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

Jos

Posts: 3,073   +97
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
 

princeton

Posts: 1,674   +1
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.
 

mosu

Posts: 546   +187
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.
 

princeton

Posts: 1,674   +1
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.
 

mosu

Posts: 546   +187
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
 

princeton

Posts: 1,674   +1
mosu said:
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.
 

Jurassic4096

Posts: 155   +0
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?)
 

Jurassic4096

Posts: 155   +0
Princeton said:
mosu said:
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.
I didn't know the 2500K and 2600K had triple/quad channel IMC's. Can i get a link?
 

Puiu

Posts: 4,146   +2,791
TechSpot Elite
@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.
 

princeton

Posts: 1,674   +1
jurassic4096 said:
Princeton said:
mosu said:
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.
I didn't know the 2500K and 2600K had triple/quad channel IMC's. Can i get a link?
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.
 

Leeky

Posts: 3,357   +116
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.
Is this comment also meant as a joke? Because your basing an opinion on nothing more than scraps of information that are currently available.

Now by all means show me the definitive proof to back up your claims Princeton.

I also don't see the point in triple channel memory, yeah it offers more bandwidth, but its marginal at best, and you're likely talking 2-3% difference in overall performance, which in the case of dual channel RAM is I imagine easily accounted for with an additional 1-2GB.

AMD has said that they intend to have cpu's targeting the high end sector. This info shows that it was a lie.
So what your saying if I'm reading your comments correctly is they're lying because they aren't offering triple channel support, and therefore, in your mind couldn't possibly compete with Sandy Bridge?
 

Vrmithrax

Posts: 1,560   +610
Guest said:
Why mention the full system price?, it makes it looks to expensive.
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. :)
 

Raswan

Posts: 278   +5
Princeton said:
raswan said:
Guest said:
Why am i getting a pop-up ad from intel over an AMD article???
Happening to me on every page.
I don't get the popup. Is it going right over the text of the article or something?
It's over the title of each article and the first 2 lines of text. Script-blocker is already enabled...
 
Princeton said:
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.
They're not truly eight-cores, the more correct term would be quad-module, but AMD is using eight-core for marketing purposes.
Anyway, each module has 2 integer cores (thus making 8 cores), but there's only 1 FP unit per module, unit that is shared between the 2 cores.
A real 8 core would have 8 integer cores and 8 FP units, but Bulldozer has 8 integer cores and 4 FP units.
 

Kibaruk

Posts: 3,836   +1,183
And then Princeton wonders why he is called a basher... to bash and beyond must be his modo.

This information is so far so good, talking about amd competing against i7 is good enough for me, assuming AMD will have the price lead (Since their procs has always been cheaper) and most AM2+/AM3 users can upgrade without even touching the memory or mobo sounds pretty darn good.
 

Vrmithrax

Posts: 1,560   +610
Kibaruk said:
And then Princeton wonders why he is called a basher... to bash and beyond must be his modo.

This information is so far so good, talking about amd competing against i7 is good enough for me, assuming AMD will have the price lead (Since their procs has always been cheaper) and most AM2+/AM3 users can upgrade without even touching the memory or mobo sounds pretty darn good.
Alas, a new mobo (AM3+) will be required for the new processors. So, it's not as simple an upgrade path as we've had in the past with AMD.
 

red1776

Posts: 5,124   +193
here is a better article on the BD details that Route44 posted a couple of weeks ago. The BD (as far as the forthcoming information) is not about outdoing Intel with "more cores" , its about ,amongst other things, much better multi-core efficiency and communication.

http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=1083