AMD Bulldozer may be compatible with AM3 boards

winginit

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 6, 2007
Messages
1,235
The only way it's possible is for an AM3 board to have an AM3+ socket on it.... there is a pin count difference which prevents AM3+ CPUs from physically dropping into an AM3 socketed board....

Check the differences on the two sockets pictured:

http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pcgameshardware.de%2Faid%2C813945%2FCebit-2011-MSI-bringt-AMD-Bulldozer-taugliche-AM3-Mainboards-sowie-BIOS-Update%2FMainboard%2FNews%2F&act=url

.... you're still going to need a new board for Bulldozer....
 

Silent.Sin

Gawd
Joined
Jun 23, 2003
Messages
969
.... you're still going to need a new board for Bulldozer....
This. I think it's a mis-translation or something going on. There will be products using AM3 level chipsets but the socket pins differ so unless you go cutting that extra pin off it won't fit in an old AM3 board (...please don't do that).

The ASRock 890FX Deluxe5 is a good example to go along with winginit's link. Look at the picture with the AM3+ silkscreen as well as the spec page listing support for "8-Core CPU" but it's obviously using older chipsets. ASRock has a long history of providing really solid mixed generation motherboards like this. It's targeting people who want to be ready to upgrade in a few months when BD comes out or someone sitting on the fence about upgrading that doesn't have the cash just yet to purchase a new mobo + CPU. You'll probably miss out on a lot of the power saving features of BD, maybe even the turbo modes but I guess we'll have to wait to hear more out of CeBIT.
 

sirmonkey1985

[H]ard|DCer of the Month - July 2010
Joined
Sep 13, 2008
Messages
22,064
This. I think it's a mis-translation or something going on. There will be products using AM3 level chipsets but the socket pins differ so unless you go cutting that extra pin off it won't fit in an old AM3 board (...please don't do that).

The ASRock 890FX Deluxe5 is a good example to go along with winginit's link. Look at the picture with the AM3+ silkscreen as well as the spec page listing support for "8-Core CPU" but it's obviously using older chipsets. ASRock has a long history of providing really solid mixed generation motherboards like this. It's targeting people who want to be ready to upgrade in a few months when BD comes out or someone sitting on the fence about upgrading that doesn't have the cash just yet to purchase a new mobo + CPU. You'll probably miss out on a lot of the power saving features of BD, maybe even the turbo modes but I guess we'll have to wait to hear more out of CeBIT.

i think most of the features will be there, the key difference is the 900 series will be using UEFI bios and the 890FX series am3+ boards will be using the annoying pos traditional bios we have been using since the dawn of time..
 

Silent.Sin

Gawd
Joined
Jun 23, 2003
Messages
969
i think most of the features will be there, the key difference is the 900 series will be using UEFI bios and the 890FX series am3+ boards will be using the annoying pos traditional bios we have been using since the dawn of time..
That ASRock board I linked to supports UEFI. I'm not entirely positive if its the chipset that enables support of UEFI or if it is a combination of chipset + OS + CPU or some variation of that, the whole convention seems confusing to me especially considering UEFI can just sit on top of conventional BIOS so all it would be doing is applying fancier menus.
 

ZixacunX

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 1, 2010
Messages
188
they officially stated before that the slot will be AMD3+ not AMD3 because they want to bring out the full potential of the bulldozer without having to cripple it. AMD3+ can use AMD3 cpus though
 

JF-AMD

I Know Bulldozer
Joined
Aug 24, 2010
Messages
261
I have verified with the desktop guys, Bulldozer is supported on AM3+ only, not AM3.
 

sc3252

Gawd
Joined
Jan 3, 2005
Messages
680
looks like the info was correct after all

http://event.asus.com/2011/mb/AM3_PLUS_Ready/

also, look under BIOS it states BIOS for testing AM3+ cpu function

http://www.asus.com/product.aspx?P_ID=kPGmtxee5RsQVsXG#download
I wouldn't bet on this BIOS working very well considering the pin layout is supposedly different...

Edit:Looks like a lot more companies than just asus are updating their pages saying they support AM3+ so maybe all that is needed is a BIOS update after all??
 
Last edited:

Michaelius

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Sep 8, 2003
Messages
4,684
What if both Asus and JF-AMD are correct?

JF says bulldozer won't work on am3 but what stops AMD from releasing am3+ (in name only) cpu based on Phenom II core as low budget alternative?
 

tlc4tvm

Limp Gawd
Joined
Nov 24, 2008
Messages
341
What if both Asus and JF-AMD are correct?

JF says bulldozer won't work on am3 but what stops AMD from releasing am3+ (in name only) cpu based on Phenom II core as low budget alternative?
That's probably it exactly!!!!

Some lowend 4000 6000 shoot maybe even 3000 and 2000 will be backwards compatiable.
Either that or they will do a die shrik on the PII and call it a AMD3+ and make it compatiable with both sockets.

Until you see a processor support list you really don't know.

--------------------

Then there is also the possibility of modding, I really hope you could pin mod a B8 into a socket AM2+/AM3. If they are truly up compatiable perhaps you can simply cut or bend that pin and attach it to ???vcore or GND??? and it will work... UI'm sure someone will try it.
 

novadaemon

Gawd
Joined
Aug 24, 2006
Messages
863
Eh, I guess if you really didn't want to buy a board this is good news. If I'm going to build a BD rig I'd at least want to get the latest chipset with it too.
 

Michaelius

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Sep 8, 2003
Messages
4,684
Eh, I guess if you really didn't want to buy a board this is good news. If I'm going to build a BD rig I'd at least want to get the latest chipset with it too.
Why?

Biggest diffrence from 8 series to 9 series is number in front.
If you have 7x0 with sb600 i can understand that but for people with 8x0 who already have sata 3 there's absolutly no point.

Still if i can put bulldozer into my 89GTD pro I'll consider AMD as option, if i have to buy new mobo I'm going back to Intel since at least they have Sli capable mobos
 

bastage

Pics of your wife?
Joined
Mar 4, 2010
Messages
12,832
Eh, I guess if you really didn't want to buy a board this is good news. If I'm going to build a BD rig I'd at least want to get the latest chipset with it too.
This exactly.


Why?

Biggest diffrence from 8 series to 9 series is number in front.
If you have 7x0 with sb600 i can understand that but for people with 8x0 who already have sata 3 there's absolutly no point.

Still if i can put bulldozer into my 89GTD pro I'll consider AMD as option, if i have to buy new mobo I'm going back to Intel since at least they have Sli capable mobos
& you think the lack of official sli support is AMD's fault. I am under the impression that it is nVidias doing that causes it.
 

mesyn191

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 28, 2004
Messages
2,983
Even if they don't improve performance or add features with the 9xx chipset they might lower power usage and fix bugs which may be worth while to some. Also we already know that the 9xx chipset will allow some additional features of BD to work, it does remain to be seen if that is something significant or not of course.
 

JMccovery

2[H]4U
Joined
Feb 9, 2006
Messages
2,211
What if both Asus and JF-AMD are correct?

JF says bulldozer won't work on am3 but what stops AMD from releasing am3+ (in name only) cpu based on Phenom II core as low budget alternative?
Why would AMD do that, since AM3 Phenom/Athlon II chips are compatible with AM3+? Unless you mean making an AM3 chip based on Bulldozer cores?

As additional information, technically every 8-series chipset that uses either the SB810 or SB850 supports UEFI/EFI, it's just that board makers didn't want to implement it. Remember, AMD doesn't have as much control over the board makers as Intel does.
 

griff30

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 15, 2000
Messages
5,795
Why?

Still if i can put bulldozer into my 89GTD pro I'll consider AMD as option, if i have to buy new mobo I'm going back to Intel since at least they have Sli capable mobos
The nVidia nForce boards support SLI.
 

Topweasel

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 12, 2005
Messages
1,509
Why?

Biggest diffrence from 8 series to 9 series is number in front.
If you have 7x0 with sb600 i can understand that but for people with 8x0 who already have sata 3 there's absolutly no point.

Still if i can put bulldozer into my 89GTD pro I'll consider AMD as option, if i have to buy new mobo I'm going back to Intel since at least they have Sli capable mobos
Only because mobo manufacturers forced them to support the X58 by refusing to buy NF200 chips.

There is just less demand for SLI support on the AMD CPU end because the .5% difference in performance per price range most people are just going to go with the full Platform angle when getting an AMD CPU. If Radeons fall behind or AMD catches up on the upper end CPU market, that could change.
 

Topweasel

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 12, 2005
Messages
1,509
What if both Asus and JF-AMD are correct?

JF says bulldozer won't work on am3 but what stops AMD from releasing am3+ (in name only) cpu based on Phenom II core as low budget alternative?
Could very well be the case. I would be very surprised if AMD truly did launch BD in 3 different configurations that quickly. My guess is the 6 and 4 core parts are AM3+ Phenom II's that don't have the pin that would keep a BD from being installed. Then later as BD matures and they get a backlog of failed module cpu's, you might see a 42xx and 62xx chips that are BD and will not work.
 

sirmonkey1985

[H]ard|DCer of the Month - July 2010
Joined
Sep 13, 2008
Messages
22,064
sounds to me like its a sales gimmic because am3+ will support am3 processors. sounds like they are trying to advertise the am3 processors they already support as am3+.
 

Topweasel

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 12, 2005
Messages
1,509
sounds to me like its a sales gimmic because am3+ will support am3 processors. sounds like they are trying to advertise the am3 processors they already support as am3+.
Probably to a degree if they don't support BD then its really just an AM3 cpu with rebranded for AM3+. Which isn't really an issue. Basically it still allows for an upgrade path and we should know better then to assume that the Phenom based CPU's would just die off. People could get a FX-6110, upgrade the board later, after they upgrade the board they can then get a FX-81**.

This confusion is also only an issue with the Retail market where most people check their boards for supported CPU's before they upgrade (or should).

In the end even if they can't get FX-8***'s in AM3, I still have to commend AMD for their attempts since AM2 came out to keep some kind of upgrade path, even if this time its a bit backwards.
 

Topweasel

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 12, 2005
Messages
1,509
Okay apparently some more rumor mongering says that the AM3+ socket doesn't match the bottom of the AM3+ processors and the Pin-out change might be to make sure they are able to work with future CPU's.

This could still end up only being true for non BD AM3+ chips. Also one other thing that occurred to me. AM3 chips use a HT 3.0 connection, while AM3+ uses a HT3.1 right. That would be one change they could make to K10 based AM3+ cpu's to make them AM3+ CPU's that could go into AM3 boards.

The one thing they are all silent on is BD support. Until someone says that these boards work with AM3+ BD's, then I would still assume the case is no.
 

JF-AMD

I Know Bulldozer
Joined
Aug 24, 2010
Messages
261
There is one bulldozer part for client, Zambezi. AMD is only supporting that product in AM3+ sockets, period.
 

Topweasel

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 12, 2005
Messages
1,509
There is one bulldozer part for client, Zambezi. AMD is only supporting that product in AM3+ sockets, period.
So... Only the FX-81** series CPU's, or are FX-61** and FX-41** series still considered Zambezi products? Its probably TMI for you to answer that, but considering the fact that all of the Athlon II and all non-6core parts are from Deneb production, yet all have different part names for their configurations, I would think then that BD would only be available in the 8k series to start with.
 

JMccovery

2[H]4U
Joined
Feb 9, 2006
Messages
2,211
So... Only the FX-81** series CPU's, or are FX-61** and FX-41** series still considered Zambezi products? Its probably TMI for you to answer that, but considering the fact that all of the Athlon II and all non-6core parts are from Deneb production, yet all have different part names for their configurations, I would think then that BD would only be available in the 8k series to start with.
All of the upcoming FX series are BD parts. FX-81** is the 4 module/8 core part, FX-61** is the 3 module/6 core part, FX-41** is the 2 module/4 core part. Apparently all of the Stars core parts fall off the radar.
 

Topweasel

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 12, 2005
Messages
1,509
All of the upcoming FX series are BD parts. FX-81** is the 4 module/8 core part, FX-61** is the 3 module/6 core part, FX-41** is the 2 module/4 core part. Apparently all of the Stars core parts fall off the radar.
I guess that's where my question comes in. You have Stars that's primarily made in two forms 4 and 6 core, we know of them as Deneb and Thuban. From there Deneb's go through tons of binning where cores and cache is disabled. You have Athlon II X2, X3, X4, and Phenom II X2, X3, and X4. Again all from Deneb. But AMD doesn't call all of them Denebs.

So if the castrated Zambezi's are the 4k and 6k series wouldn't each one of them have a different name? Maybe they are simplifying code names as well. Back in the day a the core name lived the life of the that product, now its the core and the product its self has its own code name.

As for Stars. If memory serves me right it will in the "A" series CPU's as Lynx according to the '11 road-map, which should be all Llano systems. Then again I think they are calling those Husky cores in that, but still K10 derivatives.
 

JMccovery

2[H]4U
Joined
Feb 9, 2006
Messages
2,211
I guess that's where my question comes in. You have Stars that's primarily made in two forms 4 and 6 core, we know of them as Deneb and Thuban. From there Deneb's go through tons of binning where cores and cache is disabled. You have Athlon II X2, X3, X4, and Phenom II X2, X3, and X4. Again all from Deneb. But AMD doesn't call all of them Denebs.

So if the castrated Zambezi's are the 4k and 6k series wouldn't each one of them have a different name? Maybe they are simplifying code names as well. Back in the day a the core name lived the life of the that product, now its the core and the product its self has its own code name.

As for Stars. If memory serves me right it will in the "A" series CPU's as Lynx according to the '11 road-map, which should be all Llano systems. Then again I think they are calling those Husky cores in that, but still K10 derivatives.
From what I've read, no one is sure if the 6 and 4 core BD parts are Zambezi with disabled modules/cores or actual 3 and 2 module parts. I think since the 4 module/8 core 'die' is known as 'Orochi', AMD is disabling modules on the FX-6*** and FX-4***

As a side, the Athlon IIs were actually different chips, Propus was originally a Deneb with disabled L3, but then was made as a chip with no L3 at all (x4) and with one core disabled (Rana/x3). Regor (x2) was built as a dual-core with 1MB of L2 per core. All of the Phenom II x2/x3/x4 chips with the exception of the 960T and 970T were Denebs with disabled cores/cache.
 

Topweasel

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 12, 2005
Messages
1,509
From what I've read, no one is sure if the 6 and 4 core BD parts are Zambezi with disabled modules/cores or actual 3 and 2 module parts. I think since the 4 module/8 core 'die' is known as 'Orochi', AMD is disabling modules on the FX-6*** and FX-4***

As a side, the Athlon IIs were actually different chips, Propus was originally a Deneb with disabled L3, but then was made as a chip with no L3 at all (x4) and with one core disabled (Rana/x3). Regor (x2) was built as a dual-core with 1MB of L2 per core. All of the Phenom II x2/x3/x4 chips with the exception of the 960T and 970T were Denebs with disabled cores/cache.
So what you are saying is that BD is the module (cores), Zambezi series, and Orchi is the full die?

Went trying to dig it up and the Wiki has Propus and Regor as the two redesigned chips with cache and cores disabled Denebs littering the place.

This is what I mean by two many code names. Just need 1 BD and leave it at that. Just wait till Llano hits. Then we will have to the version of integrated graphics to it.
 

JMccovery

2[H]4U
Joined
Feb 9, 2006
Messages
2,211
So what you are saying is that BD is the module (cores), Zambezi series, and Orchi is the full die?

Went trying to dig it up and the Wiki has Propus and Regor as the two redesigned chips with cache and cores disabled Denebs littering the place.

This is what I mean by two many code names. Just need 1 BD and leave it at that. Just wait till Llano hits. Then we will have to the version of integrated graphics to it.
From what I remember of what JF said:
Bulldozer is the module, Orochi is the 8 core/4 module die:
Zambezi is Orochi in AM3+ package, Valencia is Orochi in C32 package, Interlagos is Orochi in dual-die G34 package. Confused as I am?
 

jamesrb

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 29, 2004
Messages
1,051
Here is what the companies are doing. They are launching new revisions of these boards with AM3+ sockets. BD will not work in the old AM3 sockets due to the pinout difference as has been already mentioned.

Here is an example:

http://www.gigabyte.com/products/product-page.aspx?pid=3781#ov
Rev 3.1, black socket supports BD

http://www.gigabyte.com/products/product-page.aspx?pid=3755#ov
Rev 3.0, white socket doesn't support BD

JF-AMD said that the chips aren't supported in an AM3 socket. Nobody ever said that 890 series chipsets were not supported with the right socket. Honestly, 890FX was virtually identical to 790FX, other than the updated SATA controller. I would expect 990FX to be virtually identical as well. If 990FX was significantly redisigned, they would have supported USB 3.0.
 

JMccovery

2[H]4U
Joined
Feb 9, 2006
Messages
2,211
I feel that if the 9 series chipsets don't have PCI-E 3.0, AMD shouldn't waste a whole series name/number or any silicon. There was almost no point in releasing the 8 series chipsets either.
 

Topweasel

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 12, 2005
Messages
1,509
I feel that if the 9 series chipsets don't have PCI-E 3.0, AMD shouldn't waste a whole series name/number or any silicon. There was almost no point in releasing the 8 series chipsets either.
I would be less bothered by the lack of PCI-E 3.0 and more in the lack of USB 3.0.
 

Topweasel

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 12, 2005
Messages
1,509
From what I remember of what JF said:
Bulldozer is the module, Orochi is the 8 core/4 module die:
Zambezi is Orochi in AM3+ package, Valencia is Orochi in C32 package, Interlagos is Orochi in dual-die G34 package. Confused as I am?
Yes. Yes I am .
 

beto

Gawd
Joined
Mar 28, 2009
Messages
529
At the risk of stepping in it here... What about Llano? Llano isn't bulldozer, correct? It's "stars" based or whatever right? Is Llano going to work in an AM3 board?
 

Topweasel

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 12, 2005
Messages
1,509
At the risk of stepping in it here... What about Llano? Llano isn't bulldozer, correct? It's "stars" based or whatever right? Is Llano going to work in an AM3 board?
Between what I have read here and pieces I have picked up Llano is only going to be available in Lynx form or something like that (much like BD and Zambezi). That is the Laptop platform. Maybe Llano's upgrade which is going to be based on the BD architecture will be available as desktop fusion product, but I doubt AMD is really worried about a fusion product in the desktop market yet.
 

beto

Gawd
Joined
Mar 28, 2009
Messages
529
llano is the laptop part.
lol...well that's news to me. I guess I could be mistaken but I am pretty sure "Llano" is going to be for both. What they call it may be different but I am pretty sure they are going to have a "stars" based CPU/GPU on the same chip for the desktop.
 
Top