AMD bets on Bulldozer to take back the desktop

I just find it amusing that AMD wants us to believe this product hasn't been set back. Several dates have changed, plus the server parts have jumped ahead of the desktop models.
 
Pieter3dnow said:
But what you are saying is weird, they don't know tech but they do know Intel ? The only question people have is will it run windows and sometimes will it run the games I like.
Click to expand...

The majority of people I know have very little tech knowledge, but will say like a badge of honor" It's got an Intel in it." They don't have a clue what happens inside that case but they have seen enough commercials to 'know' that if they have an Intel based computer they picked a good one. I don't know how many times someone has gotten their new computer home only to be calling me with"Why is my computer not as fast as yours? I got the one with Intel in it."
 
Well with someone you mean friends right , otherwise that would be creepy :) .

Honestly I have some friends who don't know jack about Intel nor about CPU in general , they can turn on the computer do stuff with it then turn it off. They did roll through university and got their degree. Yet they have to ask me why I always tell them to buy AMD based desktops :) .

Nor could I ever explain it to them, yes the basics but not the underlying idea or technical side of it, their attention span is towards computers is minimal.
 
Opened a Future Shop flyer this morning, and was amazed to see that half of the laptop on the page were either e-350's or A8's. AMD must be doing stuff right because they are finally getting the attention they deserve from major retailers.
 
TooEasy! said:
I have no doubt that the 8-core BD will be a worthy processor. However, my concerns are memory performance. Is there any change to the architecture in regards to this? Everyone knows Intel's memory performance is banana's in comparison and I was curious on others thoughts.
Click to expand...

From what has been published thus far the first generation Bulldozers will officially support DDR3 Dual Channel RAM up to 1866Mhz.

Compared to X58 based triple channel systems this is still a pretty low overall bandwidth.

The odd thing seems to be that even when a Phenom II is overclocked to 4+Ghz, and thus performs similarly to a Core i7-965, there seems to be little benefit from overclocking the RAM. I haven't even bothered trying to clock my DDR3-2000 above 1600mhz on my 4ghz X6, because It just doesn't seem to add much benefit.

On overclocked Core i7 systems - however - people seem to be seeing huge gains from bringing their triple channel RAM all the way up to 2100Mhz...

Now, part of this is explained by the Core i7's being faster and thus hitting the RAM more frequently, but this doesn't fully explain it, or we'd see more of a difference when the Phenom II's run at 4Ghz and bench pretty closely to Core i7-965's.

The only explanation thus must be that AMD's memory controllers/protocols must somehow be more efficient than Intel's resulting in less overhead, and as such less raw memory bandwidth is needed to provide the same level of performance.

This may have something to do with my AMD AM2 -> AM3+ motherboards always have to have the memory slots so close to the CPU socket (creating fit problems for many coolers).
 
Dulak said:
I Agree - I got to wonder why AMD hasnt been touting their new processor that is coming out.
- either they are still working on it or ... heaven forbid its not so hot.
- but if I were AMD Id be selling it to the common man as the next best thing.

Is it really coming out in 1 month? ... they sure know how to be tight lipped (you would think that they wouldnt want to sell any)
Click to expand...

Remember when ATi dropped a bomb on the world with the 9500 launch? Do you remember how Nvidia got sucker punched by that release?

If AMD really has the goods, it would be best if they kept quiet...Intel is one company you don't want to warn that they are about to get perl harbored....trust me on this one.

Better to keep it as quiet as possible, and sucker punch Intel...then to open your mouth, and have Intel sucker punch you.
 
The only explanation thus must be that AMD's memory controllers/protocols must somehow be more efficient than Intel's resulting in less overhead, and as such less raw memory bandwidth is needed to provide the same level of performance.
Click to expand...

I would say just the opposite. AMD's higher latency, lower bandwidth memory controller and cache are hampering its IPC. Hopefully both are improved significantly in BD.
 
Last edited:
fatrat said:
Remember when ATi dropped a bomb on the world with the 9500 launch? Do you remember how Nvidia got sucker punched by that release?

If AMD really has the goods, it would be best if they kept quiet...Intel is one company you don't want to warn that they are about to get perl harbored....trust me on this one.

Better to keep it as quiet as possible, and sucker punch Intel...then to open your mouth, and have Intel sucker punch you.
Click to expand...

Or they keep whining about native monolithic dies, and end up with (for comsumers, and most servers) useless barcys and agenas :p
 
Zarathustra[H];1037622931 said:
On overclocked Core i7 systems - however - people seem to be seeing huge gains from bringing their triple channel RAM all the way up to 2100Mhz...
Click to expand...

Just to note, while this may be true for x58 systems, Sandybridge performance is almost flat for various memory CL timings and frequency ratings.
 
AMD, I got money and more
Give me my damn octocore
You already put out AM3+
And I'm still back of the bus
With a little volt bump to go
I sure hope I can hit 5.0
But if I don't make it that far
Still octocore will raise the bar.
 
fatrat said:
Remember when ATi dropped a bomb on the world with the 9500 launch? Do you remember how Nvidia got sucker punched by that release?

If AMD really has the goods, it would be best if they kept quiet...Intel is one company you don't want to warn that they are about to get perl harbored....trust me on this one.

Better to keep it as quiet as possible, and sucker punch Intel...then to open your mouth, and have Intel sucker punch you.
Click to expand...

I would love to see intel sucker punch
 
PoopsMacClaude said:
I wanted Team Green
But the delays kept coming
Bought a Sandy Bridge
Click to expand...

I'm betting this thing doesn't even release in Sept. the way things have been going. AM3+ boards will have sat on the market for 6-7 months without a processor. LOL!
 
heflys20 said:
I'm betting this thing doesn't even release in Sept. the way things have been going. AM3+ boards will have sat on the market for 6-7 months without a processor. LOL!
Click to expand...

Speaking of which - what am3+ should I be looking at getting for the bulldozer? ... wondering if anymore will be out by its release.
 
Jalidi said:
AMD, I got money and more
Give me my damn octocore
You already put out AM3+
And I'm still back of the bus
With a little volt bump to go
I sure hope I can hit 5.0
But if I don't make it that far
Still octocore will raise the bar.
Click to expand...

what the..
 
Last edited:
Sojuuk said:
Never seen an AMD advert but the AMC24 movie theater I go to has giant intel ads playing before movies. DANCING PENGUINS ON A GIANT SCREEN. That is like crack for the average idiot computer purchaser.
Click to expand...

They were sold on "intel inside" at DANCING PENGUINS. AMD is toast. :p
 
I'm not sure the average person even knows what brand the chip in their computer is. A lot of them have to look at the label to remember the brand of the notebook, let alone any of the components.
 
Dulak said:
Speaking of which - what am3+ should I be looking at getting for the bulldozer? ... wondering if anymore will be out by its release.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure I would reccomend a board until the actual chip ships.
There could be more changes before we have the silicone in our hands.
If it all was not worth the wait, thenim jumping ship and waiting for quad channel intel in December.
 
Chihlidog said:
Replacing the CPU is more of a pain than anything else. Slapping in a video card or a few sticks of ram takes 5 minutes. Replacing the CPU isnt something a lot of people feel like doing once we've got the rig built.

And why build a rig based on pure speculation? Sure, he could have bought an AM3+ mobo and gone with a current AMD cpu. But of course, now he's just paid a serious premium for the "budget" option since he has to buy TWO cpus. And who really knows if the BD is going to be anything special? I'm an AMD fan, but at this point in time there is zero reason to hold out hope for them to be a serious contender in the enthusiast' market. 2500k/2600k is proven performance.


They really screwed the pooch on this one. I wish AMD well but I too have lost my enthusiasm, simply because I no longer believe them.
Click to expand...

You know your right they arnt the best, But motherboards and cpu's are reasonably priced. Idk about you but I don't shit money lol Phenom II X6 is plenty fast for anything honestly. And BD will be better then phenom II x6's im pretty sure.
 
Shata said:
You know your right they arnt the best, But motherboards and cpu's are reasonably priced. Idk about you but I don't shit money lol Phenom II X6 is plenty fast for anything honestly. And BD will be better then phenom II x6's im pretty sure.
Click to expand...

unless you fold, it can but not as fast and uses more power per point.

 
Quix said:
I'm not sure the average person even knows what brand the chip in their computer is. A lot of them have to look at the label to remember the brand of the notebook, let alone any of the components.
Click to expand...

People who call a computer a "hard drive" and have no idea what the difference between RAM and hard drive space will ask for intel. I have had this happen dozens of times when they have asked me for purchase advice or to buy them a new machine.
 
fatrat said:
Remember when ATi dropped a bomb on the world with the 9500 launch? Do you remember how Nvidia got sucker punched by that release?

If AMD really has the goods, it would be best if they kept quiet...Intel is one company you don't want to warn that they are about to get perl harbored....trust me on this one.

Better to keep it as quiet as possible, and sucker punch Intel...then to open your mouth, and have Intel sucker punch you.
Click to expand...

your thinking of the r300 core that was launched as the9700pro. that was developed by artX, not ati. ati bought out artx and released it .

furthermore the top executives from ati "retired" after the ati/amd merger and were replaced by amd's people. any release strategies would be amd based

amd knew its sledgehammer and clawhammer's were killers and were not exactly quiet about the performance. there were leaks 6 months before the release that showed the performance, they were also more expensive than the intels top chip (3.0c) when released.

only when the a64's became 2nd choice with the release of intels core2's did they become cheaper. the old xp's were fast and cheap, just a little slower than the p4's at the time.
 
mrbigshot said:
the old xp's were fast and cheap, just a little slower than the p4's at the time.
Click to expand...

Did we live through the same early 2000's?

As I recall the Slot A / Socket A cpus were pretty even with P3's clock for clock, but then Intel was unable to clock the P3's much over 1Ghz and went to the P4 design instead, and the Athlons and Athlon XP's absolutely demolished the P4's as I recall.

The P4's were a huge failure for Intel.
 
mrbigshot said:
amd knew its sledgehammer and clawhammer's were killers and were not exactly quiet about the performance. there were leaks 6 months before the release that showed the performance, they were also more expensive than the intels top chip (3.0c) when released.
Click to expand...

Sure. Maybe Clawhammer. But Sledgehammer performance leaks were horrible and the ES units were clocked at 800MHz.
 
the pentium 4 3.2 was faster than the xp 3200+, the 3200+ lost out the slower 3.0c most of the time. the 800mhz bus was the reason for it. no doubt that amd's were better buys as they performed almost identically. once intel hit the core2 generation of chips is has basically has a 1 generation lead over amd.

i hope that amd can finally catch up to the nehalem and sandy bridge processors, i doubt they will do much beyond that. otherwise they would have been pushing the 8 core against the gulftown and upcoming sandy bridge -e 6 cores. if intel was worried we could see an 8 core by now. you know as well as i that they know quite a bit about the upcoming bulldozer's. you can guarantee they get a hold of es chips as soon as there out and more than likely beta chips.
 
Zarathustra[H];1037632591 said:
Did we live through the same early 2000's?

As I recall the Slot A / Socket A cpus were pretty even with P3's clock for clock, but then Intel was unable to clock the P3's much over 1Ghz and went to the P4 design instead, and the Athlons and Athlon XP's absolutely demolished the P4's as I recall.

The P4's were a huge failure for Intel.
Click to expand...

You seem to have selective memory problems ;)

Northwood A and B lost badly to Athlons XP but Northwood C reclaimed performance crown against Bartons to later loose it to Athlon 64.
 
fatrat said:
Remember when ATi dropped a bomb on the world with the 9500 launch? Do you remember how Nvidia got sucker punched by that release?

If AMD really has the goods, it would be best if they kept quiet...Intel is one company you don't want to warn that they are about to get perl harbored....trust me on this one.

Better to keep it as quiet as possible, and sucker punch Intel...then to open your mouth, and have Intel sucker punch you.
Click to expand...

Hmm so you belive company as big as Intel with bilions of dollars at stake haven't obtained sample of Bulldozer and all of it's performance numbers a month before it's release ?
:D
 
Michaelius said:
You seem to have selective memory problems ;)

Northwood A and B lost badly to Athlons XP but Northwood C reclaimed performance crown against Bartons to later loose it to Athlon 64.
Click to expand...

I just looked up Northwood C... It was released just before I graduated college in May 2003 at which point I was already sliding out of paying attention to the CPU wars.

I did build a socket 754 Athlon 64 system later on in 2004 as a reward to myself for getting my first job out of school, but it was after I had already stopped paying attentionto the benchmark wars. Then I completely fell off the planet.


I didn't build another rig until summer 2009 :p

My poor Athlon 64 and Geforce 6800 GT barely ever got used. I may have fired up a game a couple of times but that's it :p
 
Zarathustra[H];1037634469 said:
I did build a socket 754 Athlon 64 system later on in 2004 as a reward to myself for getting my first job out of school, but it was after I had already stopped paying attentionto the benchmark wars. Then I completely fell off the planet.


I didn't build another rig until summer 2009 :p

My poor Athlon 64 and Geforce 6800 GT barely ever got used. I may have fired up a game a couple of times but that's it :p
Click to expand...

Funny but that almost exactly mirrors my last cycle, except I went from the 6800GT to 7800GT due to a water leak.

Not that this info does anything to help this thread out, but hey AMD isn't trying so why should I :D
 
Hehe this screenshot tells us everything about multicore gaming:

amd-8-core-with-dirt-3.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top