Rumour: Bulldozer 50% Faster than Core i7 and Phenom II.

[videoclone]

Dont forget its also about price.... if a 8 core AMD chip is faster ( in everything ) at the same power usage then a 4 core intel chip.. "but costs the same amount then why would anyone buy the intel chip?

I think thats whats going to be the saving grace for AMD with bulldozer. in each price point they will have the faster cpu until 22nm Ivybridge shows up but by then AMD will have Bulldozer mark 2 ( kimoto ) High end chip

 

[Accord99]

Why not actually find two chips closer in clock speed? .

It's to show the closest AMD quad-core that a Sandy Bridge dual-core is equivalent to in throughput and that the core counts doesn't tell the whole picture.

 

[OCGuy]

Dont forget its also about price.... if a 8 core AMD chip is faster ( in everything ) at the same power usage then a 4 core intel chip.. "but costs the same amount then why would anyone buy the intel chip?

I think thats whats going to be the saving grace for AMD with bulldozer. in each price point they will have the faster cpu until 22nm Ivybridge shows up but by then AMD will have Bulldozer mark 2 ( kimoto ) High end chip

Man we are sure putting some high expectations on BD...

 

[PreferLinux]

Dont forget its also about price.... if a 8 core AMD chip is faster ( in everything ) at the same power usage then a 4 core intel chip.. "but costs the same amount then why would anyone buy the intel chip?

I think thats whats going to be the saving grace for AMD with bulldozer. in each price point they will have the faster cpu until 22nm Ivybridge shows up but by then AMD will have Bulldozer mark 2 ( kimoto ) High end chip

Why would AMD price them there, then? They will be making less than Intel per CPU even if the die size is somewhat smaller (but it is probably larger). They currently have their mid-range – high-end chips with a similar price/performance ratio as Intel (maybe slightly lower), so I don't see it changing much.

IB will come in Q1 2012. BD 2 won't be for significantly later than that. Probably Q2-4.

 

[Martimus]

http://translate.google.com/transla...co.jp/docs/column/kaigai/20100205_346902.html

So there is a guess on the die size that says it is less than 300mm^2? According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandy_Bridge, The four core Sandybridge Processor has a die size of 216mm^2. Which is also <300mm^2.

In other words we don't know what the difference is between the two dies based on the information we have to date.

 

[exar333]

If there is any, it's only because a smaller die allows you to fit more processors on each wafer and is less susceptible to process defects. Those can lead to improved profits.

Of course a small die size doesn't mean you're making a more efficient chip or that you'll be wildly profitable. If you make a really powerful chip on a big die that beats what the competition has, you'll be able to sell it at a higher price and be more profitable. If you make an underperforming chip on a small die, it's not going to sell well.

As JFAMD has pointed out sever times, consumers don't care about the die size. No one makes purchasing decisions based on die size. They look at raw performance, performance/price, performance/watt, or some other more complicated metric.

I love it!!!

AMD graphic division: 'Buy our GPUs over NV because they are smaller and thus more power efficient!'

AMD CPU division: 'Don't buy the FUD around die size and power consumption...'

 

[Topweasel]

I love it!!!

AMD graphic division: 'Buy our GPUs over NV because they are smaller and thus more power efficient!'

AMD CPU division: 'Don't buy the FUD around die size and power consumption...'

No he didn't say that. What he said is the amount of silicon used to manufacture doesn't matter. In that quote alone it mentioned performance per watt as being something that people looked at.

I mean seriously think about. How many times outside produce do we turn around and buy something just because it used less materials? In fact there are several products where "bigger is better" either in absolute size or the quality of materials. That doesn't mean that you can't have a bigger die size and be more power efficient then a competitor.

 

[cusideabelincoln]

AMD graphic division: 'Buy our GPUs over NV because they are smaller and thus more power efficient!'

Does AMD actually market smaller die sizes? I don't recall them marketing that aspect at all. Power consumption is a tangible marketable point; I don't see a problem with that.

I'm also sure we'll see AMD market power efficiency with Bulldozer, as it seems to be one of their design goals. I guess it depends on whether or not they met that goal. Zacate could be a good indicator in that regard, though.

 

[podspi]

Man we are sure putting some high expectations on BD...

Actually, I'd say the opposite. We're debating whether an 8-core Bulldozer will be able to beat a quad-core Sandy Bridge.

High expectations would be that the Fx-4000 series will beat the 2600K, FX-6000 series would beat the 990X, and FX-8000 series will do your taxes before you install it in a motherboard

 

[Dresdenboy]

So there is a guess on the die size that says it is less than 300mm^2? According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandy_Bridge, The four core Sandybridge Processor has a die size of 216mm^2. Which is also <300mm^2.

In other words we don't know what the difference is between the two dies based on the information we have to date.

FWIW: my analysis of the BD die resulted in ~294mm&#178; (others are close, like 292mm&#178:
http://citavia.blog.de/2011/03/01/isscc-2011-news-and-bulldozer-die-size-10726253/

 

[dma0991]

I don't know what is with the obsession of BD having a bigger die than SB. If AMD wants me to pay for their CPU based on die area, I would complain but that is the most unlikely situation. I wonder if this fuss is all about bigger die would make your rig heavier by a few milligrams.

Intel Racing division : 'we are a few milligrams lighter than our competition thus we will win this race'

 

[Idontcare]

I don't know what is with the obsession of BD having a bigger die than SB. If AMD wants me to pay for their CPU based on die area, I would complain but that is the most unlikely situation. I wonder if this fuss is all about bigger die would make your rig heavier by a few milligrams.

Intel Racing division : 'we are a few milligrams lighter than our competition thus we will win this race'

If you have any financial interest vested in AMD or Intel then the information matters.

If you are interested in technology - be it process technology, IC design, ISA engineering, etc - then the information matters.

But you are right, if you don't care about the info then you don't care about the info...which then begs the question why bother posting simply to express as much?

Clearly the people who have their reasons for caring about the info are going to post on the topic and carry on conversations about the topic.

Those who could not care less about it should find themselves not caring to post about it.

I don't care how cubic inch displacement of my car's engine relates to its gas mileage, hence I do not go to car enthusiast forums and crap on their threads with posts of "I do not understand why any of you care about this stuff, meh, lame topic, move on, nothing to talk about here..."

 

[wahdangun]

btw I have seeing Llano being shipped to OEM so is that mean we see Llano first than bulldozer ?

 

[Martimus]

FWIW: my analysis of the BD die resulted in ~294mm² (others are close, like 292mm²):
http://citavia.blog.de/2011/03/01/isscc-2011-news-and-bulldozer-die-size-10726253/

Well, it is still smaller than the Thuban, which is said to be 346 mm²: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phenom_II

I have to say that the clock speeds are disappointing if it really is that small and 3.1GHz is really the top speed bin, since it is smaller than Thuban and designed to clock higher. I am sure it is just the immaturity of the process though, and we will likely see the speed ramp up relatively high over the next few years because of it.

I still take it all with a grain of salt though. I'll see how fast it really is when it is released. I am still exctied to see it perform, and hope it really is released at Computex in June.

 

[tincart]

As a consumer, I don't care about die size.

As someone stupid enough to invest in the tech sector, I do care about die size.

Context is everything.

 

[dma0991]

@IDC : Understood.

btw I have seeing Llano being shipped to OEM so is that mean we see Llano first than bulldozer ?

IIRC Llano will come after Bulldozer.

 

[Martimus]

@IDC : Understood.



IIRC Llano will come after Bulldozer.

I think Llano was originally scheduled for release last year, but problems with the low-K dielectric on the GF 32nm process delayed the release. It now seems that they are being produced and are being shipped to customers. Since we haven't heard the same about Bulldozer (Zambezi), then I would hazard a guess that Llano will be released first.

To be honest it makes the most sense anyway, since it was scheduled originally to be released first, and the problem that we know about that caused a delay was actually a process delay, and not a design problem. This means that this process delay would effect Bulldozer as well, sicne it is being produced on the same process.

I could see them being released together even, although I expect Llano to have availability first due to the announcement of shipping silicon from AMD.

EDIT: Now that I look at some roadmaps, I see that you are right. I forgot that Llano was supposed to be released in Q3 2011, and Bulldozer was supposed to be released in H1 2011. We have less than 2 months left in H1 2011 before Bulldozer would be late, but quite a while before Q3 is over for Llano.

 

[dma0991]

According to the source from DonanimHaber, Llano will be announced first and Bulldozer or FX comes later at E3. It is not clearly stated whether BD will be announced or launched at E3. I don't understand why will there be 2 announcements on Llano at Computex and the Client Launch Event.

 

[jimbo75]

FWIW: my analysis of the BD die resulted in ~294mm&#178; (others are close, like 292mm&#178:
http://citavia.blog.de/2011/03/01/isscc-2011-news-and-bulldozer-die-size-10726253/

JF said in a thread that there have been a lot of guesses but nobody was close. Based on that, I'd say BD might come in a bit smaller.

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showpost.php?p=4814134&postcount=83

Or well, "nobody has ever gotten it right". I suppose you could be 1mm2 out lol.

 

[drizek]

I love it!!!

AMD graphic division: 'Buy our GPUs over NV because they are smaller and thus more power efficient!'

AMD CPU division: 'Don't buy the FUD around die size and power consumption...'

AMD CPU platform power consumption in a server can be lower than Intel for a given level of performance because AMD servers can have 4 x 12-core chips in a single system. Bulldozer means 4 x 16-core and, next year, 4 x 20-core.

 

[AtenRa]

So there is a guess on the die size that says it is less than 300mm^2? According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandy_Bridge, The four core Sandybridge Processor has a die size of 216mm^2. Which is also <300mm^2.

In other words we don't know what the difference is between the two dies based on the information we have to date.

Sorry the link URL was wrong, try this one

http://translate.googleusercontent....le.com&usg=ALkJrhhGTDZvNA4ijJjksX-jo2gfajc2wg

 

[ElFenix]

how many memory channels is BD supposed to support?

edit: i ask because BD's memory controller is definitely larger in the die shots, but i don't know if that's a result of different controller or different image scaling or both

 

[(sic)Klown12]

Bulldozer will still be dual-channel. JF-AMD has stated that there were tweaks to make it more efficient and allow for higher officially supported speeds.

 

[krumme]

FWIW: my analysis of the BD die resulted in ~294mm² (others are close, like 292mm²):
http://citavia.blog.de/2011/03/01/isscc-2011-news-and-bulldozer-die-size-10726253/

One module is 31mm2, what is the rest?
As the l2 is quite large, will we see quad cores sans l3?
Can there be different l3 types?

 

[itsmydamnation]

Bulldozer will still be dual-channel. JF-AMD has stated that there were tweaks to make it more efficient and allow for higher officially supported speeds.

AMD have said that there will be a 50% memory thoughput improvement, thats a combination of faster speeds and more effective memory read/write per memory clock.