AMD Bulldozer Finally!

Martini1991 · 31 Aug 2011 at 20:59

-VK- said:
Really? Have you stopped to consider the possibility that the reason AMD *isnt* flooding the internet with benchmarks is to keep the competition in the dark?

It's an interesting point of view (Shared by many across various forums) but try to consider the "corporate" aspect of not releasing information...I think it tell's a different story.

On that note, I want one now.

I'm sure you must be able to get ES whenever you ask

?

silversurfer · 31 Aug 2011 at 21:42

Thought this was quite interesting on another perspective of cutting edge tech, ARM cpu vs Intel.
Could help to add even more competition into the next gen and so better results for consumers hopefully. Maybe ARM and AMD can team up at some point except AMD is also fabless now I think

http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/07/29/arm-wants-to-wrestle-with-intel/

pmc25 · 31 Aug 2011 at 22:43

-VK- said:
Really? Have you stopped to consider the possibility that the reason AMD *isnt* flooding the internet with benchmarks is to keep the competition in the dark?

It's an interesting point of view (Shared by many across various forums) but try to consider the "corporate" aspect of not releasing information...I think it tell's a different story.

On that note, I want one now.

I think what most people want to know is when it'll be available at retailers. Now that it has shipped from the factories, it can't be long. So revealing that much isn't going to hurt AMD now (though prior to now it may have done).

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 1 Sep 2011 at 01:00

It seems that the Bulldozer clockspeeds have been leaked by Gigabyte:

http://www.gigabyte.com/support-downloads/cpu-support-popup.aspx?pid=3880

http://www.gigabyte.com/support-downloads/cpu-support-popup.aspx?pid=3901

It seems the B2 stepping will be the first production stepping.

AMD FX-8150 3600MHz 1MBx8 8MB Bulldozer 32nm B2 125W 5200 F4
AMD FX-8120 3100MHz 1MBx8 8MB Bulldozer 32nm B2 125W 5200 F4
AMD FX-8120 3100MHz 1MBx8 8MB Bulldozer 32nm B2 95W 5200 F4
AMD FX-8100 2800MHz 1MBx8 8MB Bulldozer 32nm B2 95W 5200 F4
AMD FX-6100 3300MHz 1MBx6 8MB Bulldozer 32nm B2 95W 5200 F4
AMD FX-4100 3600MHz 1MBx4 8MB Bulldozer 32nm B2 95W 5200 F4

opethdisciple · 1 Sep 2011 at 01:04

Whats the big difference between the 95w and the 125w processors?

How does it affect overclockability?

gurusan · 1 Sep 2011 at 01:15

pmc25 said:
I don't think most people have any conception of just what Israel is and stands for, let alone just how many Billions of $s Intel have pumped into it.

Not only is that just plain stupid, it's also pointless as AMD is an American company, therefore when you buy their products you are helping Israel anyway.

pmc25 · 1 Sep 2011 at 01:25

gurusan said:
Not only is that just plain stupid, it's also pointless as AMD is an American company, therefore when you buy their products you are helping Israel anyway.

Intel plough billions into Israel. There's a big difference.

V F · 1 Sep 2011 at 02:08

dfour said:
That explains everyone who buys apples products

Considering a lot of the movie makers/studios buy them as well.

eddiew · 1 Sep 2011 at 08:37

CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
AMD FX-8120 3100MHz 1MBx8 8MB Bulldozer 32nm B2 125W 5200 F4
AMD FX-8120 3100MHz 1MBx8 8MB Bulldozer 32nm B2 95W 5200 F4

Why would any sane person want the top one when the bottom one is the same but with a lower power draw/heat output...? (Other than it will presumably be a lot cheaper and a favourite of OEM builders.)

Still disappointed by 125W, I'd have thought the process shrink would be able to alleviate the need for triple figure wattages. Turning my PC into an electric fire is NOT progress

Yaayuh! · 1 Sep 2011 at 09:00

eddiew said:
Why would any sane person want the top one when the bottom one is the same but with a lower power draw/heat output...? (Other than it will presumably be a lot cheaper and a favourite of OEM builders.)

Still disappointed by 125W, I'd have thought the process shrink would be able to alleviate the need for triple figure wattages. Turning my PC into an electric fire is NOT progress

No idea, could just be a typo?

As for the 125w, yes its all had a shrink but you're also looking at 8 cores and a whole lot of processing power. It's using a lot less power then if they did it in the last generation, also if you take the power usage of 2 current quad core CPUs. 125w doesn't seem that much at all and easy to handle the heat also.
There will obviously be a couple of lower power "hand picked" uber cpus at some point as well, the opterons for example.

Bleek · 1 Sep 2011 at 09:07

Isn't there a difference in how AMD and Intel measure TDP anyway, I was led to believe Intel are more 'forgiving' with their calculations?

In reality the 125W Phenom II BE ran pretty damn cool, I know my overclocked tri-core does and that supposedly pumps out well over 100W TDP!

Martini1991 · 1 Sep 2011 at 09:09

AMD's is worst case scenario.
Given that the 1055T could come in a 95W package. 125W package for 8 cores on a die shrink is..... Kind of bad really.

DragonQ · 1 Sep 2011 at 09:23

If they're all unlocked, I'd love to see if there's a difference in the average maximum overclock of the 8120 and 8150. A 500 MHz base clock difference is pretty huge.

pmc25 · 1 Sep 2011 at 10:20

Martini1991 said:
AMD's is worst case scenario.
Given that the 1055T could come in a 95W package. 125W package for 8 cores on a die shrink is..... Kind of bad really.

It has over 30% more transistors than Sandy Bridge. Yet you've previously hailed SB TDP as good?

:confused:

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 1 Sep 2011 at 10:24

pmc25 said:
It has over 30% more transistors than Sandy Bridge. Yet you've previously hailed SB TDP as good?

A 95W version of the FX8120 is also listed.

If anything,compared to the Phenom II X4 and X6,the TDP has dropped to 95W.

Martini1991 · 1 Sep 2011 at 10:39

pmc25 said:
It has over 30% more transistors than Sandy Bridge. Yet you've previously hailed SB TDP as good?

Oh, I think 125W with 8 cores is "fine". But it doesn't make much sense?
Based on the cores they used in the 95W thuban, they could have released an 8 core Phenom II at 125W that would be 45nm..

I'm hearing doubt of September launch... This will be an interesting month.

pmc25 · 1 Sep 2011 at 10:39

CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
A 95W version of the FX8120 is also listed.

If anything,compared to the Phenom II X4 and X6,the TDP has dropped to 95W.

I know. It looks good. Don't understand why Martini is moaning. Comparatively, given the way they measure TDPs, Bulldozer's TDP is more impressive than Sandy Bridge's.

I assume the 95W 8120 part will actually be better binned than the 125W part ... or does this suggest that the 125W is counter-intuitively the better binned part and the "125W" merely indicates that it has more OC'ing headroom?

Confusing, since it could be either. In the case of the 95W 1055t, it was definitely a much higher binned product than the 125W as it required considerably lower Vcore in most cases to reach high OCs than the 125W version.

Martini1991 · 1 Sep 2011 at 10:40

pmc25 said:
I know. It looks good. Don't understand why Martini is moaning. Comparatively, given the way they measure TDPs, Bulldozer's TDP is more impressive than Sandy Bridge's.

I assume the 95W 8120 part will actually be better binned than the 125W part ... or does this suggest that the 125W is counter-intuitively the better binned part and the "125W" merely indicates that it has more OC'ing headroom?

Confusing, since it could be either. In the case of the 95W 1055t, it was definitely a much higher binned product than the 125W as it required considerably lower Vcore in most cases to reach high OCs than the 125W version.

I'm not moaning.
I'm just confused.
AMD have managed a 6 core at 95W on 45nm.

I said it's bad in comparison to that, not SB :rolleyes:

pmc25 · 1 Sep 2011 at 10:51

Martini1991 said:
I'm not moaning.
I'm just confused.
AMD have managed a 6 core at 95W on 45nm.

I said it's bad in comparison to that, not SB

Check the transistor counts between Thuban and 8 core Zambezi .... also bear in mind that Turbo is very aggressive. Also bear in mind that with advanced clock and power gating, actual power draw is likely to be far lower than Thuban when not heavily stressing it.

Consuming considerably less power and producing less heat is the thing I'm looking forward to most over my OC'd 1090t. Might allow me to get rid of the Archon and use a Venomous-X

Martini1991 · 1 Sep 2011 at 10:58

pmc25 said:
Check the transistor counts between Thuban and 8 core Zambezi .... also bear in mind that Turbo is very aggressive. Also bear in mind that with advanced clock and power gating, actual power draw is likely to be far lower than Thuban when not heavily stressing it.

Consuming considerably less power and producing less heat is the thing I'm looking forward to most over my OC'd 1090t. Might allow me to get rid of the Archon and use a Venomous-X

Fair enough.
I just find a 125W CPU a frugal point when there's a 95W part.

I wasn't bashing AMD in the slightest. A 95W 8 core is absolutely stellar, and that's worst case scenario.