Thursday, October 13th 2011

Bulldozer Aims For 50% Improvement By 2014: Is This Really Enough To Counter Intel?

The reviews are now out for AMD's brand new Bulldozer architecture, in the form of the Zambezi FX 8120 & FX 8150 processors and they don't paint a pretty picture of these flagship products. The chips use lots of power, run hot and significantly underperform compared to their Intel competition. On top of that, they are being marketed as 8 core processors, when they are actually 4 core with an advanced form of multi-threading, due to the siamesed nature of each dual processor module. Perhaps to counter this negative publicity and try to restore some faith in the AMD brand, they have released a roadmap for the planned improvements to the architecture, all the way to 2014 - an ambitious timeline, given how much and how unexpectedly things can change at the cutting edge of the technology world.
Looking at the chart, one can see that the various architectures Piledriver, Steamroller and Excavator all add up to between 30-50% projected improvement by 2014 (subject to change without notice, of course). These are all names designed to impart a tough-guy image to their products to give one the impression that they must perform very well, beating the competition into submission. Therefore, if they fail to perform competitively against Intel, those names will continue to be branding embarrassments like Bulldozer is, currently. As Intel is already 20-50% faster right now depending on the benchmark, how are these modest improvements possibly going to compete with Intel's future products? AMD has already had a change of management at the top recently, so we can only hope that the right CEO comes along and turns them around, otherwise they may end up not manufacturing x86 processors at all in future, possibly becoming a GPU company only.

The main problem with the current Bulldozer architecture is that it's very, very late to market. AMD started working on it four years ago in 2007, which is a very long time in the world of desktop processors, so AMD have effectively released a new "old" product. The two important things that it has going for it, are that it scales well with core count and clock speed - those 8GHz overclock marketing demos weren't completely without merit. What we need to see is AMD improving performance much more than the prediction slide they've released, more like 100% or more perhaps, which is not really such an unrealistic target to achieve in three years of design and process improvements. Perhaps discarding this whole architecture and starting afresh with fully discreet cores like on the Phenom might be the way forward? AMD has recently let go some of its top-level management, so perhaps their replacements can turn the company around?

So, even if AMD achieves this projected performance improvement and more, will it really be enough to counter Intel, or will Intel steamroller AMD's Bulldozer back into submission?Source:X-bit labs and Bulldozer block diagram courtesy of Hexus' FX 8150 review.
Add your own comment

132 Comments on Bulldozer Aims For 50% Improvement By 2014: Is This Really Enough To Counter Intel?

#126
nt300
I would agree, so many people want Bulldozer, just not enough out yet.
Posted on Reply
#127
dalekdukesboy
qubitDon't ever get rid of that Abit mobo and FX-55 ya hear! These are classics for their time and worth collecting. I've still got an Abit AN8 Ultra paired with an Athlon X2 3800+ and 4GB RAM and those are going nowhere. :D
yeah they are, just like my and xp's avatar are pure classics:) However point remains I was making is AMD is a dissapointment now unlike that fx-55 which was awesome and dealt with elder scrolls iv oblivion splendidly with my x1900xtx ati card which I also still have:)
Posted on Reply
#128
Super XP
Dam that avatar keeps tricking me. I read your post and I am like, NO I didn't post that, then I see your name on top :D Nice Avatar :toast:
Posted on Reply
#129
dalekdukesboy
Super XPDam that avatar keeps tricking me. I read your post and I am like, NO I didn't post that, then I see your name on top :D Nice Avatar :toast:
I have the lighter version of the avatar...a second later or earlier in the opening song sequence where his face washes out with light lol, that is the only way to tell the difference in our avatars...it's how I waded through this forum and all your responses without thinking it was me:)
Posted on Reply
#130
Super XP
Yes, for me it was a late night :), but yes I can tell the difference, just sometimes looking at it from the side makes me think its my avatar. I believe we've broke the record if there was every one, with 4 Tom Baker Avatars in a row of posts.
Posted on Reply
#131
Horrux
Who the hell is Tom Baker?
Posted on Reply
#132
Super XP
HorruxWho the hell is Tom Baker?
:roll:
The Best all time Doctor Who (1974 to 1981) Doctor Who was suffering, but once Tom Baker took the role, it skyrocketed to success. It was if he was born for the part. What pissed me off is when the producers wanted to change the show somehow and Tom Baker didn't like the changes so his final year of being the Doctor was in 1981. Rumours state that he would have been acting as Doctor Who for at least another 4 to 6 years if it wasn't for the dam producer and his dumb changes....

Tom Baker is one with the longest running Doctor Who ever. He also won the title Best Ever Doctor Who every single year and only lost to 2 other guys 3 times.

ALSO, What I like about the NEW Doctor Who (Matt Smith) is he sort of reminds me of Tom Baker's Charisma, passion, style of acting and the energy he put into it.

LINK:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Baker

Now back to BULLDOZER
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Jul 16th, 2024 10:13 EDT change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts