Actually they just said it wouldn't work with the older socket. Also this is coming from a "source" of someone else's, so he could just be full of it.
They said it wouldn't work with the older socket because the older socket couldn't handle all the capabilities of the new architecture. If adding a single pin is the only change to the socket, and that is all that is preventing it from working on the older socket, and you believe this is OK, then I pitty you.:shadedshu
The statement they made clearly is refering to not the physical socket itself not being capable, but the chipsets and boards as well. There is no reason they couldn't have released bulldozer with AM3 support, even if it did loose some capabilities when run in an AM3 board. They've done it this way in the past.
If AMD wanted you to buy a new board every time the released a new chip, they would just take Intel approach and come out with a completely new pin layout/socket each time. They have never done that, so why start now.
They've never done that?!? Tell that to all of us who have gone though 754, 939, AM2/AM2+/AM3. They did it all the time, so don't give me that crap about them not doing it. It is only recently, when they started loosing the game and had to do something else to add value to their products, that started including backwards compatibility.
If we are taking sides, I chose to believe this news report is full of crap and the old info. about the sockets were right. I mean its all up in the air until someone from AMD steps forward and says something or the NDA is lifted and BtaRunr can just tell us the truth.
You're the only one taking sides, I'm just looking at the situation for what it is.
I agree that AMD's continued silence on the matter is discomforting. Although, to be fair, AMD has never stated that the current chipsets are incompatible with Zambezi.
JF-AMD has
stated that AMD's official stance is that a motherboard manufacturer making a Zambezi chip run in an AM3 board via BIOS update is not
supported. He doesn't say it is impossible.
That is kind of my point. They could have released the processor with backwards compatility, obviously, but decided not to. Yes, the architecture might have been held back a little by an older chipset, but for someone looking for a cheap upgrade it wouldn't matter. AMD has shown no problem with holding back an architecture on an older chipset/board/socket before.
I'm glad they didn't. For me, messing up a pin on a LGA socket seems all to easy. If you do happen to mess up a pin, it can be fixed, but a pin on the CPU itself seems easier to fix for me.
agreed, much easier to fix on a CPU then on a board.
It is easier to fix a pin on a CPU, but also easier to bend/break a pin on a CPU. If I drop my motherboard, chances of bending a pin are pretty close to 0. If I drop my CPU, I'm almost guaranteed a bend pin. Not to mention dropping the CPU is easier since it is smaller.
Zambezi has +1 pin for new controler...
