AMD Bulldozer Finally!

psychas · 29 Jul 2011 at 23:56

im not sure if 8170 will be much difference to 8150 probably same as 1090 to 1100

gareth170 · 30 Jul 2011 at 00:28

Muel said:
Yayyyyyyy My board will support BD!

I'll be waiting for the FX-8170P now I think. Would be a nice upgrade to my current system, from a 3.4ghz quad to a 4.2ghz oct with 4.7ghz turbo, and from 4gb of 1333mhz ram to 8/16gb of 1866mhz+.

See this http://www.gigabyte.com/products/product-page.aspx?pid=3781#sp

it looks like if you use a BD chip on a board that as a 800 chipset, the support ram speeds are still 1066 / 1333mhz..

edit: in the QVL list for the board that linked too it has 1866mhz listed, so looks like maybe u can.

Martini1991 · 30 Jul 2011 at 02:55

gareth170 said:
what?

u asked for the link that shows an improvement from a am3 board to a am3+ board.

in some of them tests theres some nice improvements, such as when it's overclocked

Two boards, questionable reliable results, give me some from aandtech etc.

Final8y · 30 Jul 2011 at 06:44

Martini1991 said:
S
It's just marketing crap. Yes, it might be factual, but relevant? Far from it, will it make a damn difference? Probably not, an an AM3 Crosshair IV Formula will likely perform no different to a Crosshair AM3+ V Formula with a BD CPU, hell, they'll probably overclock the same too.

Facts & relevance are 2 different things & relevance does not make facts not true & because the facts don't matter to you does not mean that they don't matter to others.

nitram100 · 30 Jul 2011 at 09:20

Muel said:
Yayyyyyyy My board will support BD!

I'll be waiting for the FX-8170P now I think. Would be a nice upgrade to my current system, from a 3.4ghz quad to a 4.2ghz oct with 4.7ghz turbo, and from 4gb of 1333mhz ram to 8/16gb of 1866mhz+.

Brofist!

gareth170 · 30 Jul 2011 at 11:22

Martini1991 said:
Two boards, questionable reliable results, give me some from aandtech etc.

your trying to made out your right on many things here.

when people (including me) showed you FACTS and prove, you still say nope that wrong,

it seems like that u like to be right all the time.

zoomee · 30 Jul 2011 at 14:26

Guys, chill!

I must admit if one has a CHIV - There is no point upgrading for BD (first generation) - It can more than handle the amps/watts requirement AND is actually slightly (ever soo slightly) faster than a CHV (from ALL the benchies I've seen as opposed to one hand picked review - trust me, i've done my research on this having wanted to move to a CHV a month ago, then changing my mind).

You only have to visit xtremesystems forums to see that the EXTREME overclockers agree with this.

I can totally understand about other 'lesser' boards not being compatible, but the MAIN reason why AMD had to tout a new platform is to do with a couple of pins not being electrically connected on the MAJORITY of mainboards - nothing to do with socket design etc. Asus were one of the few manufacturers who chose not to skimp and connected ALL the required pins on the AM3 socket- most other manufacturers only chose to do it on certain models.

You can probably tell, I do agree with Martini here - Most of this AM3+ requirement spec is marketing rubbish, but completely understandable from AMD's perspective - They have to guarantee compatibility for it to be supported - hence why they have always claimed from day one they will only support BD on AM3+ - Support of AM3 for BD is down to the mainboard manufacturer). The average user does not overclock so will not see any benefit moving from an 890 series AM3 board (with announced BIOS compatibility) to a 990 series AM3+ one.

UEFI was the only thing that tempted me towards a CHV - HOWEVER - The whole point of UEFI (other than being a fancy interface which you go into once in a blue moon!) was touted as it being super quick to boot - This is not the case - tests show it is only one second behind a CHIV - so it defeated the purpose for me.

Its not about the socket but about the chipset - 890 doesn't have SLI compatibility - so thats one other valid reason for changing (if you count UEFI as the first lol!)

Besides all this - This is old news you guys are discussing - it was discussed to death back in March of this year when Asus first announced AM3 compatibility for BD. But you never know - AMD might screw things up and change the design (bearing in mind the HUGE bloomin delays) so it does need all the pins for AM3+ sockets - but I doubt this as Asus and other mainboard manufacturers would then have legal responsibility as they touted they're AM3 boards BD compatible....

Martini1991 · 30 Jul 2011 at 14:31

Zoomee, when you say day 1, what do you mean? Roadmaps always had BD as AM3

d_brennen · 30 Jul 2011 at 14:37

Martini1991 said:
Zoomee, when you say day 1, what do you mean? Roadmaps always had BD as AM3

But AMD are in the business of selling chipsets too

There's a difference between compatible and supported. Just because X isn't supported does not mean X isn't compatible, too

zoomee · 30 Jul 2011 at 14:40

Martini1991 said:
Zoomee, when you say day 1, what do you mean? Roadmaps always had BD as AM3

Agreed - but a leaked roadmap is not classed as 'official confirmation'

and they and every other company always put a disclaimer at the bottom stating "subject to change"

Martini1991 · 30 Jul 2011 at 14:40

d_brennen said:
But AMD are in the business of selling chipsets too There's a difference between compatible and supported. Just because X isn't supported does not mean X isn't compatible, too

Back before AM3+ existed, and there only was AM3, BD being on AM3 roadmap meant it was AM3 supported. AM3+ wasn't day one, that's my point.

gareth170 · 30 Jul 2011 at 15:12

Martini1991 said:
Back before AM3+ existed, and there only was AM3, BD being on AM3 roadmap meant it was AM3 supported. AM3+ wasn't day one, that's my point.

just because BD was on AM3 roadmap doesn't mean amd couldn't change it,

example maybe they tryed to support it on the am3 platform but something holded back or something. im not saying thats the reason, but just a example..

about a year ago i remember reading amd saying they could ether make BD fully am3 supported and lose alittle performance or make a new platform (am3+) that offers the full performance of the BD.... and amd choosen to go with the new platform`

edit: found this

Word straight from AMD is that they won’t be officially supporting Bulldozer on the current AM3 platform and even though they originally had plans not to. Reason is that Bulldozer ships with certain features which includes advanced power management and clock gating capabilities and will in turn require the AM3+ socket.

http://vspc.wordpress.com/2011/04/22/demystifying-amds-am3-platform-and-bulldozer-compatibility/

the lower BD should work/stable in a am3 board but overclocking maybe not...

Martini1991 · 30 Jul 2011 at 15:35

gareth170 said:
just because BD was on AM3 roadmap doesn't mean amd couldn't change it,

example maybe they tryed to support it on the am3 platform but something holded back or something. im not saying thats the reason, but just a example..

about a year ago i remember reading amd saying they could ether make BD fully am3 supported and lose alittle performance or make a new platform (am3+) that offers the full performance of the BD.... and amd choosen to go with the new platform`

Which given the rumours are Zambezi is crippled to fit on AM3+, means it was porkies.
They're now trying to tout Komodo as when their performance platform.
It also means it's porkies if, when BD releases it performs the same on AM3 boards as it does AM3+ boards.

Faruko · 30 Jul 2011 at 16:04

so much hate against the AM3+ and intel does the samething over and over again... i really dont want to give my money to intel (not that they really care, but for some reason AMD seems more friendly lol)

Elevon · 30 Jul 2011 at 16:13

Faruko said:
so much hate against the AM3+ and intel does the samething over and over again... i really dont want to give my money to intel (not that they really care, but for some reason AMD seems more friendly lol)

Some people will always find things to argue about

,personally I'm getting an Asus Sabertooth 990FX if BD performance is decent,not like AM3+ boards are expensive, there are models for all budgets.

Martini1991 · 30 Jul 2011 at 16:24

Elevon said:
Some people will always find things to argue about ,personally I'm getting an Asus Sabertooth 990FX if BD performance is decent,not like AM3+ boards are expensive, there are models for all budgets.

As is there with 1155.

Faruko · 30 Jul 2011 at 16:40

Elevon said:
Some people will always find things to argue about ,personally I'm getting an Asus Sabertooth 990FX if BD performance is decent,not like AM3+ boards are expensive, there are models for all budgets.

im gettin an Asus M5A97, looks like a nice MB

MichaelM · 30 Jul 2011 at 16:57

Will the 890 AM3+ boards, which boast support for 6 core pII be able to support the 8 core BD's or just the 6 core versions?

More marketing speak or a real concern?

gareth170 · 30 Jul 2011 at 17:13

MichaelM said:
Will the 890 AM3+ boards, which boast support for 6 core pII be able to support the 8 core BD's or just the 6 core versions?

More marketing speak or a real concern?

amd said they only supporting am3+ 900 platform for BD...

the unofficial 700/800 boards they won't be supported and it's basicly "use at your own risk"

Jokester · 30 Jul 2011 at 17:16

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.