AMD's Direction and Next-Gen Bulldozer Revealed @ [H]

The article made statements regarding multi-threaded software, and its adoption rate by contrasting it with 64-bit software. I don't believe 64-bit adoption is at all indicative of multi-core/multi-threaded adoption. To put it in other words, software does not have to adopt 64-bit before going multi-threaded. They are not mutually exclusive technologies.

I just felt the conclusion was misleading if not simply inaccurate.
 
LstOfTheBrunnenG said:
I hope this works out as well as AMD says it will, because I'll be in the market for a desktop in 2009. However, I'm holding my applause - K10 was supposed to be the best thing since sliced bread too, and it has yet to materialize, let alone dazzle us with its performance.
To my memory, you have been saying quite the opposite. You've first smeared the credibility of the people who report that K10 will be anything approacing disappointing. You've then said that these are pre-production samples of K10, and the final product will clearly be much better. You've further claimed - yesterday! - that K10 will scale to 3.8-4 GHz.

When have you said that AMD found out K10 was a failure? When before today have you protrayed K10 as a failure?

Now that Bulldozer has arrived, you're suddenly singing a different tune, and saying K10 was a stopgap all along. Don't pretend that's what you were saying before, because it's not. I could litter this thread with quotes from you that contradict what you just said, but I don't want to derail this thread any further.
Click to expand...

Dont threaten just do it it. It's kinda like sayin' "nananabooboo you cant catch meeee" Second, dont twist my words please. I still think Barcelona will compete fairly well, and will likely take the lead after Core2 hits the wall. It wont take the lead on launch, becouse of past precedence shows AMD never takes the lead on launch. It will likely take the lead later sometime.

As far as K10... Shows how much you know.... K10 was initially a massively parallel architecture that AMD was desining to compete with C2. That design was a failure. It was that failure that prompted AMD to buy ATi. Soon after they announced K8L through several planned leaks. Then renamed K8L to K10.

What we call K10 today was --not-- the initial plan. The initial K10 --was-- a failure. Barcelona on the other hand seems like a decent design, even if it is a stop-gap. AMD is not gonna go out of bussiness, and they are not dropping out of the CPU market. They are not going to close their Fabs.... 65nm will scale well, and and K10 (as we know it today) will hit 3.8-4.0ghz

If you can show anything different then please do. I dare ya.. Please....Triple double dog dare ya....
 
duby, regarding the naming scheme - The K codename was never used again after K8. The next processor, what would have been K9 if the K- codename stuck around (I won't mention the actual codename for it as I don't think it's ever been made public) was canceled during development due to the realization that the design direction wasn't where the market was headed. This much is well known and was already featured on Anandtech I believe. Barcelona (or rather, the family of processors that Barcelona belongs to, whose name again I cannot reveal) would have been called K10 had we kept the K- naming scheme.

Anyways, these threads get way too emotionally charged. You don't see people getting up in arms about TI or Samsung :p
 
As an insider you may well be correct... However on the outside things arent quite as cut and dry. Alot of news sites try to put a name on things they hear about. The chip that was cancelled was initially called by the popular news outlets K10. This is how I have come to be familiar with it./ In addition when this project was started just several weeks after the K8 launch, AMD had advertised jobs on it own website looking for engineers to help with the K10 project. K9 was always from the beginning refered to as the dual core generation. The X2...

K8 was all the single core chips. K9 was the dual core chips. K10 was a massively parallel chip that got cancelled. K8L was a redesign of K9 with 4 cores, and a much improved FPU, which was later renamed K10. This is how it was always advertised on the outside.

I'm sure things are a bit different on the inside with specific projects that can interoperate with various product designs and so forth, but news orgs like Realworldtech, theinquirer, fabtech, and others have helped propogate these naming conventions.

Personally I would rather call it by its generation then by it's code name. We all know that a Barcelona, and an Agena are more or less exactly the same thing. Call it what it truly is...In my mind it is the K10 generation.
 
duby229 said:
As an insider you may well be correct... However on the outside things arent quite as cut and dry. Alot of news sites try to put a name on things they hear about. The chip that was cancelled was initially called by the popular news outlets K10. This is how I have come to be familiar with it./ In addition when this project was started just several weeks after the K8 launch, AMD had advertised jobs on it own website looking for engineers to help with the K10 project. K9 was always from the beginning refered to as the dual core generation. The X2...

K8 was all the single core chips. K9 was the dual core chips. K10 was a massively parallel chip that got cancelled. K8L was a redesign of K9 with 4 cores, and a much improved FPU, which was later renamed K10. This is how it was always advertised on the outside.

I'm sure things are a bit different on the inside with specific projects that can interoperate with various product designs and so forth, but news orgs like Realworldtech, theinquirer, fabtech, and others have helped propogate these naming conventions.

Personally I would rather call it by its generation then by it's code name. We all know that a Barcelona, and an Agena are more or less exactly the same thing. Call it what it truly is...In my mind it is the K10 generation.
Click to expand...
And then some of those sites went and started calling Turion K8L.

K9 was supposed to come out a little over three years after K8 was first shown off. I think K8 was shown off in 2002, meaning it would be in 2005 when K9 would be released. K9 was going to be a multicore chip.

For all intents and purposes, this looks like the Athlon X2 - from this information alone. Certain people from AMD were saying this.. But then, Fred Webber (I think.) said that K9 will come after the dual core K8.


Who knows. :rolleyes: :p


I still think that at one time K9 was infact the Athlon X2. But then, I've also heard that K9 was Greyhound. Whatever happened to Greyhound??


edit http://news.com.com/AMD+hatches+new+naming+plan+for+chip+generations/2100-1006_3-5453187.html
 
|CR|Constantine said:
However, we care more about what is going on now rather than 2 years from now. AMD is so keen to talk about what they are working in the distant future yet you don't hear a peep out of them about products that will reportedly be released in a short time.

Especially products that could potentially sink or swim the entire company.
Click to expand...


Bingo !!! :) 2 years from now !!?! AMD cannot survive 2 more years of Wrector Ruiz,and 600 million dollar a quarter losses.Never mind 4 quarters...

No point in talking about the vacation your planning on taking in 09,if your on the operating room table now,bleeding like a stuffed pig,while going into shock.
 
InorganicMatter said:
AMD seems to be taking a low-profile approach and trying to detract attention from Barcelona with Fusion/Bulldozer. Not a good sign in this industry. :(
Click to expand...
This sounds like the "please buy stock" line so we can continue operations. But why would you buy stock with consistent net losses? :rolleyes:
Fooshnik said:
When you make this many slides for something 2 years off (reality: 4 years off) it kind of wreaks of "please don't sell your stock!".
Click to expand...
Fooshnik said:
Anyways, these threads get way too emotionally charged. You don't see people getting up in arms about TI or Samsung :p
Click to expand...
Right, but those are immaterial compared to this. I'm actually getting the itch to dump the am2 and move to intel quad seeing the benches of the Q6600. I'm tired of waiting for the x4 imo. But I'll probably stick it out and see how the x4 benches before deciding. :)
 
duby229 said:
Dont threaten just do it it. It's kinda like sayin' "nananabooboo you cant catch meeee" Second, dont twist my words please. I still think Barcelona will compete fairly well, and will likely take the lead after Core2 hits the wall. It wont take the lead on launch, becouse of past precedence shows AMD never takes the lead on launch. It will likely take the lead later sometime.
Click to expand...

Except for that one product launch known as the K7. Don't make us get into this again.

I also see no indication that Core 2 will hit a wall before Barcelona, do you? Do you know how well Penryn will scale against Shanghai? If you know, please tell us because we are very anxious to learn these industry secrets.
 
Too many people are getting rather heated, while arguing about a particular chip's initial life...

Just because a particular chip's designation didn't quite go as planned, does not make it a failure. We can look all the way back at AMD's old K6 CPU, whose original design never really made it that far, and that the actual product was more of a hybrid between its own design, and the one that they snagged when they bought out NexGen.

Does this make the K6 a failure? Not really. While it did lag behind Intel's Pentium MMX and eventually Pentium II, it still had some brisk sales, and that for the vast majority of folks who only wanted Microsoft Word and internet access, it was perfectly fine.

In the end, who cares if the initial attempts didn't work out? All I care about is the final product that they put out. If it does the job well, and comes in at a reasonable price, then I'll be happy.
 
BigDH01 said:
Except for that one product launch known as the K7. Don't make us get into this again.

I also see no indication that Core 2 will hit a wall before Barcelona, do you? Do you know how well Penryn will scale against Shanghai? If you know, please tell us because we are very anxious to learn these industry secrets.
Click to expand...

Oy..... This has already been discussed, please refer to that thread instead....
 
i know nothing about computers but their 2009 stuff sounds next lvl, like they're thinking outside of the box of the typical increasing mhz or just adding more cores. i mean its called FUSION!!! it has to b next lvl! :eek:
 
Manny Calavera said:
Bingo !!! :) 2 years from now !!?! AMD cannot survive 2 more years of Wrector Ruiz,and 600 million dollar a quarter losses.Never mind 4 quarters...

No point in talking about the vacation your planning on taking in 09,if your on the operating room table now,bleeding like a stuffed pig,while going into shock.
Click to expand...

Troll.

Why don't you just hang a sign that says "I work for Intel."??
Instead, you'd rather try to threadcrap and perpetuate the idea the mis-informed idea that AMD is about to go under. Go crawl back into your Intel forum please.

k. thanks.

PS- If the above is NOT true, and that you're just a pissed off shareholder or some such,
try to take a breather and relax a minute. AMD isnt going to do all of this planning,
research, and investment for nothing. *sheesh*
 
Am I the only on that thinks AMD needs to fire whoever is making these powerpoints? All of AMD's powerpoints I've seen are absolutely terrible in my opinion.
 
This is very promising from AMD. If you want to play high risk/high reward, consider buying AMD's stock.

AMD 5 year chart

Intel 5 year chart

Just look at how high AMD got when its chips were dominating the P4 series... Now Intel is the leader and taking the market share... AMD is not dead. They are right now, but they're in the lab with a pen and a pad...

If the links don't work, just go to www.msnmoney.com

Right now Intel's stock is a good buy. It should get up to around/above $30/share by the end of the year. This is about the time of year all the back to school shopping starts (laptops) and of course the holiday season is approaching quickly (in terms of stock buying timeframes).

Just think of what AMD did when the P4 was king. They came out and kicked Intel's ass. It's a back and forth battle... Intel has a much larger market share, but AMD is not to be disregarded. I wish the best of luck to AMD. I am going to watch the stock price closely and follow the details of Fusion/Bulldozer.

AMD has always been innovative. When Intel had the P4 it was frequency driven. AMD came out with chips that were much more efficient at lower frequencies (hence the whole naming scheme they use) and Intel is now using more efficient chips in their C2D chips. AMD seems to be the company that strides to make innovations to computing and long term that's a good investment (although I pity those who didn't sell AMD when it was so high...)

Also, with AMD owning ATI now, that's a whole market Intel cannot touch. Just imagine the possibilities AMD has with all this new information they have acquired...

Invest at your own risk, though. I advised people to buy Intel in March when it was at $18.98 per share. I also advised people to buy Nvidia when it was at $28/share in March. The returns are ~25% and ~65% respectively. The market is volatile right now, I suspect it will continue to decline over the next month.
 
i thought this was a tech site, not a stock/investor site. :confused: :p

bulldozer seems interesting. i wonder how new the core really is. is it "new" like conroe is, where they took the best part of several different cores and worked them together, or will it truly contain mostly new ideas and technology? :D
 
all I hear about everyone is bitching about how AMD is "somehow" trying to take the spotlight away from Barcelona. Ive never really seen AMD make a HUGE ruckus about anything really.
Everything Ive seen has been like "Heres what we are doing, its pretty bad ass, buy this now, heres what we plan to do...... our stuff wont be the same in 2 years because we need to keep trying new things to stay competitive"

Did anyone hear a peep about the mobile 2500+? Or did Amd mention to anyone how awesome their socket 939 opteron chips were gonna be? Really... socket 939? Did they REALLY make that many 939 opterons thinking we were going to ONLY use them for servers, specially since they clocked so freakin well.

Seems to me that AMD keeps their mouth shut when something bad ass is about to hit... and they let the enthusiast market turn into a fanatical craze and do the talking for them.

Thats the best marketing approach I have ever seen.
 
Ace123 said:
Did anyone hear a peep about the mobile 2500+? Or did Amd mention to anyone how awesome their socket 939 opteron chips were gonna be? Really... socket 939? Did they REALLY make that many 939 opterons thinking we were going to ONLY use them for servers, specially since they clocked so freakin well.

Seems to me that AMD keeps their mouth shut when something bad ass is about to hit... and they let the enthusiast market turn into a fanatical craze and do the talking for them.

Thats the best marketing approach I have ever seen.
Click to expand...
You may be right concerning the marketing side of things, but I seriously doubt AMD intended the mobile Bartons to be a runaway success for the desktop. That was an unexpected bonus, but I'm sure it also hurt them on the top end when users found that they could purchase a cheaper/faster alternative to the 3200+, or whatever the top AMD desktop part was available at that time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top