Bulldozer "delayed" until September 2011 (Rumor)

[Axon]

Were this come from? Intel has said IB would work with SB M/B Bios update is all thats required. Look at the specs for MSI Z68 M/Bs . It includes PCI-E 3. All you have to do is update Bios and install IB and your good to go . I know alot of people who bought on release . They were buying while I was selling . I wanted Z68 and waited as it turned out this was the correct move. The guy I sold to befor Xmas is updated with legal parts and Bob has his parts back . Everyone is happy.

Hm? I was just giving an example. I've heard that some IB chips will be 1155 and some will not. Nonetheless, ECS has also indicated that it believes 1155, already, is a dead socket. http://www.techradar.com/news/computing-components/motherboards/-z68-wont-be-around-for-long--960790

Bottom line is Intel switches sockets too frequently, at least for my taste. If you disagree, that's fine. Intel doesn't give a sh*t about either of our opinions, as they keep doing it.

 

[drizek]

That's stupid, X79 will be a niche product, just like every other X series. Maybe it will be like Nehalem where it is mildly affordable 3 years from now, but there is no way it will replace Z68. Sure, it might replace it in the $200+ market, but any motherboard $150 and under will be using 1155 for a long, long time. I mean, it is a brand new socket. If it was insufficient for Intel's mainstream chips, they wouldn't have released it(at least, you'd hope so).

 

[tijag]

Its not that it is difficult to believe, it is the ramifications of what this requires to be true if it is infact true.

Llano getting the wafers means that 90 days ago (3 months!) they made this decision to delay bulldozer and opted instead to allocate the 32nm wfr capacity to Llano.

Its not like they can make the decision today and then suddenly tomorrow or next week the product mix in the fab has turned on a dime and is 90% Llano wafers.

They either planned to delay bulldozer in favor of Llano...a decision they made 3 months ago despite telling everyone BD was not delayed...or they planned to paper launch bulldozer and had previously allocated the 32nm capacity to Llano all those months ago...or we take them at their word and they were planning to launch bulldozer, the fab is full of plenty of B1 stepping bulldozers and only just a week ago they decided to pull the plug on B1 stepping production and switch to B2 stepping.

You guys claiming/thinking this is somehow a capacity tradeoff are fooling yourselves. If AMD intends to launch in 60-90 days that means the fab's wafer starts today have got to be bulldozer-rich in order for them to have the chips coming out of the fab in 60-90 days. Unless they intend to paper-launch in 60-90 days, then they don't need to plan to produce much of anything.

If the server product launches in July, on schedule [probably final stages of validation, so although they have chips, they can't sell into channel without compeleting the validation] it might just be a case where the chips they have are going to be sold for servers, at higher profits, while they push their fusion agenda with OEM's.

They may have needed this B2 stepping to improve yields for desktop varient of BD, but there are plenty of B1 steppings that work good to satisfy the server market at this time.

IF [and this is a big if], there is nothing wrong with the performance of the B1 stepping, but that the B2 stepping will improve yields, then perhaps its just a case of making sure that the server customers are taken care of, while OEM gets flooded with as many Llano products as possible.

Meanwhile the B2 stepping will come out for desktop at a future time, probably August. That sucks for us as enthusiasts, but I don't think any of us really expect BD to be > than SNB for games, do we? I never have.

B2 may just improve yields, B1 may be good enough, and in high enough qty's to satisfy their initial needs in the server market, Llano may have lots of chips to sell and gain marketshare and mind share.

I think AMD is just 'spinning' the part where the chip is OK, but the yields aren't good enough yet for desktop volume. Instead of saying that, they can just say 'we are launching server first and concentrating on our Llano fusion product in the mean time.'

 

[Nemesis 1]

Well does this give intel the right sell for under cost . No its doesn't and if intel did such a thing AMD would take them to court . That really doesn't matter . Intel going up against LLano is a joke with SB. It would likely be the i3 class that llano is up against . You guys are making the same mistake in this cpu section I have seen is the vidio section for years. LLano has open CL . So ya march around like programmed robots singing the praises CL . Its much like AMD 64 we all know how long that took to really make a differance on the desktop and since AMD has no open Cl on BD at this time its all mute . Ya there will be a few programms that run cl . but not enough to matter . The truth is on todays desktop and clearly the mobile market AMD llano isn't even in the same performance catagory as SB till you get down to i3 serious . For99% of all mobile notebooks Intel IGP is more than enough as history clearly shows. By the time the new age of CL programming really arrives . Intel will be setting there with a CPu that kicks ass . This is about compute . Intel may not have the best graphics but in the compute area they are second to none and thats what open CL is about. You guys act like all this is new to intel and drivers are the all important equation that humbles intel . That is 100% nonsense. Itanic and ATI gpus have much in common . EPIC you can call it VLIW i hope I got that right if not you know what I mean . To me I believe intels jit compilers will be the differance and a huge differance at that. Cl on Intels SB is more than one might suspect if it leverages AVX which I sure it well. LLANO hasn"t got this . Intel on the other hand has 80% market share . So whos going to develope for what . Also keep in mind that intel owns 3 software companies . I understand why people with low incomes would praise llano . But intel has that price point covered and Intel has an excellant IGP. Than in 6 months IB shows up lower the power requirements by 50% thats 20 watt chips at the highend of mobile IB . the low end of mobile should hit 10 watts. Ya I read the article on SB power design . But really doesn't matter as we have seen in the past . So no AMD won't take market share from intel at all .

 

[Axon]

That's stupid, X79 will be a niche product, just like every other X series. Maybe it will be like Nehalem where it is mildly affordable 3 years from now, but there is no way it will replace Z68. Sure, it might replace it in the $200+ market, but any motherboard $150 and under will be using 1155 for a long, long time. I mean, it is a brand new socket. If it was insufficient for Intel's mainstream chips, they wouldn't have released it(at least, you'd hope so).

This sounds logical...then I look at 1156. Admittedly something of an odd socket line, but still: Sept 2009-Jan 2011.

Bottom line is that Intel changes sockets frequently. No hate - it works for 'em. They own the market. I'm typing on an intel PC at work, and tonight I'll return to my Intel desktop and laptop. Kudos.

Otherwise, I agree - I don't see how X79 could be their main product line, but you never know.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Hm? I was just giving an example. I've heard that some IB chips will be 1155 and some will not. Nonetheless, ECS has also indicated that it believes 1155, already, is a dead socket. http://www.techradar.com/news/computing-components/motherboards/-z68-wont-be-around-for-long--960790

Bottom line is Intel switches sockets too frequently, at least for my taste. If you disagree, that's fine. Intel doesn't give a sh*t about either of our opinions, as they keep doing it.

Really. AMD is going to 2 new sockets this year , Than what about BD with an APU that will likely be another new socket. AMD3 processors will not except BD cores unless the have the new black socket . SO stop with the socket BS. as the charts show clearly AMD changes sockets alot. BUT BUT BUT my butt.

 

[Nemesis 1]

This sounds logical...then I look at 1156. Admittedly something of an odd socket line, but still: Sept 2009-Jan 2011.

Bottom line is that Intel changes sockets frequently. No hate - it works for 'em. They own the market. I'm typing on an intel PC at work, and tonight I'll return to my Intel desktop and laptop. Kudos.

Otherwise, I agree - I don't see how X79 could be their main product line, but you never know.

Sounds like cheese to me , LLANO is on a new socket WHY? Same reason intel went from 1156 to 1155. People who buy dells just don't care. bottom line. l

 

[nonameo]

B2 may just improve yields, B1 may be good enough, and in high enough qty's to satisfy their initial needs in the server market, Llano may have lots of chips to sell and gain marketshare and mind share.

I don't get why amd would sell a lower quality processor to their server customers. While the "crappy" stepping may achieve the clockspeeds they want for their server products, it doesn't mean it can achieve that clockspeed with the desired power consumption. iirc, generally the BEST cut of cpus are used for this purpose for exactly that reason, they can reach lower power consumption at the desired clockspeeds. recall: athlon XP-M

 

[georgec84]

...I think I should have sold my AMD stock when it was around $9.70 some weeks back...

 

[Bearach]

Intel      - AMD
Socket 8   -                - 1995
Slot 1     -                - 1997
           - Super Socket 7 - 1998
Socket 370 - Slot A         - 1999
Socket 423 - Socket A       - 2000
Socket 478 -                - 2000
           - Socket 754     - 2003
           - Socket 940     - 2003
LGA 775    - Socket 939     - 2004
           - Socket AM2     - 2006
           - Socket F       - 2006
           - Socket AM2+    - 2007
LGA 1366   -                - 2008
LGA 1156   - Socket AM3     - 2009
LGA 1155   - ?              - 2011

Sorry that list is flawed. Chipset changes that effect processors should be added (i.e. FSB), server sockets added on one side, and other minor errors.

Platform changes are not JUST about socket.

Sure AMD are as bad, but you're painting an image that isn't quite true, leaving out some other key variables.

Some AM2 boards can run AM3 processors, show we then consider AM2, AM2+, and AM3 as the same? No. Cause not all could run.

 

[garagisti]

...GF is a stock company and investors would take them to court. As this would be fraud.GF stock holders and the other fab Amd uses would scream rape. GF is not an AMD company.

Erm, AMD is one of GF's big customers, if not the biggest. Volume of business given does makes a difference in how you charge the potential customer. This is the norm across many industries...

On topic now... there was/ is a guessing game going on about what, how and when... at SA forums... Now with Charlie also hinting that Server is being ramped up... i look at my previous post here... where shipping of server BD products starts in Q2, 2011. I'd not blame AMD for playing along with OEM's on this one. MagnyCours was a good chip for its time and well, nearly a bloody miracle for its size... and the fact that it was on 45nm. Now that 12 core chip on a 45nm node is doing 2.5 Ghz. However, as brilliant as that chip was, there were not so many systems from partners which came along initially. Infact i read more articles about systems built with MC chips in this year of BD launch than i read in the launch year of MC chips.

Given that they're doing 2.5 Ghz on a 12 core chip on 45nm node, i'm certain that AMD could easily manage upto 3 Ghz with 16 cores in the same, or lower thermal envelope. How is that possible? BD cores are smaller, and well on a smaller node. It is that simple. What does that mean? OEM's will want more of those and AMD will have to supply. I suspect that OEM's and AMD are working together on the server chips, even as we bicker on forums

Desktops, sure its an important market, but Llano will do AMD's bidding with OEM's for a bit... Oh yes, they're to sell 8+ million of those chips this year... And i honestly didn't expect to see Trinity this early on. I mean on Llano intro day... It was a little silly i guess... It is like, 'hey you want this candy, but wait! we have better one... come in a week again.' They sure could and may be in hindsight should have waited till their E3 conference. But hindsight's a bitch To think about it... i'd have loved to read about what socket it fits into (if it is the same as FM1, it would have built confidence in people's heads)...mem support... graphics part... all that at once... As that would have laid the smackdown proper, on Intel! Not to say that they aren't crapping their pants already... but just that AMD could have played their hand better. Gotten more mileage out of the coverage.

 

[Bearach]

Sounds like cheese to me , LLANO is on a new socket WHY? Same reason intel went from 1156 to 1155. People who buy dells just don't care. bottom line. l

It's on a new socket because it has a built in graphics processor. You are right that people buying Dell just don't care.

I think we often believe we're the major market when in fact we're a minority. The majority don't know enough, and care enough to worry about it being a different platform than previous gen.

 

[Vesku]

The AM2+ to AM3 socket transition was very cpu upgrade friendly. But I do think that AMD will be back to the same socket change rhythm as Intel starting with AM3+. In other words I think AM3+ is the new socket 939 for AMD.

 

[Genx87]

Yes, I am sure AMD opted to delay a higher margin part for an entry level integrated solution on the production side. IDC is right. If we are to see products in 90 days starts have to happen right now. Sounds like that isnt happening. I wouldnt expect to see the server variant either. I dont know the time it takes to get through the fab exactly. But a total time from start to being on a retail shelf in 90 days sounds about right. I am beginning to believe closer to the end of Q3 at the earliest for BD.

 

[Vesku]

Did that AMD guy really just show a heatspreader and say "look TRINITY"? Seems like a half-hearted attempt to distract from the delay news. I mean they are really pulling a "Pork Shoulders" nVidia move, they steal nVidia's marketing manual? Unlike Nemesis I do think AMD really has a nice thing with these hybrid chips now out of development hell. I can only hope for competition's sake that AMD's marketing department is ready to exploit this 6-9 month lead on hybrid products. I believe Intel confirmed IB will have up to 32 EUs and the clocks will probably be impressive on their 22nm process. That's where I think this desire to shout about Trinity comes from, they need that selling in volume several months before IB launch.

But come on, shouting about a hybrid (APU) product that's based on the cores of the chip you just announced as delayed, I just don't come away with the positive impression AMD wants me to have. Show me BD numbers then talk up Trinity.

 

[garagisti]

Yes, I am sure AMD opted to delay a higher margin part for an entry level integrated solution on the production side. IDC is right. If we are to see products in 90 days starts have to happen right now. Sounds like that isnt happening. I wouldnt expect to see the server variant either. I dont know the time it takes to get through the fab exactly. But a total time from start to being on a retail shelf in 90 days sounds about right. I am beginning to believe closer to the end of Q3 at the earliest for BD.

I know of fewer people who have desktop parts in their hands than there are people i know who hold server parts here and at SA and at XS. Well, it is better for AMD this way. Last time around with MagnyCours there were not many systems at launch. If AMD works with OEM's and is able to offer a higher number of products at launch, then good for them. Don't get me wrong, but i'll buy what, one chip (for personal use) in 3 years? LOL... You may get 3 or 4 in the same time-frame. However, OEM's will help them garner a larger share of the pie than you will give OEM's credit for. You did see a lot more boards coming up this time, than you had for Phenom II or Thuban... think why?

Did that AMD guy really just show a heatspreader and say "look TRINITY"? Seems like a half-hearted attempt to distract from the delay news...

...Show me BD numbers then talk up Trinity.

There... Trinity though is ready (and by all accounts should have been taping out alright), the timing for breaking the news and the manner in which it was done, was at best half arsed. Seriously, you have next best thing to sliced bread in technology and this is how you break the news? I wonder what Steve Jobs could do. He does put on a show... Don't get me wrong, i don't like Apple or their products, they have their use but... Steve Jobs/ Apple market their products quite good. Heck, i shudder to think what Intel would have done, if only they could make one such potent chip

 

[Arachnotronic]

I'm not sure I understand the hype for Trinity. A CPU with unknown performance characteristics combined with a low end GPU? Awesome?

 

[tijag]

I don't get why amd would sell a lower quality processor to their server customers. While the "crappy" stepping may achieve the clockspeeds they want for their server products, it doesn't mean it can achieve that clockspeed with the desired power consumption. iirc, generally the BEST cut of cpus are used for this purpose for exactly that reason, they can reach lower power consumption at the desired clockspeeds. recall: athlon XP-M

My theory was that the B2 stepping isn't to increase performance, but to tweak manufacturing slightly to improve yields. Perhaps the chips that they have are 'good' its just that they don't have very many. Enough to enter the server market, but not enough to sell to both server and desktop market. They choose, as they should, to sell to the higher margin market first.

It was just a theory though.

 

[Vesku]

I'm not sure I understand the hype for Trinity. A CPU with unknown performance characteristics combined with a low end GPU? Awesome?

Low end discrete becoming the default OEM box IGP, it is awesome for consumer level programmers and of course browser developers. Talking about a future product at a major industry conference with not even numberless unscaled graph comparisons with today's products, nVidiawesome.

 

[garagisti]

I'm not sure I understand the hype for Trinity. A CPU with unknown performance characteristics combined with a low end GPU? Awesome?

I wonder what people here would say if that was a chip made by Intel...

 

[AtenRa]

I believe Intel confirmed IB will have up to 32 EUs

Could you please provide a link for that ?

 

[sm625]

I don't get why amd would sell a lower quality processor to their server customers.

It makes sense to me. BD probably runs just fine at 2.5GHz. And I am guessing they are targetting 8 cores at 2.5GHz as the "juicy meaty center" of the server market.

8 cores at 2.5GHz isnt going to get them much on the desktop. All that does is kill their thuban prices. Can you imagine a 6 core thuban at close to $99? That is what they're looking at if releasing BD now. And once they do that it kinda sets those prices in stone doesnt it? Do cpu prices ever rise more than a few %? They need to beat i7-2600 so they can command better margins. So they take what chips they have now and make them server chips. Later on they'll simply release more powerful server chips for more money.

 

[Vesku]

Could you please provide a link for that ?

Seems the source quickly retracted that number, 16 EUs still the assumed count. Apparently, the 32 EU number is now clearly descriped as pure speculation about what Intel might do with 22nm if they felt the need to humble AMD's APU drive.

 

[OCGuy]

Could you please provide a link for that ?

"Besides DirectX 11 compatibility, Ivy Bridge will double the number of EUs available, some reports even suggesting that the chip is designed to feature as much as 1GB of dedicated on-die graphics memory"

I cant find any confirmations from Intel, just a statement with no source attributed.

http://news.softpedia.com/news/Inte...e-DirectX-11-Integrated-Graphics-177262.shtml

 

[Nemesis 1]

Erm, AMD is one of GF's big customers, if not the biggest. Volume of business given does makes a difference in how you charge the potential customer. This is the norm across many industries...

On topic now... there was/ is a guessing game going on about what, how and when... at SA forums... Now with Charlie also hinting that Server is being ramped up... i look at my previous post here... where shipping of server BD products starts in Q2, 2011. I'd not blame AMD for playing along with OEM's on this one. MagnyCours was a good chip for its time and well, nearly a bloody miracle for its size... and the fact that it was on 45nm. Now that 12 core chip on a 45nm node is doing 2.5 Ghz. However, as brilliant as that chip was, there were not so many systems from partners which came along initially. Infact i read more articles about systems built with MC chips in this year of BD launch than i read in the launch year of MC chips.

Given that they're doing 2.5 Ghz on a 12 core chip on 45nm node, i'm certain that AMD could easily manage upto 3 Ghz with 16 cores in the same, or lower thermal envelope. How is that possible? BD cores are smaller, and well on a smaller node. It is that simple. What does that mean? OEM's will want more of those and AMD will have to supply. I suspect that OEM's and AMD are working together on the server chips, even as we bicker on forums

Desktops, sure its an important market, but Llano will do AMD's bidding with OEM's for a bit... Oh yes, they're to sell 8+ million of those chips this year... And i honestly didn't expect to see Trinity this early on. I mean on Llano intro day... It was a little silly i guess... It is like, 'hey you want this candy, but wait! we have better one... come in a week again.' They sure could and may be in hindsight should have waited till their E3 conference. But hindsight's a bitch To think about it... i'd have loved to read about what socket it fits into (if it is the same as FM1, it would have built confidence in people's heads)...mem support... graphics part... all that at once... As that would have laid the smackdown proper, on Intel! Not to say that they aren't crapping their pants already... but just that AMD could have played their hand better. Gotten more mileage out of the coverage.

I am very happy you mentioned volumn makes a differance as M/B makers are not following this rule and it smells badly . AMD does 4x less volumn sales and the chipset cost doesn't warrant this discrepancy at all . But it seems to be falling into place now that intel has 2 seperate sockets . If this behaviour by M/B makers hasn't changed were going to go ahead with a class action suite,