Wow. Two weeks ago people were saying that you can't even overclock SB, and now I may possibly have a 4.5ghz air-cooled SB???
I don't think I will be able to hand them my money fast enough at launch.
If you like, you can alleviate some of that $-flux bottleneck by getting a head-start on the transfer and send it to me, "c/o CASH"
What it is telling me is to temper my expectations on the Bulldozer clock speed. If Intel has a better HKMG process than GF, and still isn't seeing much higher clocks than they got from 45nm, I am not sure how the GF process will do.
I believe that the SOI and perhaps better low-k might help mitigate this, as well as the difference in design (BD appears to be designed for high clock speeds). Even so, my expectation that we would see a 4GHz stock SKU from AMD by the end of 2011 is sufficiently tempered.
I am not an expert on this, but if IDC seems to think this is low, then I know to expect even less from GF due to the inherently weaker gate first HKMG implementation.
It's low for my lofty expectations, but not silly low. If all they could muster was 4GHz OC demo then that would have been silly low. I'd have been impressed with 5.3-5.4GHz on air for cherry-picked sample. Its not that I'm dissapointed with 4.9GHz, I'm just not impressed.
Regarding BD and clockspeeds...we can't make those comparisons here, the BD architecture could be clockspeed friendly (like P4 and Power7) and we could see 5GHz stock locks (just an example, but IBM is doing that with 45nm) or it could be like Core 2 Duo and be really IPC strong but not so crazy about scaling to high clocks.
Process tech can become the clockspeed limiter as can architecture, but both are different for AMD with BD and glofo 32nm so we can't really say anything about our expectations of BD's clockspeeds.