AMD Gives Early Hint at Bulldozer Performance

[niksimpson]

AMD codenames like Magny Cours are named after Formula 1 racing circuits, with Magny Cours being the site of the French GP, Barcelona being the site of the Spanish GP etc.

 

[descendency]

[citation][nom]DjEaZy[/nom]... wuhaa!!! and... how about desktop version?[/citation]
Same architecture, so you should see the same kind of performance boost. Since they are exactly half, you should still see 1.5x performance increase over from the 8 core chip over the 6 core chip (Thuban = 1090T and 1055T)

 

[Darkerson]

Here's to hoping they knock it out of the park with Bulldozer!

 

[Guest]

So no change in socket? basically that means the new chip will still have the same terrible throughput, and thus will be bottlenecked... no thanks, I'll stick with my i7/i9.

 

[830hobbes]

If anything, I would consider myself an AMD fanboy, but let's be real: AMD talking about AMD performance isn't the most unbiased source you can find. I do have faith in AMD, but I'll believe the specifics when I see them.

 

[Guest]

To those wondering what the chip names are like Magny Cours, Valencia, and Interlagos, etc...they're the names of Formula One racing circuits. I don't know if many know this, but AMD sponsors Scuderia Ferrari (the official team name of Ferrari's Formula One effort), and supplies their workstations and laptops with AMD chips. Looks like AMD are finally tying in that part, finally.

As far as the Bulldozer name goes...that is not F1 related at all, but a warning to Intel that it's about to be bulldozed!

 

[werfu]

AMD has been making huge leap in term of server hardware lately. But their desktop division is still trailling far behind. I know that the money is in the businesses, but I can't stop wishing they get a 12 cores monster consumer CPU.

 

[mrecio]

[citation][nom]werfu[/nom]AMD has been making huge leap in term of server hardware lately. But their desktop division is still trailling far behind. I know that the money is in the businesses, but I can't stop wishing they get a 12 cores monster consumer CPU.[/citation]

Your right the money is in the business side of things. I dont think AMD is hurting for cash as they really do have great low cost server hardware as well as consumer hardware. They figured out long ago striving to have the top of the line products doesnt really pay off as the enthusiast market is so small compared to the others.

AMD is doing everything right from not inflating prices (6 core for 200 bucks)to performance numbers to backward compatibility for there hardware. AMD really feels like the peoples company where intel is more the shady corporate type.

LONG LIVE AMD!

 

[TheDuke]

now I'm hoping AM3 will be compatible with them

 

[jimishtar]

I really dont get some of the people here posting. Why are u so happy about AMD backward compatibility? Like, some of u will put the Bulldozer in some crappy 4-year-old 770 mobo? For me, its just another marketing trick. If u have the money for new top-of-the-line cpu, u will probably change most of your rig anyway. Maybe server users will see a benefit, the rest, i dont think so.

 

[Sihastru]

It is possible that the first desktop Bulldozer variants will be AM3+, with dual channel DDR3, but that won't stick, they will need the quad channel memory to get that 13% performance increase per core. So for a few months you'll be able to get a "new" CPU but not really any sizable performance increase... It should be more efficient and maybe have more cores, but they will be starved by the puny dual channel memory controller.

 

[Nintendork]

If you already have the mobo and just update Thuban to Zambesi the price of the AM3+ mobo can go to a better top of the line cpu/gpu/etc.

For some intel drones:
Phenom II X6 compete on equal term with the top i7's quads. They do better in haevy multithreaded tasks just a bit behind 980X (wich is not just a i7 but a i7 with twice the cache l3 6MB --> 12MB).

 

[jimmysmitty]

[citation][nom]lashton[/nom]it will dethrone intels Core i7 890X at the moment by a significant margin, intel will only have 32nm 6 and 8 core I7 and i9 at the time of bulldozer, actually intels 2011 road map look rather plain[/citation]

Its 8 cores for consumersn not 16. 16 is targeted for the servers and more than likley the high end server market where Beckton sits.

Of course this has to be taken with a grain of salt like all CPU performance from the maker has to be. When it hits, we should see some tests showing the true performance.

And 8 cores on desktop probably in most cases wont be very fruitful just like current 6 core CPUs are a tad overkill. Only highly threaded apps will take advantage of the extra cores and certain programs will take advantage of the extra instruction sets, much like Intels AES that is only used in a handful of apps, and while it is quite nice until more apps use it it will just be an extra set of instructions not being used.

But 2011 will be interesting as will 2012 when Intel hits 22nm and AMD pushes more performance.

Man its never a good time to build a new system.

 

[jimishtar]

[citation][nom]Nintendork[/nom]If you already have the mobo and just update Thuban to Zambesi the price of the AM3+ mobo can go to a better top of the line cpu/gpu/etc.For some intel droneshenom II X6 compete on equal term with the top i7's quads. They do better in haevy multithreaded tasks just a bit behind 980X (wich is not just a i7 but a i7 with twice the cache l3 6MB --> 12MB).[/citation]

so, you will put a V8 engine in a Ford Ka, and invest the saved money in new tires?

 

[mcvf]

[citation][nom]Emperus[/nom]Not impressed.. 50% performance increase with 33% more cores (assuming same clock speeds) sounds no way exciting.. If you factor in the current performance figures then the upcoming processors would still struggle matching up to their Intel counterparts.. I guess it'd again be a price to performance ratio slogan (getting sick of it already).. And with Intel lowering prices on their current line up along with launch of sandy bridge, AMD's p2p arena looks in a spot of bother..[/citation]
I would say that the 12.5% increase would put AMD in par with Intel (clock-to-clock, core-to-core). Assuming that AMD will be able to make it on 3+Ghz, it pushes Intel to make their own 8-core CPU or they would be dethroned from the absolute power throne.
So IF this information is correct and if Intel is not preparing some kind of surprise (which is less likely, Intel makes significantly better CPUs only if he has competition on its back), it may put AMD on par with Intel CPUs and it will be only matter of price and personal preference for consumers.

 

[crabsncancer]

For me, with AMD, it's never about running neck-and-neck with Intel, but rather how close it can run next to Intel and how much can I save getting Intel-like speeds.

 

[jimmysmitty]

[citation][nom]Nintendork[/nom]If you already have the mobo and just update Thuban to Zambesi the price of the AM3+ mobo can go to a better top of the line cpu/gpu/etc.For some intel droneshenom II X6 compete on equal term with the top i7's quads. They do better in haevy multithreaded tasks just a bit behind 980X (wich is not just a i7 but a i7 with twice the cache l3 6MB --> 12MB).[/citation]

Sorry but you are wrong. A 980x is a Core i7 with 50% more L3 cache due to having 2 extra cores. All Core i7 quads have 8MB L3 cache, which is essentially like having 2MB L3 per core but the entire 8MB is shared between all the cores and has a snooping feature. A 980X has 12MB L3 and 2 extra cores along with being a 32nm part.

Other than that, the 980X is based off of the same arch, Nehalem.

 

[falchard]

The concept behind the Bulldozer is very interesting. Its not really 8 cores. Its more like 4 cores with hyperthreading. The big difference is the independant caches and much higher clocks then Hyperthreaded cores. In essence you can get a very high clocked single core well beyond anything we have today, or it can be split among 2 threads.

 

[jimmysmitty]

[citation][nom]jimishtar[/nom]so, you will put a V8 engine in a Ford Ka, and invest the saved money in new tires?[/citation]

Hah. Funniest thing is that one guy put a 5.0 Mustang V8 into a Focus. It was a 2K LB car with Mustang performance. Kinda scary.

 

[jimmysmitty]

[citation][nom]mrecio[/nom]Your right the money is in the business side of things. I dont think AMD is hurting for cash as they really do have great low cost server hardware as well as consumer hardware. They figured out long ago striving to have the top of the line products doesnt really pay off as the enthusiast market is so small compared to the others.AMD is doing everything right from not inflating prices (6 core for 200 bucks)to performance numbers to backward compatibility for there hardware. AMD really feels like the peoples company where intel is more the shady corporate type.LONG LIVE AMD![/citation]

Then explain to me why a HD5870 started at $500 and ranges from $430-$520? Or the HD5970 that still hits $700. The HD4870X2 hit at $400. The only reason why AMD is not charging more for their 6 core CPUs is because their overall performance is on par with Intels low end Core i7 quads.

AMD is only doing what they can to keep people. I can give you a 100% without a doubt guarantee that IF Bulldozer walks all over Sandy Bridge, AMD will have the same pricing structure as Intel with CPUs over $1K.

They did it before, they will do it again. Never believe that a company is on your side, because they never truly are.

 

[exodite]

I do hope AMD is right and their new chips will be competitive with Sandy Bridge on a clock-for-clock basis. I do prefer the AMD platform overall, their chipsets are a lot more feature-rich and affordable so given comparable CPU performance I'd be glad to go Fusion come next year.

That said AMD can't really drag it out much longer, if Sandy Bridge gets a 6 month head start that wouldn't be very good at all.

 

[ezodagrom]

[citation][nom]Emperus[/nom]Not impressed.. 50% performance increase with 33% more cores (assuming same clock speeds) sounds no way exciting.. If you factor in the current performance figures then the upcoming processors would still struggle matching up to their Intel counterparts.. I guess it'd again be a price to performance ratio slogan (getting sick of it already).. And with Intel lowering prices on their current line up along with launch of sandy bridge, AMD's p2p arena looks in a spot of bother..[/citation]
You're forgetting something, the 50% performance increase with 33% more cores isn't comparing with Phenom II CPUs, but with Magny Cours.

 

[wiyosaya]

[citation][nom]jonpaul37[/nom]Still not clear if Bulldozer will run on Socket AM3 motherboards though, would love to find that out because i would get a 965 and AM3 board if it did...[/citation]
[citation][nom]Haserath[/nom]Uhh..?It looks like it will support AM3.[/citation]
Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but it will not support AM3. The article says that it is for the server and workstation market and will be backward compatible with the C32 socket 4000 series Opterons and the G34 socket 6000 series Opterons.

That said, there is some similarity between the Phenom II X6 and the 6-core 4000 series opterons in core count. That makes me wonder whether the 4000 series Opterons are based on the same die as the Phenom II X6. If so, we may see a variant of Bulldozer in the "Enthusiast / Desktop" market.

Also, the highest end 4000 series Opterons are currently priced almost identically to the Phenom II X6 1090T, however, since they are not AM3 based you need a MB that will support them.

It is going to be up to us enthusiasts to determine whether we want to pay extra for that type of platform. The 4000 series opterons support multiple CPUs - i.e., you could build a dual-CPU socket C32 system right now that would have 12-cores for less than a comparable 6000 series opteron with a single CPU 12-core chip.

For anyone interested:
Opteron 6000 series info

Opteron 4000 series info

 

[cmartin011]

Magny Cours is also a fine wine vineyard

 

[RADIO_ACTIVE]

AMD is behind Intel in their core performance but what AMD brings to the table is competitive pricing! Which is great for Intel fanboys as well. This article makes me want to build a server