upcoming AMD’s Bulldozer FX Launch Lineup revealed

[StrangerGuy]

Wait so by turbo mode up to 4.2GHz, is that for all cores? I know people harp over 4.5~5GHz "overclocks" for their sandy bridge chips but infact these overclocks aren't for all the cores (I think its just a single core?). Does the same apply to BD?

I'm pretty those are on all cores. Easily achievable on air.

 

[Plimogz]

^If by "those" you mean the sandy bridge overclocks, then ditto.

WRT the 4.2GHz AMD turbo that Cookie Monster mentioned, this is taken from an Anandtech Llano review, I think it may well apply to bulldozer:

Llano is aware of the operations it's currently working on and based on the weights associated with these operations it comes up with a general estimate of its power consumption on a per core basis. [...] Based on the number of events and their individual weights, AMD estimates the power consumption of each core and determines how much TDP headroom exists in the system. If the OS is requesting the highest p-state from the CPU and there's available TDP headroom, Llano will turbo up any active cores up to a maximum frequency. Like Sandy Bridge, Llano is able to temporarily exceed the APU's maximum TDP if it determines that the recent history of power consumption has been low enough that it'll take a while for the APU to ramp up to any thermal limits.

Though perhaps as concerns Bulldozer, the granularity will not be on a per-core basis, but rather per-module.

 

[Mopetar]

I want to be hopeful.

But...from what we have seen of GloFo's 32nm SOI based on Llano, and from what we know to expect of a gate-first HKMG integration from device physics standpoint, I know my hopefullness is not really justifiable.

And yet...I really do want to be hopeful.

On the other hand, they've allegedly gone through quite a few steppings with BD, suggesting they've really been working to maximize performance around the limitations and quirks in the 32nm process. Also, that it can turbo up to 4.2 GHz suggests that it still has decent TDP headroom left. It's just a matter of how sensitive it will be to cranking up the voltage or how much of a crapshoot it will be to get one of the chips that's best able to overclock.

Wait so by turbo mode up to 4.2GHz, is that for all cores? I know people harp over 4.5~5GHz "overclocks" for their sandy bridge chips but infact these overclocks aren't for all the cores (I think its just a single core?). Does the same apply to BD?

Based on past comments from AMD, it should be for all cores/modules. They haven't released any comments on how high their chips would be able to boost if only part of the total resources were being used, so it could be slightly higher, or it could be significantly higher. It's hard to say.

 

[trollolo]

so are all these delays indicative of revisions for the better? or failures in engineering for the worse?

 

[exar333]

so are all these delays indicative of revisions for the better? or failures in engineering for the worse?

Yes to all of those. We just don't know.

Apparently we do not find out for sure until it is released...

 

[Stoneburner]

I've seen no confirmation of delay. Why is everybody convinced it's not coming this month?

 

[Rvenger]

They might as well just release the damn things now. Everyone is tired of waiting or is happy with their 2500 or 2600k by now. If it is a total flop, it'll at least give the guys running the Athlon X2 and older Phenoms a chance for a decent upgrade.

 

[RobertR1]

I have given up on SB. I seriously doubt AMD will have anything against me getting an i2500k now and getting Ivy next year while keeping the rest of my system the same.

As a gaming pc only, I might not even need Ivy.

 

[ShadowVVL]

I have given up on SB.

you mean BD


It is taking forever but hopefully these rumors are not true.If it launches in a few weeks I may get a x4, if it really does get pushed to q4 then I will wait for trinity.

 

[exar333]

you mean BD


It is taking forever but hopefully these rumors are not true.If it launches in a few weeks I may get a x4, if it really does get pushed to q4 then I will wait for trinity.

BD will not be in-stock at stores for likely 60-90 days after 'release' anyway. That was the same with Llano, IIRC. Even if it launches 3Q, it will we well into 4Q until you can probably buy one.

I couldn't care less about availability though, I want reviews!

 

[Remobz]

BD will not be in-stock at stores for likely 60-90 days after 'release' anyway. That was the same with Llano, IIRC. Even if it launches 3Q, it will we well into 4Q until you can probably buy one.

I couldn't care less about availability though, I want reviews!

Agreed!!

We need reviews soon

 

[trollolo]

can't wait to get all them cores. boy oh boy will my system monitor look spiffy

 

[bryanW1995]

This also struck me as Odd. I suspect in time there may be more 6 and 4 core processors released, but it seems to me that AMD is primarily wanting 8 core processors and only releasing 6 and 4 cores in order to Sell what doesn't handle 8 cores.

A smart move would be to actually release 4/6 core cpus now but keep the 8 core cpus that can't bin up to to 8100 speeds and leak those into the market over time. That would be a true hit or miss for unlocking/overclocking.

 

[sandorski]

A smart move would be to actually release 4/6 core cpus now but keep the 8 core cpus that can't bin up to to 8100 speeds and leak those into the market over time. That would be a true hit or miss for unlocking/overclocking.

They might be getting a very good success rate at 8 Core, leaving only small amounts for 6 and 4. 8 core CPUs are going to demand a higher $Value, so that's what they will want to Sell. Could also explain why there are more 8 core variants than either 6 or 4 combined. Have to remember they still have Llano in their lineup, so they won't want overlap to cut into Sales.

 

[jvroig]

From Anand's twitter conversation posted at AT sidebar:

@anandshimpi oooh I'm excited! Also can't wait till you can talk about Bulldozer. Soonish maybe?

@justinclay not soonish on Bulldozer I'm afraid

I don't know what "soonish" means to either of them, but suffice it to say, BD reviews won't be arriving "soonish" according to Anand.

 

[Stoneburner]

From Anand's twitter conversation posted at AT sidebar:





I don't know what "soonish" means to either of them, but suffice it to say, BD reviews won't be arriving "soonish" according to Anand.

Well FAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACK!


Anand should just post a review of an ES and tell amd to eat his ghand.

 

[busydude]

Anand should just post a review of an ES and tell amd to eat his ghand.

I see what you did there.

 

[RussianSensation]

Wait so by turbo mode up to 4.2GHz, is that for all cores? I know people harp over 4.5~5GHz "overclocks" for their sandy bridge chips but infact these overclocks aren't for all the cores (I think its just a single core?). Does the same apply to BD?

Huh? What are you talking about? You have the option of overclocking SB with the multiplier -- i.e., applying the same multiplier to all cores at the same time. So in fact, when people discuss 4.5-4.6ghz overclocks on SB, that's on all 4 cores simultaneously. There is a lot of confusion wrt to SB overclocking. It's no different than i7 920, except now instead of using FSB/QPI, you adjust the multiplier.

 

[bridito]

I don't know what "soonish" means to either of them, but suffice it to say, BD reviews won't be arriving "soonish" according to Anand.

Given that it's 14 days to "supposed" release date, I'm willing to bet the other half of my ham sandwich that this deadline is going to be blown to smithereens... like the ones before it. :'(

 

[notty22]

Given that it's 14 days to "supposed" release date, I'm willing to bet the other half of my ham sandwich that this deadline is going to be blown to smithereens... like the ones before it. :'(

Vegas would not take this bet. This was the 'around back to school date' .

 

[bridito]

Vegas would not take this bet. This was the 'around back to school date' .

I wish Vegas would take half eaten ham sands for bets! It would be far less than the small fortune I lost on the Raiders back in '86. :'(

I'm starting to think that it will be more "around Halloween date" before mere mortals can actually get their greedy paws on BD, but I'm sure praying for a much earlier date!

 

[lau808]

keep forgetting to sub

 

[TakeNoPrisoners]

What.

Napkin math time! Lets say Bulldozer is actually Husky with 8mb of L3 slapped on it. Husky performs around 6% clock for clock than Deneb, so with the L3 I think 10% better ipc is a fair approximation. Bloomfield has around 20% more ipc than Deneb iirc, so if it turbos to 4.2Ghz at 4 cores used, that would make it around equal to a 3.7-3.8ghz Bloomfield. What games do you play that are cpu bottlenecked with a i7 920@3.7Ghz?

And here is the kicker, apps that actually need the cpu power will use all 8 cores. Nifty, huh?

No they don't. I play CSS with multi core usage on and I never see more than 50% usage. Same thing but with 8 cores instead of 4.

A game written to use 4 cores will not use 8 cores period.

I don't care about turbo, I don't use it. I overclock so that all cores are running the same speed all of the time.

That isn't the point. Nobody cares what an i7 920 does at any clock speed. We are talking about BD and Sandy Bridge. The main problems I have with CPU bottlenecks are games that are CPU limited. I build PC's in a balanced way which means that I spend a roughly equal amount on GPU power and CPU power unless spending more on either does nothing.

In this case.

i5 2500k + $50 CPU cooler
$260 GPU

Or

$200~ BD CPU +$50 CPU cooler
$260 GPU

Roughly the same amount of money on each major processing component. In this case I want 4 fast cores over 8 slow cores. I do not need 8 cores so I will throw that option out leaving me with 4 fast cores that will run single core games, dual core games, and quad core games faster than the 8 core CPU.

I do not need more than 4 cores at a high clock speed. Turbo still will not cut it. In the best case the turbo still cannot go faster than the Intel CPU at a constant clock speed.