Ditching for or adding a Bulldozer? Anyone?

T

tangoseal

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Dec 18, 2010
Messages
9,743
I am very aware the numbers are not out yet. However im curious if anyone out there is already planning on ditching their current rigs for a Bulldozer or on another level if you are a Sandy operator and are planning on ditching the Bridge for the Dozer?

Or if not ditching are you planning to add a Dozer to your own network of gadgetry?

Not a flame war thread, not a troll haven, just honest curiosity on what the general community of like minded folks are thinking already.

The thread located in this forum about the preliminary pricing looks to be rather friendly for a lot of people's budgets assuming there isn't major price gouging from retailers on it's debut.
 
tangoseal said:
I am very aware the numbers are not out yet. However im curious if anyone out there is already planning on ditching their current rigs for a Bulldozer or on another level if you are a Sandy operator and are planning on ditching the Bridge for the Dozer?

Or if not ditching are you planning to add a Dozer to your own network of gadgetry?

Not a flame war thread, not a troll haven, just honest curiosity on what the general community of like minded folks are thinking already.

The thread located in this forum about the preliminary pricing looks to be rather friendly for a lot of people's budgets assuming there isn't major price gouging from retailers on it's debut.
Click to expand...

I'll jump to the motherboard but the CPU I'll wait a bit just to make sure there won't be some 12-core or 10-core coming out like the phenom IIs(X4 -> X6)
 
I honestly think all the sane people are waiting for solid numbers and reviews before they consider it. Too many people remember how AMD hyped up the original Phenom only for it to be a complete letdown. Some people see how much financial trouble AMD has been in since the ATI buyout and don't think they have the resources to come from behind again.
 
CaptNumbNutz said:
I honestly think all the sane people are waiting for solid numbers and reviews before they consider it. Too many people remember how AMD hyped up the original Phenom only for it to be a complete letdown. Some people see how much financial trouble AMD has been in since the ATI buyout and don't think they have the resources to come from behind again.
Click to expand...

ATi buy out was most profitable though it was the selling of the Fab plants that basically killed it and the bad moving forward plan(not going for the low power/tablet cpus and delaying cpu architecture after cpu architecture)
 
I'm planning on a new build if the numbers and reviews are good.
 
A poll with appropriate options would probably get more responses. ;)

Such as...

I have x CPU and plan to buy/upgrade to BD performance unseen
I have y CPU and plan to buy/upgrade to BD performance unseen
I have x CPU and do not plan to buy/upgrade to BD performance unseen
I have y CPU and no not plan to buy/upgrade to BD performance unseen
I have x CPU and plan to buy/upgrade to BD waiting for performance numbers
I have y CPU and plan to buy/upgrade to BD waiting for performance numbers
I have x CPU and do not plan to buy/upgrade to BD waiting for performance numbers
I have y CPU and no not plan to buy/upgrade to BD waiting for performance numbers
 
seronx said:
ATi buy out was most profitable though it was the selling of the Fab plants that basically killed it and the bad moving forward plan(not going for the low power/tablet cpus and delaying cpu architecture after cpu architecture)
Click to expand...
I'm not arguing that.;) My point was that a long session of AMD's financial trouble (several non-profitable quarters in a row) began near that same point in time, and many people saw that long period as a serious drain on their resources.
 
seronx said:
ATi buy out was most profitable
Click to expand...
That's an interesting look at it. AMD bought ATI for over $5 billion, and the graphics unit has earned around $250-$300 million in operating revenue in total (not per quarter or per year, the total over nearly 5 years). All the auxiliary businesses ATI had were sold off at massive losses. Billions were written off as losses on that deal. It certainly wasn't profitable at all. A lot of debt will need to be refinanced next year, as it's coming due along with a big interest payment.
 
pxc said:
That's an interesting look at it. AMD bought ATI for over $5 billion, and the graphics unit has earned around $250-$300 million in operating revenue in total (not per quarter or per year, the total over nearly 5 years). All the auxiliary businesses ATI had were sold off at massive losses. Billions were written off as losses on that deal. It certainly wasn't profitable at all. A lot of debt will need to be refinanced next year, as it's coming due along with a big interest payment.
Click to expand...

Those other auxiliary business were tablet/low power businesses and I already generally stated what happened but the whole ATi purchase was for their APU design which will get them a lot of money

Getting ATi also allowed for Wii/Xbox 360 to get pretty powerful gpus
 
Last edited:
If Bulldozer's top 8 core FX chip turns out to be better than a similiarly priced second generation i7, I might be staying AMD for the next hardware go-around, too. Still waiting on reviews, though they're coming very, very soon.

AMD's acquisition of ATI was expensive and they had to borrow a significant portion of that 5.4 billion, so no way they've broken even on that. However nack in Jan. they announced shipping their 35th million DX11 gpu, which is like 80% of the market share, plus they have a gpu in every Wii and Xbox 360 shipped, some 140 million-ish units right there.

I'd have to say despite the initial cost, the graphics division with ATI probably helped keep the company afloat while buying time to get the successor to Phenom II and Fusion out.
 
I'm currently running a Q6600 system, and am waiting to see what Bulldozer will do before building a new system.

Whatever I choose, my current Q6600 will find it's self re purposed as a rock'n home server.
 
"ditching" my Crosshair III for a Crosshair V ..... possibly drop a BD in when prices drop a bit, till then ill push this 1090T farther, current mobo is limited for me in a few respects, 990FX is a suitable replacement(890 FX was/is not for me)
 
pxc said:
A poll with appropriate options would probably get more responses. ;)

Such as...

I have x CPU and plan to buy/upgrade to BD performance unseen
I have y CPU and plan to buy/upgrade to BD performance unseen
I have x CPU and do not plan to buy/upgrade to BD performance unseen
I have y CPU and no not plan to buy/upgrade to BD performance unseen
I have x CPU and plan to buy/upgrade to BD waiting for performance numbers
I have y CPU and plan to buy/upgrade to BD waiting for performance numbers
I have x CPU and do not plan to buy/upgrade to BD waiting for performance numbers
I have y CPU and no not plan to buy/upgrade to BD waiting for performance numbers
Click to expand...

Ahh thats too much. Its a simple question already, either you are or are not considering Bulldozer.
 
seronx said:
Those other auxiliary business were tablet/low power businesses and I already generally stated what happened but the whole ATi purchase was for their APU design which will get them a lot of money
Click to expand...
Yes, "Fusion" was AMD's justification for the purchase nearly 5 years ago. It's a bit too early to start counting the piles of cash. :p Even if AMD were to attain historical record market share again, it would take several years just to break even on the ATI purchase. It might even take years just to recover the interest payments on the debt.

Unfortunately it took until early 2011 for AMD to release the first Fusion processors (Bobcat architecture), and by that time Intel had already been shipping CPUs with an on-die GPU a year earlier (also Arrandale and Clarkdale if on package counts... the first cancelled Fusion processors would have had the same configuration). If not for the change in defining "Fusion" as including a generally programmable GPU, AMD would not be able to claim a first there. ;)

Getting ATi also allowed for Wii/Xbox 360 to get pretty powerful gpus
Click to expand...
Both deals were completed before AMD purchased ATI. MS paid ATI a lump sum to use the design and MS was in charge of manufacturing it wherever it chose to. Nintendo royalties brought in minimal earnings after the initial payment. The GPU in the Wii is not powerful at all, and that was a specific choice to keep power consumption low. I'm not really getting your point there. AMD purchasing ATI has nothing to do with your claim.
 
waiting to see how the price performance picture looks.
leaning towards a llamo itx when they come out but will consider BD.
I think intel i5/i7 and motherboards are way overpriced.
 
Running a Q9600 here. Waiting to see what Bulldozer brings to the table. If the bang for the buck numbers are a solid choice, that's what will have me sold on it.
 
I just put together a Sandy Bridge rig, so I'm not going to be making the move to Bulldozer. But I do hope it does really well and can compete with Sandy Bridge.
 
pxc said:
That's an interesting look at it. AMD bought ATI for over $5 billion, and the graphics unit has earned around $250-$300 million in operating revenue in total (not per quarter or per year, the total over nearly 5 years). All the auxiliary businesses ATI had were sold off at massive losses. Billions were written off as losses on that deal. It certainly wasn't profitable at all. A lot of debt will need to be refinanced next year, as it's coming due along with a big interest payment.
Click to expand...

ATI and its patents are still worth money and arguably more valuable than they were when AMD bought them. Intel spent $2 billion on Larrabee with virtually nothing to show for. Intel also had to pay 1.5 bill to AMD and almost 2 bill to nVidia. Cool to know I guess where some of your money goes when you purchase an Intel CPU. All those Intel infringements and convictions..

Fusion is almost here. It's certainly making nVidia and Intel nervous enough to consider being friends again.
 
Last edited:
I hope that AMD's Bulldozer CPU's can actually perform well, the specs look nice on paper but can they actually live up to everybody's expectations? Its been a while since I've used AMD and I plan to get one for a secondary build.
 
currently using a q6600 and i'm already preparing for the upgrade. already spent $500, mainly on additional wc gear and case modding equipment & tools.

having said that, i won't be buying blind, BD has to have some muscle. not too concerned if BD doesn't meet up with SB on a IPC, as long as it's close. really looking forward to dropping a lot of RAM into the new build (16GB).
 
I'd be incredibly stoked if BD lives up to the hype. I, however, don't think that it will be as much of an improvement over Phenom II as people think it will be. I hope I am wrong because I have been using AMD for almost a decade now
 
Bdonedge said:
I'd be incredibly stoked if BD lives up to the hype. I, however, don't think that it will be as much of an improvement over Phenom II as people think it will be. I hope I am wrong because I have been using AMD for almost a decade now
Click to expand...

The only hype I have seen is negative hype

"Well it will never perform like that!"

"No, it is physically impossible for Bulldozer to win they are selling an 8-core for $320(Not factual yet)!!! When we all know the $1000 990X EE is the best gord(pardon my awful redneck) darn cpu in the world!!!"

"It would seem IPC performance decreases because of L1 shrink and that missing ALU and AGU unit + that FPU is just 1 unit with 256 bit pipeline while the Sandy Bridge one has a 512 bit pipeline!"

"AMD pift didn't they go bankrupt?"

any Positive Hype is AMD fanboys like myself going ooohhh these obviously fake benchmarks are the best thing in the world!!!!!!

32nm and a 500 MHz Turbo core omgsh!!!! :eek: (again, we don't know anything)

and since all the Hype is coming from these suspicious websites and not from AMD it shouldn't really be considered oh gosh Bulldozer is going to be the best CPU EVUH! but more like hmm I wonder what it will be like

The day Bulldozer comes down upon us we shalt be all dozed! (Seronx 27:24) <--- a little joke
 
Last edited:
I've seen AMD dig itself out of bigger holes before. All the have to do is out innovate and move towards some serious plans to create something that hasn't been created before. They'll do alright. They just have to keep to the "cheaper than Intel" solution. Also, the Phenom II is not that far behind Intel. They're catching up. This will be a "wait and see" situation for me.
 
definitely shooting for a 990fx, keeping my same vid card, min of 8gb/1866, maybe an SSD and a quad BD FX if its close enough to 2500k performance
 
If it is a good/great folder I may pick one up for BigAdv folding, just have to find out how it is first.
 
No reason to buy any new pc, really....

I have the following boxes @ my disposal:

E5800/4G ram/vertex 60GB/Quadro NVS 285 = main linux desktop
Thinkpad T61p with 2G ram, 100G sata disk = work laptop
S10-2 Atom netbook w/ 2G + 640GB sata = on the go laptop for dumping photos & videos
1090T, 8G ram/6850 win7/64 Mint/64 = Gaming desktop (~ 6 hours/mo) + linux desktop (~ 40 hours/mo) for the heavy crunching.

I have off: phen2 940 (8G ram)Q6600 (8G ram) as I simply don't need them on
VM Server: Phen 2 965, 16G ram, linux. Sits idle most of the time running about 20 VM's.
 
Im waiting on numbers, just like most people. I would love to go AMD, but Im not going to buy an underperforming chip. I was about to go with a 2500k but convinced myself it's worth seeing what BD brings to the market.

If it doesnt deliver competitive performance all around, then I'll be sticking with intel.
 
mesasone said:
I'm currently running a Q6600 system, and am waiting to see what Bulldozer will do before building a new system.

Whatever I choose, my current Q6600 will find it's self re purposed as a rock'n home server.
Click to expand...

This. It's either a 2600k or a BD offering, we'll see what the reviews look like. The q6600 is either going to serve as an upgrade to my NAS/Minecraft server, or go the living room for couch gaming.
 
I just bought a 1090 and it'll hold me while I wait and see. I plan on buying either a Sabertooth or Crosshair V and let my 1090 ride for a couple months til prices drop a little. Even if BD is Intel's bitch again I'll still go with BD. When I was a broke ass gamer, AMD was giving me quad cores and 4 GHz dual cores for well under $100 and the fact that they cater to the enthusiast more than Intel has me pretty loyal so I wont jump ship unless BD is just a pathetic flop.
 
Just waiting to find some good mainboards that have Tri-SLI capability, at least 8+ SATA Ports capability, , UEFI bios, Core Unlocking, and a few other options... maybe a decent onboard sound and dual lan. I need my Hard Drive space and graphics options.

I already have AM3 Tri-Core CPU that runs at 4.125Ghz. Which also idles under 30c @ 1.6250 Vcore. When that chip goes boom or I need an 8 core for at least 2 really spectacular PC games to really get running smoothley I will surely get one!

I just don't know if I will need it that soon with games like Dirt 3, Skyrim, GRID 2 but then again if the CPU is 300 sum thing with 8 Cores, I don't see why I would wait longer at that price. Then again it should run Metro and it's sequel plus BF3 online, smoother than my current CPU will allow, maybe I'll need it by then? Rage and Doom 4 will hopefully need it, but you never know if everything will be made for console and run on dual or quad fine?? Most games get by perfectly fine with 3 cores for me. For instance, when I enable my 4th core on The Resident Evil 5 benchmark it only scores me 5 FPS improvement. More cores, from my experience benefit with online games more so than Single Player/Offline games. There's just not that many online games in the future it seems.

Maybe if there was a new Counter Strike engine or a graphically updated TF2 engine I would be more excited. But I'm already ecstatic... even without those games I really am lol. I haven't been this excited since Doom 3/HL2/CSS/Oblivion era. It's to bad Valve is a sellout company now, and we're not seeing a new-engine real "Valve" game anytime soon. Hopefully BF3 fills the gap somehow perfectly or Doom 4 has a fantastic MP+SP, or Rage... hopefully there's a sleeper title out there that will rock?
 
I'd say it's still too early to call. If the CPU prices are about the same, it'll probably come down to motherboard pricing. Besides, performance numbers aren't out yet.
 
I'm not to concerned for the numbers , the pricing near $290 and $320 for 8 core seems good. The problem for me lies in the ram department. Still waiting to see what mainboards support and if that would allow some performance gains over what is currently available on AM3 (and stable) ....
 
Running a Q6600 at 3.4ghz. I'll be upgrading at the end of the year so, of course, I'm waiting on numbers. For now, Z68/2600k seems the be the route for me. BD could change that, though.
 
Last edited:
I'm still C2D, waiting to see bulldozer numbers and cost before going with a Sandy 2500k.
 
If the $320 8 core version can match i7 2600K in single threaded performance. I may replace my slower desktop 3.2GHz Q9550 system with that otherwise I will probably wait for Intel's 22nm process which should be out in Q1 2012.
 
My next build is going to be AMD. Intel keeps burning me with crappy chipsets, overpriced motherboards, weak support for features I care about, and a stupid pricing structure for VT-enabled chips. That combined with relatively bad support for their integrated graphics in linux and I'm done with them outside of their NICs.
 
I will consider Bulldozer only once it's released and we have some real numbers to look at. From that point I will evaluate it and decide whether or not I'll be interested in purchasing any CPUs based on that design.

InternationalHat said:
My next build is going to be AMD. Intel keeps burning me with crappy chipsets, overpriced motherboards, weak support for features I care about, and a stupid pricing structure for VT-enabled chips. That combined with relatively bad support for their integrated graphics in linux and I'm done with them outside of their NICs.
Click to expand...

This is total nonsense and I think you've got that backwards. Intel's chipsets are and have always been the absolute BEST in the industry. At no point in the last 17 years or so has that not been the case. This is not to say that every chipset they've had is a winner. i820, i840 etc. were shit. Overpriced motherboards? Last time I looked the LGA1155 boards were fairly reasonably priced with excellent models to be had for around or less than $200.00. And those motherboards offer a better layout and better drivers, storage performance, etc. than anything AMD has. I won't argue with VT-d pricing structures. I've never looked at it that seriously because every chip I've purchased was high end enough to have every feature I could need or want. Bad support for integrated graphics in Linux? Well I can't argue with that either. I don't run Linux myself, but I can see how that could be a problem. Though as I understand it, AMD is no better in that regard either. NVIDIA rules in that arena last I checked.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top