Mainboard Maker "Predicts" Launch of AMD FX "Bulldozer" Chips at Computex.

Red Shirt said:
Do you live near a Microcenter? They sell that processor new for $180.

http://www.microcenter.com/single_product_results.phtml?product_id=0354589
Click to expand...

Dude just the thought of BD cpu's has changed Intels pricing structure in a BIG way. Under 200 dollars for a decent cpu!?!? from Intel?!!? When the Core 2 original line up was released the e6600 was around 350 and quad q6600 was 500+. I never paid much attention to i7 release prices but you can easily see the higher end ones are still around the 300 dollar mark, what 2 years later? You can't deny that 2500k is priced well @ less than 200.00.

People need to remember that, without AMD releasing BD this year that you Intel fanboys would be paying 400.00 or so for that 2500k ;) And every time you buy an Intel CPU you jeopardize AMD's revenue and competitiveness in this exciting market. Plus you usually get outrageously lopsidedly awkward price/performance ratio in return from Intel. That's why I will always go with AMD till the end. :)
 
Last edited:
teletran8 said:
Dude just the thought of BD cpu's has changed Intels pricing structure in a BIG way. Under 200 dollars for a decent cpu!?!? from Intel?!!? When the Core 2 original line up was released the e6600 was around 350 and quad q6600 was 500+. I never paid much attention to i7 release prices but you can easily see the higher end ones are still around the 300 dollar mark, what 2 years later? You can't deny that 2500k is priced well @ less than 200.00.

People need to remember that, without AMD releasing BD this year that you Intel fanboys would be paying 400.00 or so for that 2500k ;) And every time you buy an Intel CPU you jeopardize AMD's revenue and competitiveness in this exciting market. Plus you usually get outrageously lopsidedly awkward price/performance ratio in return from Intel. That's why I will always go with AMD till the end. :)
Click to expand...
I doubt that to some degree. It might not have been $200, but it certainly would not have been $400 or more. If you compare processor prices to the enthusiast platform (for right now x58 I suppose), the i7 920 wasn't even that much at launch iirc.
 
kirtar said:
I doubt that to some degree. It might not have been $200, but it certainly would not have been $400 or more. If you compare processor prices to the enthusiast platform (for right now x58 I suppose), the i7 920 wasn't even that much at launch iirc.
Click to expand...
still, hes very correct in that, historically, intel's prices are at an all time low. For where it falls in the market, the price of the 2600k would probably have cost 40-50% more based on the old Intel pricing structure
 
My current rig is dying and the standard for my next build is no less than 2500k performance. I hope AMD can match or beat 2500k performance AND be priced fairly or ill have to jump ship to Intel!
 
I am in the same boat. My PII is struggling with Starcraft 2. I hope BD delivers. If not, this may be the first time I build an Intel PC. 2500K is priced decently and it's one fast CPU.
 
sirmo said:
I am in the same boat. My PII is struggling with Starcraft 2. I hope BD delivers. If not, this may be the first time I build an Intel PC. 2500K is priced decently and it's one fast CPU.
Click to expand...

I am surprised your having issues with an unlocked 4th core and at 3.4gz. I have the pII 965 @ 3.4gz and a 6870 which is less performance then the 5870 I thought and I am getting 50-60 fps with all options on ultra @ 1920@1080p.
 
Fantasyalive said:
I am surprised your having issues with an unlocked 4th core and at 3.4gz. I have the pII 965 @ 3.4gz and a 6870 which is less performance then the 5870 I thought and I am getting 50-60 fps with all options on ultra @ 1920@1080p.
Click to expand...

It's fine in 1v1s but 4v4s can choke. Also watching 8x replays aren't as smooth. The CPU is the bottleneck the video is fine.
 
kirtar said:
I doubt that to some degree. It might not have been $200, but it certainly would not have been $400 or more. If you compare processor prices to the enthusiast platform (for right now x58 I suppose), the i7 920 wasn't even that much at launch iirc.
Click to expand...

Intel has shown in the past that they without competition they have been slow to release products, charge more for them, and force changes against consumers will.
 
All in all, I'm just waiting for the confirmation of AM3+ support on AM3 boards, and I hope Foxconn announces AM3+ compatibility with their AM3 boards (hoping that my $69 board can carry me into FX land).
 
odysseus145 said:
I'm ready for BD so I can pick up a cheap, second hand Thuban.
Click to expand...

i would sell my 1090T, but its looking like you wont be able to drop an actual BD into an AM3 board (regardless of what some threads here say, from JF-AMD last i saw it was BD is not compatible with AM3, though SOME AM3+ chips will work with AM3...)
 
lol u can buy mine. When BD comes out i will be selling it or well passing it down to my father.

I am sick of hearing about how games don't use more than 2 cores. Time to wake up people, its only a matter of time before next gen games and everything else comes out, ALL new games released from here on out usually support 3+ cores. So a quad core cpu will be better than a dual core. IPC on the intel side is a bit faster. AMD has the logical cores vs hyper threading.

Truth be told today's cpu's are at least 4-5 years ahead of the general market, and being fully supported. AMD hex core cpu's should TRASH intel's 4 core models, why don't they? because both cpus are not fully supported with ALL cores. Truth is both Intel and Amd are very well matched atm but the industry being behind in terms of software makes intel's better IPC took that much better.

Bulldozer is going to change things a bit I think. Muti-threaded support is growing fast. If Amd can bring you more cores for the same price as intel, and muti-threaded support is growing, Amd will do very very well for themselves.

Bulldozer improves the IPC from the Phenom II, to what extent no one knows minus the few lucky people with samples. I would guess it will outperform the current I7's but be a bit slower IPC than Sandy bridge. However given the support of higher speed spec ram, the BD should be equal to SB performance, anything muti-threaded will bare win to BD, while anything single threaded will bare win to intel. Overall i foresee a small victory by AMD until intel's next launch.
 
W.Feather said:
i would sell my 1090T, but its looking like you wont be able to drop an actual BD into an AM3 board (regardless of what some threads here say, from JF-AMD last i saw it was BD is not compatible with AM3, though SOME AM3+ chips will work with AM3...)
Click to expand...

It's actually looking more like AMD won't officially support BD in current AM3 motherboards, but some motherboard manufacturers can opt to support BD on certain boards. If AMD was to support BD in AM3 boards, they would have to make it support all AM3 boards, not just a select few as MSI and Asus are doing.
 
ebduncan said:
AMD hex core cpu's should TRASH intel's 4 core models, why don't they? because both cpus are not fully supported with ALL cores.
Click to expand...
It's because a Hyperthreading Nehalem based core is capable of 1.5X more throughput than a single Phenom II core at roughly the same clock speed.
 
Got both, love both. I notice that in Handbrake the 1090t is equal or a bit faster than my 2600k...they are kinda equal. But the 2600k at max overclock (5.0 Ghz) will decimate the 1090t (4.2Ghz - 6 core) at it's max overclock. Honestly, I don't have any problems with StarCraft 2 or any game on the 1090t. Still looking forward to Bulldozer.
 
SLee said:
It's because a Hyperthreading Nehalem based core is capable of 1.5X more throughput than a single Phenom II core at roughly the same clock speed.
Click to expand...

Even without hyperthreading Intel has a > 20% advantage in IPC. This is why Phenom X4s need over 800 MHz extra to be equal to i5s. SB increased this lead by an additional 5 to 15%.

My expectation is bulldozer will cut Intel's IPC advantage in half and if you factor in a more aggressive turbo boost it should be competitive at around the same frequency at single threaded tasks (provided the 3 or 4 module bulldozer chip can hit 3.5 GHz at under 130W) and it should win at tasks that require 6 or more threads.
 
Red Shirt said:
Some of the technical people from BioWare said that Star Wars:The Old Republic will "greatly take advantage of multi-core". Something to consider in your next build if you are wanting to play this.

http://www.pcgameshardware.com/aid,...e-considering-Direct-X-11-in-the-future/News/
Click to expand...



Bioware: "The Old Republic greatly takes advantage of multi-core. Multi-core both improves frame rate and smoothness by offloading work to the extra cores such as disk IO, rendering or audio."


Sounds like a Crytek representative...
 
Bioware: "The Old Republic greatly takes advantage of multi-core. Multi-core both improves frame rate and smoothness by offloading work to the extra cores such as disk IO, rendering or audio."


Sounds like a Crytek representative...
Click to expand...

That is a horrible answer to that question. It said nothing about supporting more than 4 cores at all.
 
Dual core can be refered to as multi-core so that doesnt sound too promising for that game.
 
Tsumi said:
It's actually looking more like AMD won't officially support BD in current AM3 motherboards, but some motherboard manufacturers can opt to support BD on certain boards. If AMD was to support BD in AM3 boards, they would have to make it support all AM3 boards, not just a select few as MSI and Asus are doing.
Click to expand...

so....AM3+ CPU automatically means BD? Could that possibly be o lets say, a Deneb on a new socket? or a Porpus, for the low end segments.....if you note (last I saw) all the ads from MSI/Asus only say AM3+ CPU ready, and not Bull Dozer.......until anything officially says that Bd will work in AM3, i stand by believing that BD will not work on AM3(as has been stated before...)
 
W.Feather said:
so....AM3+ CPU automatically means BD? Could that possibly be o lets say, a Deneb on a new socket? or a Porpus, for the low end segments.....if you note (last I saw) all the ads from MSI/Asus only say AM3+ CPU ready, and not Bull Dozer.......until anything officially says that Bd will work in AM3, i stand by believing that BD will not work on AM3(as has been stated before...)
Click to expand...

So uhh.... 32nm advertised on MSI means a die shrink of Deneb or Propus is in the pipeline? And I didn't say anything definitive, I just said it looks like that is what is happening, and I didn't say I knew for sure.

For providing a higher upgradability, MSI's AM3 motherboards also support the latest AM3+ multi-core processors. For the innovative 32nm process, AMD AM3+ multi-core processors deliver not only higher power efficiency but better electrical specifications.
Click to expand...

http://event.msi.com/mb/am3+/
 
Here is another AM3+ Mobo on newegg

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157248

Scroll down and it clearly states "Supports AM3+ Processor, 8-Core CPU Ready"

Maybe there will be 8 core thubans die shrunk, as well as newer 8 core BD's to choose from when AMD releases their 32nm CPU's in a few weeks (I know they have 4 models of the newer 32nm 8 Core CPU's they are planning, they have stated that much at least)...who knows I think it's highly possible...just have to wait, and then start upgrading to beast mode :D That would be cool cuz if you don't want an AM3+ mobo plus CPU costs maybe AMD will have 32nm 8 core thubans that drop into AM3 and AM3+ boards? I just like the idea of more options I think. Maybe I'm way off on this guess....
 
teletran8 said:
Maybe I'm way off on this guess....
Click to expand...
Just like your other posts. ;)

Signs-point-to-yes-.jpg
 
Tsumi said:
So uhh.... 32nm advertised on MSI means a die shrink of Deneb or Propus is in the pipeline? And I didn't say anything definitive, I just said it looks like that is what is happening, and I didn't say I knew for sure.



http://event.msi.com/mb/am3+/
Click to expand...

who knows......i just said i would believe other statements (by JF-AMD) iirc, that BD will not be AM3, over marketing from the mobo manufactures.......dont get me wrong, but dropping a BD into my Crosshair III would be awsome(very unlikely since none of the enthusiast stuff has word of am3+ support, just the *70/*80 boards
 
CaptNumbNutz said:
Just like your other posts. ;)

Signs-point-to-yes-.jpg
Click to expand...

You know what's funny though?

I said long ago before anyone else that maybe the 6 cores could unlock to 8 cores, and look at this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_AMD_FX_microprocessors

Both BD Quad and Hex cores are really 8 Cores with disabled modules. People here gave me sh%%% for saying that. So I might be right on unlocking the new BD chips. ;)

I mean there is a FX-4110, FX-6110, & FX-8110. Then there is this lone duckling the FX-8130P now look on the Wikipedia what makes it unlike the others?

Oh yes the FX 8130P requires TDP of 125 WATT! The same watt requirement as the high end 6 core Thubans on the market today the other BD chips are 95 watt! I would say that is a Thuban 8 Core kiddies. ;) also it has a P in it which probably means Phenom (8 Core). :D Try that in your magic 8 ball next time, broski :eek:

None of this has been confirmed or denied by AMD though :D
 
Last edited:
teletran8 said:
You know what's funny though?

I said long ago before anyone else that maybe the 6 cores could unlock to 8 cores, and look at this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_AMD_FX_microprocessors

Both BD Quad and Hex cores are really 8 Cores with disabled modules. People here gave me sh%%% for saying that. So I might be right on unlocking the new BD chips. ;)

I mean there is a FX-4110, FX-6110, & FX-8110. Then there is this lone duckling the FX-8130P now look on the Wikipedia what makes it unlike the others?

Oh yes the FX 8130P requires TDP of 125 WATT! The same watt requirement as the high end 6 core Thubans on the market today the other BD chips are 95 watt! I would say that is a Thuban 8 Core kiddies. ;) also it has a P in it which probably means Phenom (8 Core). :D Try that in your magic 8 ball next time, broski :eek:

None of this has been confirmed or denied by AMD though :D
Click to expand...

Ugh, considering the design of BD, I highly doubt that any 4 or 6 core chips will be 8 core with disabled modules, doesn't make any sense at all.
 
teletran8 said:
You know what's funny though?

I said long ago before anyone else that maybe the 6 cores could unlock to 8 cores, and look at this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_AMD_FX_microprocessors

Both BD Quad and Hex cores are really 8 Cores with disabled modules. People here gave me sh%%% for saying that. So I might be right on unlocking the new BD chips. ;)

I mean there is a FX-4110, FX-6110, & FX-8110. Then there is this lone duckling the FX-8130P now look on the Wikipedia what makes it unlike the others?

Oh yes the FX 8130P requires TDP of 125 WATT! The same watt requirement as the high end 6 core Thubans on the market today the other BD chips are 95 watt! I would say that is a Thuban 8 Core kiddies. ;) also it has a P in it which probably means Phenom (8 Core). :D Try that in your magic 8 ball next time, broski :eek:

None of this has been confirmed or denied by AMD though :D
Click to expand...

Please pass around what your on. I want some!
 
I'm going to guess that since only the 125W model has the "P" it is similar to the "SE" in the Opteron lineup indicating the highest wattage segment and the model name will simply drop the P when a lower wattage stepping at the same clock speed arrives.
 
Digital Viper-X- said:
Ugh, considering the design of BD, I highly doubt that any 4 or 6 core chips will be 8 core with disabled modules, doesn't make any sense at all.
Click to expand...

They might be. Now it might be a hell of a lot cheaper for AMD to develop and produce smaller die sized CPU's. The Athlon II X2 and X4 variants for example. Thuban vs. Deneb. Now they have 4 lines with major distinctions in each. Netbook, APU, Desktop, and Server. With major differences in CPU in the first 3. Splitting off the Foundries might have been the smartest thing AMD has done in years.
 
ebduncan said:
hope this helps people looking to run am3+ cpu's in am3 boards.

http://www.gigabyte.com/microsite/274/mb-am3plus.html

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128490 (first one listed on newegg)

specs of other
http://www.gigabyte.com/products/list.aspx?s=42&jid=10&p=2&v=26


Gigabyte is putting a black cpu socket on all its new boards which will support the AM3+ cpu.

We are getting close to launch date thats my hunch :)
Click to expand...

i find it interesting that both Asus and MSI release a bios update, but gigabyte releases a new revision of the mobo itself to support am3+ and no bios update for the older boards..

so either gigabyte is milking ppl/screwing over their users or they cheaped out in something elsewhere?
 
no no

They are just replacing the cpu socket with a new black socket to let users know its compatible. Bios updates are available to support the new cpus already on the supported boards...

I believe gigabyte just released a new version number for all new boards being made which will support the am3+ cpu, combined with the new cpu socket to let u know its compatible.

from what i have noticed, MOST AM3 Boards which support DDR3 1866(OC) have bios updates to support the new am3+ cpus.

Makes sense since the am3+ cpus natively support ddr 3 1866.

Older am2+,am2 boards will have to be replaced to run the am3+ cpu.
 
ebduncan said:
hope this helps people looking to run am3+ cpu's in am3 boards.

http://www.gigabyte.com/microsite/274/mb-am3plus.html

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128490 (first one listed on newegg)

specs of other
http://www.gigabyte.com/products/list.aspx?s=42&jid=10&p=2&v=26


Gigabyte is putting a black cpu socket on all its new boards which will support the AM3+ cpu.

We are getting close to launch date thats my hunch :)
Click to expand...

Damn! No mention from Gigabyte on IOMMU support. I know that isn't a feature that most people want/need/use but it is a feature that AMD provides with their chipset and it's up to the MB manufacturer to implement in the bios. It is a big bonus for a bunch of us VM users.
 
"Thank you for contacting AMD. I would like to verify for you that yes, the 890FX chipset does offer the IOMMU feature, however you will want to keep in mind that manufacturers can decide to enable or disable this feature through the BIOS and therefore you will want to verify with manufacturer of your specific board. But in short, yes it does offer the ability to do so. "

I asked about that awhile back :)

the GA-890FXA-UD5 (Rev 3.1) does not support it in the bios. I recieved this response from them. "Unfortunately the feature is not supported on this board". Also, on AMD's specs [1] for this chipset don't spec IOMMU"

The feature is there, but cannot be used on any 890fx board that i know off.

Sure it would be nice to turn your box into a home Virtualization server with out buying server grade parts. Guess AMD doesn't want that to happen quite yet.
 
ebduncan said:
. . .manufacturers can decide to enable or disable this feature through the BIOS and therefore you will want to verify with manufacturer of your specific board. . .

. . .Guess AMD doesn't want that to happen quite yet.
Click to expand...
My board supports IOMMU and if it didn't I would blame Biostar, not AMD. It's among other chipset features that can be locked out by the vendor possibly to save on testing/support or simple oversight.
 
ebduncan said:
no no

They are just replacing the cpu socket with a new black socket to let users know its compatible. Bios updates are available to support the new cpus already on the supported boards...

I believe gigabyte just released a new version number for all new boards being made which will support the am3+ cpu, combined with the new cpu socket to let u know its compatible.

from what i have noticed, MOST AM3 Boards which support DDR3 1866(OC) have bios updates to support the new am3+ cpus.

Makes sense since the am3+ cpus natively support ddr 3 1866.

Older am2+,am2 boards will have to be replaced to run the am3+ cpu.
Click to expand...

if u check their website, only the new revision (3.1s) of the mobos has am3+ support (for now anyway). Also, i have a 890FX board rev 2 which is y i'm paying attention and there hasn't been a bios for rev 2.x since november. The 3.x revs got a new bios in march.

I just have a bad feeling about it...
 
Actually most of the 890FX MBs do have support for IOMMU. I can't remember where it was that users were reporting their experience getting it to work. I will try to find it and post it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top