AMD Bulldozer Finally!

[Andy__C]

Being honest i doubt AMD would lose that much sleep if all the impatient people on here went SB i mean your a small percentage in an even smaller market segment in other words your irrelevent. No amount of moaning or complaining on forums is going to affect release in anyway and people only want benchmarks for their own selfish reasons they don't care about anything but themselves. Also a few of the people on here only want them in hope they are not x% faster then SB so can indulge in some more AMD bashing.

It's always good when someone from a company becomes a member of a forum and interacts with that community but from what i have seen were lucky JF is still here. Misquoted, misinterpreted and generally the object of some pretty stupid comments not a good way to keep a representative around is it. It will come out when it comes out and we the consumer will have the same choice then we always have mainly our budget, our needs and what best suits the two nothing new there.

Fanobys from either side can jog on as far as i am concerned they think they are the be all and end all but end up being nothing usefull or constructive. So lets just wait for the damn things and if you can't buy what your going too and stop whinging on here or expecting a large company to endulge your little temper tantrums.

+3

 

[mr griffin]

close thread then! no more point talking about it.

 

[deusexlumina]

+4 to that wall of text, we're lucky to have a representative around here

 

[njm106]

close thread then! no more point talking about it.

+1 this threads been going round in circles for the past umpteen pages unless some more benchies come out official or otherwise there doesn't seem to be much more point to this.

 

[Beren]

close thread then! no more point talking about it.

+2 I just thumbed through it all thinking maybe we had found some sneak preview benchies... V interested in this one - and I might be able to afford to build a decent PC by the time it comes out

 

[drunkenmaster]

I see you don't understand even though JF has made it clear many times.

Its not about whether AMD has a better CPU than Intel, its about supply chain & stock of existing AMD products that can end up being dead stock & no one wants to be left with it.

They want to sell what they have available now & not have people holding out because they seen some benchmarks of a product that is not available.

Basically, if you have say, 150mil of cpu's in the warehouse, distro's and retailers/oem's waiting to be sold which would make say a 50mil profit and bring back 200mil. Well how many extra Bulldozer sales do you need just to cover the 100million you lose when you slash the costs on those unsold CPU's when you release benchmarks early and cause no one to want them anymore?

How useful is a new way better cpu if you ruin an entire years profits by making existing stock worthless.

One of the tougher things in product launches is timing manufacturing switches, stock piling, stock clearing and a new launch as closely as possible to minimise the loss or lack of profit on the older chips.

To a certain degree, unlike Intel where Sandybridge is a very good chip but existing hexcore chips were actually faster, and the older i7's were very competitive this is more like the P4d to core 2 duo jump, as in, the second core 2 duo was available no one with half a clue wanted the old chip at all even at bargain prices, they were just rubbish in comparison.

Bulldozer is coming out with two more cores over the hexcore desktop stuff, its faster per core and seems set to come out at much higher clock speeds(with turbo), as in the second its available no ones gonna want the old stuff except at seriously slashed prices.

Though thats why I'd expect to see octo cores first, hexcores shortly after as they'll be cut down octo's, then production/release of quad cores I could see being a couple months later so Phenom's aren't blown out of the water across the entire range instantly.

 

[pspcpog]

close thread then! no more point talking about it.

+3 It's good to have a representative from the industry, however if there is no real useful info coming from him then we might as well close the thread as there's nothing much we could do until BD actually comes out to the market.

 

[lollyhayes]

+1 I read this thread every day and have seen nothing new for the past month despite regular posting...

 

[deusexlumina]

I think people are taking this whole thing too seriously. The thread is for discussion of bulldozer, and that's what has been happening. No reason to close the thread, despite the lack of benchmarks.

 

[RizlaKing]

"however if there is no real useful info" JF has given little bits of useful info and also clarification on some thngs from the AMD position which is all he can do at the minute. But i am sure once more info can be freely given he will get that info to us on here if we havn't driven him off the forum by then. Just because he is not giving some people what they want and bowing to the demands doesn't mean he serves no purpose or isn't doing something useful.

Think of company rep's like condoms m8 better to have them and not need them then to need them and not have them his time will come .

 

[Hagar]

Also this is not the only forum worldwide which he posts in. There is only one thread here for gossip on Bulldozer so keep it, it attracts little or no flaming etc. so keep it up I say.

andy.

 

[Predicament]

REALLY... 25 DAY COUNTDOWN OMGEEEZZ

To the source of this info - DOUBLE CHECK YOUR FACTS.

 

[scrlk]

REALLY... 25 DAY COUNTDOWN OMGEEEZZ

To the source of this info - DOUBLE CHECK YOUR FACTS.

If you bothered to read the OP you would have found out it was the count down for CeBIT.

 

[psychas]

well only 2 months left and still pretty much nothing , maybe something will leak around next month.

 

[Zarf]

well only 2 months left and still pretty much nothing , maybe something will leak around next month.

Not that much point tbh, even if info leaks it's not hitting the shelves any faster. Even if you want to know because you're considering SB, it's worth waiting whatever the exact performance numbers are because the SB prices will drop.

 

[dustofnations]

Not that much point tbh, even if info leaks it's not hitting the shelves any faster. Even if you want to know because you're considering SB, it's worth waiting whatever the exact performance numbers are because the SB prices will drop.

That's a very valid point, people make fallacious arguments about bang-for-buck, but you can't really make any judgement until both products are on the open market. I think we can almost certainly guarantee that Intel will aggressively shift their prices to compete if BD turns out to be a cracker.

Also +1 to having an AMD rep in here, he may not give people the answers they want but it is excellent to have the opportunity for candid expert insider information and opinions, instead of the usual disinterested PR churn. I don't expect people to be sycophants but at least respectful as they would be to any other forumite.

 

[psychas]

not getting Sb tbh , as i will only need to swap out cpu when bulldozer will be out.

also i prefer cpu pins then socket pins .

and going from 6 core to 4 would feel like downgrade sidestep for me 8 cores for the win

 

[drunkenmaster]

That's a very valid point, people make fallacious arguments about bang-for-buck, but you can't really make any judgement until both products are on the open market. I think we can almost certainly guarantee that Intel will aggressively shift their prices to compete if BD turns out to be a cracker.

Also +1 to having an AMD rep in here, he may not give people the answers they want but it is excellent to have the opportunity for candid expert insider information and opinions, instead of the usual disinterested PR churn. I don't expect people to be sycophants but at least respectful as they would be to any other forumite.

THe only problem with that logic is, Intel/Nvidia/most companies don't follow that practice.

Being slower doesn't require Intel to drop prices, being slower AND losing sales and Intel would think about it.

If AMD only have say 16-18% of the desktop market(can't remember if the just under 20% somewhere number is desktop only or desktop + server?), and they have a crap chip but its crazy cheap, or if they have a great chip and its competitively priced or better bang for buck, neither really matter if, most importantly, they only have production capacity for 16-18% of the market.

The area AMD suffered most I always felt was, Ath 64 was massively dominant for some time, it was just hands down miles better than P4's, the problem was AMD had two fabs in dresden and Intel had eleventy billion fabs.

If the world needs 100million chips, and AMD can only produce 20million chips, it doesn't really matter if AMD can produce the 20million worst, of the 20million best chips, the market still wants 100million, so Intel will sell 80million regardless.

If you could sell 80million either way, why drop prices, GloFo's other fabs should help bring Glofo's(and as a byproduct AMD's) capacity up a little in the short term and a lot in the long term, till then Intel run the show just on pure production capacity.


ANyway, interesting AMD news, to some anyway, Q1 last year AMD announced 250mil profits on 1.6billion revenue, doesn't come close to Intel at circa 12billion revenue and silly profit, but they've managed to get 500million profit this quarter on 1.57billion revenue, which is a heck of a lot healthier than for years(ever? I don't know their long term history in terms of profit).

 

[deusexlumina]

yeah thats definately good for amd. i remember they were in trouble around the phenom I era.

 

[dustofnations]

THe only problem with that logic is, Intel/Nvidia/most companies don't follow that practice.

Being slower doesn't require Intel to drop prices, being slower AND losing sales and Intel would think about it.

If AMD only have say 16-18% of the desktop market(can't remember if the just under 20% somewhere number is desktop only or desktop + server?), and they have a crap chip but its crazy cheap, or if they have a great chip and its competitively priced or better bang for buck, neither really matter if, most importantly, they only have production capacity for 16-18% of the market.

The area AMD suffered most I always felt was, Ath 64 was massively dominant for some time, it was just hands down miles better than P4's, the problem was AMD had two fabs in dresden and Intel had eleventy billion fabs.

If the world needs 100million chips, and AMD can only produce 20million chips, it doesn't really matter if AMD can produce the 20million worst, of the 20million best chips, the market still wants 100million, so Intel will sell 80million regardless.

If you could sell 80million either way, why drop prices, GloFo's other fabs should help bring Glofo's(and as a byproduct AMD's) capacity up a little in the short term and a lot in the long term, till then Intel run the show just on pure production capacity.


ANyway, interesting AMD news, to some anyway, Q1 last year AMD announced 250mil profits on 1.6billion revenue, doesn't come close to Intel at circa 12billion revenue and silly profit, but they've managed to get 500million profit this quarter on 1.57billion revenue, which is a heck of a lot healthier than for years(ever? I don't know their long term history in terms of profit).

Right, the grand assumption being that they lose market share on the basis of poorer performance. I should have qualified the statement with "those institutions, organisations and individuals who purchase based upon price-to-performance characteristics".

And availability, obviously.

edit: and I'm not sure they'd get away with no-profit products just to ruin AMD any more, I suspect they'd get hit by the antitrust/anticompetition regulators for that.