Where Are The Barcy Bench Reviews?

|CR|Constantine

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jan 20, 2006
Messages
218
(Dons dusty potato sack clothes and grabs pitchfork)

After sitting through the malaise that Anand's reviews reported yesterday and after sitting through an equally mind numbing streaming launch celebration late last night I was finally after a year + of waiting, ready to finally see some real numbers.

After a year of secrecy and little if no information we still (after a bloody launch) have no more real information than we can compare against other sources:confused:

(Crowd beings screaming "Rabble...Rabble...Rabble")

WTF? is the NDA lifted or not?
Has the NDA been lifted but AMD gave little or no time for reviewers to test?
Did AMD just send processors and let reviewers scrounge for themselves to come up with other parts?
Do great and thorough sites like Hard refuse to throw up something quick like Anand just to be first out of the gate and would rather test thoroughly?

I just cannot believe that ALL the hardware review sites (bar Anand and Tech Report) are completely silent on this launch.
 
Do great and thorough sites like Hard refuse to throw up something quick like Anand just to be first out of the gate and would rather test thoroughly?


Kyle has stated in other threads that the Opteron version of Barcelona is a server part and HardOCP doesn't do server reviews. Since the Phenom desktop version of Barcelona (Kuma, etc) isn't scheduled to launch until later this year, you will have to be a little more patient to see something here.

So no, HardOCP doesnt' "refuse" to post a Opteron/Barcelona review, it just outside of their scope.
 
I would guess that some more stuff will pop-up today and in the next few days as well.

Supposedly the NDA wasn't fully lifted till 10p.m. last night (what time zone)?

I bet the other reviewers wanted to get sleep before doing a whole bunch of tests.

As for what we will see for desktop performance.. don't expect much since the server boards have to have registered ECC at only DDR2-667... much slower than what will be seen on the desktop scene.
 
See http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070910-barcelonas-out-and-the-reviews-are-out.html

That was the launch.

ars said:
And this is why almost all of the handful of Barcelona "reviews" that went live today do little to increase our knowledge of AMD's latest. In a move that we've seen again and again from hardware companies that want to stack the review deck on launch day, AMD shipped Barcelona systems to hardware reviewers on Friday for a launch on Monday. This kind of behavior is designed to produce failed reviews that are shaky and opaque so that the hardware company can control the launch-day media narrative through a combination of an information shortfall and of spinning the little bit of info that is there.
Game. Set. Match.

AMD didn't and doesn't want Barcelona reviewed. It wants to control the "message."
 
...
So no, HardOCP doesnt' "refuse" to post a Opteron/Barcelona review, it just outside of their scope.

If AMD had sent them a box I'm pretty sure they would have come up with something, considering all the attention this launch had in the enthusiast community. The lack of tests (and test objects) is ridiculous. So what now... another 90 days of hype before the Phenol launch?
 
If AMD had sent them a box I'm pretty sure they would have come up with something, considering all the attention this launch had in the enthusiast community. The lack of tests (and test objects) is ridiculous.

I guess that is the point, HardOCP didn't get a review system because they don't review servers. See link for Kyle's full comment regarding this.

http://www.hardforum.com/showpost.php?p=1031418727&postcount=8

Again, this points to no "refusal" on the part of HardOCP to do a review, it is just not an area that they cover.
 
post deleted - duplicate link to ars technica article linked to in a previous post
 
See http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070910-barcelonas-out-and-the-reviews-are-out.html

That was the launch.

Game. Set. Match.

AMD didn't and doesn't want Barcelona reviewed. It wants to control the "message."

LOL why are you into conspiracy theories?
Think logically man, what's there to lose?
I think (plausibly this time) that AMD just doesn't have release grade processors developed yet. They sent prerelease testbeds to the *P*review guys to tease us AMD fanboys.

If you've ever been overwhelmed in a fight before, you'll find once it falls back into your hands, you start to savour every punch that lands, but not enough to get intoxicated off the endorphines, you can guess what happens now. :eek:
 
LOL why are you into conspiracy theories?
It's not a "conspiracy theory" to point out what AMD did.

AMD made a big marketing presentation and gave review systems to 2 sites: AnandTech (probably the largest NA-based tech site) and The Tech Report (has an impressive sounding name). AMD is free to cherry pick quotes from those AMD marketing department approved reviews. It will give AMD "credibility" that some "top sites" praised Barcelona, even though both reviews expressed serious reservations.

By the time the chips start to filter down to other sites for real independent reviews (this is where the zealots come in), they will complain that those reviews are biased or "payed" (sp) for by Intel.

What's the net result? AMD has one set of marketing materials, and Intel has another. My word against your word for the next 2 months until systems are released. A completely opaque launch that like I said earlier is the crummiest I can ever remember.
 
PXC why do you read the AMD forums if when you hate AMD so much? its not normal behaviour.
 
PXC why do you read the AMD forums if when you hate AMD so much? its not normal behaviour.
Am I touching a nerve by pointing out sleazy tactics that I find distasteful? And who says I hate AMD?
 
Well, pxc, this is the AMD forum, where, as you can expect, fans will be hanging around. After posting opinion piece, after opinion piece it can just get a bit old and annoying. After a little bit more of this annoying mouth piece, it can get a little agitating.

If your not willing to except the truth, then at least hear us and stop the annoying whining. Thats the least you can do.
 
And who says I hate AMD?

it was hinted that you don't like AMD on a different thread about a week back.

but i happen to agree with you AMD is on the ropes, im just really sad about it and you seem happy about it.

it just like SGS-Thomson, and cyrix all those years ago. it was once a 4 horse race (or two horses and 1 mule and a donkey), then 3, and for the last 7 years or so its been a 2 horse race.

i will continue to buy AMD if the price is good value but i don't think they will ever get the performance crown back again. Although i hope im wrong about this.
 
i will continue to buy AMD if the price is good value but i don't think they will ever get the performance crown back again. Although i hope im wrong about this.
Few on this forum have purchased as much AMD hardware as I have, yet even I have to admit that a good portion of AMD's successes over the past 6 years had as much to do with Intel's missteps as it did AMD's architectural advances. I don't think Intel will allow anyone to catch it with its pants down again any time soon.
 
Few on this forum have purchased as much AMD hardware as I have, yet even I have to admit that a good portion of AMD's successes over the past 6 years had as much to do with Intel's missteps as it did AMD's architectural advances. I don't think Intel will allow anyone to catch it with its pants down again any time soon.

More like grabbing their ankles... :D

Methinks it's going to be a long hard road for AMD, and until they get out their 45nm parts they've got a hell of a fight on their hands. :(

The shareholders need to get Wrector Ruiz out before he does any more damage.
 
04/22/03. Do you guys remember this date? yes, K8 Opteron launch. Were we flooded with reviews around the internet? not at all.

About four reviews the launch date; Toms, Anand, ExtremeTech (if it can be named review)and Tecchannel (the fifth was about two weeks later, 05/07/03)
http://www.amdboard.com/opteron_reviews.html

About the same number that we have today. So, nothing strange.
 
More like grabbing their ankles... :D

Methinks it's going to be a long hard road for AMD, and until they get out their 45nm parts they've got a hell of a fight on their hands. :(

The shareholders need to get Wrector Ruiz out before he does any more damage.

I dont understand why you say this. He's taken the company from Sanders, who survived almost strictly off the retail channel. Ruiz has taken the company into the OEM markets for Desktops, Laptops, Workstations, and Servers. He took the company from the edge, to being a leading competitor. Before Ruiz, AMD didnt have Laptoip market share,. They didnt have Server market share. They didnt have workstation market share. Desktop market share was tiny. They existed almost solely off the scraps left in the retail market.

Sanders brought the company from nothing to a 286 second source to a 386 competitor, to a k5 failure to a k6 fringe. Never once in Jerry Sanders career did AMD ever come close to the success they enjoy today. And --all-- of it is thanks to Ruiz.

Give the guy some credit before you shout off about stuff you clearly dont study and or even try to understand.
 
I just realized, the guy in charge of sending out reviews was gone all summer and just got back last week. :p

When I met with him when I was in Austin, in his cubicle he had a dry erase board on one of the walls that said "Quad-core requests." There was only one written down; I think it was the Tech Report..
 
It's not a "conspiracy theory" to point out what AMD did.

AMD made a big marketing presentation and gave review systems to 2 sites: AnandTech (probably the largest NA-based tech site) and The Tech Report (has an impressive sounding name). AMD is free to cherry pick quotes from those AMD marketing department approved reviews. It will give AMD "credibility" that some "top sites" praised Barcelona, even though both reviews expressed serious reservations.

By the time the chips start to filter down to other sites for real independent reviews (this is where the zealots come in), they will complain that those reviews are biased or "payed" (sp) for by Intel.

What's the net result? AMD has one set of marketing materials, and Intel has another. My word against your word for the next 2 months until systems are released. A completely opaque launch that like I said earlier is the crummiest I can ever remember.

Really?
I mean, honestly, you're surprised individual enthusiasts sites didn't get review boxes for Opterons? As Arvidas pointed out, there was hardly a flurry of reviews when the original Opterons launched, and Xeons hardly make a whimper in comparison to even a speed bump on the desktop lines.

There are not people banging on the [H] servers at 11.59 to find out if they're dropping Barcelona or Xeon into their new 40U racks. This is not the place people buying Barcelona do their shopping by in large, what value is it for AMD to give Barcelona review units to sites like [H]OCP?

If at midnight on the day Agena's reviews are available there are a scant few reviews from hand pick enthusiasts sites, I will lay into AMD for strong-arming their way to favorable reviews. But limited reviews on a product none of us will actually buy for ourselves? Come on now.
 
04/22/03. Do you guys remember this date? yes, K8 Opteron launch. Were we flooded with reviews around the internet? not at all.
If you actually looked at the 4 review sites, only 2 had hardware supplied by AMD. hothardware only had a press release (no hardware and no benchmarks).

That list you posted is not complete anyways. AMDZone and several other sites had Opteron on 4/22/03 (use archive.org if any of the pages are down).
http://www.amdzone.com/articleview.cfm?ArticleID=1270
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/opteron/
http://www.aceshardware.com/read.jsp?id=55000251
http://www.athlonxp.com/modules.php...File&file_wrap=html/reviews_opteron_peek.html
http://www.amdboard.com/tyan_s2880_opteron_board.html
http://www.2cpu.com/gallery/opteron_preview?&page=1

see http://icrontic.com/forum/showthread.php?t=143 and [H]'s Opteron launch page. I found those links without too much effort.

X-bitlabs also had their review up early, but you said 4/22/03 so I won't count it. And the list above is only the English language sites. There were several other sites in other languages that had K8 on launch day.

Despite your faulty recollection, K8 was reviewed at most of the large sites on launch day.
 
I dont understand why you say this. He's taken the company from Sanders, who survived almost strictly off the retail channel. Ruiz has taken the company into the OEM markets for Desktops, Laptops, Workstations, and Servers. He took the company from the edge, to being a leading competitor. Before Ruiz, AMD didnt have Laptoip market share,. They didnt have Server market share. They didnt have workstation market share. Desktop market share was tiny. They existed almost solely off the scraps left in the retail market.

Sanders brought the company from nothing to a 286 second source to a 386 competitor, to a k5 failure to a k6 fringe. Never once in Jerry Sanders career did AMD ever come close to the success they enjoy today. And --all-- of it is thanks to Ruiz.

Give the guy some credit before you shout off about stuff you clearly dont study and or even try to understand.

Yeah, I do see some of your points, but still that doesn't help so much when Chipzilla (Intel) is intent on making AMD do a hard faceplant into the ground and into Chapter 11 land. I've done lots of research on the subject, and Barcelona/K10. Perhaps I should be blaming the engineers who "botched" the Barcelona core so that it's 9 months late instead? The point of what I was saying is that heads need to roll because of this, when AMD is truly at a crossroads, where faliure to deliver and being on time is simply not an option.
 
Yeah, I do see some of your points, but still that doesn't help so much when Chipzilla (Intel) is intent on making AMD do a hard faceplant into the ground and into Chapter 11 land. I've done lots of research on the subject, and Barcelona/K10. Perhaps I should be blaming the engineers who "botched" the Barcelona core so that it's 9 months late instead? The point of what I was saying is that heads need to roll because of this, when AMD is truly at a crossroads, where faliure to deliver and being on time is simply not an option.

You say that you've done lots of studying, but you dont even know --why-- barcelona was "late"

First Barcelona is --not-- K10 instead it is K8L. K10 was a very highly parallel multicore architecture that AMD was working on that got scrapped. It was that project that set AMD back. Shortly after they scrapped the K10 project they announced they were working on K8L in its place. In addition it was K10's failure that prompted AMD to purchase ATi. Some people will argue about naming conventions, this is what happened.

K8L is a stop gap. It always was. K10 got scrapped, and Fusion will be the very highly parallel architecture that replaces K10. Barcelona was late becouse it wasnt even started until after K10 was scrapped. Fusion will be what K10 was supposed to be.
 
If you actually looked at the 4 review sites, only 2 had hardware supplied by AMD. hothardware only had a press release (no hardware and no benchmarks).

That list you posted is not complete anyways. AMDZone and several other sites had Opteron on 4/22/03 (use archive.org if any of the pages are down).
http://www.amdzone.com/articleview.cfm?ArticleID=1270
http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/opteron/
http://www.aceshardware.com/read.jsp?id=55000251
http://www.athlonxp.com/modules.php...File&file_wrap=html/reviews_opteron_peek.html
http://www.amdboard.com/tyan_s2880_opteron_board.html
http://www.2cpu.com/gallery/opteron_preview?&page=1

see http://icrontic.com/forum/showthread.php?t=143 and [H]'s Opteron launch page. I found those links without too much effort.

X-bitlabs also had their review up early, but you said 4/22/03 so I won't count it. And the list above is only the English language sites. There were several other sites in other languages that had K8 on launch day.

Despite your faulty recollection, K8 was reviewed at most of the large sites on launch day.

Good list to confirm my previous post. Thanks.

http://www.firingsquad.com/hardware/opteron/

No benchmarks.

http://www.athlonxp.com/modules.php...File&file_wrap=html/reviews_opteron_peek.html

No benchmarks.

http://www.amdboard.com/tyan_s2880_opteron_board.html

haha. Nice Tyan motherboard.

http://www.2cpu.com/gallery/opteron_preview?&page=1

LOL. Great Photo Album.

So, we have to add amdzone and aces hardware to the sites listed in the amdboard link that I provided in my previous post (btw, Aces doesn't exist today as hardware review site, unfortunately, only forum).

In summary, we had about five reviews (aka, benches) when K8 Opteron was launched (04/22/03). Now we have three (someTom's staff guy said that they would post its review during the past monday, the launch day, but they haven't posted it yet). And Aces, one of the few sites that covered server parts, isn't active since months ago, so obviously, they are out from this issue. But for sure, if they would be active, they would have reviewed Barcelona, without doubt (just like the few others that cover server parts, have done).

Well, I see basically the same picture that when K8 Opteron was launched. Do you know why? because the majority of hardware sites don't care about server processors (you have Kyle statement in some thread a pair of days ago: we don't cover server processors. As simply as that), just like the majority of hardware sites, thats the reason why when Xeons or Opterons are launched (platform launch or concrete model) they aren't reviewed for the vast majority of hardware sites, they are only reviewed for a few of them (the few that cover server parts). From the rest sites, you'll have as much a "copy and paste" article about the platform and some nice photos.
 
You say that you've done lots of studying, but you dont even know --why-- barcelona was "late"

First Barcelona is --not-- K10 instead it is K8L. K10 was a very highly parallel multicore architecture that AMD was working on that got scrapped. It was that project that set AMD back. Shortly after they scrapped the K10 project they announced they were working on K8L in its place. In addition it was K10's failure that prompted AMD to purchase ATi. Some people will argue about naming conventions, this is what happened.

K8L is a stop gap. It always was. K10 got scrapped, and Fusion will be the very highly parallel architecture that replaces K10. Barcelona was late becouse it wasnt even started until after K10 was scrapped. Fusion will be what K10 was supposed to be.

From what I've heard, the reason for the delays was there were "speed-path" problems with parts of the chips, like the memory controller being unstable and other coherency and routing issues, causing them to be unstable above 1.4-1.6GHz, hence the reason for A0 being scrapped, and the rolling out of B0, B1, and finally B2 steppings being rolled out. B2 finally allows Barcelona to ramp all the way up to 3GHz or higher, within acceptable TDP limits and still be perfectly stable. The B2 revision parts are what AMD demoed with Tri-fire 2900XT cards running on an RD790 board earlier before the launch. All these extra revisions are why AMD is late to the game so they can get the stability, power consumption, and scaling issues sorted out. You seem absolutely determined to "prove" that I'm just some jackass spewing forth ignorance from my hindquarters, that knows absolutely nothing about what I'm saying. I've been following the CPU and graphics parts of the computer industry since I've been 13. I must know something by now. Surely more than you give me credit for.

And you're wrong about Barcelona/Agena/Kuma being K8L. K8L was the Turion dual core moblie parts, while Griffin is an evolution of K8L. AMD has confirmed this.
 
Well, I see basically the same picture that when K8 Opteron was launched.
LOL

No, within 3 days of launch of K8, there were 3x as many reviews and the processors were available shortly after for anyone to buy. How is that the "same picture?" :rolleyes:
 
LOL

No, within 3 days of launch of K8, there were 3x as many reviews and the processors were available shortly after for anyone to buy. How is that the "same picture?" :rolleyes:

If you are happy naming review to some photos, thats fine. Too bad, it's not for the rest of the world :rolleyes:
 
From what I've heard, the reason for the delays was there were "speed-path" problems with parts of the chips, like the memory controller being unstable and other coherency and routing issues, causing them to be unstable above 1.4-1.6GHz, hence the reason for A0 being scrapped, and the rolling out of B0, B1, and finally B2 steppings being rolled out. B2 finally allows Barcelona to ramp all the way up to 3GHz or higher, within acceptable TDP limits and still be perfectly stable. The B2 revision parts are what AMD demoed with Tri-fire 2900XT cards running on an RD790 board earlier before the launch. All these extra revisions are why AMD is late to the game so they can get the stability, power consumption, and scaling issues sorted out. You seem absolutely determined to "prove" that I'm just some jackass spewing forth ignorance from my hindquarters, that knows absolutely nothing about what I'm saying. I've been following the CPU and graphics parts of the computer industry since I've been 13. I must know something by now. Surely more than you give me credit for.

And you're wrong about Barcelona/Agena/Kuma being K8L. K8L was the Turion dual core moblie parts, while Griffin is an evolution of K8L. AMD has confirmed this.

Most new spins dont get released until the C revision anyway. Blaming Hector Ruiz for making Barcelona "late" for waiting until the B revision is a bit odd. For example the earliest retail Sledgehammers were C1 revisions. There were a few OEM B3's, but it was more or less launched on the C1 revision. So I just think your over reacting. I'm not trying to make you look like anything, I'm just pointing out that your basing opinions on asinine things that would have happened no matter who was CEO.

About naming conventions, AMD doesnt use the terms K10, or K8L publicly. They have slipped up in the past, however they dont support it officially.

As such it is us, the enthusiast community that makes this stuff up.It was actually TheInquirer that made the name K8L, and when they made that name it was refering to Barcelona. It was actually AMD themselves that made up the name K10 when they announced on there web site that they were looking to hire engineers for the K10 project.

So we know that K10 was in fact a massively multicore architecture that AMD scrapped. Soon after they started working on K8L that TheInquirer named. It was only recently that some unknown catalyst forced the term K10 on Barcelona. I dont know what it was, but Barcelona is --not-- K10. Barcelona is K8L, and K10 is a crapped project.
 
First Barcelona is --not-- K10 instead it is K8L. K10 was a very highly parallel multicore architecture that AMD was working on that got scrapped. It was that project that set AMD back. Shortly after they scrapped the K10 project they announced they were working on K8L in its place. In addition it was K10's failure that prompted AMD to purchase ATi. Some people will argue about naming conventions, this is what happened.
We've been over this before :) Not arguing, just telling. There are no internal K-named codenames after K8. There is K8G, which is just a rev G part, known externally as Brisbane. That's it. As for the scrapped project, I cannot tell you the name, but it doesn't start a K. Barcelona would have been K9, Bulldozer would have been K10, had that naming convention continued. But post-K8 codenames are all actual words. It's all rather confusing, some projects have the same internal/external codenames, and some have entirely different internal/external names, such as Falcon, Sandtiger, Shanghai etc.

But then, as Shakespeare so succinctly put it, "What's in a name that which we call a rose? By any other name would smell as sweet." :)
 
We've been over this before :) Not arguing, just telling. There are no internal K-named codenames after K8. There is K8G, which is just a rev G part, known externally as Brisbane. That's it. As for the scrapped project, I cannot tell you the name, but it doesn't start a K. Barcelona would have been K9, Bulldozer would have been K10, had that naming convention continued. But post-K8 codenames are all actual words. It's all rather confusing, some projects have the same internal/external codenames, and some have entirely different internal/external names, such as Falcon, Sandtiger, Shanghai etc.

But then, as Shakespeare so succinctly put it, "What's in a name that which we call a rose? By any other name would smell as sweet." :)

I understand your view 100%. I just simply disagree. Giving everything a different name is asinine. It doesnt make any sense.

Barcelona, Agena, Kuma, etc are all exactly the same thing. Why do they all have a different name? It's one of the dumbest things I've evr heard of. I know that TheInquirer made it up, and AMD doesnt support this nomenclature, but it just makes more sense to call it what it is. In my mind this generation was announced as K8L so its K8L.

If it walks like a duck, and looks like a duck, and sounds like a duck, then its prolly a duck. Barcelona, Agena, Kuma, and everything else that eventually gets released in this generation will be K8L.
 
I understand your view 100%. I just simply disagree. Giving everything a different name is asinine. It doesnt make any sense.
Duby,

I don't mean to escalate this OT sub-thread into something out of proportion, but if it is AMD's convention to name their products this way, who are we to judge the merits (or lack thereof) of such a nomenclature? It is their products after all, and whether we agree with him or not, morfinx represents AMD here, albeit in an informal, unofficial position.
 
Duby,

I don't mean to escalate this OT sub-thread into something out of proportion, but if it is AMD's convention to name their products this way, who are we to judge the merits (or lack thereof) of such a nomenclature? It is their products after all, and whether we agree with him or not, morfinx represents AMD here, albeit in an informal, unofficial position.
Obviously because 10 > 8
Even if it's 8L, 10 is still larger than 8.
 
why the hell does everyone keep comparing the k8 launch to the k10 launch.....
YOU GUYS THEY ARNT REVIEWING A RETAIL PROCESSOR FOR HOM COMPUTING!
get it threw your thick freaking skulls.
Shit loads of "enthusiast" sites dont have review peices because there arnt any Server enthusiast sites that have enough grunt to even look at giving a free cpu to, to do a review of, other than maybe.....ANADTECH...... one of the only sites given the cpu to?

Or maybe it makes sense to not give out a bunch of cpus to a bunch of sites to review for a product thats going to be reviewed for a purpose that the cpu was never intended for?

unless you are a bunch of IT techs and network managers....... AMD NEVER INTENDED FOR YOU TO DISECT EVERY REVIEW AND MOMENT IN TIME THAT HAD TO DO WITH THE FREAKING SERVER PART OF THEIR CPU LINE!.

so.... wait for the freaking phenom release date.... when that date comes and there isnt 100,000,000,000,000 reviews for you to gobble up..... then you can be pissed off.
 
Duby,

I don't mean to escalate this OT sub-thread into something out of proportion, but if it is AMD's convention to name their products this way, who are we to judge the merits (or lack thereof) of such a nomenclature? It is their products after all, and whether we agree with him or not, morfinx represents AMD here, albeit in an informal, unofficial position.

No, no please dont misunderstand me. I understand 100%. No offense intended to morfinx, or AMD in any way. I just dont agree with it. Barcelona was announced as K8L therfore it is K8L.

If AMD doesnt like that nomenclature then they should have been the ones to announce it with the nomenclature that they intended. Instead they chose a confusing multitude of names, after the fact, that all represent exactly the same thing, with nothing to indicate so.

If AMD doesnt like it, well, its too late to fix it in this round. They can still provide a proper nomenclature for future generations if they get on the ball now and release the proper information now.
 
why the hell does everyone keep comparing the k8 launch to the k10 launch
The "K8" that was launched first was the Opteron. It seems a little bit reasonable to compare the Opteron launch in 2003 with the Barcelona Opteron launch in 2007. :p
 
Most new spins dont get released until the C revision anyway. Blaming Hector Ruiz for making Barcelona "late" for waiting until the B revision is a bit odd. For example the earliest retail Sledgehammers were C1 revisions. There were a few OEM B3's, but it was more or less launched on the C1 revision. So I just think your over reacting. I'm not trying to make you look like anything, I'm just pointing out that your basing opinions on asinine things that would have happened no matter who was CEO.

I said that in one of my previous posts that perhaps I should have blamed the engineers at fault for the speed path issues rather than AMD's CEO. I guess you missed that. And as for over-reacting, I don't neccesarily feel that I am. This is do-or-die time for them. They couldn't afford screw-ups and that's exactly what happened. Intel is about to roll out their Penryn 45nm architecture. AMD doesn't have room for delays or foul-ups. We all need them to succeed, otherwise we will see a return to the old Intel: stagnant, un-innovative, and overly expensive. We need AMD to pull this off.
 
Regarding the various Barcelona steppings mentioned in this thread, here's a post from another forum which elaborates:

dave_graham said:
DaveB said:
So, is this the status of the various steppings then?

B1 -> low speed stepping, not for release
BA -> errata 248, 274, 278, and 279 not fixed, low speed 2.0 GHz stepping, first shipped part

B2 -> errata 248, 274, 278, and 279 fixed, medium speed 2.5 GHz
B3 -> ?, I dunno
basically...you forgot A0/A1 (EVT), B0/B1 (DVT), BA (shipping rev), B2 (SE rev; will supercede BA in Q4), B3 (which would be a further mask and RAS refinement core...probably Shanghai, honestly)

DaveB said:
The theory being that the 2.0 GHz chips reviewed were B1 and the 2.5 chips were B2. The Q4 2.0 GHz shipping version is BA, and in Q? AMD will ship the 2.5 GHz B2. Then B3 sometime in 2008.
it's not a theory. it's fact.

B1 chips were 1.9ghz and 2.0ghz, the B2 was the 2.5/2.6 parts. the Q3 shipping version (don't know why we're belabouring this point seeing as how enterprise customers are receiving them...talked to Sun today, as a matter of fact) is BA. AMD will ship B2's at the end of Q4.
I don't know how accurate the information about Barcelona steppings is in this post, but there does appear to be a lot of steppings that the average enthusiast is not aware of.
 
I don't know how accurate the information about Barcelona steppings is in this post, but there does appear to be a lot of steppings that the average enthusiast is not aware of.
There's always a lot of steppings that the average enthusiast is not aware of :)

Note: this is not a confirmation or denial of the above posted info.
 
A little off topic, but it's still pretty funny. Wiki has announced the bankruptcy of AMD effective yesterday. Forget buying Barcelona from the Egg. :D

On September 12th, 2007 AMD held a press conference announcing their intentions to file for bankruptcy. It was also stated that their current fabs would be liquidated and their current processor and graphics lines would be pulled of the market. It was not made clear when or if the company would emerge from bankruptcy.

Now this is some serious FUD!
 
Back
Top