AMD Bulldozer Finally!

[gareth170]

It seems if those slides about thicker pins, better noise control and so on are true then yeah BD might work on non AM3+ boards, but overclocking might be severly limited.

im glad you understand

same thing i said the lower BD should work/stable at stock in a am3 board but overclocking maybe not...

 

[wannabedamned]

at last someone that understands

I think most people understand to be fair, Unfortunately a select few are choosing to ignore...or not believe the very obvious

 

[Martini1991]

I think most people understand to be fair, Unfortunately a select few are choosing to ignore...or not believe the very obvious

I'm not choosing to ignore it, as I said, I fully expect a CH IV to overclock the same chip to the same levels as a CH V.
If it doesn't? AMD's CEO can use me as a slave.
I fully expect the CH IV to work with all the same BD CPU's as the CH V. Not once have I said this of lower AM3 boards.

 

[gareth170]

I think most people understand to be fair, Unfortunately a select few are choosing to ignore...or not believe the very obvious

yeah i don't mean it by others don't understand. i ment that he understood the same way i seen it.

 

[MichaelM]

It would be nice to just upgrade the CPU but even if that works I wouldn't bother doing so until comparison tests are released by a review site about 890FX vs 990FX with Bulldozer chips. We don't have those reviews yet but there is no harm discussing influences which will effect such tests for now.

Also best to wait a little while in case any bugs pop up and for prices to drop on either AMD or Intel's side.

 

[wannabedamned]

Undervolting may become a bigger thing with BD on AM3 boards. Max potential minimum voltage.

Overclocking on AM3+ boards

 

[djkav]

Hmm board choices?

Invest in socket am3+ or wait for FM1 around the corner, which direction...

 

[Jayster]

Hmm board choices?

Invest in socket am3+ or wait for FM1 around the corner, which direction...

FM2

 

[Elevon]

Hmm board choices?

Invest in socket am3+ or wait for FM1 around the corner, which direction...

I always get a new board with CPU anyway,personally trying to wait for next generation boards is a bit pointless,just go with what's available at the time you buy,there's always something new around the corner and you end up playing catchup forever.

 

[psychas]

if true i guess will have to buy ch V

 

[gareth170]

amd may push the fm2 platform back to late 2012 or even 2013.. roadmaps are just a guideline.

 

[Martini1991]

if true i guess will have to buy ch V

I doubt that, unless AMD actually force the upgrade using larger pins (Which is underhand).

 

[gareth170]

I doubt that, unless AMD actually force the upgrade using larger pins (Which is underhand).

if they was to use larger pins, on any of the bd chips (maybe top end chip) would be due to the safety has they use more amps , it's not underhand.

 

[gareth170]

ASRock has marketed themselves as the first manufacturer with AM3+ sockets. The socket is now black rather than the old white and has AM3B labeled on it. The pin holes are larger than socket AM3. Speculation is AMD may make the pins on processors larger and they may not be compatible with socket AM3 in the future.

http://www.pureoverclock.com/review.php?id=1284&page=7

 

[Akagi]

aaaaaand im still most likely going to get sandybridge.

 

[gurusan]

Go for it. You won't regret it.

 

[N19h7m4r3]

I'm still playing the waiting game. I got super close to buying SandyB though.

I recently built a friend a new pc with the i5 2500 and it's fast. Very fast, even compared to my AMD 940 am2+ system.

I just hope there's some M-ITX boards out along with bulldozer, that'll all I'm going for.

 

[two00lbwaster]

I'm interested in how Windows will handle BD on 9*0 chipsets when the CPU powers down the core completely so that it's turned off. For example, when you go into task manager/procmon will you still see 8 cores or will the core graphs be dynamically added and removed as the cores are started and powered off?

I have been considering an Asrock 970 Extreme4 to go with my Phenom II 955 BE with some fast DDR3 as it's currently sat in an ageing M3A32-MVP Deluxe/WiFi-AP with some 6400LL DDR2.
The reasoning for this is that I'll be able to drop in a cheap Bulldozer chip when the FM2 Piledriver chips make their arrival.

 

[Jokester]

I would be pretty sure that it'll be entirely transparent to Windows so that it won't know if an idle core is on or off and the CPU will just handle it. Saying that though, Windows tries to spread threads across all cores I think, so with a BD core, what it should be trying to do is load all the threads onto one core as long as it's not running anywhere near 100%.

Edit: Might need a CPU driver like the old X2s did when they first came out.

 

[two00lbwaster]

I would be pretty sure that it'll be entirely transparent to Windows so that it won't know if an idle core is on or off and the CPU will just handle it. Saying that though, Windows tries to spread threads across all cores I think, so with a BD core, what it should be trying to do is load all the threads onto one core as long as it's not running anywhere near 100%.

Edit: Might need a CPU driver like the old X2s did when they first came out.

I'm not sure if turbo core / cool and quiet require drivers to work or whether they are completely self contained in the BIOS/UEFI.

You're right that Windows tends to try to level out load across cores, however, turbo core 2.o can't let that happen as it needs to shut down the cores to overclock to the full potential.
That's why Bulldozer will perform poorer on non-9x0 chipsets as those chipsets don't have the advanced core shutdown abilities that the 9x0 chipsets have, which means that you can't reach the highest turbo core overclocks without it.