News - AMD revises Bulldozer down from 2.0 to 1.2 billion transistors

[HEXUS]

What does all this mean for the struggling architecture?

Read more.

[watercooled]

1.2B logic to 2B on-die seems unlikely. 2B on-die would mean a similar transistor density to Llano, but the GPU on Llano has a lot to do with that. I think I read somewhere it has something to do with dual-die Opteron i.e. it has 2B transistors in use, maybe due to disabled memory controllers or something? Please don't quote that though, I'm unsure of the validity of the source.

What does it mean?
Well, probably nothing really...

[shaithis]

Hmmm....that's some variance they work within!

[Biscuit]

considering the levels of precision involved in making a processor, you would think a 40% error would be something they should have noticed a long time ago

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

This news was mentioned a few weeks ago by AMD but for some reason the media has picked it up only now??

It could be like with Sandy Bridge which has two figures;1.16 billion transistors and 995 million transistors. The 1.2 billion number is probably the number of active transistor units;AFAIK certain units are made up of multiple transistors and certain transistors serve no electrical purpose,ie, used to separate certain parts of the chip or serve as redundant units.

If you look at the die it seems there is a reasonable amount of free space:

http://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/img/pc.../430/044/5.jpg

Some people have speculated that it separates key components and hence minimises heat hotspots.

However,TBH,what is more important though is performance for a given price.

[Brewster0101]

I've read elsewhere that AMD were not aware of the mistake, it was the PR companies fault and as a result that PR company no longer works for AMD.

Also in the news from another website is that AMD are apparently considering leaving the desktop CPU market as they can't compete or make money from their operations - they've had enough of running in the RED on their banks statements.

[watercooled]

Said website is completely ignoring Llano then?

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Also in the news from another website is that AMD are apparently considering leaving the desktop CPU market as they can't compete or make money from their operations - they've had enough of running in the RED on their banks statements.

Why do you keep repeating this stuff in all the AMD threads today??

You do realise AMD has been profitable for the last year.

[watercooled]

It would be interesting to see what this 'other website' is. Just another case of a website (probably harmlessly) discussing the market, then someone using it as a source to quote it as a fact, then it snowballs from there. AMD have said nothing of the sort publicly, and anything 'leaked' is as reliable as any other rumours.

[Brewster0101]

Why do you keep repeating this stuff in all the AMD threads today??

You do realise AMD has been profitable for the last year.

Someone correct if I am wrong but the only reason AMD turned a profit was because of selling large amounts of assets/plants. When these are taken out of their financial reports, AMD lost money.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Someone correct if I am wrong but the only reason AMD turned a profit was because of selling large amounts of assets/plants. When these are taken out of their financial reports, AMD lost money.

Eh,no??? That was at the beginning of the year. Their profits are not massive but they made Q1 profits of $54million from actual sales(this is not counting the GF asset sale),a Q2 profit of $61 milllion and a Q3 profit of $97 million. If anything the production problems at GF impacted the profits they made quite a bit. However,still having to run GF would have probably meant losses.

They actually made 35% more in revenue than they did in Q3 2010:

http://techreport.com/discussions.x/21912