Image Courtesy: X-Bit Labs

AMD Wants to "Bulldozer" Intel's Sandy Bridge

Add Your Comments

Image Courtesy: AMD

Image Courtesy AMD

We bring you more news about AMD’s upcoming Bulldozer architecture, this time coming from the crew over at X-bit labs. According to their recent article, they have seen “a document from AMD” which claims that Bulldozer “will be fully able to rival Core i7 2600-series chips” (Sandy Bridge).

That’s a bold statement from AMD, and it marks a very exciting time for the performance and overclocking community in the near future as these two rivals battle it out. Let’s take a look at the AMD product positioning diagram from X-bit labs.

Image Courtesy: X-Bit Labs

Image Courtesy X-Bit Labs

This document lists an easy comparison between what AMD will be offering and how it stacks up against Intel’s product line. Especially of interest is the far right-hand column, which lists the selling points for choosing AMD over Intel when comparing the available products from both companies. They are also including GPU processing on all of the Lynx and Brazos processors, some of which are quad core models.

AMD still plans to launch the Bulldozer processor line in Q2 2011, so we’ll see what this product launch brings. Either way, the healthy competition between AMD and Intel will only bring faster and cheaper hardware to the masses, which is always a good thing for overclockers.

Jmtyra

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Discussion
  1. Evilsizer
    not sure if this got posted or not

    http://arstechnica.com/business/news/2011/03/leaked-bulldozer-benchmarks-may-give-glimpse-of-amds-future.ars


    Thanks.

    Let's hope that BD gets better with age.

    As someone else pointed out - I haven't read such a "provocative" thread in a long time:chair::)
    mjw21a
    Depends on the efficiency of the CPU.... Some benchies on in development CPU's at 1.8GHz showed something like 50% increase in multimendia type tasks but I think we'll still have to wait for the release CPU's before we cna make a judgement.

    Too hard to find out whats real and whats not until that point of time.


    Everyone's, waiting for AMD to update their server chipset line too.
    ScorpiDragon
    I think, with AMD bringing out a 3.5GHz CPU on the G34 platform, will be ideal for encoders and gamers too. Like the movie industry, is screaming out for a high-end workstation system (better chipset with USB3 and Sata6, etc.).


    Depends on the efficiency of the CPU.... Some benchies on in development CPU's at 1.8GHz showed something like 50% increase in multimendia type tasks but I think we'll still have to wait for the release CPU's before we cna make a judgement.

    Too hard to find out whats real and whats not until that point of time.
    I think, with AMD bringing out a 3.5GHz CPU on the G34 platform, will be ideal for encoders and gamers too. Like the movie industry, is screaming out for a high-end workstation system (better chipset with USB3 and Sata6, etc.).
    just wanted to say, it's been a long time since i've seen a good and dirty AMD vs Intel thread around here! man, things got downright nasty when AXP's and a64's ruled the world!

    here's hoping bulldozer is a bang and not a poof.
    MattNo5ss
    Interesting:

    http://www.techpowerup.com/142366/AMD-FX-Series-Processors-Releasing-on-June-11.html


    Hmm with any luck that date is wrong and it will be sooner but for some reason I doubt that.

    At least provided that date is accurate to any degree we will see BD soon :santa:

    Hope everyone has been saving their spare change for upgrades :D
    87dtna
    The only reason it's going to be able to compete with sandybridge is because it will have 8 full cores. I actually think thats pretty pathetic to only compete with sandybrige with twice as many physical cores!! It should be whipping it.



    hmmmm i was under the impression that its 4 "cores" that have 2 tightly nit integer clusters...

    This is a single Bulldozer core, but notice that it has two independent integer clusters, each with its own L1 data cache. The single FP cluster shares the L1 cache of the two integer clusters.


    http://www.anandtech.com/show/2872
    QuietIce
    You're right - and I won't post it but I'm sure you understand what the problem is ... ;)


    As an Amd guy at heart, I'm feeling with you now. :rolleyes:

    BTW, I will be taking my "golden" chip under ln2 this weekend. I'll be sure to post results. ;)
    Theocnoob
    You can run a 2600K at 5Ghz indefinitely around 1.35V if you get a good bin chip. Sometimes even lower volts than that.
    You guys quoting vCore just makes me laugh. As far as I'm concerned 1.35 vCore is stock voltage and has been for the past five years. I haven't looked at Intel vCore since my Q6600 wouldn't keep it's 3.5 GHz OC on air after I took it off water. It's been running stock, now, for the past two years. I guess it got used to the good WC temps because moderate air isn't enough to OC it. :(

    I also find it funny you guys continue to add more qualifiers with each post. First it was "but that's for benching only", now it's "if you get a good chip". LOL! But keep up the hype, Intel's PR department would be proud! But I have to ask - if SBs are so good why all the hype in the first place? Can't they stand on their own merits?

    Theocnoob
    And ya AMD is flubbing the whole 'what is a core' thing pretty hard. Having the ability to handle two instructions in true parallel on a core doesn't make two cores.
    Indeed. They're using it as a selling point for the masses - but you'd think most people on OCF would know enough about CPU architecture to see past that.

    ChanceCoats123
    LOL. Everyone needs to just calm down a bit. Let me remind everyone (myself included) that there is NO point in arguing over a chip that isn't even close to release, none the less out.
    You're right - and I won't post it but I'm sure you understand what the problem is ... ;)
    LOL. Everyone needs to just calm down a bit. Let me remind everyone (myself included) that there is NO point in arguing over a chip that isn't even close to release, none the less out.
    QuietIce
    *snip - IMOG*

    Regardless of what AMD calls a "core" for selling purposes it's still a quad with only four floating point units and four L2 caches - or did I miss that SB quads only have two FP units and two L2 caches?


    You can run a 2600K at 5Ghz indefinitely around 1.35V if you get a good bin chip. Sometimes even lower volts than that.

    And ya AMD is flubbing the whole 'what is a core' thing pretty hard. Having the ability to handle two instructions in true parallel on a core doesn't make two cores.

    Just based on your whole post there, did you not have wheaties this morning? Because I know when I don't have my wheaties my posts come out a little rough.
    87dtna
    Guess what man, he's probably running 4.8ghz as a DAILY overclock at around 1.35v. ALL 2600k's can reach 5ghz on air very easily.


    *snip - IMOG*

    87dtna
    I see....but it's kinda like ''cheating'' when you have twice as many physical cores....? Yet it still only ''competes'' with sandy bridge? Sad.
    Regardless of what AMD calls a "core" for selling purposes it's still a quad with only four floating point units and four L2 caches - or did I miss that SB quads only have two FP units and two L2 caches?

    You want to know what's sad? That Intel, a company with at least four times the money and size, is doing so poorly against AMD. Sad that they have to constantly be beaten with the AMD stick to advance technologically. Sad that when they do start to lose they act like the mafia. That's what's sad.

    "Why support giant monopolistic robber barons that would still be selling you P4's if AMD hadn't kicked their butt?"

    -rseven

    doz
    "System" is such a poor indication of pricing.
    Yes it is - and it's too bad they can't get any closer than that. Most likely they're still under an NDA and that's the best they can do. :-/

    doz
    As for the launch date, failure. June? Really? I dont see why they are so far behind.
    I don't think I've seen anything that ever stated otherwise. First it was 1H11 then 2Q11. Do you have a link showing something different???
    I'm not saying I agree with Amd saying that their "system pricing" matches intel. I'm simply clearing the air. BD chips, yes even the octacores, will not cost anywhere near $700.
    doz
    "System" is such a poor indication of pricing. Id like to see numbers but if they are releasing 4/6/8 core models, I really dont see the 8 core being cheaper than $300, BARE MINIMUM. To boot, "system" doesnt state what quality of components, video card, hard drives. You really cant believe that youll get a $300 video card, $100 PSU, $100 case, $100 HDD + 8 core BD for $700 ;/

    As for the launch date, failure. June? Really? I dont see why they are so far behind. Its really a disappointment and just going to keep Intel prices where they are at unfortunately :(


    I agree completely, 'system' price doesn't specify at all, what is included in that huge term. I mean you could consider it as a barebones all the way up to case+psu+mobo+ram+cpu+video+hard drives+optical drive, which if you can get a gaming-SB-equivalent system for $700 with non-crappy parts in every other slot then that would be incredible.
    doz


    As for the launch date, failure. June? Really? I dont see why they are so far behind. Its really a disappointment and just going to keep Intel prices where they are at unfortunately :(


    I don't think AMD will ever be able to dent Intel prices again the way they began to back in the FX vs Pentium 4 era when the FX was a WAY better CPU. Once Intel woke up from their Pentium 4 10Ghz goal/delusion they started moving at a pretty alarming rate. The fact that they're like 100x times larger and better funded than AMD isn't helping AMD much either. I think AMD was wise to acquire ATI and begin making some profit in the GPU sector. Hopefully it'll go into R&D to catch up with Intel and really start putting some price pressure on again. AMD only made the high price mistake once, IMO, in the FX era. I think that CPU could have destroyed the P4 in sales if not for how much money AMD was asking for the FX line. Lack of educating the consumer was also a factor.