-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
AMD Bulldozer Finally!
- Thread starter AceTK
- Start date
i'll say it again amd as been working on it for over 5+years tho, theres no reason for this
your forgetting this point
also Piledriver (BD2) is only 15-20% faster as it is now which would being it up to phenom ii 6x performance level clock for clock
new stepping of BD1 may help performance very slightly and heat/power.
Last edited:
You are forgetting, BD2 will be able to clock much higher.
If the BD2 were clock restricted, then I would agree that IPC would be the most important factor to consider, but given that BD2 is likely to clock higher (just like the P4), it should comfortably be able to beat Phenom and become AMDs fastest CPU.
Exactly. It wasn't designed to be this slow. AMD obviously had bigger plans, but it just didnt pan out.
I have no doubt that BD2 will be everything that BD1 should've been. The problem for AMD is that when they release BD2, they may run into IvyBridge...which basically means that the competition would've improved, as well.
Associate
I've heard rumours of a B3 stepping. But it would be too late. Bulldozer is already a nadir in the eyes of most enthusiasts atm
I'm starting to become fond of you
Well the thing is I used to be an AMD nut.
I had a K62 450, Athlon 1400, Athlon 3000+, and Athlon 4400 X2 (the last chip lasted me over 3.5 years until the E8400 as released).
After C2D was released, I still kept my 4400+ because I would have had to buy a whole new motherboard and ram which I didnt want to do, but then I got the E8400. This didnt last long because then I wanted quad core and the I7 920 D0 was a beast which I pre ordered for launch (I5s werent out then, otherwise I would have gone for the less expensive platform without HT).
I simply looked at CPU reviews before buying and thought 'Why the heck would I not want an E8400 / I7 920 over the current crappy AMD CPUs?'
Over 2 years later, and my I7 920 still owns every AMD CPU on the market? The only thing better is Intel Sandybridge, but with 22 nm and X79 around the corner that would be a pointless upgrade.
This I7 920 could easily last me for a total of 5 years at least since I got it in April 2009. If I actually dont replace it that would be a record for any CPU I have ever owned.
It is absolutely the user's fault. AMD never promised to deliver a super CPU that would destroy their own line up. They claimed that they were making an 8 core cpu which would be very good. They also delayed release by 6 months and released no marketing lines during this time. To me, it was obvious that they were struggling and would basically release a beta version of the CPU (which they call BD). They had to release something because they needed to make money from the CPU.
If AMD had promised users something out of this World and then on release date, they introduced a turd...then users could be upset.
Before the release of BD, I stated clearly that AMD were in trouble and I also asked why on Earth anybody would wait to buy AMD, given that Intel had one of the best value and best performing CPUs, in history - 2500K? AMD fans could not answer this question.
I think there was mention of a B3 stepping. But you can guarantee that AMD will be improving the BD. Call it Piledriver, call it a new stepping, call it a BD2...there will definitely be an improvement over the current BD.
i really don't think Piledriver will be able to clock much higher than bd.
BD has a perfect head room similar to SB
the lightly threaded/single threaded performance is whats important for gaming ect , 15-20% faster over bd won't be enough.
Last edited:
With how much voltage exactly?
when i had the 8150 it had 4ghz with stock voltage 1.275v, 4.5ghz with 1.35v
so what about the amd performance slides ect????
I agree on this.
I agree, to an extent.
Amd's problem right now is that they cannot supply retail channels with enough CPUs. What this means is that there is not enough supply to satisfy demand. This then, pushes prices up. Once there is plenty of supply in retail channels, you will definitely see prices go down. Until then, AMD can and will continue charging a premium price for a product which is not readily available.
Why would AMD/retailers charge a lower price, when at the higher price, the CPUs in stock, are selling? This is a basic rule of supply and demand: when supply is tight, hike up the prices. I believe we are currently seeing this with hard drive prices right now, which are currently selling for 100% more than they were, before the Thailand floods.
Soldato
there are a couple of major stumbling blocks and its less Bulldozers somewhat poor initial performance (note initial, because I still have faith that there are gains to be had based on the sound architecture). the biggest problem is like said above supply, to be fair the problem is Global Foundries rather than the company that designed the processor, the die size is similar to the previous generation so that is nothing new for them, its just there are quite obvious problems with their 32NM process that is producing terrible yields. which at the end of the chain is affecting the consumer because when there is a demand for a product and no supply, prices go up accordingly.
same sort of problem that is still plaguing Llano, its not the chips performance but rather the manufacture of the processor that is proving its achillies heel. that is the problem AMD have had for years, they cannot (absolutely) match the production capabilities of Intel and that is hampering them terribly as a company. Llano is eating into Intel market share in its target segment, Zacate is eating considerably into Intel market in its target segment, also believe that Opterons are starting to regain some market share, but its impossible for AMD to gain ground when they cannot supply this growing demand. contrary to the Intel followers AMD are in a decent position at the moment, beating Intel in some areas of the market but they'll never be able to really challange them unless Global Foundries sort their baggage out and unless they get more software support. all of this equals a damned shame for me personally, because I think AMD have the know how to compete with Intel and make the market more interesting.
Edit: also it hasn't failed, its just hit a bit of a bump in the road, outright can't believe the negativity on here of all places toward a brand new architecture and process. just became such an Intel haven recently that regardless of what Bulldozer achieved it would never have been enough. performance can only get better and its not like the designers at AMD are uneducated idiots, give them a chance or you may as well kiss goodbye to competition and essentially the desktop market, because without AMD it is just Intel, and just Intel is monopoly. also like said AMD never promised to deliver a chip that would compete with Sandy Bridge on an IPC basis, they did however want to hold the line with IPC so either they have failed to deliver that or Bulldozer has some niggles that can be ironed out, but anyone who expected a miracle chip that would so destroy the previous generation was just being so short sighted.
same sort of problem that is still plaguing Llano, its not the chips performance but rather the manufacture of the processor that is proving its achillies heel. that is the problem AMD have had for years, they cannot (absolutely) match the production capabilities of Intel and that is hampering them terribly as a company. Llano is eating into Intel market share in its target segment, Zacate is eating considerably into Intel market in its target segment, also believe that Opterons are starting to regain some market share, but its impossible for AMD to gain ground when they cannot supply this growing demand. contrary to the Intel followers AMD are in a decent position at the moment, beating Intel in some areas of the market but they'll never be able to really challange them unless Global Foundries sort their baggage out and unless they get more software support. all of this equals a damned shame for me personally, because I think AMD have the know how to compete with Intel and make the market more interesting.
Edit: also it hasn't failed, its just hit a bit of a bump in the road, outright can't believe the negativity on here of all places toward a brand new architecture and process. just became such an Intel haven recently that regardless of what Bulldozer achieved it would never have been enough. performance can only get better and its not like the designers at AMD are uneducated idiots, give them a chance or you may as well kiss goodbye to competition and essentially the desktop market, because without AMD it is just Intel, and just Intel is monopoly. also like said AMD never promised to deliver a chip that would compete with Sandy Bridge on an IPC basis, they did however want to hold the line with IPC so either they have failed to deliver that or Bulldozer has some niggles that can be ironed out, but anyone who expected a miracle chip that would so destroy the previous generation was just being so short sighted.
Last edited:
Caporegime
On what basis? You've literally just pulled that out of no where.
Gareth has a good chip that's for sure.
And AMD did mislead people with their marketing, lets not forget the beating 980x slides they were producing etc. The youtube video showing it being the 980x, but it wasn't a 980x, it was a 2500k in cinebench.
Last edited:
what about the amd performance slides ect????
people was basing it on them..
also surely it wouldn't be wrong for people to be thinking a 8 core should outperform a 6x in 8 threaded software clock for clock.
Caporegime
While bulldozer on the whole has room to improve, Zambezi does not, that is out now, there's nothing wrong with being negative towards the product which has caused AMD to lose their price/performance "crown".
And yes, other area's might be where they get most of their sales, but even then, in the OEM world, they make up a tiny amount compared to Intel, are the OEM's going to think "Yes Bulldozer is class?" or stick to Intel? And the server market? They've got like 5-7% isn't it?
And yes, other area's might be where they get most of their sales, but even then, in the OEM world, they make up a tiny amount compared to Intel, are the OEM's going to think "Yes Bulldozer is class?" or stick to Intel? And the server market? They've got like 5-7% isn't it?
fixed
Caporegime