News - AMD reveals more details on Bulldozer and Bobcat CPUs

[HEXUS]

Sub-1W operation for notebook chips and massive scalability for desktop chips.

Read more.

[razer121]

Do you think that bulldozer is going to be a new socket? I'm not really into the whole AMD scene XD

[AGTDenton]

im no really into the whole AMD scene XD

I used to be before they fell asleep behind the wheel.
Perhaps now their injuries have healed they might have something to offer over the next few years, but after my Phenom experience I will not be joining in for a long time.

[kalniel]

Do you think that bulldozer is going to be a new socket? im no really into the whole AMD scene XD

For someone not into it you've asked a very pertinent question.

The simple answer, relating to the processor they're talking about at the moment, is no. The server chip works fine on the latest server socket/motherboard.

But the answer you're looking for is relating to the client(desktop) chip I expect, and they've not said anything either way about it, so we don't know. There is no mention so far of anything like interconnects or memory controller channels that would give us a clue either.

I used to be before they fell asleep behind the wheel.
Perhaps now their injuries have healed they might have something to offer over the next few years, but after my Phenom experience I will not be joining in for a long time.

AMD hadn't changed the core chip design since the athlon 64. Now they have, so it's worth paying interest

[razer121]

Well i just wondered, the socket type has been around for a while now hasn't it? I've got to say im pretty intrested in this chip though...

[kingpotnoodle]

Do you think that bulldozer is going to be a new socket? I'm not really into the whole AMD scene XD

I'd be shocked if it wasn't...

50% extra performance from 33% extra cores sounds pretty pants.

Assuming their current 12 core beast has performance 100, or 8.333 per core. Then the Bulldozer will have 16 cores and 150 performance, or 9.375 per core. That's a whopping 12.5% increase per core... hardly amazing stuff.

[kalniel]

I'd be shocked if it wasn't...

50% extra performance from 33% extra cores sounds pretty pants.

Assuming their current 12 core beast has performance 100, or 8.333 per core. Then the Bulldozer will have 16 cores and 150 performance, or 9.375 per core. That's a whopping 12.5% increase per core... hardly amazing stuff.

But you're getting more cores for the same cost (both monetary and power-wise), so overall performance per watt per dollar is up 50%, which is amazing stuff.

[kingpotnoodle]

Do you think that bulldozer is going to be a new socket? I'm not really into the whole AMD scene XD

I'd be shocked if it wasn't...

50% extra performance from 33% extra cores sounds pretty pants.

Assuming their current 12 core beast has performance 100, or 8.333 per core. Then the Bulldozer will have 16 cores and 150 performance, or 9.375 per core. That's a whopping 12.5% increase per core... hardly amazing stuff.

[kalniel]

echo?

[Funkstar]

Assuming their current 12 core beast has performance 100, or 8.333 per core. Then the Bulldozer will have 16 cores and 150 performance, or 9.375 per core. That's a whopping 12.5% increase per core... hardly amazing stuff.

Does it really matter how much performance you get from each core though?

If you are getting 16 cores for the same price and power consumption as the previous 8 and the overall performance has jumper by 50% for the same class of processor (again, defined by the price and thermal performance) then that is a cracking jump

It's all about how you run the numbers really.

[kalniel]

Now my words are echoing in funkstar's voice

[AdamAnubis]

Hmm, I need to look back at AMD really. No idea what socket means what or anything any more Interested to see how this all pans out though. Considering an upgrade soon and if these are cheaper and outperform i5/i7 then I may be interested.

[Jimbo75]

I'd be shocked if it wasn't...

50% extra performance from 33% extra cores sounds pretty pants.

Assuming their current 12 core beast has performance 100, or 8.333 per core. Then the Bulldozer will have 16 cores and 150 performance, or 9.375 per core. That's a whopping 12.5% increase per core... hardly amazing stuff.

Then you realise these cores are about 60% the size of Phenom II cores.

And yes, it's AM3 socket for desktop.

[kalniel]

And yes, it's AM3 socket for desktop.

Not r2?

[Georgy291]

another fundamental question, is it overclock-able? and also whats the performance like?

since the intels next arheticture doesnt look that promising to me as its not overclock-able and well doesnt have that much more performance gain

[kalniel]

another fundamental question, is it overclock-able? and also whats the performance like?

The server version is 50% faster than the previous top AMD server chip.

We don't know about overclockability, but no reason to think it's going to be bad.

since the intels next arheticture doesnt look that promising to me as its not overclock-able and well doesnt have that much more performance gain

We don't know either of those things. The k version chips are easy to overclock, and there are no performance figures so I'm not sure where you get the performance statement from.