• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Bulldozer requires new socket, AM3+

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
JFAMD said:
Yikes, with ~1000 forum posts this week I realize that I was wrong and I was commenting on something else in a different forum (just can't remember who or what).

Reading the comment at the start of the thread I do believe that this is true because, from the style, this seems completely in line with that person, who would know about the compatibility. Not sure why it was posted without an attribution from an AMD person, but I believe it to be true.
Click to expand...

I didn't follow that at all! :|
 
2 things.

1. I thought I corrected HardOCP on sockets, apparently I was mistaken, that was in a different thread.

2. Reading the OP's quote, I believe it is accurate.
 
JFAMD said:
Reading the comment at the start of the thread I do believe that this is true because, from the style, this seems completely in line with that person, who would know about the compatibility. Not sure why it was posted without an attribution from an AMD person, but I believe it to be true.
Click to expand...

I don't get it. The first poster (waiting for nahalem) is (if the name wasn't obvious enough) known for being pro-intel. How would he know anything about compatibility? Kyle said he asked that specific question to AMD at Hot Chips and got a 'yes, but limited' as his answer.

Could you quote the specific comment at the start of the thread? I'm pretty sure this is either sarcasm or I'm missing the quote.
 
Last edited:
So, let me get this straight (feel free to help me out here Aigo) Intel kicks 3 different sockets in 16 months. AMD uses 3 over 4.5 YEARS and people whine?

Ok, my choice from wisdom of wiser people than myself to upgrade to an AM3 processor that will drop straight in my soon to be AM3+ mobo will be a problem for me? Nope. OK. Upgrade to BD chip when first set of runs probs go away and prices come back to earth? not a prob, next summer not too far away. ok.

As far as the near sighted scanners that don't want to read some of the posting of information here and elsewhere, DDR4 isn't that far out, probably the design reasoning for AM4 socket wait. Wasn't ddr3 the big kicker for AM3 in the first place?

So a little bit of history, combined with wisdom of others in know of near future means I have to change only 1 component at a time? Motherboard going into wifes comp, along with any other outdated pieces, like HDD, hmmm. Time and money better spent than trying to stay 3 frames per second ahead of a "lessor AMD" reading this forum? Gaming I can see 120hz (90hz according to ophthalmologist for average human) so 120 fraps? OK Video card upgrade, not entire MOBO and CPU/GPU etc. Better places to spend my money, like stocking my wine cellar.
 
Wish they'd make an all encompassing socket that somehow lasts more than one or two generation's of CPU's. Perhaps a board with upgradeable, socket based chipsets?

Considering how socket happy Intel is I suppose I should be quite alright with the change.

I hate buying new motherboards just to get a new CPU, though. The feature sets almost never change so you're left with perfectly decent hardware that has no future because of ONE socket .... so again you're paying for USB/on board sound/sata/ide, ddr2/3 support, ect, which you already had on your previous board.

There has got to be a better way.
.
 
I don't have a new problem with getting a new socket. I've only ever upgraded a CPU once anyway.

My beef is the damned little wires for the front panel that are always a pain in the ass to plug in.
 
TemjinGold said:
Why even call it AM3+ if there's no BC? Why not just call it AM4?
Click to expand...
The socket names seem to correlate with memory technology used. AM2 (all revisions) using DDR2, AM3 (all revisions) using DDR3, and AM4/AM4+/etc. will be reserved for DDR4-based platforms I'd assume.

Kind of sucks about not being able to use BD in AM3 boards, but oh well. Backward compatibility is nice, but it can hold things back as well if AMD or Intel has to stick with the same old sockets and old technology. It will be worth it if they plan to use a new socket to accommodate some big changes (moving from dual channel DDR3 controller to tri or quad channel, for example).
 
New socket to come along with a new architecture? That doesn't happened before, right?

BTW, having a new CPU + mobo means I can dump the old combo into another machine or makes it easier to sell. Maybe that's just me.
 
Sp12 said:
I don't get it. The first poster (waiting for nahalem) is (if the name wasn't obvious enough) known for being pro-intel. How would he know anything about compatibility? Kyle said he asked that specific question to AMD at Hot Chips and got a 'yes, but limited' as his answer.

Could you quote the specific comment at the start of the thread? I'm pretty sure this is either sarcasm or I'm missing the quote.
Click to expand...

I think what you are witnessing is the fact that up until very recently it was the plan to have BD be AM3 compatible w/reduced feature-set in similar fashion to how Phenom II was AM2 compatible but really you wanted it on an AM3 platform to access the entire feature-set.

Only very recently was the decision made internally at AMD to can the AM3 compatible aspects of Bulldozer, that decision has not entirely made it around all the various water-coolers within AMD so you are going to have a transition period here where the left-hand isn't fully aware of what the right-hand is doing.

So there will be a bit of apparent contradiction as everyone gets synchronized to the same reference page again.

This is normal for any business organization. This is why JF is so careful and liberal with his disclaimers that he is server, not client, because one of the differences to be made there is he is not inside the most immediate circle of decision makers for client products so there is always opportunity for things to change on the client side and for the client side to start disseminating that info to the public before it has been fully digested by everyone with an AMD employee badge.

Same reason why JF no doubt appreciates his client-side counterpart refraining from making comments regarding AMD's server roadmap.

(not speaking for JF here, he can defend himself well enough, just saying we shouldn't waste time and effort debating whether or not BD will be AM3 compatible...the short answer is that it will not be, end of story)
 
So finally, in late 2011, AMD is breaking backwards compatibility with AM2, introduced in 2006. It had to happen at some point. AM2/AM2+/AM3 all happened without breaking compatibility (depending on the willingness of motherboard manufacturers to support older products).
 
Well, it's good news and bad news. If keeping it AM3 compatible would mean making it less than what it could be, then I think it would be a mistake to do so. While it was apparently their intention to make it AM3 compatible, at least we're being told well in advance, that it's not going to be.
 
I just want to know if AM3+ is Llano compatible.

If it isn't, then we can expect yet another socket-incompatibility if/when bulldozer finally goes fusion. (supposedly a 2012 ETA)

Has anyone heard/seen jack about Llano socket plan?
 
Idontcare said:
I just want to know if AM3+ is Llano compatible.

If it isn't, then we can expect yet another socket-incompatibility if/when bulldozer finally goes fusion. (supposedly a 2012 ETA)

Has anyone heard/seen jack about Llano socket plan?
Click to expand...

Yeah, Llano is Socket FS1. Completely incompatible because it needs to carry the graphics and PCIe links. It only has a southbridge, not the current two-chip chipset that Bulldozer will use.
 
So basically, whenever AMD finally gets around to unleashing Fusion on mankind and sweeping us into the future with all that APU goodness we can expect AM3+ to be useless as well?

Nice.
 
Idontcare said:
So basically, whenever AMD finally gets around to unleashing Fusion on mankind and sweeping us into the future with all that APU goodness we can expect AM3+ to be useless as well?

Nice.
Click to expand...

Unless they maintain a line of higher-end CPU's with no "Fusion" component.

There's definitely a segment of the market that doesn't want or need an integrated GPU
 
evident said:
fwiw, 775 lasted a long time. the current state of sockets is a joke and an effort to squeeze more $, imo.
Click to expand...

Heh, except my awesome 955x 775 board couldn't handle Core2. Then my 975x board couldn't handle anything past the first rev of Core2.

At that point I stopped buying Intel again 😉

Many 775 boards that were out before the penryn quads couldn't support them. Then Intel pushed down DDR3...

Pretty much have to count on buying the proc/memory that is going to be permanently paired with your Intel motherboard when you buy it. It is fine as long as you accept that going in.

Nat
 
Well, at least AMD boards are cheaper, a nice one will probably only set you back $100. It's still kind of annoying, but I guess I'm used to Intel sticking it to people in this regard.
 
This may be a dumb questions, but in light of this new info, could/would AMD push the AM3+ chipset ahead of bulldozer (3/6/9 months) since it will maintain compatibility with AM3 cpu's? Or must/will they show simultaneouly?
 
jaydee said:
This may be a dumb questions, but in light of this new info, could/would AMD push the AM3+ chipset ahead of bulldozer (3/6/9 months) since it will maintain compatibility with AM3 cpu's? Or must/will they show simultaneouly?
Click to expand...

I was informed by an industry source last week that AM3+ (990) would be available 06/11. Take that with a grain of salt, though, as he had previously denied knowledge of BD's incompatibility with AM3.
 
why would anyone even care about this issue when motherboards are $50-60 (some even $25). i think i got my last few for free in a bundle. plus the new features (better graphics, faster memory, usb3?) make the money spent on a new board easily worth it
 
OBLAMA2009 said:
why would anyone even care about this issue when motherboards are $50-60 (some even $25). i think i got my last few for free in a bundle. plus the new features (better graphics, faster memory, usb3?) make the money spent on a new board easily worth it
Click to expand...

lulz +1

its not a 300 dollar X58 were talking about here.\

id buy the new board for the USB3.0 and the SATA 6G.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top