AMD's Bulldozer and Bobcat Processors Preview @ [H]

I would check Anand for a more in-depth analysis, this is right up his alley. Of course we will still give you better information on actual performance when it comes to your desktop. :)
 
thanks for the article Kyle.. and yeah i cant wait to see an [H] review of these things.. should be quite interesting for those of us running F@H since they are claiming a 50% increase in performance compared the magny cours which the 2.2ghz magny was matching the 2.66ghz xeon x5650..
 
Last edited:
So from what I understand, 2 cores in 1 bulldozer module can actually work on 1 thread. Is that correct?

Now if only AMD could give out some info on IPC...
 
John Fruehe at AMD has specifically stated that each core in a module will appear to the OS and function as a separate core, not as two threads on a SMT core (like HyperThreading would). I bring this up in reference to the comment towards the end of the article where you say "I might be wrong on this but our operating systems should see the Bulldozer module as a single processor core with SMT enabled.".

See : http://blogs.amd.com/work/2010/08/23/”bulldozer”-20-questions-round-one/

Now, it might end up that way and this has all been posturing, but everything else I've read has indicated that what we should see at the OS level each module are two discrete cores, each with a 128bit FMAC FPU (an FPU that when idle can have its execution resources used by the other core transparently, or specifically called out as one 256bit FMAC if using AVX type instructinos - I expect this to be like having extra integer cores in an integer CPU, when resources are available the FP scheduler will dispatch more (non dependent) FP instructions than would be available in a normal non shared situation, pseudo-HT in fashion)
 
Thanks for the link. AMD has a problem getting its message out. PR is not its strong point.
 
sound promising.. hopefully AMD can bring some competition to intel like they did to nvidia
 
I just bought my AM3 board, and 1055t. Is it already approaching end of life? :( I assume new boards will need to be pjurchased for bulldozer.
 
Bulldozer on the "client" (desktop) will be available in up to 4 module / 8 core in AM3 (AM3r2 / AM3+ ?) socket, so depending on your board's design may just need a BIOS update.

They have so far only stated BD coming to desktop via AM3 and Servers via C32 (4000 series - ) / G34 (6000 series). C32 / G34 currently are where you'll find the current Magny-Cours (8/12) and Lisbon (4/6 core) processors. C32 will likely be for 4 module / 8 core BD and G34 8 module / 16 core BD respectively.
 
MISMCSA said:
I just bought my AM3 board, and 1055t. Is it already approaching end of life? :( I assume new boards will need to be pjurchased for bulldozer.
Click to expand...


no not approaching end of life.. the am3+ bulldozers will be backwards compatible with AM3 only boards.. am2+ has reached its EOL when the bulldozers come out.. and bio's correct on all the other stuff..
 
I have been awaiting this since I heard about it long ago... It will be intersting to see how it stacks up to Intel's offering.

I am hoping that AMD will get a huge jump in RAM throughput like they did when they first moved to on-die memory controllers. Back in the day, it would take an Intel DDR2 system to have almost double the RAM speed to match AMD's on-die controller that was using DDR1. And even then, the latency on the Intel based system was way higher than on the AMD system....

I really hope they come through with something amazing this time around. It would give me a very good reason to go back to AMD.
 
I'm hoping between this, Fusion, and the reported next gen GPU's coming out AMD opens a serious can of whoop ass. I recently purchased 342 shares and some analysts believe between all this the stock could jump to over $20 over the next year.
 
Can't wait for this. Sounds like tech that could make a difference. I just wish I knew when :(
 
It was interesting to hear AMD compare its Bulldozer module to current Intel HyperThreading architecture and you will see the comparison made on the slides below. AMD seemed to be of the mind, "Why do we need something akin to HyperThreading when we can add an additional core to our module for about a 5% increase in die size?"
Click to expand...

I like this. It's time to give hyperthreading the boot and start using more real cores. Sure hyperthreading helps, but some software get confused.

The 6000 series server processors will have 12 to 16 cores, or 6 to 8 modules.
Click to expand...

Nice! Now come on out already quit making us wait.
 
It is highly unlikely a 6 module 12 core or larger BD will be released for the desktop, unless the desktop migrates from AM3r2 to C32 or some other updated socket.
 
I would love to see AMD produce a core I7 killer. I want real competition and price drops. More power for less money. :D Unfortunately the Phenom II x6 competes closer with the corei5.
 
Very interested in Bobcat, I hope it won't take long until we see a netbook using it, with good build quality (metal, not plastic), a HDMI port and at least 2GB RAM.
 
I just hope that AMD will return to the higher end market and their CPU's can outperform i7 980x and match Intel's Sandy Bridge. Since they are doing so well in the GPU market, they need to get their act together and design a CPU that can match Intel's high end offerings.

And as for not being compatible with current AM3 boards... thats a shame for people who purchased an AM3 board thinking it was compatible with Bulldozer. If I were to get Bulldozer I would have purchased a new chipset/board anyway that was designed for Bulldozer anyway instead of putting it on an older board like I did for 1090T/890FX.
 
On the marketing front I can clearly recall that Lance Armstrong was sponsored by AMD for a "few" wins in the tour de france.

But "nearly" every computer commercial tend to have the *ntel logo flashed as if that would somehow be important but it is the reality of things. AMD can't compete on the same level maybe not ever.

AMD is the company who made their failing 4 core cpu into a sellable 3 core version not because they want to look pretty.

AMD is the company when *ntel cant produce cpu they still can't move volume across major OEM due to arrangements made.

AMD been struggling ever since, only recently they finally settled some legal battle's. Expecting them to come out blazing when the Bulldozer comes out to beat the I7 or whatever *ntel has going on is a bit to much really.

I would just hope they do well, people need to be reminded maybe more often that *ntel when they had more marketshare made you pay a premium price for a mid range cpu.
 
Last edited:
the bulldozer is an interesting concept, too bad it doesn't seem to be implemented to scale down more when possible (eg: 16 cores into 4 modules, or even 2). I mean, in theory, multiple cores working on a single thread should be able to work faster than a single core. I bet a good portion of the delays are coming from coders scratching their heads trying to get it to work properly atm, lol.

which ever way the billdozer goes it looks like the bobcat may be a big success for the mobile community.
 
John Vuong said:
And as for not being compatible with current AM3 boards... thats a shame for people who purchased an AM3 board thinking it was compatible with Bulldozer. If I were to get Bulldozer I would have purchased a new chipset/board anyway that was designed for Bulldozer anyway instead of putting it on an older board like I did for 1090T/890FX.
Click to expand...

I was thinking the same thing wouldn't mind buying a new board as long as the improvements are there.
 
Skull_Angel said:
the bulldozer is an interesting concept, too bad it doesn't seem to be implemented to scale down more when possible (eg: 16 cores into 4 modules, or even 2). I mean, in theory, multiple cores working on a single thread should be able to work faster than a single core.
Click to expand...

multiple cores do not work on a single thread
 
Skull_Angel said:
the bulldozer is an interesting concept, too bad it doesn't seem to be implemented to scale down more when possible (eg: 16 cores into 4 modules, or even 2). I mean, in theory, multiple cores working on a single thread should be able to work faster than a single core. I bet a good portion of the delays are coming from coders scratching their heads trying to get it to work properly atm, lol.

which ever way the billdozer goes it looks like the bobcat may be a big success for the mobile community.
Click to expand...

i suggest reading the anandtech article.. you might actually learn how the bulldozer is designed to work..

Pieter3dnow said:
On the marketing front I can clearly recall that Lance Armstrong was sponsored by AMD for a "few" wins in the tour de france.

But "nearly" every computer commercial tend to have the *ntel logo flashed as if that would somehow be important but it is the reality of things. AMD can't compete on the same level maybe not ever.

AMD is the company who made their failing 4 core cpu into a sellable 3 core version not because they want to look pretty.

AMD is the company when *ntel cant produce cpu they still cant move volume across major OEM due to arrangements made.

AMD been struggling ever since, only recently they finally settled some legal battle's. Expecting them to come out blazing when the Bulldozer comes out to beat the I7 or whatever *ntel has going on is a bit to much really.

I would just hope they do well, people need to be reminded maybe more often that *ntel when they had more marketshare made you pay a premium price for a mid range cpu.
Click to expand...


honestly after the 3rd double spaced like i gave up reading anything you said since it makes absolutely no sense the way its written.. and quit with the dang "*ntel" crap..
 
sirmonkey1985 said:
honestly after the 3rd double spaced like i gave up reading anything you said since it makes absolutely no sense the way its written...
Click to expand...

Yeah i should have used quotes in between. People in all their previous comments are expecting to much from a company like AMD.
 
These chips do not have to lay waste to everything Intel. Not one bit.

All they have to do is provide decent application performance for a decent price.

Thats all 98% of PC users have cared about for the past few years since the intro of dual core CPUs totally removed the need for high end, high price CPUs.

Its what AMD can deliver for $100 that counts.

So what if Intel has the fastest $1000 CPU. Its actually irrelevant to most folks in the real world.

The so called 'budget CPU' is now the 'everyman CPU'. Thats the market AMD should go for.

Just saying this when all the tears break out when it doesnt crush the top Intel chips. It doesnt have to.

No one really cares. AMD just has to actually get a PR/marketing dept and start knocking on more doors. They will never sell if no one outside the business knows about them.

Time to get a jingle boys!
 
matrix563 said:
i hope its am3 compatible!
Click to expand...

That would mean that AMD will loose against Intel's high end that will have 2 times the memory bandwidth. I expect their to be a low/mid end version that is AM3 compatible with 4 or less cores and a high end version with 6 to 8 cores that will need quad channel ram.
 
Reading between the lines it sounds like they are aiming for lots of cores, but each one isn't as fast as an intel core. Intel can sell you fairly cheaply a quad core with 4 very quick cores (and 4 very slow hyperthreading ones). I expect for the same money AMD will sell you and eight core cpu with 8 fairly fast cores.

This works fine for servers but sounds rubbish for gaming. Games only require about 3 cores but you want those cores to be really really quick.
 
sbuckler said:
This works fine for servers but sounds rubbish for gaming. Games only require about 3 cores but you want those cores to be really really quick.
Click to expand...

But will probably still give you around 50-60fps+ with a decent GPU for around $100-$150.

So whats the issue?
 
sirmonkey1985 said:
no not approaching end of life.. the am3+ bulldozers will be backwards compatible with AM3 only boards.. am2+ has reached its EOL when the bulldozers come out.. and bio's correct on all the other stuff..
Click to expand...

so were stuck with these fucking pins for a while longer ? ! :)
 
I read the whole thing and do not see any thing new at all (well except the slides for bobcat).

Edit: And I guess the discussion of the server sockets.
 
The following is opinion. There's no demeaning or anything negative, I believe.

1. It is actually critically relevant that AMD providing parts that will lift their ASP, or any particular product's higher margin.
2. Most users will be happy if they get AMD-version of i7-920 overclock to 4GHz for <USD100, me included.
3. However, that implies AMD is forever living on very thin-line of buffer-zone.
4. Almost all the users say they want competition
5. Almost all the users know basically you need money to continue competition.
6. Almost all the enthusiasts say buy Core i7-920 overclock to 4GHz. In the process they are willingly putting 284 dollar processor and may 150-200 dollar motherboard into service
7. Almost all the enthusiasts, if AMD comes out with AMD-Newgeneration-920 overclock to 4GHz with same performance as Intel, but because now the Nextgeneration Intel-X-cpu is even better, so perhaps I only consider paying much less now.

So the key issues here are
1. If AMD can provide BD-920 with the same performance as Core i7-920. Are you willing to pay for it with USD284
2. If you feel differently, how much are you willing to pay for it?

Circular Logic,
1. If you are not willing to pay for it, AMD continues with lower ASP/margin.
2. Lower ASP/margin implies thin-buffer, and your organization is forever under pressure, especially in this expensive high-tech race business because every time it is couple hundreds of millions or one/two billions.

AMD will continue to innovate, nothing less, but the key issue here is how to ensure our enthusiasts pay with the same passion and tenacity as they preach and demonstrate their alliance with Core i7-920 overclock to 4GHz at, yep, USD 284 suggested retail price.
 
Last edited:
to issue #2...yes.....i got the 1090T the week after it came out.....a great CPU that performs in tasks that actually use the cores at the same level as the 920/930 ....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top