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

[bryanW1995]

not at all, but the current SB offerings are their midrange lineup, and 2500k isn't even the top part in the midrange SB lineup. If AMD can't/won't price their high end, brand new, best thing ever, etc etc etc cpu any higher than a 6 month old midrange intel cpu then it's most likely a performance issue. Now, if the absolute top end cpu is priced in the $600+ range but they offer lower-clocked octos ~ $300 then that's perfectly fine, what I'm worried about based upon that chart is that performance of even the highest-binned BD chips will be so anemic that amd doesn't expect to be able to command a price premium vs 2600k.

Besides, how much room do you think intel has for additional k series SB chips right now? I think that they could release a stock unit up to around 3.7-3.8, and possibly go up to 4.0 + if they were really pushed. If they changed the turbo a bit they could go even higher. What would 2600k cost (and keep in mind that it is really just as fast as a theoretical 2700k, 2800k, etc) if there are 2-3 higher skus out there? $150? $200?

 

[IntelUser2000]

What would 2600k cost (and keep in mind that it is really just as fast as a theoretical 2700k, 2800k, etc) if there are 2-3 higher skus out there? $150? $200?

On the naming:

2600 means 2nd generation 600 series. So a higher clocked version would be 26x0. Presumably that means 2700/2800/2900 naming is a different class.

Now if there was a higher SKU released they would phase out the older models and make the new ones at the same price.

 

[Mopetar]

Now if there was a higher SKU released they would phase out the older models and make the new ones at the same price.

Or they'd price the newer models at a higher price and possibly consider dropping the current prices a little. Unless AMD is able to outperform some of Intel's current offerings, they have no real reason to lower prices.

Any word if the 700+ series is going to use LGA 2011? Previously only the 900 series used the higher-end socket, but that's only one data point and doesn't dictate what Intel will do in the future.

 

[drizek]

Now, if the absolute top end cpu is priced in the $600+ range but they offer lower-clocked octos ~ $300 then that's perfectly fine, what I'm worried about based upon that chart is that performance of even the highest-binned BD chips will be so anemic that amd doesn't expect to be able to command a price premium vs 2600k.

I think I can give AMD the benefit of the doubt. In graphics hardware, IMO, they have been ahead of nvidia since the HD 3000 series and they have never priced themselves above nvidia, at least not significantly so. They also never really went after the aboslute top end performance. They had better cards but nivida usually had the best cards. They solved that problem by gluing two GPUs together, and that is exactly what they are doing with bulldozer where it matters, with 16-core server chips that Intel likely won't be able to touch.

 

[IntelUser2000]

Or they'd price the newer models at a higher price and possibly consider dropping the current prices a little. Unless AMD is able to outperform some of Intel's current offerings, they have no real reason to lower prices.

Probably only by $10-20. The fact that they priced some of their best CPUs in the $300 range might also mean future pricing is already done in. That is of course a big WAG.

 

[scbjmshpv]

the new AM3+ chip will last 5-6 years as for socket goes like the AM2 does atm (with almost all current AMD CPU)? just question, i would like to have the price tag of 1100t they had at beginning of $299.00 for newer processor if they want to really win over intel.

 

[Mopetar]

the new AM3+ chip will last 5-6 years as for socket goes like the AM2 does atm

We hope. It could be the next AM3 for all we know.

 

[itsmydamnation]

i think Am3+ will be short lived, on the 10core BD i would expect tri channel memory, this will allow them to keep there bandwidth per socket advantage in the server market over intel ( quad channel vs Hex channel). and at 10/20 cores more bandwidth will help.

you then add in fusion and i can see AMD going tri channel across the board.

 

[dennilfloss]

ASUS pledges support for AM3+ both for current and future motherboards

It's not listed but any chance my mainboard might support it too with a bios update?

 

[wahdangun]

i think Am3+ will be short lived, on the 10core BD i would expect tri channel memory, this will allow them to keep there bandwidth per socket advantage in the server market over intel ( quad channel vs Hex channel). and at 10/20 cores more bandwidth will help.

you then add in fusion and i can see AMD going tri channel across the board.

amd already have quad channel ram in their magnycours cpu, and it will support buldozer

 

[itsmydamnation]

amd already have quad channel ram in their magnycours cpu, and it will support buldozer

thats dual channel per memory controller and then HT between them. im taking about trichannel per memory controller.

 

[bryanW1995]

I think I can give AMD the benefit of the doubt. In graphics hardware, IMO, they have been ahead of nvidia since the HD 3000 series and they have never priced themselves above nvidia, at least not significantly so. They also never really went after the aboslute top end performance. They had better cards but nivida usually had the best cards. They solved that problem by gluing two GPUs together, and that is exactly what they are doing with bulldozer where it matters, with 16-core server chips that Intel likely won't be able to touch.

3870 - beat 8800 ultra and was top dog for a few months and was priced like it
4870 - beat out by gtx 295, but it was #1 for a few months, had highest price while on top
5970 - ran unopposed for 18 months, and in fact is still a few % faster than anything currently available. msrp was, what, $699? and how many actually sold that low?
6990 - looks to be either the leader or co-leader until 28nm. prices might be a bit lower if nvidia is able to compete with or surpass it, but that will be based upon performance b/c the market has clearly shown that $700+ video cards are acceptable if the power is there.

those have been a pretty decent track record, so it makes sense to emulate that. however, in single gpu x1950xtx was top dog, 9700 pro obliterated the competition, 2900xt probably would have been tops but it would have sounded like a 5900 ultra so we're very lucky amd bought ati when they did. When they have the crown they charge prices reflective of that position as well, whether it's been as a single gpu in the ati days or as multi gpu in the amd days. Like gpus, the cpu market has shown that people will pay well over $700 (even over $1000) for the best of the best performance. If the 8 core top end bulldozer cpu is faster than anything intel has they'll price it at $1000, if it's a little bit faster than 4 core SB but gets smoked by westmere they'll go for $400, and if it's a bit faster than i7 970 but doesn't OC as well it will probably go for $600-700.

 

[SlowSpyder]

the new AM3+ chip will last 5-6 years as for socket goes like the AM2 does atm (with almost all current AMD CPU)? just question, i would like to have the price tag of 1100t they had at beginning of $299.00 for newer processor if they want to really win over intel.

I'm still rocking an AM2+ board.

Though I'm sure my Phenom 2 is holding back my CF'd 5870's in some games. If Bulldozer is decent (note: doesn't have to be the fastest, but best in my budget) I might bite once prices settle down. I have been quite pleased with how AM2+ has aged, so I wouldn't mind jumping on the next socket at all.

 

[bryanW1995]

that k9a2 platinum was a great mobo, I looked at that one before eventually deciding to stick with intel.

 

[drizek]

3870 - beat 8800 ultra and was top dog for a few months and was priced like it
4870 - beat out by gtx 295, but it was #1 for a few months, had highest price while on top
5970 - ran unopposed for 18 months, and in fact is still a few % faster than anything currently available. msrp was, what, $699? and how many actually sold that low?
6990 - looks to be either the leader or co-leader until 28nm. prices might be a bit lower if nvidia is able to compete with or surpass it, but that will be based upon performance b/c the market has clearly shown that $700+ video cards are acceptable if the power is there.

those have been a pretty decent track record, so it makes sense to emulate that. however, in single gpu x1950xtx was top dog, 9700 pro obliterated the competition, 2900xt probably would have been tops but it would have sounded like a 5900 ultra so we're very lucky amd bought ati when they did. When they have the crown they charge prices reflective of that position as well, whether it's been as a single gpu in the ati days or as multi gpu in the amd days. Like gpus, the cpu market has shown that people will pay well over $700 (even over $1000) for the best of the best performance. If the 8 core top end bulldozer cpu is faster than anything intel has they'll price it at $1000, if it's a little bit faster than 4 core SB but gets smoked by westmere they'll go for $400, and if it's a bit faster than i7 970 but doesn't OC as well it will probably go for $600-700.

I wasn't talking about absolute top end performance, but the "mainstream" level of cards. The 3850 was eventually $99. The 4830 went for less than $100 while the 4850 was only a little more. I was going to point out that the 5000 series was the exception, and in fact I sat out that generation because I couldn't find anything in my price range.

 

[Avalon]

This seems like a dirty tactic on behalf of AMD if it's true that Asus has found a way to enable Bulldozer support on current AM3 motherboards. If AMD is seriously pulling this crap, I will no longer be purchasing their products. Even from an environmental standpoint it's wrong; think of all the motherboards that will go to landfill instead of remaining useful, just because AMD's marketing department got greedy and wanted to sell more chipsets. Lame. :thumbsdown::thumbsdown:

There's always e-recycling

 

[Dark Shroud]

AMD can't seem to win here. People complain that their CPUs don't perform well enough. Then people complain when AMD makes a superior product that also needs a new socket. The fact that AM3+ will support older CPUs is a big plus in my book. You guys can't have everything and if you still want to complain just remember AMD is still far nicer than Intel in this area. Us LGA 1155 owners in a years time will be in the same place LGA 1156 owners currently are.

think of all the motherboards that will go to landfill instead of remaining useful, just because AMD's marketing department got greedy and wanted to sell more chipsets. Lame. :thumbsdown::thumbsdown:

I'm not sure where you're from but I recycle electronics all the time. If you have a local Bestbuy you can take stuff into them for free. Just look this stuff up, my local BBs have a limit of three items at a time. I also just throw the stuff into my recycle bins.

 

[JFAMD]

This seems like a dirty tactic on behalf of AMD if it's true that Asus has found a way to enable Bulldozer support on current AM3 motherboards. If AMD is seriously pulling this crap, I will no longer be purchasing their products. Even from an environmental standpoint it's wrong; think of all the motherboards that will go to landfill instead of remaining useful, just because AMD's marketing department got greedy and wanted to sell more chipsets. Lame. :thumbsdown::thumbsdown:

Based on the socket compatibility over the past 5 years, I think we have a much better track record on sockets.

 

[Phynaz]

Based on the socket compatibility over the past 5 years, I think we have a much better track record on sockets.

Which you also know is a meaningless metric.

 

[SickBeast]

Based on the socket compatibility over the past 5 years, I think we have a much better track record on sockets.

You guys do, but you've slipped as of late. Why didn't you put a DDR memory controller into the AM2 series CPUs to extend the life of Socket 939? The performance gain from DDR2 was negligible, and again, what you guys are doing is an environmental nightmare.

Some of you scoff at this but you should be ashamed of yourselves. Putting a perfectly good motherboard to landfill along with some sticks of memory is not only a complete waste of money, but it's creating an environmental nightmare in Asia where these components are essentially sent away to rot, full of toxic chemicals.

I'm a proud supporter of Greenpeace. If need be I will contact them on this issue as I feel that it will cost AMD next to nothing, and the environmental gain would be huge. I contacted AMD some time ago about creating new CPUs for the Socket 939 platform and they didn't even bother to reply.

This type of attitude is arrogant. Perhaps Intel can get away with it because they're #1. If AMD keeps this up they're going to go broke.

 

[SickBeast]

I don't see how a 3% performance gain is worth it when AMD could say "look, our solutions will save you money as you won't need a new motherboard, plus we're doing a good thing for the environment.

Perhaps the old schoolers could care less about this stuff, but I can assure you that it means a great deal to the younger generation.

 

[JFAMD]

You guys were the ones to bring up socket compatibility, knocking AMD for it. All I am saying is that if socket compatibility leads to less boards in landfills, then we are ahead.

The entire discussion is really pointless, because in the market at large, only a very small percentage actually upgrade CPUs, so I don't understand why people are taking a shot at AMD.

 

[Zstream]

Useless babble

Quit knocking the same boring drum. It get's old quick and annoying as heck in a technical discussion on Bulldozer. If you want to look at the overall track record, look at Intel or Apple or any other company in the world.

 

[wahdangun]

You guys do, but you've slipped as of late. Why didn't you put a DDR memory controller into the AM2 series CPUs to extend the life of Socket 939? The performance gain from DDR2 was negligible, and again, what you guys are doing is an environmental nightmare.

Some of you scoff at this but you should be ashamed of yourselves. Putting a perfectly good motherboard to landfill along with some sticks of memory is not only a complete waste of money, but it's creating an environmental nightmare in Asia where these components are essentially sent away to rot, full of toxic chemicals.

I'm a proud supporter of Greenpeace. If need be I will contact them on this issue as I feel that it will cost AMD next to nothing, and the environmental gain would be huge. I contacted AMD some time ago about creating new CPUs for the Socket 939 platform and they didn't even bother to reply.

This type of attitude is arrogant. Perhaps Intel can get away with it because they're #1. If AMD keeps this up they're going to go broke.

I don't see how a 3% performance gain is worth it when AMD could say "look, our solutions will save you money as you won't need a new motherboard, plus we're doing a good thing for the environment.

Perhaps the old schoolers could care less about this stuff, but I can assure you that it means a great deal to the younger generation.

wtf, AMD can't make dual imc in their CPU, and basically why right now they can support two type of ram in their CPU is because AMD was a part of JDEC group and they was the one that actually push the DDR3 standard to be close enough to DDR2 standard so they can just make the IMC compatible with both standard (ddr2 and ddr3).

and what the hell amd should do, you all moaning about AMD must increase their IPC but when it require to change socket you get all get mad. you can't get the cake and eat it too you know

 

[tincart]

I'm a proud supporter of Greenpeace. If need be I will contact them on this issue as I feel that it will cost AMD next to nothing, and the environmental gain would be huge. I contacted AMD some time ago about creating new CPUs for the Socket 939 platform and they didn't even bother to reply.

I'm imaging some Greenpeace people clustered around a recently opened package from SickBeast containing a Socket 939 motherboard going "Sooooooo, what is it?"