More details about AMD's Bulldozer-based FX lineup emerge

More information is slowly starting to surface regarding AMD's upcoming Llano and Zambezi processors. Following last week's reveal of the expected initial lineup and ship dates, X-bit labs has apparently gotten hold of an AMD slide filled with model specifications and other details. According to the site, the FX-series will initially be comprised of four chips (instead of eight as previously suggested): the four-core FX-4110, the six-core FX-6110, and the eight-core FX-8110 and FX-8130P. All four would be available as 'Black Edition' parts with an unlocked core multiplier for easier overcl...

Read the whole story

Dual channel memory? Is this a ****ing joke? I know the speed increases will be marginal for most people but there's no reason not to include it.

Also it's nice to know AMD needs 8 cores to make a cpu that will compete with the new i5. This has got to be a joke.

If they use AM3 socket it must be dual channel memory. And it's 8 physical cores against 8 virtual cores (4 cores with hyper threading), all in the same 95 W power envelope.. And again, it's not about speed, it's about processing power.

Why am I getting a pop-up ad from Intel over an AMD article???

Use a script blocker for ads

It isn't the AM3 socket Mosu. It's an improved version known as AM3+. Get your facts straight. Also speed and processing power are directly related. If a cpu processes X amount of information 2 seconds faster then it has more processing power.

With roughly the same 940 pins even if it's called AM3+ it won't aloud three or four channel memory.Yes, they may increase memory speed, but not connectivity in a broader sense

It still shows new technology has been pushed to the side by backwards compatibility. It's the same reason why anyone wanting more than a modest setup won't even touch AMD.

Happening to me on every page.

I don't get the popup. Is it going right over the text of the article or something?

95w TDP's across the board right out the gate, I'm impressed, even if it is 32nm. Not bad pulling that off using an all new architecture, especially coming from under-performing (versus the competition) 125w Phenom II X4 CPU's. Could I be coming back to AMD? I just pray they fix their Sata III performance and don't break anything that worked well in the past. Oh, and some serious SSD support should be automatic. ie: TRIM (over RAID?)

It pops-up over the text.

I didn't know the 2500K and 2600K had triple/quad channel IMC's. Can i get a link?

yes, it is going over the text of the AMD article.

@Princeton stop the stupid comments when you haven't even seen the numbers yet. Wait for some official benchmarks.
Who cares if it's 8 cores vs 4 cores when you are comparing two entirely different chip designs. And they went for dual channel because it is cheaper for both the producer and the consumer. The fact that an AMD system is cheaper then an intel one is the main reason why people buy it.
PS: Sandy Bridge is also dual channel.

Why mention the full system price?, it makes it looks to expensive.

LGA 1155 isn't Intel's high end platform. It'll be LGA 2011.

AMD has said that they intend to have cpu's targeting the high end sector. This info shows that it was a lie.

Gives a budgeting ballpark, to compare alongside the current Sandy Bridge based system price points. This is way easier than trying to lay out actual component prices up front, because you just KNOW that anti- crowds will scream and point if you go $5 over a target price quoted in passing 3.2 years before a product release.

It's over the title of each article and the first 2 lines of text. Script-blocker is already enabled...