Bulldozer delayed... again (and again, and again)

[SunnyD]

Text

?Our guidance for the Bulldozer CPU core was reset to expect test silicon in late 2010 and product in 2011,? said Damon Muzny, a spokesperson for AMD, as reported by X-bit labs.

but on the bright side...

AMD has developed the next-generation Bulldozer micro-architecture and processor design form zero. The architecture is expected to be able to deliver much more performance in comparison with existing chip versions, while also including the SSE5 instruction set.

My guess is that it didn't quite hit performance targets to be competitive with i7.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: SunnyD
My guess is that it didn't quite hit performance targets to be competitive with i7.

Dirk's the man now, lead architect of the original K7 architecture that's been recycled in every AMD core for a decade now.

If he has had a chance to decide the fate of his baby's replacement then we'd want no one else in that driver seat.

The only chance AMD has, IMO, to stay relevant in the desktop market is if Dirk creates another miracle.

Now whether Globalfoundries can produce that miracle at the GHz and price-points...well that is up to Hector...

 

[masteryoda34]

Originally posted by: SunnyD
My guess is that it didn't quite hit performance targets to be competitive with i7.

Except Bulldozer has to compete with Intel's next generation uarch if it's coming out in 2011. Even if it is competitive with i7 that won't be good enough.

 

[jones377]

This has been known since the analyst meeting in November last year.

 

[aigomorla]

Originally posted by: masteryoda34

Originally posted by: SunnyD
My guess is that it didn't quite hit performance targets to be competitive with i7.

Except Bulldozer has to compete with Intel's next generation uarch if it's coming out in 2011. Even if it is competitive with i7 that won't be good enough.

isnt that what amd has been doing?

go after intel's later tech?

right now there not aiming at gainestown or i7, there going after C2Q.

and honestly im not suprised at the delays.

Which also gives intel another reason to hold back also, so i think the tech growth from now until AMD catches up is gonna be very slow expecially with today's global recession.

 

[Martimus]

Originally posted by: jones377
This has been known since the analyst meeting in November last year.

Yeah. When I read the title, I thought the architecture was being pushed back to 2012. I hope the processor is impressive and goes toe to toe with the best Intel has to offer.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: aigomorla
isnt that what amd has been doing?

go after intel's later tech?

right now there not aiming at gainestown or i7, there going after C2Q.

You know both sides operate under the fog of war when it comes to making plans today to create a product that won't exist for 4 yrs and neither will its competition.

There is no such thing as "going after" a product that exists now, there is no time to conceive, develop, and deploy a reactive product in an industry that conforms to Moore's law evolution cadence.

 

[Phynaz]

Originally posted by: jones377
This has been known since the analyst meeting in November last year.

I posted in May of last year Bulldozer was a 2011 CPU.

I think at the time Viditor was still claiming it to ship this year.

 

[SunnyD]

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: aigomorla
isnt that what amd has been doing?

go after intel's later tech?

right now there not aiming at gainestown or i7, there going after C2Q.

You know both sides operate under the fog of war when it comes to making plans today to create a product that won't exist for 4 yrs and neither will its competition.

There is no such thing as "going after" a product that exists now, there is no time to conceive, develop, and deploy a reactive product in an industry that conforms to Moore's law evolution cadence.

I would wholly expect AMD's CPU teams to be under the same directive now as ATI's GPU teams were for the RV700-series: Simplify, be efficient, don't waste die space. The goal is staying competitive while INCREASING margins by DECREASING cost/ASP. AMD knows it's best competitive by providing cost-efficient solutions and living in lower margins than Intel.

 

[KingstonU]

I would like for Bulldozer to be around by the time I make my next computer purchase in a couple of years.

I really just hope that they survive that long and don't go the way of GM. They milked and sat on the X2 for wayyyy to long. And by the time they realized that Intel had surpassed them they were too late to prevent things from going downhill. Then their stock went from $42/share in 2006 to $2.14/share today.

 

[heyheybooboo]

Yah can't correctly do Bulldozer and Fusion without software utilizing AMD SSE5. Without the new instructions the Bull is just a Dozer and there ain't no fuse to the Fusion.

Hopefully the gains by AMD at 45nm will encourage some folks to show a little interest in SSE5 coding and instruction sets. I doubt AMD has the money to do it for them ...

 

[jones377]

Originally posted by: Phynaz

Originally posted by: jones377
This has been known since the analyst meeting in November last year.

I posted in May of last year Bulldozer was a 2011 CPU.

I think at the time Viditor was still claiming it to ship this year.

well, it still might

 

[Nemesis 1]

To me this is good news. IF AMD wants to compete with intel on CPUs. They have to think this out. I like that there doing just that. Amd has to set Sandy as the target.

Intel kind threw a spanner wrench in the works . I must say intels plan as its shaping up is brillant.

Here what intel did that really floored many many, High level people. Intel could have done 2 things with sandy and come up with about= performance gains and efficiency.

Intel could go to an AVX256bit vectoring processor which they did. Which will increase performance about 90% above Nehalem on apps suited to the process. Than they ported SSE. Than with sse2 they use a simple pertext of vex to insure good compatability with sse2 larrabbee. This move surprised many including me . Most including AMD were exspecting . THe number 2 choice to be done. Intel simply had to add FMA to X86. Intel opted not to use FMA yet. Most curious. Looks like intel wants to see if AMD does FMAx86 . Than they can use it also . Either way intel will activate FMA(avx) when they want to . Its smart I will give them that. I am not even sure that you can do FMA x86. DOing fuse/multi/add in same clock. Can it be done on x86?

If not AMD should work on CAL /brook/ DX11 for ATI . Which is the big equalizer here. This is going to be a great battle. It ain't over till its over.