BD + AM3 boards a go ?

[nonameo]

I would bet the 4 core is a native 4 core and not a crippled 8 core, however the 6 core could very well be a crippled 8 core.

mmm, no, I think the 4 cores will be crippled. I mean, they do have module level power gating now. However, I think we'll eventually see a native 4 core bulldozer.

edit: especially considering that 32nm is a new process and I'm not exactly sure that you would call bd small(its supposed to be bigger than sandy bridge by a fair amount right?)

 

[podspi]

mmm, no, I think the 4 cores will be crippled. I mean, they do have module level power gating now. However, I think we'll eventually see a native 4 core bulldozer.

edit: especially considering that 32nm is a new process and I'm not exactly sure that you would call bd small(its supposed to be bigger than sandy bridge by a fair amount right?)

You're thinking of the server version of Bulldozer, which is going to have lots of extra stuff client CPUs don't need. OF course, if there is only one mask, then yes, BD will be quite large, but my understanding (this is only my hobby) is that 8-core BD actually will end up being close to the size of Deneb now. Of course, bear in mind that Deneb on 32nm would be SMALL. Like, really small.

 

[drizek]

I would bet the 4 core is a native 4 core and not a crippled 8 core, however the 6 core could very well be a crippled 8 core.

Leaks suggest that there will be some quad core cripplies. They say that the quads can have "up to 8MB" cache, which would imply that it is a crippled octo.

Thing is, with the power gating, we might never even be able to tell apart a cripple from a native if they have the same amount of cache. It could be a real lottery to find one that unlocks.

Also, if the yields are poor, they might actually be better off doing 4-core cripples than doing quad natives. Any issues with a native quad on either module would send it to the trash heap. On the other hand, with 4 modules, you can mix n match too good modules out of four.

 

[nonameo]

You're thinking of the server version of Bulldozer, which is going to have lots of extra stuff client CPUs don't need. OF course, if there is only one mask, then yes, BD will be quite large, but my understanding (this is only my hobby) is that 8-core BD actually will end up being close to the size of Deneb now. Of course, bear in mind that Deneb on 32nm would be SMALL. Like, really small.

If amd can make bulldozer smaller than sandy bridge AND faster then that would be awwweeesssoommeee

Not that small really matters to much to your average consumer, but if it means AMD can have more resources in the future to make better processors and compete better(supposing they don't swindle it away) then again, awesome.

 

[Elixer]

http://www.overclockers.com/amd-confirms-support-bulldozer-am3/

The pinouts on AM3 and AM3+ are different. However, AM3+ CPUs will physically fit in an AM3 socket

As we thought ...

 

[drizek]

So will there not be the extra pin in the current generation of zambezis?