Page 3 of 20 FirstFirst 123456713 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 286
  1. #31
    Joined
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Crazy AZ USA
    Posts
    3,516

    Re: Any Bulldozer rumors?

    Quote Originally Posted by Poci View Post
    Reason I ask is cause there were 939 opterons and people were getting good OCs from them in desktop mobos.
    I think Intel has now broken down the barrier that AMD elected to erect.
    "We say in our platform that we believe that the right to coin money and issue money is a function of government....

    Those who are opposed to this proposition tell us that the issue of paper money is a function of the bank and that the government ought to go out of the banking business. I stand with Jefferson rather than with them, and tell them, as he did, that the issue of money is a function of the government and that the banks should go out of the governing business."

    William Jennings Bryan.

  2. #32
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    California
    Posts
    26,262

    Re: Any Bulldozer rumors?

    Quote Originally Posted by AeroSim View Post
    I think Intel has now broken down the barrier that AMD elected to erect.
    AMD and Intel have both done their bit there...
    "The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
    Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."


    -The Gipper


  3. #33
    Joined
    Nov 2002
    Location
    In bed with one of my avatar AMD girls :D
    Age
    39
    Posts
    8,876

    Re: Any Bulldozer rumors?

    Ohh boy, I sense another intel amd flame war.

    Meh, I simply refuse to buy intel cause I heard they are involved with the industrial military complex.

    Seriously, a 300 mhz celey is what got me into pc hardware. I wanted more speed so I went out and got a new mobo with a 700 mhz duron and couldnt be happier. For 30 bucks they performed just as well as a equaly clocked PIII.
    And to unlock for OCing all you needed was a pencil!!

  4. #34
    Joined
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    10,610

    Re: Any Bulldozer rumors?

    Quote Originally Posted by AeroSim View Post
    I think Intel has now broken down the barrier that AMD elected to erect.
    I really don't understand this comment. Care to clarify?


    "The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them."
    - Albert Einstein (1879-1955)

  5. #35
    Joined
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Crazy AZ USA
    Posts
    3,516

    Re: Any Bulldozer rumors?

    Quote Originally Posted by TheGlasMan View Post
    I really don't understand this comment. Care to clarify?
    Without getting lost again as to which thread I'm in, it's really not that hard to explain.

    AMD bridged the enterprise world to the consumer market with the AMD 64- to the point where there was pretty easy interchangeability between the Opteron world and the consumer world with the Athlon X2 CPUs- like the Denmark cores- etc. It was nice to have access to both worlds.

    Today you have socket incompatibilities where you really can't get higher end AMDs without entering the enterprise class. The differences between the AM3/3+ and the G34s are obvious and deliberate. I think the place where I felt it recently was in the Mangy-Cours where I could not check out 8-12 core counts with a consumer class board. They're fine for work, but ...

    Intel, however, looks to be making the socket R for Sandy Bridge in both worlds. This could allow interchangeability should it actually come to pass. Something that may be more restrictive in AMD-ville.

    There is no point in arguing the economic, technical or preferential philosophies involved at this point- but my best memories of AMD where being able to play in this field at home with the X2s on 939s and I could take advantage of the economical, technical and preferential aspects of it fairly simply.

    Barcelona left a bad taste in my mouth and after all the drubbing AMD has had since- I find it a little surprising that they have not become more prolific with multi-core and multi-CPU platforms in the consumer market.
    Last edited by AeroSim; 03-27-2011 at 02:49 PM.
    "We say in our platform that we believe that the right to coin money and issue money is a function of government....

    Those who are opposed to this proposition tell us that the issue of paper money is a function of the bank and that the government ought to go out of the banking business. I stand with Jefferson rather than with them, and tell them, as he did, that the issue of money is a function of the government and that the banks should go out of the governing business."

    William Jennings Bryan.

  6. #36
    Joined
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    10,610

    Re: Any Bulldozer rumors?

    The current Opterons are the equivalent of 2xx and 4xx Opteron K8's, ie 2 a and 4 socket cpu's. They no longer make 1xx equivalents ( in K8 1xx was identical to A64) The c32 Opterons have the extra HTT link and cost more than PhenomII with a much much higher clock rate.

    The market is different now then when cpu's were single and dual core. I ran Opterons and x2's with great enjoyment but I have no interest in the current opterons (except 4 x 12 cores which I cannot afford) on a desktop board, but like my K8's my PhenomII x4 and x6 work harder then any workstation.


    "The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them."
    - Albert Einstein (1879-1955)

  7. #37
    Joined
    May 2001
    Posts
    11,534

    Re: Any Bulldozer rumors?

    But the good news is this summer will be a good time to pick up an i7.
    ...Does anybody else feel like Congress simply bailed themselves out? Isn't that what they really mean by a bailout?

  8. #38
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    California
    Posts
    26,262

    Re: Any Bulldozer rumors?

    Quote Originally Posted by notdrugged View Post
    But the good news is this summer will be a good time to pick up an i7.
    H3ll.. right now prices are nice if you have MC nearby. I just "downgraded" from an i7-860 to an i5-2500k. Ht just did not show any serious advantages in anything I was doing. 4 real & 4 virtual cores vs. 4 real cores for a much better price.
    "The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
    Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."


    -The Gipper


  9. #39
    Joined
    Nov 2002
    Location
    In bed with one of my avatar AMD girls :D
    Age
    39
    Posts
    8,876

    Re: Any Bulldozer rumors?

    Quote Originally Posted by AMDScooter View Post
    H3ll.. right now prices are nice if you have MC nearby. I just "downgraded" from an i7-860 to an i5-2500k. Ht just did not show any serious advantages in anything I was doing. 4 real & 4 virtual cores vs. 4 real cores for a much better price.
    Huh? Why would you do that? Downgrade? Unless you were desperate for cash?

  10. #40
    Joined
    May 2002
    Location
    Kansas
    Age
    33
    Posts
    1,088

    Re: Any Bulldozer rumors?

    Well, Intel is sort-of going that route. Sure, some of their server chips and desktop chips share LGA 1366, but the desktop chips still lack the extra QPI link necessary to team them up on a dualie for instance. I doubt Intel will be motivated to change that in the future. It's still sort of neat that you could use a Xeon on a desktop board like the good old days with Opteron 100 models.

    Pencil overclocking was fun. Less fun was what followed with conductive paint and batteries. I think we're better off these days with unlocked chips.

    It's hard to complain much about the server vs. desktop platform from AMD. The server parts have quad-channel memory controllers, so they're going to need more lands. I suppose they could make the desktop chips go LGA and have a compatible pin-out regardless of if the pins are all used, but you have to ask yourself why they'd bother. It only makes sense for us, not them.
    Sometimes I feel like I'm becoming a dinosaur.

  11. #41
    Joined
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Central NJ
    Posts
    11,090

    Re: Any Bulldozer rumors?

    Quote Originally Posted by AeroSim View Post
    Without getting lost again as to which thread I'm in, it's really not that hard to explain.

    AMD bridged the enterprise world to the consumer market with the AMD 64- to the point where there was pretty easy interchangeability between the Opteron world and the consumer world with the Athlon X2 CPUs- like the Denmark cores- etc. It was nice to have access to both worlds.

    Today you have socket incompatibilities where you really can't get higher end AMDs without entering the enterprise class. The differences between the AM3/3+ and the G34s are obvious and deliberate. I think the place where I felt it recently was in the Mangy-Cours where I could not check out 8-12 core counts with a consumer class board. They're fine for work, but ...

    Intel, however, looks to be making the socket R for Sandy Bridge in both worlds. This could allow interchangeability should it actually come to pass. Something that may be more restrictive in AMD-ville.

    There is no point in arguing the economic, technical or preferential philosophies involved at this point- but my best memories of AMD where being able to play in this field at home with the X2s on 939s and I could take advantage of the economical, technical and preferential aspects of it fairly simply.

    Barcelona left a bad taste in my mouth and after all the drubbing AMD has had since- I find it a little surprising that they have not become more prolific with multi-core and multi-CPU platforms in the consumer market.
    Not sure I really understand why you'd hold it against AMD that they changed tactics. There have always been server-only sockets, and there always will be. When the technical merits of a socket are insufficient to support their target usage, the manufacturer makes a new socket. Frankly, by including support for C32 and G34 sockets, AMD is ensuring compatibility where it matters most: their core Opteron market. You also can't blame them for not wanting peopel putting server-class CPU's in consumer-grade mobos and then overclocking the crap out of them. If they want to protect their higher-end desktop market thats fine too. Look what intel did with SB, locking down OC'ing on everything but the top two SKU's, so Intel is hardly a saint with this kind of crap


    Trust me, I do science
    My Hardware, Past and Present

  12. #42
    Joined
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    6

    Re: Any Bulldozer rumors?

    While everyone gets all up in arms about the idea of a 2P enthusiast platform, it is a tiny market and shrinking.

    When we were living in a dual socket world there were people who wanted to get to 4 cores and 2P was the way to get there. In a world where you can get 8 cores (this summer) the need for dual sockets continues to get even smaller.

    At its peak, it was less than a percent of the desktop world, then, the last time I had looked at it, it was ~.4% if I remember correctly.

    While it might be interesting to some, nobody is really buying these, at least not in any kind of quantity to make supporting it profitable.
    While I work for AMD, my posts are my own opinions.

    http://blogs.amd.com/work/author/jfruehe/

    Follow AMD Opteron on Twitter: @JF_AMD

  13. #43
    Joined
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Central NJ
    Posts
    11,090

    Re: Any Bulldozer rumors?

    Quote Originally Posted by JFAMD View Post
    While everyone gets all up in arms about the idea of a 2P enthusiast platform, it is a tiny market and shrinking.

    When we were living in a dual socket world there were people who wanted to get to 4 cores and 2P was the way to get there. In a world where you can get 8 cores (this summer) the need for dual sockets continues to get even smaller.

    At its peak, it was less than a percent of the desktop world, then, the last time I had looked at it, it was ~.4% if I remember correctly.

    While it might be interesting to some, nobody is really buying these, at least not in any kind of quantity to make supporting it profitable.
    I think hes more referencing the fact that back in S939 days, there were S939 "Opterons" and S939 "Athlons" and you had the opportunity to use server chips even in 1P boards. Still, that was a special case since 2P opterons still used S940. Now hes crapping on AMD because they no longer have the "server" SKU's on desktop sockets, while Intel does (1366 Xeons). Frankly I was happy to have Opteron on S939 because they seemed to get the goodies earlier, (like dual core) and OC'd well, but if AMD felt from a PR standpoint that it cheapened the brand, then they have every right to re-adjust their strategy.

    Now with core counts climbing rapidly, consumers are seeing far less of a need for multi-socket systems, especially since very little consumer grade software even scales over 6-8 cores, let alone the 12-24 that are possible in current 2P setups. Folding@Home is obviously a special case

    Lastly, I'd like to personally welcome you to the PcPer forums. I've seen you post over at [H] and am glad to have someone with a bit of insider knowledge make their way over here

    EDIT: oh yea, and I'm hoping Bulldozer brings AMD performance back in line with Intel so I can return to my namesake
    Last edited by Activate: AMD; 03-30-2011 at 03:57 PM.


    Trust me, I do science
    My Hardware, Past and Present

  14. #44
    Joined
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Southern Tier of NY
    Age
    52
    Posts
    21,707

    Re: Any Bulldozer rumors?

    Quote Originally Posted by Activate: AMD View Post
    EDIT: oh yea, and I'm hoping Bulldozer brings AMD performance back in line with Intel so I can return to my namesake
    Agree. We badly need some performance info/rumors in this thread.
    If you enjoy gaming click here to learn about the Fragging Frogs.



    [Proudly using only AMD desktop CPUs since 1996 and now also GPUs in 2014 - Thanks AMD!!]
    My Rigs - My Upgrade History - My Games

  15. #45
    Joined
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Crazy AZ USA
    Posts
    3,516

    Re: Any Bulldozer rumors?

    Quote Originally Posted by Activate: AMD View Post
    ....

    EDIT: oh yea, and I'm hoping Bulldozer brings AMD performance back in line with Intel so I can return to my namesake
    I agree too- we need performance competition again to worry some of these high-end prices and liven the place up with renewed flame wars.

    "We say in our platform that we believe that the right to coin money and issue money is a function of government....

    Those who are opposed to this proposition tell us that the issue of paper money is a function of the bank and that the government ought to go out of the banking business. I stand with Jefferson rather than with them, and tell them, as he did, that the issue of money is a function of the government and that the banks should go out of the governing business."

    William Jennings Bryan.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •