Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Does AMD Bulldozer considered as failure

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    60

    Does AMD Bulldozer considered as failure

    The AMD’s bulldozer processors are meant for compete with Intel’s Sandy Bridge processors. Many people have assumed that it will surely going to beat Sandy Bridge but now it is a rumor that Bulldozer is a huge failure. There is no confirmed source about this news but some rumors is moving all over the internet.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    237

    Re: Does AMD Bulldozer considered as failure

    AMD has not lagged behind and has used this drop in Intel's reputation for presenting new processors Bulldozer, a true beast capable of overcoming the high-end i7, in particular are 65% better than the i7 980X. The benchmark (tests) were performed Passmark and Cinebench, which have compared various Intel processors (including Sandy Bridge) and AMD's new architecture, the latter being the winner: It's a big blow to Intel, and more in these times. AMD Bulldozer and eight native cores will start to look at machines this summer, more than enough time to react by the competition. After a long time, the world of processors to get interesting again.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    766

    Re: Does AMD Bulldozer considered as failure

    A former engineer at AMD, Cliff Maier, explained the reasons for failure of a Bulldozer technical point of view. First, while the CPU was hand drawn, AMD has adopted an automated system design, it does not boost performance

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    163

    Re: Does AMD Bulldozer considered as failure

    AMD planned the launch of the new four-to eight-core initially at Computex in Taipei. The reason for the shift: a performance problem in the current B0 and B1 stepping of the new processors. From the subsequent B2 stepping, AMD engineers are hoping that the speed problem is fixed. Come to Bulldozer processors in the B2 stepping, but it takes even by the end of.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    796

    Re: Does AMD Bulldozer considered as failure

    This choice was wanted by the fact that engineers of AMD and ATi have mixed some time ago, and has forced AMD to stop the manual design of its chips. Where the rub is that an automatic is a chip design that eventually 20% larger and 20% slower. It creates a die larger, dead spaces, higher costs and energy inefficiency. AMD therefore has to sell its FX already cheaper than it originally hoped, and this is unfortunately for the former foundry too next to that offered by Bulldozer on the tables of benches. Once Intel makes a chip with Sandy smaller, cannot afford to lower its prices, and margin over AMD.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    658

    Re: Does AMD Bulldozer considered as failure

    AMD has officially confirmed at Computex that bulldozers will come later. Next, the company had apparently announced that it create the new CPUs probably take another two to three months in the trade.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    189

    Re: Does AMD Bulldozer considered as failure

    AMD continues to attract the non-Intel Hyper-Threading with, which can accelerate the competitor's CPUs by a fifth. AMD is more one of modules, each with two cores - and in the new family up to four modules in a CPU are used, but only in one module of the cores is also a floating-point unit included. Bulldozers offer more functionality than the Intel hyperthreading. Because only the register sets are doubled and the CPU can more quickly between two threads, ie tasks, switch back and forth when a thread waits for the result of a computation step.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    669

    Re: Does AMD Bulldozer considered as failure

    AMD needs to compete with Intel's CPUs can be counteracted with more transistors and larger memories. This means not only bigger chips, but also greater power consumption than the Intel CPUs.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    644

    Re: Does AMD Bulldozer considered as failure

    While Intel logo, Intel needed at almost every new CPU generation or variant because of another base, a new motherboard is AMD is characterized by an enormous longevity of the various platforms. Current AMD processors for Socket AM3 and DDR3 memory will work on many older motherboards with the AM2 socket and DDR2 memory

    Of new processor architecture, one always expects a boost in performance. Because AMD "with" bulldozers first time in years makes fundamental changes to the CPU cores, which are expected in this case, many observers quite large.

    But the leap in performance compared to the current Phenom II processors might be smaller than many expect it.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    669

    Re: Does AMD Bulldozer considered as failure

    AMD will definitely bring out a bomb. And the prices are definitely tumbling on both sides, so I'd rather wait with my decision. The clock is currently on the Intel side benefit will increase dramatically with the new structure, but also breadth of AMD. In addition, AMD's next Celeron processors are anyway, the absolute clock hunters in the global OC-lists.

Similar Threads

  1. Which RAM should I considered for Core i7 860 w GIGABYTE GA-P55A-UD3?
    By Mick$Tyler in forum Motherboard Processor & RAM
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 02-11-2010, 05:54 AM
  2. Do I need a college degree to be considered?
    By recent in forum Education Career and Job Discussions
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 27-07-2010, 10:55 PM
  3. What should be considered while crafting a website?
    By Kanakpriya in forum Technology & Internet
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 06-03-2010, 03:48 AM
  4. What should be considered while building a website design?
    By Radames in forum Software Development
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 05-03-2010, 01:51 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Page generated in 1,711,656,685.98998 seconds with 17 queries