AMD Bulldozer may be compatible with AM3 boards

empoy said:
Orochi is the internal name. Bulldozer to the outside world.
Zambezi, Interlagos and Valencia are the platform names.
Click to expand...

Dynomutt said:
according to the research i have done, Orochi is the die/architecture, name also known as a module featuring 2 x86 cores, this is simply duplicated on die to create 4, 6 & 8 core processors which is known as bulldozer or bulldozer could be the architecture name, im not 100% sure
Click to expand...
Jesus, when are people going to learn to read the thread? I could understand if this was posted several pages ago in a long ass thread, but that is not the case here. The answers you are seeking are only a few posts up, posted by John Fruehe who works in AMD's server division.

The official answer, post #115 of this same thread:
JF-AMD said:
Orochi is the name of the die.
Bulldozer is the name of the core.
Zambezi, interlagos and valencia are the processor names.
Click to expand...
 
We don't even know if Asus's 890FX and 890GX boards will support bulldozer yet, but I wouldn't count on it (yet). If it does, then Asus's 890FX and 890GX probably have a more robust VRM system than their 790 boards to support the additional stress put on by bulldozer.
 
http://event.msi.com/mb/am3+/

MSI has come out with BIOS update support for bulldozer on AM3 boards too.
More impressively it includes lower end boards down to 760G.

There should be no doubt that Bulldozer will fit AM3 now. The only question remain is how many feature we might lose and how much performance penalty.
 
wweeii said:
http://event.msi.com/mb/am3+/

MSI has come out with BIOS update support for bulldozer on AM3 boards too.
More impressively it includes lower end boards down to 760G.

There should be no doubt that Bulldozer will fit AM3 now. The only question remain is how many feature we might lose and how much performance penalty.
Click to expand...

There is tons of doubt. Lets wait till some NDA's are lifted on the chip itself before jumping on this bandwagon that still is super cryptic.
 
ANY announcement made on today of all days is suspect until confirmed at a later date. It's a bit less likely to be an AFD joke since it's in regards to currently shipping products and it's a feature that's been confirmed to work on competitor boards. Still I don't believe anything I read on the internets between the last day of march and april 2nd after everyone in the world's had a chance to get their jollies in.
 
There is rumor now that AMD will have backwards compatability of Bulldozer with Super Socket 7 boards with a BIOS update.
 
griff30 said:
There is rumor now that AMD will have backwards compatability of Bulldozer with Super Socket 7 boards with a BIOS update.
Click to expand...
Do you know how awesome it would be if AMD made Bulldozer compatible with Socket A??? NForce 2 + Bulldozer = dual-channel DDR + dual-channel DDR3 = DDR4 awesomeness! AMD+Nvidia-infused, Soundstorm accelerated pain for Intel, oh yeah! :D
 
Based on recent incidences with my MSI 890GXM, that is a bad thing for anything over a quad core. Their current selection vregs can't hold up to much more overclocked or not. but based on the AM3 architecture I hope it is all true so ASUS will go that far back too. :D That will be 3 less boards I will have to replace in this household to get BD setups a rolling here. :D But we will just have to wait and see in June.
 
I to am hoping the MSI bios update will be all I need. I was under the assumption when the 890 chip came out it would be good for BD regardless to only learn that it would be a different socket was a kicker.

MSI has stated that they have a bios update for certain mobos.
 
And MSI specifically mentions 32nm process and turbo core 2 so this theoretically rules out rebranded AM3 Phenom II sold as AM3+ cpus.
 
I had just ordered an Phenom II 555BE, and I noticed that, apparently the booklet that comes with newer AM3 processors has a diagram that shows 754/939/940, AM2/+/AM3 and Socket F. Also, oddly enough, on the AM2/+AM3 diagram, it has AM3+.

I know it's not definitive, but, someone on the client side must have made the decision to make AM3+ processors compatible with AM3.
 
it looks like to me most makers are just rushing out revisions of the old boards that have the am3 black sockets
 
The chipset doesn't make a difference in whether or not a board will support Bulldozer-based chips, hence the 8-series Gigabyte AM3+ boards. Even the old VIA K8T/M and the Nforce 3 will work with AM3+.
The 900-series chips are rumored to have PCI-E 3.0 support, but for some reason, the PCISIG has delayed it, again.
 
JMccovery said:
The chipset doesn't make a difference in whether or not a board will support Bulldozer-based chips, hence the 8-series Gigabyte AM3+ boards. Even the old VIA K8T/M and the Nforce 3 will work with AM3+.
The 900-series chips are rumored to have PCI-E 3.0 support, but for some reason, the PCISIG has delayed it, again.
Click to expand...

That's not quite true and you just need to look at the KT133 and Thunderbird support to see that. Sure AMD themselves and some of their closest partners (Nvidia back in the day) more likely to include features and communication techniques that might be included in the next couple CPU's in a current chipset, but the fact remains that as architectures change their can be very important developments that just didn't exist even in development when a chipset is made that would limit its use in the future.

We won't know if that really applies to the K8T and NF3/4, because only one MB manufacture would try it and I doubt even they would, but these chips are not always going to be compatible.
 
Well, I'll wait for the 990 series chipsets to emerge. Something about hacked up 790/890 chipsets kinda bother me. Do it right the first time around. ;) I know I was kinda hoping that it would all just "work together" but I also feel it will be more headaches than it is worth now the more I think about it. In the mean time, I need to figure out how to get this 6.2L HEMI in a Scion.... ;)
 
It was different during the K7 days, because the EV6 data rate was tied to the bus clock, instead of using clock multipliers like what's used on HyperTransport. Actually the AMD 750 and the KX133 supported both Slot A and Socket A, its just that both sucked, and had to be replaced.
 
Michaelius said:
Tried AMD lately ? Socket A, 754,939, AM2, AM2+, AM3 in the same time frame ;)
Click to expand...

Key difference was backwards compatibility for the socket, where Intel had little to none. AM2 cpu's could be used in AM2+ sockets, AM3 cpu's could be used in AM2+ and AM3 sockets. AM3 cpu's will be able to be used in AM3+ sockets.

Heck, even some AM2+ and AM3 cpu's could be used in some select motherboards with bios updates and/or by setting things manually in bios, but they lost some advanced power controls as a result.

If this happens, it will be un-official and only supported by certain motherboards and their manufacturers. AMD has already stated that they won't "officially" support it, therefore it might be possible "un-officially" provided the Bulldozer cpu uses the exact same pin configuration as AM3 cpu's even though socket AM3+ has more pins available. I would be willing to bet that if that is the case, AMD will only do that for the first few bulldozer chips, and those extra pin(s) will be utilized in the future.
 
Michaelius said:
Tried AMD lately ? Socket A, 754,939, AM2, AM2+, AM3 in the same time frame ;)
Click to expand...

No comparison. There was some backward/forward compatibility within the design as AM2 took hold in late 2006 I believe. More than I could say for Intel. If you had a 775 Smithfield setup you were pretty well guaranteed you had to buy new shit to go to C2D, especially if you had the ones with rambus memory. Remember that? "The new standard for performance" that Intel tried to implement as the standard that silently disappeared into the night shortly after it's release and regular DDR stayed despite their attempt to phase it out and has since evolved into what we use today. So yes, Intel changes things up too damned much. AMD seems to have their upgrade path a little more user friendly if you know what you are looking for. For example, when BD releases, Everything on my current board will work, processor, memory, video card, hard drives, ETC. and I can pick up a Bulldozer chip later on to finish it off. Leaving C2D, A whole new setup required to be upgraded to X58. Now on to the 1156 going to 1155 or 1366 you have to buy a new processor and motherboard, at least but wait... on the 1366 to take full advantage of triple channel you got to buy a new set of memory. Some 1366 boards out there Intel has you can run dual channel memory on a triple channel setup until you get another stick or buy the new set. Good ol' Intel has the consumer by the balls for at least $400-$700 if you upgrade as you go with their upgrade path. AMD If you go with a good motherboard to get your upgrade path started (because you can use your current AM3 stuff you may be into it at $100-$250 and you still have a little money in your pocket at the end of the day instead of a broke ass with bragging rights) and you can pick that processor up later when it is more financially realistic on a budget. that is the differences. AMD since AM2 has had this going on.
 
Hedghawg71 said:
No comparison. There was some backward/forward compatibility within the design as AM2 took hold in late 2006 I believe. More than I could say for Intel. If you had a 775 Smithfield setup you were pretty well guaranteed you had to buy new shit to go to C2D, especially if you had the ones with rambus memory. Remember that? "The new standard for performance" that Intel tried to implement as the standard that silently disappeared into the night shortly after it's release and regular DDR stayed despite their attempt to phase it out and has since evolved into what we use today. So yes, Intel changes things up too damned much. AMD seems to have their upgrade path a little more user friendly if you know what you are looking for. For example, when BD releases, Everything on my current board will work, processor, memory, video card, hard drives, ETC. and I can pick up a Bulldozer chip later on to finish it off. Leaving C2D, A whole new setup required to be upgraded to X58. Now on to the 1156 going to 1155 or 1366 you have to buy a new processor and motherboard, at least but wait... on the 1366 to take full advantage of triple channel you got to buy a new set of memory. Some 1366 boards out there Intel has you can run dual channel memory on a triple channel setup until you get another stick or buy the new set. Good ol' Intel has the consumer by the balls for at least $400-$700 if you upgrade as you go with their upgrade path. AMD If you go with a good motherboard to get your upgrade path started (because you can use your current AM3 stuff you may be into it at $100-$250 and you still have a little money in your pocket at the end of the day instead of a broke ass with bragging rights) and you can pick that processor up later when it is more financially realistic on a budget. that is the differences. AMD since AM2 has had this going on.
Click to expand...


1. using new mobo that runs with old cpu is pointless as far as upgrade path goes
2. all X58 mobos run with dual channel memory showing minimal loss of performance
3. Intel had similar upgrade path in late 775 as huge number of 965 chipset mobos could run 45 quad cores without any problems and newer P35/P45 could run Pentium IV chips without any problem.

PersonalJ said:
And not all of them support C2Q :eek:
Click to expand...

Ahh so when Intel did it with 775 it was bad but when AMD does exactly the same thing with AM3+ all is cool? Find me any diffrence in situation of people who bought 775 back then only to find C2D won't work later to what AMD does today?

Or how was 754 any diffrent than 1156 ?
 
754 to 939 was to support dual channel memory, which is physically impossible with 754. AM2 was to support an IMC, which would conflict with the chipset memory controller of 939. AM2 boards have largely been compatible with AM3 processors if the motherboard manufacturer decided to update the bios for it, and even then, some have reported older AM3 processors working with AM2 boards that don't officially support them. AMD initially tried to make Bulldozer compatible with AM3 boards, but then felt that trying to make it compatible would interfere with too much of Bulldozer's performance. Even then, some motherboard manufacturers are saying some of their current boards will be compatible with bulldozer. How much it gimps it, we will see. AMD has tried to keep aspects of backwards compatibility in their designs, but sometimes it just doesn't work out. They did, however, made sure that AM3 CPU's will work with AM3+ motherboards.

How about 1156 to 1155. Was there really a point to that? Did the different architecture of sandy bridge force a complete incompatibility with 1156 boards? 1156 was barely 1 and a half years old. Intel now has 3 current socket types flying around, none of which are compatible with each other. Whereas AMD has only 1 socket type currently for the processor, which are compatible with all current motherboard sockets being used (AM2+, AM3, and most AM2 motherboards, depending on the manufacturer and processor).
 
754 and 939 coexisted at the same time and they already had IMC integrated (Am2 added DDR2 support)
939 was supported with dual core cpus but 754 was abondomed.

New 8x0 chipsets were released 12 months ago at that time Bulldozer design was in final stages. Why aren't all 890 mobos buldozer ready then ? Same chipsets will be used to power new mobos with barely any changes?

And please provide me a single reason why I should be happy that i can run AM3 cpu in am3+ mobo as X6 owner?
There's nothing wrong with it - it's CPU that works in it a big fucking joke that barely matches previous gen intel cpus using 6 threads vs 4 of i5 750.
 
Michaelius said:
New 8x0 chipsets were released 12 months ago at that time Bulldozer design was in final stages. Why aren't all 890 mobos buldozer ready then ? Same chipsets will be used to power new mobos with barely any changes?
Click to expand...

Its the same situation that has played out on AMD boards before: Some AM2 boards were compatible with AM2+ processors, and Some AM2+ boards were compatible with AM3 processors. This happens because AMD doesn't have a lot of control over the board mfgs.

Michaelius said:
And please provide me a single reason why I should be happy that i can run AM3 cpu in am3+ mobo as X6 owner?
There's nothing wrong with it - it's CPU that works in it a big fucking joke that barely matches previous gen intel cpus using 6 threads vs 4 of i5 750.
Click to expand...

One reason for running an Phenom II in an AM3+ board: someone who wants upgrade from a Phenom II + AM2+ board, but continue to use a perfectly good cpu until they are ready to upgrade to Zambezi.

Tsumi said:
754 to 939 was to support dual channel memory, which is physically impossible with 754. AM2 was to support an IMC, which would conflict with the chipset memory controller of 939. AM2 boards have largely been compatible with AM3 processors if the motherboard manufacturer decided to update the bios for it, and even then, some have reported older AM3 processors working with AM2 boards that don't officially support them. AMD initially tried to make Bulldozer compatible with AM3 boards, but then felt that trying to make it compatible would interfere with too much of Bulldozer's performance. Even then, some motherboard manufacturers are saying some of their current boards will be compatible with bulldozer. How much it gimps it, we will see. AMD has tried to keep aspects of backwards compatibility in their designs, but sometimes it just doesn't work out. They did, however, made sure that AM3 CPU's will work with AM3+ motherboards.
Click to expand...

I've noticed that lately, a fair amount of people think that 754/939 did not have an IMC. The last time an AMD platform had a chipset-bound memory controller was back in the K7 days.

Tsumi said:
How about 1156 to 1155. Was there really a point to that? Did the different architecture of sandy bridge force a complete incompatibility with 1156 boards? 1156 was barely 1 and a half years old. Intel now has 3 current socket types flying around, none of which are compatible with each other. Whereas AMD has only 1 socket type currently for the processor, which are compatible with all current motherboard sockets being used (AM2+, AM3, and most AM2 motherboards, depending on the manufacturer and processor).
Click to expand...

How about the rumor that from now on, any consumer-level Intel platform socket will only have a 2-year lifespan? Seriously, what is the point of changing the socket every one-and-a-half to two years? Though it is a better idea than changing the VRD spec, rendering older boards useless...
 
Last edited:
JMccovery said:
One reason for running an Phenom II in an AM3+ board: someone who wants upgrade from a Phenom II + AM2+ board, but continue to use a perfectly good cpu until they are ready to upgrade to Zambezi.
Click to expand...

And what would he gain? Sata 3 which has any sense only with fast SSD and usb 3 which he could get on controler card for fraction of cost and without headache of changing mobo?
 
Michaelius said:
And what would he gain? Sata 3 which has any sense only with fast SSD and usb 3 which he could get on controler card for fraction of cost and without headache of changing mobo?
Click to expand...

Well alot of the 800 series boards out there now already have USB3 and SATA III as mine does right now. The point of moving to a new motherboard would be to go to the new Bulldozer processor when I decided to down the road. ONCE AGAIN, The upgrade path with AMD is alot easier on the wallet as you can do it a piece of time, and shut the hell up about the abandonment of the 754, that architecture was used in their laptops for a few more years after AM2 was introduced. 939 to AM2 was about a two year leap also which during the 754 "abandonment" :confused:, it was phased out in favor of new technologies not just shut down. So looking back at AMD vs Intel on upgrades, AMD is the cost effective way to go.
 
Michaelius said:
And what would he gain? Sata 3 which has any sense only with fast SSD and usb 3 which he could get on controler card for fraction of cost and without headache of changing mobo?
Click to expand...

What kind of headache is changing out a motherboard? If the previous board had an AMD chipset, and the new board has an AMD chipset also, there is no headache involved.

Why would one upgrade to a board that is supports current and upcoming processors? Cost. Features. Stability. Forwards and backwards compatibility... If YOU want to buy a new board and processor every time, it is your prerogative. If someone else wants to buy piecemeal, it is theirs.
 
JMccovery said:
What kind of headache is changing out a motherboard? If the previous board had an AMD chipset, and the new board has an AMD chipset also, there is no headache involved.

Why would one upgrade to a board that is supports current and upcoming processors? Cost. Features. Stability. Forwards and backwards compatibility... If YOU want to buy a new board and processor every time, it is your prerogative. If someone else wants to buy piecemeal, it is theirs.
Click to expand...

because BD hasnt been fully and actually confirmed for AM3.....just that AM3+ chips will work in them
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top