Bulldozer "delayed" until September 2011 (Rumor)

[aphelion02]

I'll think that people here are logging on to learn about technology in general and then making an informed choice on basis of choices available. Like any sane human being would do. I want to build a rig from scratch today. If you help me with a $155 2600K chip, i'd buy it from you. Similarly if AMD did a promo for me, i'd buy from them. It all depends on my needs as a user, and availability and at what price...

I upgraded to a C2D system after writing to AMD in my country (India), complaining about higher than global prices. My friends also owned some variation of C2D... They moved to Phenom II X4 and X6 respectively in '09 and '10. I could tell you as an AMD system owner... there's this smoothness you can't explain XD

Now to some people who just refuse to believe and acknowledge...
- did Intel muscle OEM's? Yes!
- did Intel wrote compilers slowing competition? Yes! Still does... most codes run using X87 on AMD chippery. AVX is also crippled for them, even in the new compilers.
- did Microcenter have abnormal prices? Yes! The only place, where you could build a Nehalem i7 rig in about the same money/ sometimes even less (shocking i know) than an AMD Phenom II X4. I don't know how they did it... god damn it, but they did it. i7 930 was selling about $70-100 cheaper than anywhere else. Can you explain it in any other way than preferred customer rates? Same for intel motherboards.

There's more... but i'm done feeding the trolls... If you have nothing constructive/ new knowledge to share, i might as well save me some time...

Just so people know... This is from a machine powered by Intel chippery and Nvidia

Why are you quoting me? Your post seems like it totally ignored mine.

 

[aphelion02]

Not at all. You may recall the competition over the last decade between NV and AMD (then ATI), over performance AND image quality. It is the unanymous opinion that increased performance is irrelevant if it comes at the cost of decreased image quality. The same apples apply here. The ony difference is, intel's image quality has always sucked and have the worst graphics in the industry. Reviewers have given intel a free ride on image quality and for whatever reason, don't hold them to the same standard as AMD and NV. Just as the post I was replying to initially, excuses and apologies are made in regard to intel's decisions to compete on the same level of performance. If AMD or NV sacrificed image quality for performance, you'd better believe they would hear about it.

If you checked AT's benchmarks, quicksync had great image quality, very close to the x86 path. It was far superior in terms of image quality to both AMD and NV's GPU based transcode.

 

[Tuna-Fish]

If you checked AT's benchmarks, quicksync had great image quality, very close to the x86 path. It was far superior in terms of image quality to both AMD and NV's GPU based transcode.

QS had image quality comparable to one of the worst CPU-based H.264 implementations out there. A video encoding benchmark without x264 is a total joke.

 

[garagisti]

Why are you quoting me? Your post seems like it totally ignored mine.

You didn't read what i said...

 

[aphelion02]

You didn't read what i said...

My post was directed at Jimbo. It had nothing to do with me any discussion of bang per buck or the relative performances of the processors. I made that abundantly clear.

 

[xd_1771]

The Dozer was delayed for one of these reasons:
- B0/B1 stepping performance issues (Phenom TLB bug style or C2/C3 revision style?)
- To get Llano (mainstream) out first
Both which make sense

 

[Arachnotronic]

I don't buy the "let Llano out first" reasoning because if it were true, we'd still be getting performance previews of BD to, you know, keep users hanging on instead of just jumping onto the Sandy Bridge.

 

[Idontcare]

I don't buy the "let Llano out first" reasoning because if it were true, we'd still be getting performance previews of BD to, you know, keep users hanging on instead of just jumping onto the Sandy Bridge.

It is definitely an excuse of convenience.

In order for there to be any truth to it AMD would have had to have made this decision 3+ months ago, far enough back to have made a material impact to their lot-start allocation of wafers to avoid starting a bunch of B1 bulldozer wafers in favor of starting a bunch more Llano wafers.

And if that was indeed the case then they've been rather disingenuous to everyone, from their supply chain to the channel to their shareholders, in regards to the repeated statements that zambezi was launching in H1 2011 and that there was no delay.

I don't believe AMD mislead anyone. I believe they intended to launch zambezi on schedule and they did start a whole bunch of production wafers on B1 stepping in anticipation of building the inventory they needed to support a product launch 3+ months ago.

I believe they discovered that the intended 32nm process maturity and yield ramp that was supposed to coincide with zambezi production failed to materialize as the yields of their bulldozer wafers remained below the threshold needed to support a product launch and so they decided to delay the release and give GloFo more time to mature the process.

I also believe the B2 stepping was planned/intended anyways in support of Interlagos/Valencia launch, and it is just coincidental that the B2 stepping will be exiting the fab in bulk around the time that AMD is thinking yields will be good enough to then support the intended product launches.

Just as the server and the desktop product teams do not intimately co-mingle their business plans, neither do the zambezi and llano product teams. These are independent parallel operations, claims that Llano was prioritized at the expense of zambezi seven days before zambezi was launching is just a marketing convenience IMO aimed at appeasing wallstreet.

There is so much momentum required to pull off a product launch, so many third-party business partners to manage and align, that it simply doesn't work this way in which you get to make last minute schedule changes for the sake of strategic prioritization without sending shockwaves through the channel and the supply chain. When something like this is done it is done only as the last resort when all else has been tried but failed.

 

[skipsneeky2]

They could also be milking the last resources of their current product.

Expect even lower prices on high end products before the official release if anything.

 

[drizek]

On the other hand...

where is the availability of black socket motherboards? Where are the BIOS updates for the white sockets? If they were expecting a launch this week, we would have these things out by now.

AMD made this decision a lot further back than a week ago.

 

[drizek]

They could also be milking the last resources of their current product.

Expect even lower prices on high end products before the official release if anything.

There is nothing to milk. Phenom II is already overpriced. THe i5 2500K is $180. AMD has nothing to compete with that other than an 1100T for $120, and that isn't going to put out a lot of milk.

 

[Nemesis 1]

On the other hand...

where is the availability of black socket motherboards? Where are the BIOS updates for the white sockets? If they were expecting a launch this week, we would have these things out by now.

AMD made this decision a lot further back than a week ago.

The White socket is not pin compatiable with the BD core.

 

[ed29a]

I don't buy the "let Llano out first" reasoning because if it were true, we'd still be getting performance previews of BD to, you know, keep users hanging on instead of just jumping onto the Sandy Bridge.

Exactly. The vast majority of AMD's desktop/latop clients read Anandtech, HardOCP and other review sites to know which processor is better.

:whiste:

 

[Topweasel]

I don't buy the "let Llano out first" reasoning because if it were true, we'd still be getting performance previews of BD to, you know, keep users hanging on instead of just jumping onto the Sandy Bridge.

Retail and 3 party OEM sales are not worth that much money period. I am not saying that BD is the answer to everything Intel. But even if the numbers were great, the only it could do, because Intel is still going to sell its chips, is kill off sales of Athlon II X4- Phenom II X6.

Llano is on the other hand almost a completely new market of CPU's, well in theory. They can talk it up because, well they have almost no laptop market right now outside some supped up E-350 setups. So it isn't going to possibly hurt their relationships with OEM's to talk up a product that doesn't have another AMD product its going to cannibalize. Its also why just about everything AMD has talked about in regards to it has been its strength in the mobile market. Not the desktops, where again it could hurt Athlon II and low end Phenom II sales.

 

[podspi]

Can't wait for the Phenom II firesales.

AM3+ motherboard + a Phenom II for dirt cheap is a platform that could easily last half a decade for non-intensive office work.

 

[JFAMD]

It is definitely an excuse of convenience.

In order for there to be any truth to it AMD would have had to have made this decision 3+ months ago, far enough back to have made a material impact to their lot-start allocation of wafers to avoid starting a bunch of B1 bulldozer wafers in favor of starting a bunch more Llano wafers.

And if that was indeed the case then they've been rather disingenuous to everyone, from their supply chain to the channel to their shareholders, in regards to the repeated statements that zambezi was launching in H1 2011 and that there was no delay.

I don't believe AMD mislead anyone. I believe they intended to launch zambezi on schedule and they did start a whole bunch of production wafers on B1 stepping in anticipation of building the inventory they needed to support a product launch 3+ months ago.

I believe they discovered that the intended 32nm process maturity and yield ramp that was supposed to coincide with zambezi production failed to materialize as the yields of their bulldozer wafers remained below the threshold needed to support a product launch and so they decided to delay the release and give GloFo more time to mature the process.

I also believe the B2 stepping was planned/intended anyways in support of Interlagos/Valencia launch, and it is just coincidental that the B2 stepping will be exiting the fab in bulk around the time that AMD is thinking yields will be good enough to then support the intended product launches.

Just as the server and the desktop product teams do not intimately co-mingle their business plans, neither do the zambezi and llano product teams. These are independent parallel operations, claims that Llano was prioritized at the expense of zambezi seven days before zambezi was launching is just a marketing convenience IMO aimed at appeasing wallstreet.

There is so much momentum required to pull off a product launch, so many third-party business partners to manage and align, that it simply doesn't work this way in which you get to make last minute schedule changes for the sake of strategic prioritization without sending shockwaves through the channel and the supply chain. When something like this is done it is done only as the last resort when all else has been tried but failed.

You are overthinking it. This is scheduling. Server is still expected to be shipping in Q3.

 

[Vesku]

I'm reading too much into JFAMD's statement, but throw in what he's saying with some early reviews of the ASUS and MSI AM3+ motherboards and I'd say if they launched now it would have been bad on PR. The MSI seems to need additional tweaking and none of the other companies have any reviews out. ASUS has been the only one confident enough to start to sell their 9xx AM3+ boards. If the other companies were confident in their products I'm positive you would be seeing several of them for sale, the demand is there, the Sabertooth sold out of initial stock within 48 hours. Edit: And that was at $200 with the saddest motherboard extras package I've yet seen for their quality motherboard lines.

For all that the 9xx chipsets are described as respins of the 8xx series, it seems that getting all the power management and turbo features working solidly has not been easy for at least some motherboard companies. Perhaps some of the Bulldozer die tweaks have been to improve these aspects as well?

Instead, my guess is they will launch desktop bulldozer hand in hand with the first Radeon 7xxx gpus. There is that 7xxx preview HardOCP is getting in Dallas next month. If they don't do a combined launch I really have to question the quality of AMD's consumer products marketing department.

 

[drizek]

It isn't AMD's fault that MSI can't write a proper BIOS.

 

[Vesku]

Not just MSI, only ASUS seems to be ready to go. No reviews of Gigabyte that I could find. If they had theirs ready to go I can't imagine why they'd let ASUS get all the early sales.

 

[drizek]

Gigabyte updated some of their old models for AM3+ support. There are two in stock on Newegg. Also, ASRock has the Deluxe5, although that too is an 890FX instead of 990FX, although they advertise it as supporting all the power management features of BD(I think they were just too cheap to license SLI).

 

[Vesku]

I'd be skeptical of their power promises on the 8xx boards, do they say BD turbo is fully supported?

 

[drizek]

Damned if I know. It's all marketing speak.

http://www.asrock.com/news/events/2011AM3+/

 

[Vesku]

I see 2 models that fill both their turbo columns (Turbo 50 and Turbo UCC), no way of knowing how those turbo modes relate to unannounced official BD modes. Has anyone had any luck getting a refund when support is iffy or non-existent for on the box advertised features?

 

[drizek]

I see 2 models that fill both their turbo columns (Turbo 50 and Turbo UCC), no way of knowing how those turbo modes relate to unannounced official BD modes. Has anyone had any luck getting a refund when support is iffy or non-existent for on the box advertised features?

lol, I seriously doubt it. Have you seen the insane claims these companies make?

ASRock XFast USB Technology - Faster Than Your Imagination
...

According to the below graph, it shows that the ASRock XFast USB technology can even boost USB 3.0 performance up to 335.23%!

 

[LucJoe]

Now that the delay is confirmed (?) what do you guys suggest for an almost complete build that was holding out for June 20th release?

1) Z68 + Sandy bridge (ex Asus P8Z68-V Pro + 2500k)
2) 990 + budget AMD chip (with the plan to go BD in the fall)

Other tidbits:

• will go with a 580 to drive games at 2560x1600 and other... tasks 😀
• coming from an E6850 @3.6 with an HD4860, yea, it's ancient.