• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

Bulldozer.....

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

mjw21a

Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2004
I know Bulldozer based chips won't be available till Q1 next year, but does anyone have any information on whether these will work on existing AM3 mainboards?

There doesn't appear to be much information available but was is does seem rather interesting.

I'd love to have a straight forward plug in upgrade without having to replace anything else. :rock:
 
Cool, I'm liking the idea of just upgrading the chip next year and getting a massive performance boost.....

Was reasing somewhere that they're expecting an 80% performance increase per core due to some improvement or another with just 12% increase in module/core size.....

Is SOI dead yet or will it still be used?
 
They will stick with SOI and it will work in AM3 motherboards, but we will see at least 2 new chipsets until it is launched I would expect better results with those boards especially in OC just like with mobos based on SB750.
I would recommend to get the mobo from a maker which released updated BIOS for AM2 boards to support AM3 processors, gigabyte did a pretty good job there.
 
They will stick with SOI and it will work in AM3 motherboards, but we will see at least 2 new chipsets until it is launched I would expect better results with those boards especially in OC just like with mobos based on SB750.
I would recommend to get the mobo from a maker which released updated BIOS for AM2 boards to support AM3 processors, gigabyte did a pretty good job there.

Just hoping for a drop in replacement for my current rig (in my sig). Running a Gigabyte GA-MA790XT-UD4P AM3 board.
 
It should work, I got a 790FXT-UD5P to tie me over the next couple of years.
Although I am skeptical about that 80% performance jump per core, but half of it will make me happy. ;)
 
Hmmmm, I think it's probably more accurate to say 80% per module or something like that.... Supposedly only 12% actually size increase on silicon. Pretty big gain all up. So the 8 core solution will include 4 modules, and the 16 core solution includes 8 modules. Each module counts as 2 cores but with shared components..... I think thats how it works.

So I guess its actually less efficient per core but much more efficient in silicon cost. Either way, I'm just hoping AMD outperform Intel initially. They'll need to as they need to get a longer run out of each new architecture. Anyway, it won't really matter if software devs can't figure out a way to make use of those extra cores....
 
Well many many developers are making multi-threaded apps now, and when 2011 finally rolls around along with Bulldozer, multi-threaded apps will be mainstream. You have to keep in mind though, most applications hardly need one core at all. So, the OS does a pretty good job with core affinity to balance performance out across all cores for maximum performance. Also, many apps are categorized by different precedence levels to allow high precedence apps to take all the performance they need first. So, 4 modules (8 'cores') will allow the OS tons of room to distribute processing evenly. So there should be quite a big performance increase. I can't wait for Thuban to come out already.
 
If its compatable with my current rig then sometime next year will be upgrade time for me, otherwise it can wait another year.
 
My upgrade path from my current Phenom II 940+AM2+ system goes like this:
1) Phenom II 940 --> Phenom II X6 (Thuban)
2) Phenom II X6 + New AM3 890FX motherboard (w/DDR3-1333 ECC)
3) Phenom II X6 --> Bulldozer

Never before have I had such a smooth upgrade path for so many years. When I get the DDR3 and AM3 motherboard, I'll actually have TWO systems to do Folding@Home on.
 
I just want Bulldozer. Reads like a massively updated/all new architecture. If it works in my current board then that'll be great. Should be significantly better on power consumption than the current generation of AMD chips.
 
Back