AMD Starts Shipping "Bulldozer" CPUs

Status
Not open for further replies.

totalgenius

Distinguished
Jul 13, 2007
4
0
18,510
0
Yay its alive, can we get some benchmarks.

Still waiting eagerly for the Zambezi, AMD please release the i7 exterminators.
 

Archean

Distinguished
Jun 18, 2011
314
0
18,810
6
[citation][nom]DjEaZy[/nom]... the desktop version is not far away...[/citation]

It will be good if they are at least able to compete with SNBs, but unfortunately Q1-12 will also see the launch of IVBs which would mean that AMD will again be behind Intel by at least a one full cycle.
 
i've heard this before, a few times, i'll believe it when i see a legit benchmark and a cpu on someones price list. This is crap, i just want to see a full review of a desktop bulldozer processor, is it too much to ask AMD??? its my birthday in a couple weeks, your too slow amd, i just found this neat z68 PCIE-3 Asrock motherboard that im going to get with an INTEL processor http://pccasegear.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=18137&cPath=1183 you are losing customers to intel and they are people that would have been happy to own an AMD setup and may have waited for it if there was proof that it was any good.....
 


All processors are in fact still built on the x86 architecture, so in reality, there is no such thing as x64, although it's a widely used term.

The correct way to write it would be x86-32 and x86-64.
 

AbdullahG

Distinguished
Jun 17, 2011
2,798
0
20,960
61
[citation][nom]fffffffffff[/nom]BD delayed againhttp://www.insideris.com/amd-bulld [...] l-q4-2011/[/citation]
Most people already knew that. BD is suspected to launch in at least October. If you guys really want to keep track and stay up-to-date on BD, you should head over to the CPU & Components forum (sub-forum CPU) and check out the BD rumors thread. There's some pretty useful info there.
 

sykozis

Distinguished
Dec 17, 2008
1,759
5
19,865
37
[citation][nom]Archean[/nom]It will be good if they are at least able to compete with SNBs, but unfortunately Q1-12 will also see the launch of IVBs which would mean that AMD will again be behind Intel by at least a one full cycle.[/citation]
This seems to come up with every CPU article. AMD uses a completely different release cycle from Intel. For AMD to be "at least one full cycle" behind Intel, they would have to be attempting to use the same or similar release schedule.
 

Archean

Distinguished
Jun 18, 2011
314
0
18,810
6
@sykozis
Well let me allow to clarify what I was saying, "AMD is just getting to 32nm process tech. and Intel is already preparing to launch 22nm processors, hence AMD is full 'process cycle' behind Intel (discounting all other architectural differences etc.)".
 

calguyhunk

Distinguished
Jul 6, 2010
1,456
0
19,460
58
Ironically, the very reason people choose AMD (choice)is being undermined by the guys at AMD themselves by delaying this thing since time immemorial.

Having said that though, I'd rather they bring out a perfect product from the get-go rather than a half baked one which will actually do them more harm than good especially at this stage.

Nobody buys AMD to compete with Intel. They buy it for...

1. Value for money.

2. Principle- Anti-monopoly.

Of course, the unlocked cores never hurt. But of course now, even that is a non-issue.
 

SchizoFrog

Distinguished
Apr 9, 2009
416
0
18,790
1
I wish AMD well but this seems to have dragged on for far too long now that I have my doubts about how competitive it will actually be against Intel's chips. If Bulldozer finally turns up on the desktop front (as Zambezi) and is mid range at best, it may not be the final nail in the coffin but it will be a MASSIVE stake through the undying heart of AMD-racula.
 

calguyhunk

Distinguished
Jul 6, 2010
1,456
0
19,460
58
[citation][nom]calguyhunk[/nom]Ironically, the very reason people choose AMD (choice) is being undermined by the guys at AMD themselves by delaying this thing since time immemorial.Having said that though, I'd rather they bring out a perfect product from the get-go rather than a half baked one which will actually do them more harm than good especially at this stage.Nobody buys AMD to compete with Intel. They buy it for...1. Value for money.2. Principle- Anti-monopoly.Of course, the unlocked cores never hurt. But of course now, even that is a non-issue.[/citation]
 

ulysses35

Distinguished
Jul 2, 2008
1,681
0
19,960
97
@ calguyhunk, I choose the CPU that I want and suits my needs, and most importantly is available to buy in the shops.

Value for Money ?? really ?? even ther lowest Pentium G series chip beats most of the current AMD range and isnt that expensive.

Principle ?? are you an enthusiast or a fan boy ? I personally got for the best chip available in my price range - most of the time that turns out to be Intel.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY