All}

with 4 cores used in any module will utilize half of the CPUs total resources
with 2 cores used in any module will utiilize 1/4 of the CPUs total resources
with 6 """"" 3/4 of the CPUs total resources
with 8 """"" All of the the CPUs total resources

Module holds 100% of the stuff needed for 1 core and 2 cores to operate without a bottleneck

---and now for something totally different--------



			
				Brad_Hawthorne@EVGA said:
			
		

> I helped setup an AMD event on the 15th and staffed the event on the 16th. The two systems I worked with were Bulldozer 3.4ghz engineering samples. I pulled up the system control panel to confirm the chips as 3.4ghz ES. I have mixed thoughts about it. I liked that they did 3.4ghz on the stock AMD heatsink by default. On the other hand, it was definitely ES silicon. I was getting random CTD on things while we were demoing. I did no benches on the hardware because I had no time. They were Dirt3 Eyefinity 3x1L demo rigs.





			
				Brad_Hawthorne@EVGA said:
			
		

> Everything was cranked up to maximums in the settings, running them 5760x1080. No noticeable lag spikes or FPS issues with real world use in game. I believe the video cards in the rigs were 6990. The port config was two dvi and 2 mini-dp. Ran two of the projectors via dvi and the third via minidp-to dvi adapter. The rigs were connected to D-Box motion actuated racing chairs with Logitech G27 setups. I have pics and video of the rig configurations on my Canon t2i. I just finished driving Dallas-Wichita though in 6 hours so I'm a bit tired. Will update pics when I wake up later today.









What he does^


----------



## Wile E (Jul 17, 2011)

If both threads going to a module need to access the fpu, one has to wait. By definition, that's not 100% resource availability.

And eyefinity setups prove absolutely nothing. Gaming is an absolutely terrible metric to judge cpu performance.

Sorry, but I would happily bet money that Intel still wins IPC per core per clock.


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Jul 17, 2011)

Here is a quote from JF-AMD that says that you don't get 100% out of two cores in a module.



> OK, daddy is going to do some math, everyone follow along please.
> 
> First: There is only ONE performance number that has been legally cleared, 16-core Interlagos will give 50% more throughput than 12-core Opteron 6100. This is a statement about throughput and about server workloads only. You CANNOT make any client performance assumptions about that statement.
> 
> ...



http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums...-From-AMD-at-ISSCC-2011&p=4755711#post4755711

So now I'm back to hoping that they can figure out a way to make 4 threads run on 4 modules.


----------



## seronx (Jul 17, 2011)

Wile E said:


> If both threads going to a module need to access the fpu, one has to wait. By definition, that's not 100% resource availability.
> 
> And eyefinity setups prove absolutely nothing. Gaming is an absolutely terrible metric to judge cpu performance.
> 
> Sorry, but I would happily bet money that Intel still wins IPC per core per clock.



The FPU isn't a resource and both threads aren't going to wait for the FPU since it is tasked way differently than in CMP

256bit commands are done at the module level not the core level
(Meaning AVX support is the same as Intel's AVX for compatibility)

SSE5 is where it is at for AMD(XOP, CVT16, FMA4)

SSE is done at the core level(8xSSE)(SSE5 128bit)
AVX is done at the module level(4xAVX)(AVX 128bit+AVX 128bit)

Sorry, but I would bet money that AMD and Intel have equal IPC per core per clock



Damn_Smooth said:


> Here is a quote from JF-AMD that says that you don't get 100% out of two cores in a module.
> 
> So now I'm back to hoping that they can figure out a way to make 4 threads run on 4 modules.



He isn't talking about what I am talking about

It's harder to explain once you go from the throughput world to the speed world

There is no overhead....that is the issue
The core CMP issue is there but isn't really bad

CMT scales on the module level not the core level
200% -> 397.5% -> 595% -> 792.5%
vs CMP
100% -> 197.5% -> 295% -> 392.5% -> 490% -> 587.5% -> 685% -> 782.5%

Do you see the trade off?


----------



## Wile E (Jul 17, 2011)

seronx said:


> *The FPU isn't a resource and both threads aren't going to wait for the FPU since it is tasked way differently than in CMP*
> 
> 256bit commands are done at the module level not the core level
> (Meaning AVX support is the same as Intel's AVX for compatibility)
> ...



Bullshit, if both threads need floating point, one has to wait, plain and simple fact. I don't care about SSE5, that's a completely irrelevant distraction, and doesn't change the point at all.


----------



## seronx (Jul 17, 2011)

Wile E said:


> Bullshit, if both threads need floating point, one has to wait, plain and simple fact. I don't care about SSE5, that's a completely irrelevant distraction, and doesn't change the point at all.



No...there is no waiting for each core

AVX done on both cores or done half-length
128bit AVX+128bit AVX
2x128bit AVX

You not understanding this is lousy tiddings



Damn_Smooth said:


> Here is a quote from JF-AMD that says that you don't get 100% out of two cores in a module.
> 
> So now I'm back to hoping that they can figure out a way to make 4 threads run on 4 modules.



Back to you

4 core Orochi vs 4 core Phenom II

Both score 4000~
But in multithreading there is an overhead but the Orochi design alleviates that to the module level and not to the core level

4 core Orochi will get a real world score of 15000~ where in an no-overhead world it will get 16k
4 core Phenom II will get a real world score of 14000~ where in an no-overhead world it will get 16k

The distance gets even bigger with more cores

8 core Orochi vs 8 core Phenom II

4000 again
8 core Orochi will get a real world score of 30000 where in a no overhead world it will get 32K
8 core Phenom II will get a real world score of 28000 where in no overhead world it will get 32k

But that is at the same clocks and for the same IPC

Phenom II has 3 IPC per core while Zambezi has 4 IPC per core(this is where the 25% comes in)

and Zambezi will have a higher clock

Same clocks though
Phenom II 3.4GHz
4200
Zambezi ignoring all the extra stuff that increases a little bit
5000~(I'm going to say it will get 5000ish(±400)

Phenom II 8C - 29400
Zambezi 8C - 34500

But that is if it is well programmed


----------



## Wile E (Jul 17, 2011)

Thanks, but I'll wait for the real info to release.


----------



## seronx (Jul 17, 2011)

Wile E said:


> Thanks, but I'll wait for the real info to release.








Is this real enough?

128bit Execution per Core
256bit Execution per Module


----------



## xenocide (Jul 17, 2011)

128-bit - 32 FLOPS
256-bit - 64 FLOPS

wait what?


----------



## seronx (Jul 17, 2011)

xenocide said:


> 128-bit - 32 FLOPS
> 256-bit - 64 FLOPS
> 
> wait what?



It's due to the FMACs

Intel doesn't have FMACs

1x128bit
or
1x256bit
per core

AMD has FMACs

1x128bit
per core
1x256bit
per module

The best I can come up with


----------



## Benetanegia (Jul 17, 2011)

I'm amazed at the sheer amount of BS that you can write in one night. lol not pretending to be offensive, it's almost a complimment.

Anyway, FMAC has nothing to do with that. FMAC is the way the math is done. AMD used 2x128 bit FMAC units. Which means 2 fused mulply accumulate units.

Intel used 1x 256 bit FMUL and 1x 256 bit FADD. The result is similar.

The difference is that BD can use 1x 128 bit for each "core", which may or might not be an advantage for legacy code that is heavily parallelized (8 threads). In the server arena this might be a real advantage, in desktop, it will help nothing most probably (8 threads required).

What AMD doesn't say either is that the 128+128 = 256 bit operation is slower than the "native" 256 bit operation, so slower for AVX, there is overhead. Pretending there is not, is just like believing in fairies.

Or just like believing that GlobalFoundries or not, the yields are the same for an old architecture and a new architecture.


----------



## AphexDreamer (Jul 17, 2011)

I have no idea what is going on here or what is being said but would honestly like to know. 

I do plan on picking up one of these processors, of course after they are actually out and I've read a couple of reviews. 

Should I worry about all the info that is being thrown around here?


----------



## Benetanegia (Jul 17, 2011)

AphexDreamer said:


> Should I worry about all the info that is being thrown around here?



As someone who only wants to buy the thing, not really. Wait until the reviews are performed and make your decision based on the performance for your prefered applications.

We just like to talk about and predict performance based on our knowledge of the architecture and the different tech utilized.


----------



## seronx (Jul 17, 2011)

Benetanegia said:


> blah blah blah



Using 128bit+128bit is 6% slower I am to lazy to google up what we already should know

The yields are better

Because they have been producing AMD Zambezi chips since
Late August 2010(8 weeks after Bulldozer was taped out)
Late August 2010 -Late October 2010 = A1
November 2010 - January 2011 = B0
February 2011- April 2011 = B1
May 2011 - July 2011 = B2
^That span of time I am pretty sure they don't have yield issues

Since, the desktop market likes the legacy benchies it will do great



AphexDreamer said:


> I have no idea what is going on here or what is being said but would honestly like to know.
> 
> I do plan on picking up one of these processors, of course after they are actually out and I've read a couple of reviews.
> 
> Should I worry about all the info that is being thrown around here?



No, you shouldn't we are bickering about stuff you won't have to worry about



Benetanegia said:


> As someone who only wants to buy the thing, not really. Wait until the reviews are performed and make your decision based on the performance for your prefered applications.
> 
> We just like to talk about and predict performance based on our knowledge of the architecture and the different tech utilized.



Basically


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Jul 17, 2011)

seronx said:


> No, you shouldn't we are bickering about stuff you won't have to worry about



and what you know little about, for all you know they may allow the use of 2x128bit fpu to 1 core if underused meaning it would have 100+% resources, im not saying it will just saying that not one person on here knows what them mofos are !actually! gona be capable of regarding speed or function, your spreading FUD simples and clearly sat on an AMD dildo 

not once have i seen it be your imho, no your waffling like its a fact, and no sprd sheets please or screanies , ive seen em all and been following it as long as everyone else on TPU


----------



## Benetanegia (Jul 17, 2011)

seronx said:


> Using 128bit+128bit is 6% slower I am to lazy to google up what we already should know
> 
> The yields are better
> 
> ...



And why did they had so many revisions? Because yields were not good my friend. And now they delayed it again, for which reason? Obvious. They still have some issues.



> Since, the desktop market likes the legacy benchies it will do great



Even if that was true:

legacy apps == poor multi-threading == don't dream of 4 threads being fully utilized, let alone 8 == 128+128 bit advantage goes down the drain.

And when major developers start using AVX in 1-2 years tops, BD will have the disadvantage. "Only" 6% if you will (I want proof btw), still a big one considering that the die size increases too.


----------



## seronx (Jul 17, 2011)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> and what you know little about, for all you know they may allow the use of 2x128bit fpu to 1 core if underused meaning it would have 100+% resources, im not saying it will just saying that not one person on here knows what them mofos are !actually! gona be capable of regarding speed or function, your spreading FUD simples and clearly sat on an AMD dildo
> 
> not once have i seen it be your imho, no your waffling like its a fact, and no sprd sheets please or screanies , ive seen em all and been following it as long as everyone else on TPU



http://blogs.amd.com/work/2010/10/25/the-new-flex-fp/

You need to read this



> One of the most interesting features planned for our next generation core architecture, which features the new “Bulldozer” core, is something called the “Flex FP”, which delivers tremendous floating point capabilities for technical and financial applications.
> 
> For those of you not familiar with floating point math, this is the high level stuff, not 1+1 integer math that most applications use.  Technical applications and financial applications that rely on heavy-duty use of floating point math could see huge increases in performance over our existing architectures, as well as far more flexibility.
> 
> ...





Benetanegia said:


> And why did they had so many revisions? Because yields were not good my friend. And now they delayed it again, for which reason? Obvious. They still have some issues.



And those issues weren't yield bent




Benetanegia said:


> Even if that was true:
> 
> legacy apps == poor multi-threading == don't dream of 4 threads being fully utilized, let alone 8 == 128+128 bit advantage goes down the drain.
> 
> And when major developers start using AVX in 1-2 years tops, BD will have the disadvantage. "Only" 6% if you will (I want proof btw), still a big one considering that the die size increases too.



I am mainly talking about Cinebench, wPrime, and those other benchies


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Jul 17, 2011)

seronx said:


> You need to read this



yes cos ive not seen that before(<sarcasm), gimp no screenies i said


----------



## seronx (Jul 17, 2011)

theoneandonlymrk said:


>



The cores do not need the Floating Point Unit

The Floating Point Unit needs the cores



Oh me....forgetting about that single fact


----------



## pantherx12 (Jul 17, 2011)

Whilst Seronx is a bit chatty, stop giving him such a hard time guys.

If you disagree that's fine but your treating him like he's an idiot when we're in a thread that's entirely based on speculation.

Which is just as stupid.


It's kind of annoying coming in here and seeing people talk down to one person so much.


----------



## Benetanegia (Jul 17, 2011)

seronx said:


> And those issues weren't yield bent



Of course they were. When you do a respin, it's always related to yields in one form or another. When they say they cannot get high enough clocks, it means not enough chips yield at whatever the target clocks were.



> I am mainly talking about Cinebench, wPrime, and those other benchies



Those are not desktop apps. Unless you spend all your time doing CAD rendering, in which case you are not an standard desktop user, and not even an standard enthusiast or gamer.

Also they are benchmarks with almost never represent actual performance, because they are highly optimized for MT and floating point math, which is not attainable on REAL code.

I happen to spend a lot of time doing CAD btw. For work. So I have always been highly interested in BD. That does not mean that I will believe in AMD's claims 100%, when they contradict everything I know about computer science, much less those claims coming from an AMD evangelist. I dont need AMD nor anyone to tell me what would be the performance and the trade offs, when I can look at their architecture and know what to expect. It's like I don't need an evangelist telling me how the universe was created or how the world was populated with different animals, when I actually know about the big bang and evolution.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Jul 17, 2011)

he talks down back to us, im sorry seronx, but i do feel your sounding a bit like a tape recorder now and as i say stateing too much to be fact pre release


----------



## pantherx12 (Jul 17, 2011)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> he talks down back to us, im sorry seronx, but i do feel your sounding a bit like a tape recorder now and as i say stateing too much to be fact pre release



I can imagine it being somewhat frustrating for him though having everyone post in ways where you can feel the >=( in the words 


To be honest I don't think there's anything else about clock speed to be discussed and everyone should go have a nice cup of coffee or tea.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Jul 17, 2011)

pantherx12 said:


> To be honest I don't think there's anything else about clock speed to be discussed and everyone should go have a nice cup of coffee or tea



thats mine and a few others point i think

been work 6-12, il go av a lie down get out tother side o bed this time lol


----------



## pantherx12 (Jul 17, 2011)

I think this image sums up everything.


----------



## seronx (Jul 17, 2011)

Benetanegia said:


> Of course they were. When you do a respin, it's always related to yields in one form or another. When they say they cannot get high enough clocks, it means not enough chips yield at whatever the target clocks were.



The yields are okay, they were okay since AMD facepalmed and said this Good Chip deal wasn't a good idea Global foundries is like robbing us before the CPU even launches

^that was in April 2011

And there is a conference call on Thursday @ July 21st

I don't know what is about but the "yield" issue will be shot down in that conference call supposedly



Benetanegia said:


> Those are not desktop apps. Unless you spend all your time doing CAD rendering, in which case you are not an standard desktop user, and not even an standard enthusiast or gamer.



I do gaming + recording and the recording application can address up to 12 cores

SSE3 -> SSE4.2 is going to mean I'll be able to record at 60fps
(I don't record to my hard drive)

http://www.twitch.tv/seronx/b/286984318
me playing a space game WITH nothing to do




Benetanegia said:


> Also they are benchmarks with almost never represent actual performance, because they are highly optimized for MT and floating point math, which is not attainable on REAL code.



Multithreaded performance is what I deal with everyday!




Benetanegia said:


> I happen to spend a lot of time doing CAD btw. For work. So I have always been highly interested in BD. That does not mean that I will believe in AMD's claims 100%, when they contradict everything I know about computer science, much less those claims coming from an AMD evangelist. I dont need AMD nor anyone to tell me what would be the performance and the trade offs, when I can look at their architecture and know what to expect. It's like I don't need an evangelist telling me how the universe was created or how the world was populated with different animals, when I actually know about the big bang and evolution.



I am not an AMD Evangelist sadly, I own 2 Pentium 4s ($2000 PCs)



theoneandonlymrk said:


> he talks down back to us, im sorry seronx, but i do feel your sounding a bit like a tape recorder now and as i say stateing too much to be fact pre release



I know a couple things



pantherx12 said:


> I can imagine it being somewhat frustrating for him though having everyone post in ways where you can feel the >=( in the words
> 
> 
> To be honest I don't think there's anything else about clock speed to be discussed and everyone should go have a nice cup of coffee or tea.



>=(

Clock speeds are higher than 3.6GHz, how high I don't know but the sky is the limit(or until the heat melts the interconnects)


----------



## jpierce55 (Jul 17, 2011)

pantherx12 said:


> I can imagine it being somewhat frustrating for him though having everyone post in ways where you can feel the >=( in the words
> 
> 
> To be honest I don't think there's anything else about clock speed to be discussed and everyone should go have a nice cup of coffee or tea.



I am amazed these threads are even staying open. People are speculating about speculations. These aren't even official releases. Everybody has already decided how this processor will perform and we don't even know for 100% certain what the processor will be.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Jul 17, 2011)

Benetanegia said:


> It's like I don't need an evangelist telling me how the universe was created or how the world was populated with different animals, when I actually know about the big bang and evolution.



nobody knows at this time...

their are but theories and scientists are fond of making new ones



http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/is-everything-we-know-about-the-universe-wrong/

much can and will change in the next month regardless of what any of us knows or realises and hence such surety is false


----------



## Benetanegia (Jul 17, 2011)

seronx said:


> The yields are okay, they were okay since AMD facepalmed and said this Good Chip deal wasn't a good idea Global foundries is like robbing us before the CPU even launches
> 
> ^that was in April 2011
> 
> ...



The yields were obviously bad, and was certainly backed up by the fact that AMD changed his deal with GF to a per worming chip deal.



> I do gaming + recording and the recording application can address up to 12 cores
> 
> SSE3 -> SSE4.2 is going to mean I'll be able to record at 60fps
> (I don't record to my hard drive)



For video encoding Intel's QuickSync, has proven to be better than any other MT apporach out there. If you really are into gaming + video, the best answer right now is going Intel.



> Multithreaded performance is what I deal with everyday!



I do too, to a high extent, but because I do, I actually know how it works, so I know that AMD's claims (and yours by extention) about scaling and IPC etc, are complete bollocks!!



> I am not an AMD Evangelist sadly, I own 2 Pentium 4s ($2000 PCs)



That's actually a proof supporting your AMD evengelism rather than the opposite. If instead of having bought AMD CPUs in the P4 era, I had bought P4s, I would be burnt too and I would most probably by an AMD fanboy lol.

The evidence seems to support the idea. You bought 2 P4s, but you have not used any other Intel CPU since. That's it you never actually used the good Intel chips, only the worst ones. That pretty much equals fanboyism. Read this:

http://techreport.com/discussions.x/21294

Only one purchase is needed to become a fanboy. Whatever you used before is irrelevant, it is the last purchase/election what matters.



theoneandonlymrk said:


> nobody knows at this time...
> 
> their are but theories and scientists are fond of making new ones
> 
> ...



None of that actually contradicts the big bang, only the way it may have happened. It does not contradict, it does show some flaws in the model.

Anyway, that was not my point. i.e. the big bang theory being "wrong" does not make the Bible right.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Jul 17, 2011)

Benetanegia said:


> Only one purchase is needed to become a fanboy. Whatever you used before is irrelevant, it is the last purchase/election what matters.




your sounding like youve a deffinate lean yourself  I hope they bring out something better then intels but because intel will then bring out something better again and so on, I personally wont be goin intel till they settle on a socket for a while/at all as i value the option to upgrade in parts. roll on BD so i can see some reviews


----------



## seronx (Jul 17, 2011)

jpierce55 said:


> I am amazed these threads are even staying open. People are speculating about speculations. These aren't even official releases. Everybody has already decided how this processor will perform and we don't even know for 100% certain what the processor will be.



An 8-core 32nm HKMG CPU that uses the FX+Black Moniker
An 6-core 32nm HKMG CPU that uses the FX+Ultimate Moniker
An 4-core 32nm HKMG that will likely get replaced next year by an APU that uses the FX+Ultimate Moniker

The Processor is from AMD

The CPU is set to release in 2011, no real date on launch since it's a surprise!!!!

and there is a Flex FPU and what it does is magic, you know the unicorn kind

 Unicorn Magic.... #$%^ Yeah




Benetanegia said:


> The yields were obviously bad, and was certainly backed up by the fact that AMD changed his deal with GF to a per worming chip deal.





> AMD added the new pricing agreement doesn't mean it is expecting lower yields from Global Foundries' 32nm process but that it will give "better protection" if yields are lower than expected.





> AMD said that 32nm production is ramping up better than it forecasted last year and it tried to play down the significance of its new deal with Global Foundries.



If is the question, and we won't find out will we since Zambezi will be cheap because of the "Better Protection"



Benetanegia said:


> For video encoding Intel's QuickSync, has proven to be better than any other MT apporach out there. If you really are into gaming + video, the best answer right now is going Intel.



False, SSE is where it is at

You are talking about Conversion

I am talking about capturing



Benetanegia said:


> I do too, to a high extent, but because I do, I actually know how it works, so I know that AMD's claims (and yours by extention) about scaling and IPC etc, are complete bollocks!!



3 IPC to 4 IPC is not complete bollocks

You aren't looking at the right areas

Scaling factors are the easiest to calculate with AMD CPUs


----------



## Benetanegia (Jul 17, 2011)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> your sounding like youve a deffinate lean yourself  I hope they bring out something better then intels but because intel will then bring out something better again and so on, I personally wont be goin intel till they settle on a socket for a while/at all as i value the option to upgrade in parts. roll on BD so i can see some reviews



Hmm according to the TechReport blogpost, yes I am a Sandy Bridge fanboy, since in my last purchase, I was forced to buy a SB when my previous build died. I was actually waiting for BD to make my purchase, not that I was going to buy BD, but I was waiting for it. When the BD module idea was first presented I was totally sold out, but then we got actual architecture info, and it's not exactly what they first claimed.

The difference is that I don't post every single AMD (Intel in my case I supose) PR stuff I come across and pretend it's a fact.


----------



## Benetanegia (Jul 17, 2011)

seronx said:


> False, SSE is where it is at
> 
> You are talking about Conversion
> 
> I am talking about capturing



To my knowledge and actual experience capturing (without any encoding going on) does not require ANY CPU time. That's what DMA is for.



> 3 IPC to 4 IPC is not complete bollocks
> 
> You aren't looking at the right areas
> 
> Scaling factors are the easiest to calculate with AMD CPUs



3 IPC to 4 IPC IS completely bollocks. Since AMD went from 3 IPC per core to 4 IPC per module. Each module can only issue 4 instructions, so when all 8 cores are used only 2 IPC per core. It will be able to do 4 IPC when only 4 are used though. 

BD can do 8 threads and 4 IPC, but not at the same time. The BS comes from the fact that they are pretending to sell the idea that BD has 8 cores AND 4 IPC at the same time which is completely false.


----------



## seronx (Jul 17, 2011)

Benetanegia said:


> To my knowledge and actual experience capturing (without any encoding going on) does not require ANY CPU time. That's what DMA is for.



Capture is SSE/Encoding is SSE for realtime




Benetanegia said:


> 3 IPC to 4 IPC IS completely bollocks. Since AMD went from 3 IPC per core to 4 IPC per module. Each module can only issue 4 instructions, so when all 8 cores are used only 2 IPC per core. It will be able to do 4 IPC when only 4 are used though.
> 
> BD can do 8 threads and 4 IPC, but not at the same time. The BS comes from the fact that they are pretending to sell the idea that BD has 8 cores AND 4 IPC at the same time which is completely false.



Zambezi can do 8 thread and 4 IPC per core

Phenom II can only do 1 of these scenarios
3 ALU ops
3 AGU ops
Not both
6 IPC in theory but the architecture didn't allow it so half/half was done 3 ALUs ops or 3 AGUs ops

Zambezi can do 2 ALU ops and 2 AGU ops per cycle thus it has a max of 4 IPC

but utilization of both increased(The IPC doubled realistically)

And I am pretty sure the last ALU and AGU weren't used often because they were called an AMU whatever the f that means
(Phenom II)
and most programs didn't even support it it was there just for the third floating point pipeline


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Jul 17, 2011)

Benetanegia said:


> 3 IPC to 4 IPC IS completely bollocks. Since AMD went from 3 IPC per core to 4 IPC per module. Each module can only issue 4 instructions, so when all 8 cores are used only 2 IPC per core. It will be able to do 4 IPC when only 4 are used though.
> 
> BD can do 8 threads and 4 IPC, but not at the same time. The BS comes from the fact that they are pretending to sell the idea that BD has 8 cores AND 4 IPC at the same time which is completely false.



bit too irate though dude,

 1   Each module can only issue 4 instructions 2 integer and 2 fpu= 4x4 =16 ipc max so how is it being limited to 8??

 each module is doing its own scheduling? so it shouldnt need to drop below 3-4 ipc per module(2 integer 2 fpu or 1 integer 2fpu etc etc) still making anything between 4 - 16 ipc total not 8?




seronx said:


> And I am pretty sure the last ALU and AGU weren't used often because they were called an AMU whatever the f that means
> (Phenom II)



thats why im saying your wrong though dude as performance benches etc might not best make use of this new archtecture for a while if at all.


----------



## Benetanegia (Jul 17, 2011)

To both of you. Each module can do 4 issues, so 2 per core when both cores in a module are used.

2 IPC x 8 "cores" == 16 IPC for the entire chip <- this is also true for SB with HT

or

4 IPC x 4 cores == 16 IPC <- this is also true for SB w/o HT

What is not posible and is being claimed is:

4 IPC x 8 cores == 32 IPC


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Jul 17, 2011)

Benetanegia said:


> 4 IPC x 8 cores == 32 IPC




so is AMD sayin that?

i hadnt heard that.


----------



## Benetanegia (Jul 17, 2011)

theoneandonlymrk said:


> so is AMD sayin that?
> 
> i hadnt heard that.



Well if I'm 100% honest, I don't know if AMD trully said that or if it's being said by seronx and/or one of his links/quotes. But you gotta understand my confusion, I think that I've seen 20x more Bulldozer related claims made by seronx, than on the rest of the internet. In any case I'm responding to seronx and not AMD themselves so if at all, I'm being lenient to seronx by assuming that AMD did said that and that he is not making that up (too).


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Jul 17, 2011)

as i read it, it could be poss to do 4x32b AVX calcs of the same type on one fpu and 4x32b AVX calcs of a different type on the other fpu plus 2 integer instructions at a max per clock? per module which does make for some interesting ipc figures single precision obv, and coded for obv,.

 imho thats why its got a scheduler on the flex fpu as it will likely be used to allow  double precision 64b x 2 per 128b fpux2 + 2 integer in use and that is then impressive no?.


----------



## seronx (Jul 17, 2011)

Benetanegia said:


> To both of you. Each module can do 4 issues, so 2 per core when both cores in a module are used.
> 
> 2 IPC x 8 "cores" == 16 IPC for the entire chip <- this is also true for SB with HT
> 
> ...





theoneandonlymrk said:


> so is AMD sayin that?
> 
> i hadnt heard that.





Benetanegia said:


> Well if I'm 100% honest, I don't know if AMD trully said that or if it's being said by seronx and/or one of his links/quotes. But you gotta understand my confusion, I think that I've seen 20x more Bulldozer related claims made by seronx, than on the rest of the internet. In any case I'm responding to seronx and not AMD themselves so if at all, I'm being lenient to seronx by assuming that AMD did said that and that he is not making that up (too).



IPC has increased per core

How it increases is unknown till it releases

It is 4 Complex Instructions per clock per module

The decoders are a fusion of Complex and Simple which is like 






What is the difference between

3 Simple Instructions(Phenom II)
to
4 Complex Instructions(FX)


----------



## Benetanegia (Jul 17, 2011)

seronx said:


> IPC has increased per core
> 
> How it increases is unknown till it releases



Yes sir. 
The more you tell me that, the more I believe. Faith is starting to grow on me!

God, I've been so wrong. How could I have assumed it had anything to do with tech, when it's all magic! It's something mystical that nobody knows until the truth is revelaed to us by the Lords. The answer is not on the architecture, it's on our faith. Through faith we will be stronger and beat competition!!

No, now seriously. Pretty much everything has been revealed about the architecture and there's no magic formula. Actual/runtime IPC (as oposed to theoretical IPC) in BD might end up higher than on previous AMD architectures because of 2 main reasons:

1- use of multi-threading.
2- better branch prediction.

Point n. 1 is what we are mostly discussing. How much better is CMT over SMT? AMD will obviously want make you believe it's much much better and so much better in fact that it equals 2 complete cores. I call BS.

Point n. 2 is from where most serious IPC improvement claims come from. Most of the improvements for Sandy came exactly from increased IPC due to better scheduling and branch prediction. Theorerical IPC remains the same as Nehalem after all, and the 2500k can often times match 6 core i7's on threaded apps. Westmere already had much improved front end, and SB supposed an even bigger jump.

Bulldozer does introduce a much stronger branch predictor, but it's still to be seen if it can match or even come close to Intel's, which is its strongest point since Core 2.



seronx said:


> It is 4 Complex Instructions per clock per module
> 
> The decoders are a fusion of Complex and Simple which is like
> 
> ...



Read the link I posted, please.

At some point you will have to stop posting BS. Istanbul could do 3 simple and 3 complex too and Bd does 4 simple/4complex per module. So does Intel (mixing simple and complex), although differently.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jul 17, 2011)

Benetanegia said:


> The difference is that I don't post every single AMD (Intel in my case I supose) PR stuff I come across and pretend it's a fact.



Thats been my point since day one. Marketing is marketing is marketing.

What worries me about BD is the fact they said an over all increase of 30%......Thats AMD cherry picking stats to get that 30% increase for marketing. So in the real world its more like 15% or 20%......maybe.

This has been my number one concern. Not the IMC. Not the Mhz. Not the architecture. That little marketing number. You can tell far more about a pre-release product on the marketing you see IF you know what to look for in marketing. Both AMD and Intel are famous for inflating numbers. More then car manufactures! So everything you see. Everything you read. Its all FUD until we see real world numbers. No math in the world can explain how a CPU will work based of marketing slides.


----------



## seronx (Jul 17, 2011)

Benetanegia said:


> Bulldozer does introduce a much stronger branch predictor, but it's still to be seen if it can match or even come close to Intel's, which is its strongest point since Core 2.
> 
> Read the link I posted, please.
> 
> At some point you will have to stop posting BS. Istanbul could do 3 simple and 3 complex too and Bd does 4 simple/4complex per module. So does Intel (mixing simple and complex), although differently.



I read it already get out of town

The increase is like this

1000 for Phenom II per core

1000 for Zambezi per core

It is the same, the performance didn't drop like you think it would it actually increased

1150 for Zambezi per core

There is another increase but I would wait till benchmarks to see this increase
(there is a huge difference between the Bulldozer/Zambezi to the Bulldozer/Zambezi we would have gotten in 2009, and it doesn't help that it only says this in the software guide)


----------



## Benetanegia (Jul 17, 2011)

seronx said:


> I read it already get out of town
> 
> The increase is like this
> 
> ...



No I actually think the increase is more like this:

 for Phenom 2 per 
 for Zambezi per  plus  when the  is activated and a good deal of Turbo too.

Ok, ok I'm done with feeding the troll. Sorry guys.


----------



## HalfAHertz (Jul 17, 2011)

@seronix I stopped reading your posts a long time ago. It's really nice to see someone who is very eager and interested in the technology but the majority of the things you post are total bull...half the time you pull numbers out of thin air and the other half you contradict yourself. 
    Please stop spamming the Bulldozer threads with made up numbers and rumors unless you can show something solid and believable.

Now what I would like to know is would it make any sense to combine CMT and HT, if at all possible? The thread management and logistics horror aside, 16 threads would be better than 8 if half the time you can't saturate the cores with information at a 100%.


----------



## fullinfusion (Jul 17, 2011)

Thats not very nice^

This guy bullshit or not is giving more then others. If it's not an Intel fan bashing the BD *imo im thinking some are feeling threatened by amd this go around* but hey Who knows till the chip hits the reviews... Half the shit in these threads are BS any ways so to point fingers is some what bios don't you think?


----------



## seronx (Jul 17, 2011)

Benetanegia said:


> No I actually think the increase is more like this:
> 
> for Phenom 2 per
> for Zambezi per  plus  when the  is activated and a good deal of Turbo too.
> ...



Same clocks
Phenom II with Zambezi has the same performance

But there is some unknowns with the Bulldozer architecture particularly the



> There are four integer execution units per core.



(4 ALUs + 2AGUs + 1 Store/Load Unit) per core
2 ALUs + 2 AGLUs + 1 Store/Load
and what does this design mirror?

Sandy Bridge

I looked it up, in the k15h handbook in programming

What they changed is instead of:
4 Simple AGLUs like originally planned(8 IPC per module)
We get:
2 Complex ALUs + 2 Simple AGLUs + 1 Load Store Unit(8-10 IPC per module)



HalfAHertz said:


> @seronix I stopped reading your posts a long time ago. It's really nice to see someone who is very eager and interested in the technology but the majority of the things you post are total bull...half the time you pull numbers out of thin air and the other half you contradict yourself.
> Please stop spamming the Bulldozer threads with made up numbers and rumors unless you can show something solid and believable.



Well I never read your posts



HalfAHertz said:


> Now what I would like to know is would it make any sense to combine CMT and HT, if at all possible? The thread management and logistics horror aside, 16 threads would be better than 8 if half the time you can't saturate the cores with information at a 100%.



Yes, IBM is going to do it for their new "undisclosed" processor


----------



## cadaveca (Jul 17, 2011)

fullinfusion said:


> Thats not very nice^
> 
> This guy bullshit or not is giving more then others. If it's not an Intel fan bashing the BD *imo im thinking some are feeling threatened by amd this go around* but hey Who knows till the chip hits the reviews... Half the shit in these threads are BS any ways so to point fingers is some what bios don't you think?



Point is taht we should be able to contain our excitement and look at this with a clear head. FUD is FUD, not matter how enthusiastic you are about something.

All things surrounding actual performance are under NDA. Zambezi is in the wild, and those that have it can't talk about it.

So rather than getting all giddy like a preschool girl with Barbie dolls, and falsely rasing expectations, it seems most prudent to sit back adn watch the show.

There's nothing wrong with seronx's posts, except that alot of people can't seem to accept his posts as just a post, and are getting a bit excited. This causes arguments, which really serve no purpose but to create dissention among our members.

That's where the problem is..the arguments his posts spawn.

It'as doubly bad when really, nobody cares about Bulldozer no, really, because nobody can buy it. When we can go and pick it up, toss it in our boards, then we can discuss the ins and outs of it...doing such before having the product in hand can be nothing other than marketing.


----------



## radaja (Jul 17, 2011)

seronx said:


> In real world tasks there will be no differences between 1 core used to 2 cores used
> 
> *1 core in a module has access to 100% of the resources
> 2 cores in a module has access to 100% of the resources*
> ...





seronx said:


> You got it backwards
> 
> There is 800% resources
> 
> ...



i dont quite get how you went from 100%(post 229) to 200%(post 233) in the parts i highlighted?
are you talking about two different things in these explanations?


----------



## xenocide (Jul 18, 2011)

radaja said:


> i dont quite get how you went from 100%(post 229) to 200%(post 233) in the parts i highlighted?
> are you talking about two different things in these explanations?



Chalk it up to magic.


----------



## Wile E (Jul 18, 2011)

radaja said:


> i dont quite get how you went from 100%(post 229) to 200%(post 233) in the parts i highlighted?
> are you talking about two different things in these explanations?



Faerie dust.


----------



## seronx (Jul 18, 2011)

radaja said:


> i dont quite get how you went from 100%(post 229) to 200%(post 233) in the parts i highlighted?
> are you talking about two different things in these explanations?



A core can only access or get filled so much

Two different explainations

1 is talking about utilization and 2 is talking about the amount of utilization in a module scale because the module is pointless to talk about as the windows OS will schedule it not us

Core 1 will be utilized 100%
Core 2 will be utilized 100%

They won't be fighting for resources

If the module provides 2x that of a normal core that means 200%

Core 0 will use 100% of that 200%
Core 0 and 1 will use 200% of that 200%
Core 1 will use 100% of that 200%

CMT = Real cores

A lot of people are dissing this design thinking it is worse
but it isn't!

It is a lot better than what is expected



xenocide said:


> Chalk it up to magic.


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Jul 18, 2011)

seronx said:


> A core can only access or get filled so much
> 
> Two different explainations
> 
> ...



I don't have anywhere near as much confidence as you do about this. But being the AMD fan that I am, I hope you get the last laugh.


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 18, 2011)

Reading obr and his rants cracks me up. Posted Saturday about Llano



> AMD had originally thought that the voltage will be 1.3 V and frequencies above 3 GHz, as we all know what happened - default voltage 1.4 V and 2.9 GHz frequency miserable for the highest model without Turbo. We caught this time, "the bullet" AMD itself ... with their old official slides. So, still think that 32nm production at AMD (Glof) is good ... nope, it's a complete meal. What does it mean for the Bulldozer? - AMD is in a really bad situation. To not live up to promise, and this year released a Bulldozer really had to compromise enough to offer the first models and their parameters. The market will really only waste. odpadek first is called the FX-8110 with a pitiful 2.8 GHz and 1.4 V default It will be a tragic performance chip is ridiculous. few good cores that are able to produce by October, will go to processors FX-8150 without a "P". It will be a very limited production, only a few chips for review. AMD with him at the last minute lifted the basic stroke but reduced the Turbo. The tension is high again, 1.4 V. Since the cores are not better enough, AMD had to discontinue models FX-8130 and FX-8120, they will be listed in the second wave - to be more and better cores, and somehow manages to zberchat manufacturing process. October will be great for fans of AMD's disappointment, when Bulldozer come the poor, the vast majority of children and wise guy enough to roll your eyes at the performance ... is executed.


----------



## erocker (Jul 18, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> Reading obr and his rants cracks me up. Posted Saturday about Llano



I'm wondering why people actually care what this guy says?  Anyone can: Make a website, make stupid claims and opinions, fake benchmarks and spread it around the web. Whoopee!

*Here's a statement. AMD FX series will be released (in retail) at or before 8/23/2011 which is the release date for "something else".


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 18, 2011)

erocker said:


> I'm wondering why people actually care what this guy says?  Anyone can: Make a website, make stupid claims and opinions, fake benchmarks and spread it around the web. Whoopee!
> 
> *Here's a statement. AMD FX series will be released (in retail) at or before 8/23/2011 which is the release date for "something else".



Gives us something to discuss E. Ser.. I plan on going with an 8150 and a Crosshair V on release day so i can test it head to head against sandy bridge.


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 18, 2011)

It seems the original delay was because of poor yields



> Analyst: Yield drove Globalfoundries change
> Peter Clarke
> 6/21/2011 7:28 AM EDT
> 
> ...



Source :

http://www.eetimes.com/electronics-news/4217113/Analyst-chip-yield-Globalfoundries


----------



## xenocide (Jul 18, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> And, while 32-nm yields are still not optimal, we do not foresee AMD materially under-shipping demand in the second half of 2011.



Am I the only one that think's that's a rather douchey statement on their behalf?  It almost sounds like they don't think AMD will sell well enough to be in short demand, but I could just be reading into these things unnecessarily.


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Jul 18, 2011)

xenocide said:


> Am I the only one that think's that's a rather douchey statement on their behalf?  It almost sounds like they don't think AMD will sell well enough to be in short demand, but I could just be reading into these things unnecessarily.



You could look at it worse and think that AMD just doesn't give a shit and is going to send them out no matter what.

I really don't know what to make of it though. I do know that the laptop I'll be getting for school will have Llano inside. They better not be sold out.


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 18, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> You could look at it worse and think that AMD just doesn't give a shit and is going to send them out no matter what.
> 
> I really don't know what to make of it though. I do know that the laptop I'll be getting for school will have Llano inside. They better not be sold out.



You don't need Llano to watch porn at college. Sandy Bridge will do just fine.


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Jul 18, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> You don't need Llano to watch porn at college. Sandy Bridge will do just fine.



I like my porn at 1080p thank you.


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 18, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> I like my porn at 1080p thank you.



Trust me bro. After class you'll be banging so many girls you won't have time for porn... Unless you're a fatty or ugly then porn will be your only friend.


----------



## Neuromancer (Jul 18, 2011)

cadaveca said:


> ...
> 
> It'as doubly bad when really, nobody cares about Bulldozer no, really, because nobody can buy it. When we can go and pick it up, toss it in our boards, then we can discuss the ins and outs of it...doing such before having the product in hand can be nothing other than marketing.



So simple...

I love theorizing, but facts are facts. We have none and wont till it is released.


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Jul 18, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> Trust me bro. After class you'll be banging so many girls you won't have time for porn... Unless you're a fatty or ugly then porn will be your only friend.


----------



## Thatguy (Jul 18, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> Trust me bro. After class you'll be banging so many girls you won't have time for porn... Unless you're a fatty or ugly then porn will be your only friend.




  I rather get a hooker, easy terms, agreed upon service for the investment.


----------



## YautjaLord (Jul 18, 2011)

Thatguy said:


> I rather get a hooker, easy terms, agreed upon service for the investment.



Like any one that doesn't have enough sources for long time commitment; much like me. 

Back to topic. Seeing that AMD vs Intel trend is bad for my eyes + i don't know much about this ALU/FP/SSE stuff that much like you all, i tend to side with majority & say: til TechPowerUp gets the hands on actual CPU (be it 8-, 6- or 4-core Dozer) & pits it vs Sandy/Ivy Bridge as much as the speculation _might_ sound valid, it's still speculation. Hard gaming/benchmarking numbers is what needed, period. If frequency-wise Dozer beats the f*** out of Sandy Bridge or vice versa (for example 3.1GHz FX-8120 vs 3.4GHz i7 2600K) in - say - SuperPi, wPrime, PCMark Vantage & 3DMark11's CPU benchies than this what counts. Til that happens - as much as the info sounds good it's only speculation. Hope this happens by end of August though: this delay is f***ed up.


----------



## XoR (Jul 18, 2011)

Bulldozer will be fast CPU coz it will have high clocks for 1-4 thread apps and many cores for >4 thread apps 

I wouln't hope for beating Intel in performance/clock ratio or performance/power_consumption though... Bulldozer will be one power hungry beast 

ps. there were only one cpu family that was without confusion of how much cores it does really posess, legendary Pentium D 




and it ran 5GHz with ease 

all other multi-cores are just a scam...


----------



## [H]@RD5TUFF (Jul 18, 2011)

XoR said:


> Bulldozer will be fast CPU coz it will have high clocks for 1-4 thread apps and many cores for >4 thread apps
> 
> I wouln't hope for beating Intel in performance/clock ratio or performance/power_consumption though... Bulldozer will be one power hungry beast
> 
> ...



Now if only my UD5 would support one.


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 18, 2011)

XoR said:


> Bulldozer will be fast CPU coz it will have high clocks for 1-4 thread apps and many cores for >4 thread apps
> 
> I wouln't hope for beating Intel in performance/clock ratio or performance/power_consumption though... Bulldozer will be one power hungry beast
> 
> ...



Ahh Netburst. What a piece of shit


----------



## Frick (Jul 18, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> Ahh Netburst. What a piece of shit



Naaah, if you had the cooling for it some CPU's were pretty good.


----------



## Steevo (Jul 18, 2011)

Frick said:


> Naaah, if you had the cooling for it some CPU's were pretty good.


Meh.


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 18, 2011)

Frick said:


> Naaah, if you had the cooling for it some CPU's were pretty good.



I have a 965 EE in the closet. Even under water it sucked.


----------



## laszlo (Jul 18, 2011)

http://www.behardware.com/articles/833-1/amd-bulldozer-architecture.html


----------



## Thatguy (Jul 18, 2011)

laszlo said:


> http://www.behardware.com/articles/833-1/amd-bulldozer-architecture.html



I personally suspect that one of the reason phenom performance lags intel so much is do to the decoder being less efficient, it they improved this, the chips performance increase could be huge.


----------



## Heavy_MG (Jul 19, 2011)

XoR said:


> Bulldozer will be fast CPU coz it will have high clocks for 1-4 thread apps and many cores for >4 thread apps
> 
> I wouln't hope for beating Intel in performance/clock ratio or performance/power_consumption though... Bulldozer will be one power hungry beast
> 
> ...


It also doubles as a space heater.


----------



## YautjaLord (Jul 19, 2011)

Poor AMD if it doesn't fix the blocking factor, just like Intel got rid off NetBurst & gained the market share in performance; i'll feel sorry & besided - there's another issue involved: Intel's monopolistic reign if AMD winds up dead.  Gotta wait til some benchies proove otherwise, but for now only thing AMD & Intel fans (me included, though not entirely AMD or Intel fan but rather tech abuser ) need to do is - fear; fear of monopoly & sky high prices if Intel wins. Is there a news on when exactly Dozer releases or what?


----------



## Heavy_MG (Jul 19, 2011)

seronx said:


> If you have a 4 thread application it will use 4 cores
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Woah,it's faster than the 1100T.


----------



## Heavy_MG (Jul 19, 2011)

YautjaLord said:


> Poor AMD if it doesn't fix the blocking factor, just like Intel got rid off NetBurst & gained the market share in performance; i'll feel sorry & besided - there's another issue involved: Intel's monopolistic reign if AMD winds up dead.  Gotta wait til some benchies proove otherwise, but for now only thing AMD & Intel fans (me included, though not entirely AMD or Intel fan but rather tech abuser ) need to do is - fear; fear of monopoly & sky high prices if Intel wins. Is there a news on when exactly Dozer releases or what?


You do have a point there,even if BD kicks SB ass,Intel will still outsell them because they have their  ways of squeezing AMD out of the market. However i've been told if AMD ever went under,there would be several lawsuits(though I think Intel would just pay them off) and the FTC splitting up Intel before they get a chance to sucker consumers with sky high prices,and the government possibly giving AMD a bailout. After Netburst Intel has gained themselves almost all of the market share and huge sum of profits,Intel is most likely going to win with faster processors every time. AMD simply doesn't have the R&D funding to beat Intel & force further innovation anymore. Without AMD we would still be on Netburst.


----------



## xenocide (Jul 19, 2011)

YautjaLord said:


> fear of monopoly & sky high prices if Intel wins. Is there a news on when exactly Dozer releases or what?



Okay there are multiple things wrong here.  If Intel ever did develop a monopoly they would be subject to a number of Anti-Trust laws, and within years it would be resolved.  As for the price, Intel's CPU's offer performance that greatly exceeds the current lineup of AMD CPU's, and are priced accordingly.  Yes, you can get a Thuban x6 and in some applications it will be on par for a 2500k or 2600k, but 9/10 times the SB CPU's decimate it in performance.  So if it performs significantly better, why would it be cheaper?

The new SB-E CPU's announced have high price points because there is NOTHING else at that price point from AMD, and Intel isn't really sure how Bulldozer will affect how competative their pricing is.  If BD does well, SB\SB-E CPU's will drop in price accordingly.  It boils down to economics, why sell the best possible product at the lowest possible price when you can space out your products to maximize profits?  Millions of companies have done this before Intel, and millions will do it after.


----------



## YautjaLord (Jul 19, 2011)

Had to add - my 2 cents/IMHO; my bad guys.  Maybe i just fear for the worst way too much; gotta wait til CPU hits the PC store shelves & benchmarked rather then speculate what will or will not happen. Thanx. It's just that anticipation sometimes kills even pretty much patient person like me. Hope the CPU will arrive by end of August so PC store near me have it by the time i'll upgrade.


----------



## XoR (Jul 19, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> Ahh Netburst. What a piece of shit



NetBurst wouldn't be that bad overall if Intel didn't made Prescott and just shrinked Gellatin cores to 90nm for top P4HT and Northwood (with at least 256kb L2) for Celerons and cheaper P4s. Then we would definitely see >4GHz dual-core 65nm cpus and those would be much faster per MHz than 9xx 

and as for Pentium D, those cpus were quite cheap. I got 805 + Asus SLI mobo for less than X2 3800+ was priced  Maybe 805 was not as fast and not as power efficient but it was faster overal than similary priced Athlons X1 and @3.8GHz didn't lacked performance at anything. Just like today Phenoms II, not as fast and not as good but at least cheap


----------



## Thatguy (Jul 19, 2011)

xenocide said:


> Okay there are multiple things wrong here.  If Intel ever did develop a monopoly they would be subject to a number of Anti-Trust laws, and within years it would be resolved.  As for the price, Intel's CPU's offer performance that greatly exceeds the current lineup of AMD CPU's, and are priced accordingly.  Yes, you can get a Thuban x6 and in some applications it will be on par for a 2500k or 2600k, but 9/10 times the SB CPU's decimate it in performance.  So if it performs significantly better, why would it be cheaper?
> 
> The new SB-E CPU's announced have high price points because there is NOTHING else at that price point from AMD, and Intel isn't really sure how Bulldozer will affect how competative their pricing is.  If BD does well, SB\SB-E CPU's will drop in price accordingly.  It boils down to economics, why sell the best possible product at the lowest possible price when you can space out your products to maximize profits?  Millions of companies have done this before Intel, and millions will do it after.




   this gets so annoying, you don't have to make ferraris to be competitive, you just have to build a better toyota camary.


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 19, 2011)

YautjaLord said:


> Poor AMD if it doesn't fix the blocking factor, just like Intel got rid off NetBurst & gained the market share in performance; i'll feel sorry & besided - there's another issue involved: Intel's monopolistic reign if AMD winds up dead.  Gotta wait til some benchies proove otherwise, but for now only thing AMD & Intel fans (me included, though not entirely AMD or Intel fan but rather tech abuser ) need to do is - fear; fear of monopoly & sky high prices if Intel wins. Is there a news on when exactly Dozer releases or what?



There isn't going to be any monopoly


----------



## YautjaLord (Jul 19, 2011)

Though i have to add that few things doesn't change over the time when those sites present Dozer, namely: 8MB of L3 cache, DDR3 1866MHz mem controller & Black Edition moniker for 8/6/4-core CPUs, but Black Edition is the obvious one. lol If this will be true for all those CPUs once they released - it's quite understandable why it takes for AMD so long to launch it & why there are delays like that; B2/C0 revisions (& not B1 as in Engineering Sample's case) have to be as fast (if not faster) as 2600K/980X in both synthetic & gaming benchies; plus SLI tech in AMD core-logic: someone there beleives he/she/they could get market share once the Dozer is out & benchmarked, whether it wins or loses.


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 19, 2011)

YautjaLord said:


> Though i have to add that few things doesn't change over the time when those sites present Dozer, namely: 8MB of L3 cache, DDR3 1866MHz mem controller & Black Edition moniker for 8/6/4-core CPUs, but Black Edition is the obvious one. lol If this will be true for all those CPUs once they released - it's quite understandable why it takes for AMD so long to launch it & why there are delays like that; B2/C0 revisions (& not B1 as in Engineering Sample's case) have to be as fast (if not faster) as 2600K/980X in both synthetic & gaming benchies; plus SLI tech in AMD core-logic: someone there beleives he/she/they could get market share once the Dozer is out & benchmarked, whether it wins or loses.



BD will beat a 2600K in mulithreaded benchmarks but it has no shot in gaming thanks to intel's superior IPC


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 19, 2011)

Just for you Ser..







Guy over in Japan i believe just received his C0 Bulldozer. 






SOurce :

http://diybbs.zol.com.cn/10/11_99971.html


----------



## [H]@RD5TUFF (Jul 19, 2011)

I will be skipping them as they will be phased out shortly after release, which really makes me wonder why AMD is bothering other than a desperate effort to stay relevant.


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 19, 2011)

[H]@RD5TUFF said:


> I will be skipping them as they will be phased out shortly after release, which really makes me wonder why AMD is bothering other than a desperate effort to stay relevant.



Over at XS all they really can say is GF's 32nm process is absolute shit.


----------



## [H]@RD5TUFF (Jul 19, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> Over at XS all they really can say is GF's 32nm process is absolute shit.



Time will tell.


----------



## erocker (Jul 19, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> Over at XS all they really can say is GF's 32nm process is absolute shit.



Yeah, I read over there. They know as much as anyone else on this subject. It means nothing.


----------



## [H]@RD5TUFF (Jul 19, 2011)

erocker said:


> Yeah, I read over there. They know as much as anyone else on this subject. It means nothing.



I would agree, it's too early to be making assumptions, only when you get a retail product can you start to evaluate.


----------



## YautjaLord (Jul 19, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> Just for you Ser..
> 
> http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=117843&d=1311031770



That looks f***ed up for all revisions, excluding C0; how come they (XS) know this? Is it how people find out info these days? Did they stole the rev. B1/B2/C0 CPUs or something?  

Jokes aside, this wouldn't look good if FX-8120 will be rev. B2 CPU; make it & it's older 8150 bro C0 along with 6100 & 4100. The rest doesn't need to be changed, i.e. L1/L2/L3 caches, DDR3 1866MHz mem controller, etc...... Unless it's speculations again.


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 19, 2011)

YautjaLord said:


> That looks f***ed up for all revisions, excluding C0; how come they (XS) know this? Is it how people find out info these days? Did they stole the rev. B1/B2/C0 CPUs or something?
> 
> Jokes aside, this wouldn't look good if FX-8120 will be rev. B2 CPU; make it & it's older 8150 bro C0 along with 6100 & 4100. The rest doesn't need to be changed, i.e. L1/L2/L3 caches, DDR3 1866MHz mem controller, etc...... Unless it's speculations again.



People know because everyone has a computer these days as well as a cell phone. News travels fast


----------



## erocker (Jul 19, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> People know because everyone has a computer these days as well as a cell phone. News travels fast



FUD travels just as fast too.


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 19, 2011)

erocker said:


> FUD travels just as fast too.



One mans fud is another mans fookie... don't ask.. 

I enjoyed reading the progression of the BD ES chips. I'm very curious how C0 will do.


----------



## Thatguy (Jul 20, 2011)

With a totally brand new chip, with all new parts, with all new tech, with a new process. do you think we are going to get b3's ? I suspect we may see c2 or higher revisions in reality. Its all new, so it was bound to have bugs IIRC it tapped out over the winter which means they have likely been into bug fixs for a while. designing a new micro is no small feat. That siad. I disagree with some statements here about bulldozer having a lower IPC. I think they are looking at the design from the wrong angle. 

 But we shall see.


----------



## YautjaLord (Jul 20, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> People know because everyone has a computer these days as well as a cell phone. News travels fast





erocker said:


> FUD travels just as fast too.



 True + it's good Photoshop break for laughs (trying to create Web 2.0/3D-like navbar in this prog, so far it pisses me off then helping); thanx for entertainment. roflcopter 



Pestilence said:


> One mans fud is another mans fookie... don't ask..
> 
> I enjoyed reading the progression of the BD ES chips. I'm very curious how C0 will do.



Yes i want to see bta do a C0 review too & quite eagerly, but only _when this FX-8120/8150 released._  Gotta go back to searching for "Creating Glass/Embossed/3D/etc... navbar in Photoshop" tutors.  See you all by end of this week.


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 20, 2011)

Thatguy said:


> With a totally brand new chip, with all new parts, with all new tech, with a new process. do you think we are going to get b3's ? I suspect we may see c2 or higher revisions in reality. Its all new, so it was bound to have bugs IIRC it tapped out over the winter which means they have likely been into bug fixs for a while. designing a new micro is no small feat. That siad. I disagree with some statements here about bulldozer having a lower IPC. I think they are looking at the design from the wrong angle.
> 
> But we shall see.



If this tester is just now getting his C0 i can totally see the top of the line BD being a limited supply run for the first few months of release.


----------



## Wile E (Jul 20, 2011)

Thatguy said:


> this gets so annoying, you don't have to make ferraris to be competitive, you just have to build a better toyota camary.



Depends on what ground you are competing. Competing for maximum profits? You are 100% correct. Competing for the performance crown? Couldn't be more wrong.

I don't give a shit about the Camry, I want to know what the Ferrari is doing.


----------



## cadaveca (Jul 20, 2011)

Wile E said:


> I don't give a shit about the Camry, I want to know what the Ferrari is doing



I can't afford a Ferrari, so any time spent looking at it, or even remotely thinking about it, seems pointless.


Camry doesn't work for me either...it's to small to fit my entire family in it. 


I mean, if I wanted to be Ben Johnson, I'd take steriods. however, not everyone agrees that taking steriods in professional sports is a good idea.


Funny. Sounds like manufacturer's focus on top performance, may not be so prudent, when compared with real-life situations. I can only hope that the execs that have control over these things, like myself, don't live in fantasy worlds were everyone is rich, and can afford a Ferrari.


Don't know who Ben Johnson is? That's OK, I don't know the point of LN2 benchmarking for performance comparison or marketing, either.


----------



## Wile E (Jul 20, 2011)

cadaveca said:


> I can't afford a Ferrari, so any time spent looking at it, or even remotely thinking about it, seems pointless.
> 
> 
> Camry doesn't work for me either...it's to small to fit my entire family in it.
> ...


I'm a car enthusiast. When I want to read about cars, I want to read about the fast ones and how they perform against the competition. Doesn't mean I'm gonna buy them, but reading about family sedans is no damn fun.

Just like with computers, when I want to read about them, I want to read about the fast ones and how they compare. I don't want to know what the budget chips can do. The only difference here is, I'm likely much more able to save up money to get the top performer, and will do so if the opportunity arises.

And yes, I remember Ben, and the scandal in Seoul.


----------



## cadaveca (Jul 20, 2011)

Wile E said:


> reading about family sedans is no damn fun


Then it should be the job of those that sell them to make them more fun, rather than providing a distraction from the lack of enjoyment.



Wile E said:


> I don't want to know what the budget chips can do.


In my world, you fix problems at the source, not patch things over with bandaids.

Of course, there's always a place in the market for the Ferraris, but that doesn't mean that everyone needs to have a model like it all thier own. Fortunately, the market is large enough that exclusion of such product lines is not only feasible, the remaining segments are such that should not, and cannot, be ignored.



Wile E said:


> And yes, I remember Ben, and the scandal in Seoul.


And the largest segment deserves the largest investment. Success comes through sacrifice, but you must never sacrifice too much(like Ben did). Buying a Ferrari, and then living in a cardboard box, is just silly.

So it remains to be seen..is AMD making some sort of sacrifice here? Seems like the time delay was a sacrifice in sales, to me. Are these clockspeeds enough, or did they sacrifice too much? Ferrari, or Camry?


----------



## YautjaLord (Jul 20, 2011)

I'm muscle/sports/monster vehicle fan & as long as it have speeds in excess of 200 kmph it's fine by me, but i vote Mustang Shelby 2006 or anything with V10 & 280/300 kmph. Same goes for CPUs: if the Intel currently is like Ferrari & VIA is like Toyota Corolla (which is not bad either - 240 kmph is quite good too), then AMD is Mustang Shelby 2006/2009 with V8 & with excellent speeding (and ramming) abilities.  Hello, decided to jump over here to see what comments do you have b4 i'll google for navbar creation tutors. 

But if Dozer becomes prototype F1 bolid of CPU & still sold like great muscle car - that would be real funny, if not hillarious (in a good way).


----------



## Thefumigator (Jul 20, 2011)

YautjaLord said:


> I'm muscle/sports/monster vehicle fan & as long as it have speeds in excess of 200 kmph it's fine by me, but i vote Mustang Shelby 2006 or anything with V10 & 280/300 kmph. Same goes for CPUs: if the Intel currently is like Ferrari & VIA is like Toyota Corolla (which is not bad either - 240 kmph is quite good too), then AMD is Mustang Shelby 2006/2009 with V8 & with excellent speeding (and ramming) abilities.  Hello, decided to jump over here to see what comments do you have b4 i'll google for navbar creation tutors.
> 
> But if Dozer becomes prototype F1 bolid of CPU & still sold like great muscle car - that would be real funny, if not hillarious (in a good way).



What I'm liking from AMD is the platform itself. The AM3 backward compatibility on a completely new microarch. I mean, it should be like a Mustang Shelby which was owned by someone who never used it. I feel it that way.


----------



## YautjaLord (Jul 20, 2011)

Mmmmm.... Mustang Shelby w/V10 or better V12-type of current AMD CPU & still no company have a time to optimize any apps for it, just for Intel with HT; beats me. Atleast there's now one app (actually it's a game & it starts with C lol) that uses multicore CPUs to extent so i hope to see this app running & optimized for both Dozer & SB/IB; numbers like that suppose to determine how good or bad the competition is. And if SisSandra & other CPU benchmarking apps will include optimizations for both Intel's & AMD's upcoming CPUs as well - the better. Off-topic: Mustang Shelby costs ~190000 sheckels in Israel; 190000 divide by 3.5 & you'll get the price in USD; drives just as fast & doesn't cost a fortune like Ferrarys & other sports cars that cost 500000 - 1000000 sheckels. Same should be with CPUs. Just my 2 cents, though. Thanx Thefumigator.


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 20, 2011)

Bulldozer isn't a Shelby. 

Bd is more like a V8. It has high power consumption and is a bitch to cool

Sandy Bridge is a Turbod 4cyl. Doesn't eat a lot of power and can hit 5ghz on air


----------



## YautjaLord (Jul 20, 2011)

Hope to see that when new Dozer info is out; hope by end of this month there will be news when it's released for real & what real specs each CPU (FX-8xxx/6xxx/4xxx) will have. And i hope the Dozer is not Shelby but rather F1 bolid instead.  Plus i love the 3.1GHz to 4.0GHz Turbo mode (not that it needed when you decide to go over 4.0GHz). Right now my current CPU (Phenom II 965BE) is close to Shelby 2005/2006 with V8/10 after 4.0GHz OC.


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 20, 2011)

YautjaLord said:


> Hope to see that when new Dozer info is out; hope by end of this month there will be news when it's released for real & what real specs each CPU (FX-8xxx/6xxx/4xxx) will have. And i hope the Dozer is not Shelby but rather F1 bolid instead.  Plus i love the 3.1GHz to 4.0GHz Turbo mode (not that it needed when you decide to go over 4.0GHz). Right now my current CPU (Phenom II 965BE) is close to Shelby 2005/2006 with V8/10 after 4.0GHz OC.



A Phenom II X4 is close to a Ford Fiesta at no matter what clock speed


----------



## YautjaLord (Jul 20, 2011)

Something i just came up & also something for us to laugh at: to beat Ferrary - say - 2011 on it's own field one have to be either...... a Ferrary 2012 or something close to 2012 F1 bolid. I hope FX-8150/8120 will be something between Ferrary 2012 & 2012 F1 bolid. Atleast the specs of those two say they're pretty much that fast. Ford Fiesta? Still fast, but not as Shelby. Though i wanna see how my current CPU will run when paired with Sabertooth 990FX, 2x4GB DDR3 1600MHz, Indigo Extreme ETI & AX1200W PSU; bet close to Shelby 2005. Plus i think that i prooved myself as Mustang fan now, didn't i?  

P.S. Photoshop/Crysis/Bioshock (giving you few of the apps i have) doesn't give that much of a flying f*** bout CPU rather GPUs when at 1920x1200 (excluding Photoshop); with 2xGTX 460s SLI they run like champs though OC'd CPU is favored too.


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 20, 2011)

Xbit labs Article on BD









> fter Advanced Micro Devices releases its FX-series microprocessors code-named Zambezi this September, the company will only refresh its lineup of high-end chips sometimes in the first quarter of next year. The first refresh of desktop Bulldozer family will likely precede the launch of Intel Corp.'s code-named Ivy Bridge microprocessors.
> 
> Despite of the fact that AMD's initial family of FX-series Bulldozer microprocessors will only include for models (two eight-core versions, one six-core and one quad-core models), AMD will not broaden it until at least the middle of the first quarter of next year, according to a source with knowledge of AMD's confidential plans. In mid-Q1 2012 AMD is projected to introduce four new models, which will broaden the FX lineup to eight stock-keeping units (SKUs).
> 
> ...


----------



## cadaveca (Jul 20, 2011)

Rehash of old info for hits.  You posted why? Same info is in the OP...


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 20, 2011)

cadaveca said:


> Rehash of old info for hits.  You posted why?



Old info? I thought it was brand new.  My bad guys

It's NEW TO ME!!!!!!!!


----------



## cadaveca (Jul 20, 2011)

Sure, because you never posted in this thread before...:shadedshu



Pestilence said:


> Exact specifications of the AMD FX chips currently known only from unofficial sources.



QFT. GTFO.

This is so important, I'mma gonna post it again.



Pestilence said:


> *Exact specifications of the AMD FX chips currently known only from unofficial sources.*


----------



## Thatguy (Jul 20, 2011)

YautjaLord said:


> I'm muscle/sports/monster vehicle fan & as long as it have speeds in excess of 200 kmph it's fine by me, but i vote Mustang Shelby 2006 or anything with V10 & 280/300 kmph. Same goes for CPUs: if the Intel currently is like Ferrari & VIA is like Toyota Corolla (which is not bad either - 240 kmph is quite good too), then AMD is Mustang Shelby 2006/2009 with V8 & with excellent speeding (and ramming) abilities.  Hello, decided to jump over here to see what comments do you have b4 i'll google for navbar creation tutors.
> 
> But if Dozer becomes prototype F1 bolid of CPU & still sold like great muscle car - that would be real funny, if not hillarious (in a good way).



I think AMd is building a corvette zr1 2011 model and you'd have to compare it to other exoctics to see why its such a tremndous car, I think the 4 and 6 core cpu's will be like lower level corvettes. 

But thats just my impression, not the ferrari pricetag.


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 20, 2011)

cadaveca said:


> Sure, because you never posted in this thread before...:shadedshu



Just because i post doesn't mean i read every post.


----------



## cadaveca (Jul 20, 2011)

But it says right in the article that it's FUD, and you still posted. No offense man, but really? Maybe I'm taking this a bit too seriously, but man....

Forum Guidelines:



> Behavior that is inappropriate/should be reported:
> 
> 
> Posting "FUD" (Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt), especially if the poster is trying to pass it off as legitimate news.


----------



## YautjaLord (Jul 20, 2011)

In order to somehow settle down (even though i admit i don't have the rights to tell you what to think/do true, merely giving you opinion) the thing that's going in here (Pestilence vs rest of TPU members/staff, lol jk) here's what i can say: following apps have to be tested on FX-8xxx/6xxx/etc - Crysis 1 & 2, 3DMarkVantage/11, all CPU apps suite TPU uses while compared head-to-head with SB-E & numbers monitored; this will be the only legitimate indicator of Dozer's performance & this will only happen when those 8/6/4-cored Dozers will be released. The only thing left is to find out official (and not FUDed) info _from AMD itself._ What planned by AMD in August? If anyone of you knows you better tell, cause that will be legitimate too. Why August? Cause it's Q3 (Q4?) 2011 which is close enough to that rev. B2/C0 release date of CPUs judging by this thread.  Just need to wait for end of this month/beginning of August official Dozer info.  to all.


----------



## radaja (Jul 20, 2011)

this is on the *AMD facebook* page



> Report: FX is on the Move. Stay tuned for the launch of "Operation Scorpius: The Legend of FX" comic book this Thursday! We're offering free wallpapers, the comic book of course and a chance to win an AMD FX 8-core desktop processor. You won't want to miss this!


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 20, 2011)

A comic book? Wtf Amd


----------



## radaja (Jul 20, 2011)

yea thats what i thought too?


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Jul 20, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> A comic book? Wtf Amd



I was more interested in winning an 8 core Fx. 

Clearly our priorities are different.


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 20, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> I was more interested in winning an 8 core Fx.
> 
> Clearly our priorities are different.



I never win anything so ill just buy it


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Jul 21, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> I never win anything so ill just buy it



Good luck with that. Let me know what store you bought it from because there are none available near me.


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 21, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> Good luck with that. Let me know what store you bought it from because there are none available near me.



Did I say today? No I meant when they're released in September


----------



## Thatguy (Jul 21, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> Did I say today? No I meant when they're released in September



they might just release anytime, hard to say.


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Jul 21, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> Did I say today? No I meant when they're released in September



That's a pretty defeatist attitude for you to have though. You should enter just like everybody here should because if one of us wins, we might have an early chance to tell the others about the performance of the real Bulldozer.


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 21, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> That's a pretty defeatist attitude for you to have though. You should enter just like everybody here should because if one of us wins, we might have an early chance to tell the others about the performance of the real Bulldozer.



I'll enter and if i win we'll have a TPU raffle and i'll donate it to the winner.


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Jul 21, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> I'll enter and if i win we'll have a TPU raffle and i'll donate it to the winner.



That's really cool, but bench it first. I'm more interested in real performance than a free Bulldozer.


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 21, 2011)

Damn_Smooth said:


> That's really cool, but bench it first. I'm more interested in real performance than a free Bulldozer.



Definitely would bench it against sandy bridge first and post the results.


----------



## YautjaLord (Jul 21, 2011)

radaja said:


> this is on the *AMD facebook* page
> 
> 
> 
> ...



That was eh.... nice? Nah!!!!!!! WTF was that?! That's why i don't visit Facebook & now this stuff is like the last nail in it's coffin for me: not that i want to visit this POS site anymore (not dissing the social networks though, live & let live that's my general approach), but i'll also log out of it. Here, i said it. 

Jokes aside (though i'm dead serious bout erasing my Facebook profile) this is rather both intriguing & yet f***ed up: winning 8-core FX-series is nice, but comic? Seriously, WTF????!!!! Makes me suspicious bout company's plans? I think it does.


----------



## Wile E (Jul 21, 2011)

cadaveca said:


> Then it should be the job of those that sell them to make them more fun, rather than providing a distraction from the lack of enjoyment.
> 
> 
> In my world, you fix problems at the source, not patch things over with bandaids.
> ...


I'd do it.


----------



## cadaveca (Jul 21, 2011)

Wile E said:


> I'd do it.



 Of course. Thanks for proving my point.


----------



## Wile E (Jul 21, 2011)

What point? I didn't see one made.


----------



## cadaveca (Jul 21, 2011)

Wile E said:


> What point? I didn't see one made.



YOU weren't supposed to.


----------



## Wile E (Jul 21, 2011)

I don't get it. All I want to know is, where is my Ferrari?


----------



## YautjaLord (Jul 21, 2011)

I am Carmageddon fan as well, not AvP only; so i'd like my Suppressor-type of CPU (if you remember what Carma's Suppressor is). If SB/IB is - say - Semi with nitro than i want the Dozer to be Suppressor with all APO installed: fast, heavy & butchering. Ferrari is good, but when you see something like APC speeding @ you, you know you have zero time to dodge it's slam; i'd like the Dozer to be like that. Forget bout sports car analogies, speeding APC is better in all aspects.


----------



## WarEagleAU (Jul 21, 2011)

Wow $320 for the top end of the octo cores? Very nice price and prolly something Ill scoop up. I thought AMD was using High K Metal Gate technology not SOI anymore.


----------



## _JP_ (Jul 21, 2011)

Wile E said:


> All I want to know is, where is my Ferrari?


At the dealer, waiting for you to go pick it up.
Oh wait...you were talking about the processor...well, then it's at Intel HQ...waiting for you to go pick it up. Pack some heat, they won't give it up easily.


----------



## radaja (Jul 21, 2011)

From AMD's Comic,maybe a hidden release date?








and possible clockspeed?3600Mhz?


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 21, 2011)

November 19th?


----------



## cadaveca (Jul 21, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> November 19th?



December. 


Just in time for Christmas.


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 21, 2011)

cadaveca said:


> December.
> 
> 
> Just in time for Christmas.



Whoohoo..... sleigh bells ring... are you listening?

If its any later then october Amd should just fold up and say fuck it


----------



## HalfAHertz (Jul 21, 2011)

A whole page talking about the comic and nobody gave a link? 

http://sites.amd.com/us/promo/processors/Pages/operation-scorpius.aspx

It's nothing special but it sure looks a lot better than the crappy animation.


----------



## erocker (Jul 21, 2011)

It would be nice if some members here would just fold up and say f*** it in regards to posting useless posts in this thread.


----------



## [H]@RD5TUFF (Jul 21, 2011)

erocker said:


> It would be nice if some members here would just fold up and say f*** it in regards to posting useless posts in this thread.



Lot of fud 




Wile E said:


> I don't get it. All I want to know is, where is my Ferrari?



Parked in the Intel lot.


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 21, 2011)

erocker said:


> It would be nice if some members here would just fold up and say f*** it in regards to posting useless posts in this thread.



Someone's a Mr. Grumpy Pants today


----------



## cadaveca (Jul 21, 2011)

HalfAHertz said:


> It's nothing special



Yep, just marketing, and nothing in there worth getting excited over, IMHO. But thanks for the link.


----------



## [H]@RD5TUFF (Jul 21, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> Someone's a Mr. Grumpy Pants today



Only on days that end in Y. 






















j/k


----------



## Widjaja (Jul 21, 2011)

AMD comic?

AMD battles the infamous Intel corporation, 

"Ruby, Intel are bring out the Sandybridge!"
"Thuban, bring out the Bulldozer......it's 8 core FXin time...."


----------



## YautjaLord (Jul 21, 2011)

HalfAHertz said:


> A whole page talking about the comic and nobody gave a link?
> 
> http://sites.amd.com/us/promo/processors/Pages/operation-scorpius.aspx
> 
> It's nothing special but it sure looks a lot better than the crappy animation.



Lol'd bout Dozer: if he punches you in a head you forget 4th grade; marketing gimmick, but still hillarious. Thanx for the laughs, dude.


----------



## erocker (Jul 21, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> Someone's a Mr. Grumpy Pants today



Yeah, it's the heat. Freaking brutal.


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 22, 2011)

erocker said:


> Yeah, it's the heat. Freaking brutal.



Ohh i know bro. I have the A/C blasting. Is it September yet?

Pretty soon people will be bitching about...


----------



## Pestilence (Jul 22, 2011)

Ohh and the real reason why i came to this thread... It seems the 8150 will be right around 300.00 so newegg should have them for 299.99 or maybe 289.99



> Five (5) AMD FX series eight-core processors. Approximate Retail Value: $300 USD each.



And OBR has posted this on his blog



> I am out of my cave now, but THIS WEEKEND you will see complete Review of AMD FX (Bulldozer) CPU with comparision to Phenom II X6! Clock-to-clock ... Eye-to eye
> 
> 20+ benchmarks, games, tests ... 3,3 GHz (+ Turbo) Phenom II X6 vs AMD FX at 3,3 (3,6 GHz) + Turbo!
> 
> ...


----------



## Thatguy (Jul 22, 2011)

HalfAHertz said:


> A whole page talking about the comic and nobody gave a link?
> 
> http://sites.amd.com/us/promo/processors/Pages/operation-scorpius.aspx
> 
> It's nothing special but it sure looks a lot better than the crappy animation.



That comic is hilarious.


----------



## Melvis (Jul 22, 2011)

Here is something new for you guys to look at (I think)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hcTAyU2Fm98


----------



## Damn_Smooth (Jul 22, 2011)

Pestilence said:


> Ohh and the real reason why i came to this thread... It seems the 8150 will be right around 300.00 so newegg should have them for 299.99 or maybe 289.99
> 
> 
> 
> And OBR has posted this on his blog



That tool doesn't have a release chip. If he even has an ES. Screw him and anything he blabbers on about.


----------



## Heavy_MG (Jul 22, 2011)

A source is saying BD is going to be out in August.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/07/22/amd_q2_2011_numbers/


----------



## mastrdrver (Jul 22, 2011)

radaja said:


> From AMD's Comic,maybe a hidden release date?
> 
> http://i55.tinypic.com/zsvbk2.jpg
> 
> ...



Look at the text above the clock speed. As BeepBeep pointed out on XS, that clock speed is the HT clock, not the core clock.



Pestilence said:


> And OBR has posted this on his blog



And why would anyone believe anything he posts from now on?

I love how he is proud that he "punked them all" and then turns around and says believe me.

 epic fail. what a tool.


----------



## Melvis (Jul 22, 2011)

Heavy_MG said:


> A source is saying BD is going to be out in August.
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/07/22/amd_q2_2011_numbers/



So a 35% increase in performance over there current 16core Opteron with this new 8core Bulldozer core? is that right?


----------



## Funtoss (Jul 22, 2011)

3.6Ghz is heaps for a default clock for me!


----------



## Benetanegia (Jul 22, 2011)

Melvis said:


> So a 35% increase in performance over there current 16core Opteron with this new 8core Bulldozer core? is that right?



It says the 16 core (8 BD modules) Interlagos to be 35% faster than current 12 core Opterons.


----------



## YautjaLord (Jul 22, 2011)

> Still later in the call, when it was clear that Wall Street needed something to get excited about, AMD let slip that the Opteron 6200s would launch next month and that their desktop companion, the FX Series, code-named "Zambezi", would come out next month, as well. After clarification from AMD's press relations people, El Reg discovered that AMD's top brass meant to say that these two chips would ship _*for revenue next month*_, but it is still not clear when they will be formally announced.
> 
> AMD didn't want to say much more about the third quarter, except that overall sales for the company should be up 8 to 12 per cent compared to Q2.



Just as i thought/hoped; but this "still not clear when they will be formally announced" stuff sounds like FUD, though.  Still hope those statements true, though shame there's no info how those Dozers perform. Will look up on Egg for those (FX-8150 & 8120) by August then.


----------



## Disparia (Jul 22, 2011)

Shipping for any reason = more chance for leaks! And real numbers, and real specs, and glory!


----------



## Thatguy (Jul 22, 2011)

I think you guys are ignoring the fact that unlike intel who presents 8 fake cores and one real core with the HT scheme. bulldozer will have on decoder feeding 2 cores. Traditionally the decoder is really exspensive in terms of die space, so making 1 super powerful decoder " when most are underutilized" and giving it to INt units is likely to beat out the in HT design. 

 think about it, plus they get to streamline the pipeline 

 I think IPC will actually be higher then many predict as they have a real core hyperthreading model. 

 We shall see however.


----------



## Wile E (Jul 23, 2011)

Thatguy said:


> I think you guys are ignoring the fact that unlike intel who presents 8 fake cores and one real core with the HT scheme. bulldozer will have on decoder feeding 2 cores. Traditionally the decoder is really exspensive in terms of die space, so making 1 super powerful decoder " when most are underutilized" and giving it to INt units is likely to beat out the in HT design.
> 
> think about it, plus they get to streamline the pipeline
> 
> ...


Nah, I'm still going with Intel will be faster per core per clock.


----------



## YautjaLord (Jul 24, 2011)

Seeing that major mainboards manufacturers (ASUS, MSI, Gigabyte, etc...), post the vids of their boards even on YouTube (lineup of M5A97X-EVO, M5A99X-EVO, Sabertooth 990FX & ROG C5F, saw the vid today) makes me beleive that Dozer will, hopefully, be able to give atleast some kick in a gut to this oversized Intel's SB/IB Godzilla; it just gotta be atleast _that_ good. My mainboard of choise for real this time? Sabertooth 990FX; AI Suite II's Thermal Radar, TurboV EVO & the mobo's UEFI BIOS look just great (gotta see though if Thermal Radar is better than SpeedFan in temp monitoring & such), Military Design looks more then just impressive, plus one won't build mainboard like that for looks alone; hope they'll come by the end of August/beginning of September with those rev. C0 CPUs. You just _can't_ give up on waiting for this CPU (FX-8120 rev. C0 125 or - even better - 95W TDP in my case) after seeing that kind of vids. Typed in YouTube's search field "Sabertooth 990FX reviews" got 10 or so vids reviewing & benchmarking the afformentioned board. Plus Sabertooth was for Intel CPUs only & after they moved to AMD CPUs as well - that indicates something atleast quite interesting; just my 2 cents, though.


----------



## heky (Aug 11, 2011)

So, any new info on the bulldozer front?


----------



## Melvis (Aug 11, 2011)

heky said:


> So, any new info on the bulldozer front?



Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee....No


----------



## twilyth (Aug 11, 2011)

heky said:


> So, any new info on the bulldozer front?



I have an alert set on Google Alerts (beta) for a couple of things with bulldozer in the search string.  I have the "only the best" option selected.  I haven't seen anything interesting recently.  I guess the last big news was about the earlier-than-expected release of the BD Opterons.  Sorry.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Aug 11, 2011)

Bulldozer needs to come out already so I can envy something else I can't afford.


----------



## jpierce55 (Aug 11, 2011)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Bulldozer needs to come out already so I can envy something else I can't afford.



Well, we can speculate that the price is ~$300 because AMD is giving away some BD's in a contest and the value is listed at $300. We do know that is an FX, but not what one. $300 is a little pricey for me also, but it is not unearthly high like some people feared.

The contest ends the 6th of next month, so I would say that it will release next month, but when is not for certain, and why aren't any reviews out?


----------



## gopal (Jul 12, 2012)

Worst amd processors ever!


----------



## brandonwh64 (Jul 12, 2012)

gopal said:


> Worst amd processors ever!



Ok so you thread necro to bash AMD?


----------



## Covert_Death (Jul 12, 2012)

gopal said:


> Worst amd processors ever!



well technically it is the or is one of the best AMD processors to date. but that is true for every new generation. there is nothing wrong with these CPU's, they work perfectly for what they are meant for. if you are using it for something other than what it was built for then that is all on you for not doing your research. these are AMAZING at CAD, truly can't be beat right now


----------



## Norton (Jul 12, 2012)

Covert_Death said:


> well technically it is the or is one of the best AMD processors to date. but that is true for every new generation. there is nothing wrong with these CPU's, they work perfectly for what they are meant for. if you are using it for something other than what it was built for then that is all on you for not doing your research. these are AMAZING at CAD, truly can't be beat right now



They run great for me running calculations/crunching for World Community Grid. I'm using 3 of them ATM


----------



## Melvis (Jul 13, 2012)

gopal said:


> Worst amd processors ever!



Pentium 4 worst possessor ever!! :shadedshu

Like others have said the AMD Bulldozer in certain areas can not be matched, but it is limited. I myself wasn't happy when it was released as i wanted to upgrade to it, but it would of been more of a side grade for me, now im waiting on Piledriver, this i hope will give me a good boost in performance.


----------



## Prima.Vera (Jul 13, 2012)

Any news about the next Steamroller and Escavator CPUs? I see no news recently from AMD...


----------



## Frick (Jul 13, 2012)

Melvis said:


> Pentium 4 worst possessor ever!! :shadedshu



Hey, later on it was quite fast. And hot, and expensive. The first ones were .. well slow, hot and power hungry.


----------



## techtard (Jul 13, 2012)

Someone cast turn undead and let's kill this thread again.


----------



## Melvis (Jul 14, 2012)

Frick said:


> Hey, later on it was quite fast. And hot, and expensive. The first ones were .. well slow, hot and power hungry.



Yea i guess they where getting as fast as a sempron, my bad


----------



## INSTG8R (Jul 14, 2012)

techtard said:


> Someone cast turn undead and let's kill this thread again.



Indeed  1 new user decides he has a one liner to necro the tread with and now it just won't die...:shadedshu


----------

