Piledriver not coming until 2013 now?

[Rvenger]

Am I understanding this correct?

http://www.anandtech.com/show/5503/understanding-amds-roadmap-new-direction

I see Piledriver listed under 2013 now, so they are going to keep Bulldozer at its current state I am guessing? This is becoming unreal imo :'(

 

[GTRagnarok]

Eh? It says Piledriver right under 2012 Desktop there.

 

[piesquared]

Well that works out fine, i've been waiting for them to axe it completely and focus on APU's where the real performance growth exists. Maybe time for an APU section here on Anandtech?

 

[Rvenger]

Well that works out fine, i've been waiting for them to axe it completely and focus on APU's where the real performance growth exists. Maybe time for an APU section here on Anandtech?

 

[Olikan]

Well that works out fine, i've been waiting for them to axe it completely and focus on APU's where the real performance growth exists. Maybe time for an APU section here on Anandtech?

the apu's right now are just a cpu and a gpu glued togheter.

when an apu really starts working like an apu, maybe XD

 

[Rvenger]

I did not see that slide before the one I posted??


I am guessing we will not see piledriver until December. But seriously, how much effort are they going to be putting into this CPU. According to Rory Read, its barely even been discussed upon.

 

[pelov]

They're just sticking to Vishera for AM3+ into 2013, it looks like. So they don't expect a Steamroller core derived chip for the desktop market that year.

 

[Arachnotronic]

Vishera v.s. Ivy Bridge...interesting.

 

[Ferzerp]

I think they really need to stop pushing the module as two cores concept. It's going to hurt them on the server side because core counts matter more and more often for licensing purposes, and it makes their products look worse when they're trying to make them look better. We'd think bulldozer is less awful if they'd call it quad core. In that case, it would just be crazy overpriced.

edit: this is unless they can manage to take care of the penalties that sharing the resources cause.

 

[guskline]

I'll be surprised to see a a Piledriver core until the earliest October of 2012. Remember the Bulldozer debacle? My suggestion to CEO Rory? Have the GPU engineers that gave us the 7970/7950 at AMD work on the Piledriver core. At least there will a legitimate contender to Intel.

 

[piesquared]

the apu's right now are just a cpu and a gpu glued togheter.

when an apu really starts working like an apu, maybe XD

Well that's not all they are, they share some pretty significant parts in Llano and further integration in Trinity with mostly completed integration into 2013. They won't be competing for the high end desktop title, but that really doesn't matter. Pretty excited to see it all come together on HSA though.

 

[thilanliyan]

Damn it. I was hoping for Piledriver THIS year.

What happened to that 2012 slide? Is it from the same article that was linked?

 

[Maximilian]

Bit disappointing that

 

[ViRGE]

Damn it. I was hoping for Piledriver THIS year.

What happened to that 2012 slide? Is it from the same article that was linked?

Eh? Both the 2012 and 2013 slides are from AnandTech.

2012
2013

And Piledriver is coming this year on both the APU and the CPU, which the 2012 slide notes.

 

[Olikan]

Well that's not all they are, they share some pretty significant parts in Llano and further integration in Trinity with mostly completed integration into 2013. They won't be competing for the high end desktop title, but that really doesn't matter. Pretty excited to see it all come together on HSA though.

fine...they do share things, and llano is an interesting product when developers write code on the metal, like embed and HPC.

i was talking about the HSA ^_^

Damn it. I was hoping for Piledriver THIS year.

What happened to that 2012 slide? Is it from the same article that was linked?

DUDE...second post...it will have piledriver this year

 

[pantsaregood]

Unless something is seriously wrong with Bulldozer (as in, not working as it was intended), Piledriver isn't going to help much. Bulldozer is much slower than K10 per clock, and even if Piledriver closes that gap, it still happens to be two generations behind on performance per clock.

Bulldozer is bad because the individual cores are pathetic. The module design was honestly a pretty interesting and potentially good alternative to hyperthreading, but the individual cores suck too much to make it noticeable. If Sandy Bridge cores came in the same configuration, it would be far more effective than HT.

 

[lifeblood]

Lets face it, AMD no longer has any interest in us. All they're going to be offering us is a low end server CPU that can't run games for dog crap. I might as well trash my AM3+ board and go Intel before the prices double. Unfortunately, since their will no longer be any competition in the performance desktop market, their will be no further advancement either. Why try when nobodies pushing you? We're back to the P4 days of paying big dollars for a 100mhz speed increase.

 

[Ferzerp]

Intel has been innovating because they have to compete with themselves or sell no processors. It's been that way for ages already.

The P4 time is totally not the right time period to use to prove that competition is needed in the way you referenced it, because AMD was well ahead there, so that time period was when they had the stiffest competition (yet you feel advancement was low, and incremental upgrades were priced at a premium). Nehalem and SB both came out in times of very, very, very little AMD competition.

Just look a video cards, we have that competition, and how has that helped innovation and prices? It hasn't. Prices have been going up up up, and upgrades only come with increases in price instead of what we see on the CPU side (upgrades come out at similar prices to old products. $300 now gets you much more than $300 3 years ago. In video cards, not so much...

 

[dma0991]

I've lost hope in BD on ever taking over the top end since it was released. Any iteration afterwards is just not going to beat Intel even with 15% projected improvements with each iteration. If AMD improves, you can well expect Intel to improve as well, so it goes back to the same story again and again.

What I'm interested in is looking at Trinity. It would be great if it provided equal or more performance than Llano with Piledriver cores.

 

[Olikan]

Intel has been innovating because they have to compete with themselves or sell no processors. It's been that way for ages already.

Just look a video cards, we have that competition, and how has that helped innovation and prices? It hasn't. Prices have been going up up up, and upgrades only come with increases in price instead of what we see on the CPU side (upgrades come out at similar prices to old products. $300 now gets you much more than $300 3 years ago. In video cards, not so much...

give me a break!

in 3 diferent generation
vliw-5 -> vliw-4 -> GCN
nvidia went for gpu compute

ivy bridge is what again? oh yeah...a 22nm sandy
and sandy is a tweak of core 2 duo

 

[Ferzerp]

give me a break!

in 3 diferent generation
vliw-5 -> vliw-4 -> GCN

ivy bridge is what again? oh yeah...a 22nm sandy

And we've had tiny, tiny increases in performance with each, and increased prices to match (the largest jump is with the 79xx, and the price severely inflated on them). Video cards were like CPUs, the 7970 would have replaced the 6970 at the same price.

Look at the performance of what you can get for your money from both companies. At a given price range, the amount you get hasn't increased much at all. This is especially true on the lower end of things.

In the processor space, we know when something new on the top end comes out, it's going to be $1,000 and no one is going to buy it. in the $200-$400 range, we're going to get what is most purchased (by enthusiasts), and every release is going to be a substantial improvement. Up until AMD released the 79xx cards, pretty much the only card that beat the top end of the previous generation is the top end of the new generation. Now they have 2 skus that beat the top end, but the price was adjusted upward to match, keeping similar price for performance.

Video card tech is relatively stagnant, which each company leapfrogging the other with the bare minimum to get a few people to upgrade. We know the 79xx series is held back with the massive OC overhead it has as proof. Why are they being released so gimped if not to continue to play the game?

 

[Olikan]

And we've had tiny, tiny increases in performance with each, and increased prices to match (the largest jump is with the 79xx, and the price severely inflated on them). Video cards were like CPUs, the 7970 would have replaced the 6970 at the same price.

Look at the performance of what you can get for your money from both companies. At a given price range, the amount you get hasn't increased much at all. This is especially true on the lower end of things.

In the processor space, we know when something new on the top end comes out, it's going to be $1,000 and no one is going to buy it. in the $200-$400 range, we're going to get what is most purchased (by enthusiasts), and every release is going to be a substantial improvement. Up until AMD released the 79xx cards, pretty much the only card that beat the top end of the previous generation is the top end of the new generation. Now they have 2 skus that beat the top end, but the price was adjusted upward to match, keeping similar price for performance.
(

let's see...core 2 duo realesed in 2006
in 2006 ati showed X1900

whitch one more than triple the performance?

 

[Ferzerp]

I'm really talking about since the 5870 and 480 timeframe here. There was a massive increase, there, and then stagnation. Sure, if you go back farther you can break the trend, but I'm not talking 6 years ago here. I'm talking more the mid 2009 to now timeframe.

2600k (if you are using the whole thing and not just 1 core) is likely triple the performance of a like priced core2duo though. Let me see which costed similar.

 

[piesquared]

Well I see the int.. i mean anantech community has managed to get polyzp's thread locked, I guess this one deserves the same fate. Seriously OP, why are you trolling this forum? Why are you posting false information and what's with the sad face in the title, when you are clearly posting misinformation? Why do you post here and why don't you just leave nobody wants to read your flamebait trolling, especially when you know full well it's not true. This thread serves no purpose and should be locked.

 

[Olikan]

I'm really talking about since the 5870 and 480 timeframe here. There was a massive increase, there, and then stagnation. Sure, if you go back farther you can break the trend, but I'm not talking 6 years ago here. I'm talking more the mid 2009 to now timeframe.

2600k is likely triple the performance of a like priced core2duo though. Let me see which costed similar.

but i took the sandy's bridge father and compared to it's son
in the same time frame, ati.....well, is still using silicon to make gpus