I know I know, it's Interlagos, not Zambezi. It still shines a little light toward the tunnel's end.
0
LeonardoWake up and smell the glaciersEagle River, AlaskaIcrontian
edited September 2011
"Interlagos†is expected to launch and be available in partner systems in the fourth quarter of this year
So, Opterons will be incorporated into servers sometime before 2012. That's all we know. For those of us thinking about a desktop build....keep waiting.
Financially, this would be the prudent move for AMD: When production is not fully ramped up, service the commercial markets first, where the higher profits are. As production increases - yields improve at the foundry - then ship to the retailers. I'm beginning to believe the rumors that foundry yields are not as high (yet) as AMD had hoped, that there's not enough volume to supply the server market as well as the desktop market. I hope I'm wrong.
On a personal level, do I wait longer to see desktop BD results or do I just go for the known entity - 2600K?
So, Opterons will be incorporated into servers sometime before 2012. That's all we know. For those of us thinking about a desktop build....keep waiting.
Financially, this would be the prudent move for AMD: When production is not fully ramped up, service the commercial markets first, where the higher profits are. As production increases - yields improve at the foundry - then ship to the retailers. I'm beginning to believe the rumors that foundry yields are not as high (yet) as AMD had hoped, that there's not enough volume to supply the server market as well as the desktop market. I hope I'm wrong.
On a personal level, do I wait longer to see desktop BD results or do I just go for the known entity - 2600K?
I'm holding out for reviews. Zambezi would almost have to be a real turd for me not go for it. Especially where F@h is involved, but I need it to do everything else that I do (gaming, professional, ...etc.) at least as well as the 2600K alternate.
Nothing prevents you from buying an AM3+ board today and equiping it with a really inexpensive AM3 quad. They have quad core chips that perform admirably for under $100 now. For that cost, you can either sell it at a marginal loss, smack it in another machine, or just put it in the spare parts drawer when your ready to upgrade to Bulldozer. If your set on it, got the cash saved, I'd say you may as well get started on it, plenty of good options for AM3+ boards are already available for desktop enthusiasts.
I'm holding out for reviews. Zambezi would almost have to be a real turd for me not go for it. Especially where F@h is involved, but I need it to do everything else that I do (gaming, professional, ...etc.) at least as well as the 2600K alternate.
I can't say much, but I can say this:
There's not much of a mystery going on.
0
LeonardoWake up and smell the glaciersEagle River, AlaskaIcrontian
edited September 2011
Nothing prevents you from buying an AM3+ board today and....
If the employment of the upgraded systems were to be for general use, then yes, what you suggest makes sense. Most any multi-core processor out today and projected for the near future would be more than adequate for everyday use. Considering that my desire for high performance use revolves around Folding@Home (yes, one-trick pony), I will not make purchases on faith. Were it not for my Folding passion, I'd be satisfied with my previous Q6600 builds and wouldn't be looking to upgrade at all.
I'm not a folding enthusiast, please forgive me if I'm way off track here.
I thought 90% of your performance yield came from the graphics card when folding. Assuming you have enough to feed the grahpics cards, is there really going to be any value to having the absolute top of the line CPU? :confused2
bigadv folding decimates the PPD from graphics cards, but requires 8+ cores (virtual or otherwise) to complete within preferred deadlines. Projects are not always available, but you can also run SMP WUs through the same client. On the boards that Leo is looking at, I imagine he will also run the best PPD/$ graphics cards for GPU folding as well.
0
LeonardoWake up and smell the glaciersEagle River, AlaskaIcrontian
edited September 2011
Cliff, my intent was not to derail this thread and push Folding. (the 'one-trick pony' reference was to myself) I was merely stating my stance on Zambezi: hoping the best for it; I'm interested enough to reserve money for it; I will wait and see if its multithreaded performance is at the level I want, if it can compete favorably with Intel's unlocked, 8-thread *Sandy Bridge CPUs.
Gamers and general use demands must be expressed by others, as my requirements are somewhat singular.
Multithreaded CPU processing is king right now in Folding's molecular modeling simulations.
Cliff, my intent was not to derail this thread and push Folding. (the 'one-trick pony' reference was to myself) I was merely stating my stance on Zambezi: hoping the best for it; I'm interested enough to reserve money for it; I will wait and see if its multithreaded performance is at the level I want, if it can compete favorably with Intel's unlocked, 8-thread *Sandy Bridge CPUs.
Gamers and general use demands must be expressed by others, as my requirements are somewhat singular.
Multithreaded CPU processing is king right now in Folding's molecular modeling simulations.
You said it for me Leo. I have a full functioning system listed in my sig. So, I can afford to wait it out and make a decision based on what I see in reviews. I also have all of the components that I need for a new build, which will be zambezi, if I like what I see.
Leo, perhaps you remember the thread which was based on a folding rig? Well this is where it has taken me. So, I don't regard any of the above as a hijack but as a reasonable, and welcomed response, and opinion. We have similar interests in zambezi - is what it amounts to I believe.
0
LeonardoWake up and smell the glaciersEagle River, AlaskaIcrontian
edited September 2011
On the boards that Leo is looking at, I imagine he will also run the best PPD/$ graphics cards for GPU folding as well.
The 'best' graphics? No. In fact, during my last major upgrade cycle last year, I sold off my GTX 295 beasts (8 cards, 16 GPUs) and replaced them with GTS 450s. Although my upgrade budget this year is healthy, there are limits to what I will inflict on our power bill - that's the main reason why I run the low power 450s and let the Lynnfield and Sandy Bridge CPUs perform the lion's share of production.
And that's why I have such high hopes for Zambezi - to state again - multi-threaded performance. How well will the new AMD archicture function as compared to the Intel core/Hyperthreaded virtual core architecture? I haven't had this much interest in a new series of CPUs in years!
Edit: Oh, Tushon, you wrote "PPD/$" GPUs. Well, yes, within reason. If the $ part of the equation isn't too high and if power consumption isn't crazy.
LeonardoWake up and smell the glaciersEagle River, AlaskaIcrontian
edited September 2011
8150 @ $230? I can't believe it. Something must be wrong with these chips. Sorry this is just my first/gut reaction. I still want one though.
Yeah, you don't just sell a brand new, top notch desktop part for $230. My gut reaction is the same as yours.
"2700K" Humm, if it's only 100-200MHz faster than the 2600k, it's a big yawn from me. If it will overclock just as high or higher with less of a voltage boost, then :D
Yeah, you don't just sell a brand new, top notch desktop part for $230. My gut reaction is the same as yours.
"2700K" Humm, if it's only 100-200MHz faster than the 2600k, it's a big yawn from me. If it will overclock just as high or higher with less of a voltage boost, then :D
"2700K" Humm, if it's only 100-200MHz faster than the 2600k, it's a big yawn from me. If it will overclock just as high or higher with less of a voltage boost, then :D
don't care about it's stock speed over the 2600k
I care about the price of the 2600k lowering with the release of the 2700k
nice overclock, those guys are nuts
0
LeonardoWake up and smell the glaciersEagle River, AlaskaIcrontian
edited September 2011
It appears the overclocking was performed on one module. Still though, very impressive. I hope the OC is at least a hint of what kind of real world performance to forward to.
I want to address the performance speculation based on price speculation.
Seriously though, the days of shelling out about a grand for the top of the line chip are over, and it is a good thing for all of us. Chip fabrication has advanced so far in the past decade, it's almost unfathomable how far we have come. I actually read a little while back that the Athlon II quad core chips they were selling for around $100, they were actually turning a pretty good margin on those at that price, that's how good manufacturing has become over the past few years, they can run quad core chips, box them plop in a little heatsink and a sticker and still make a nice margin at $99. There has never been a better time to be a desktop PC enthusiast, we are building rigs we could barely dream of a few short years ago at a fraction of the cost.
I don't think a top of the line "enthusiast" "gamer" chip can garner more than $300 or so these days. There will always be the few that will pay anything for the fastest part, but when you look at the competitive nature of the market, and the reality that a very small number of desktop users that honestly require more power than they already have available to them, it honestly would not surprise me if AMD makes a smokin fast chip and sells it for around $230 a pop while turning a nice little margin on it because their fab is actually that efficient. Obviously, this is speculation based on speculation, but I think its at least as likely as "OMG Bulldozer is gonna blow if it's not priced through the roof!"
Not that anyone who knew their ass from a hole in the ground ever thought that was a good idea.
This is true. "About a grand" is a bit of an exaggeration for illustrative purposes. I'm just saying, and I know, I've always been a bit of an optimist when it comes to AMD, but I would not be surprised if we could buy their top of the line CPU for under $300 and compete with every other chip on the market, it not beat it this time out. I would not be surprised if the AMD / Global Foundries partnership is capable of this.
I can't wait to give Icrontic a big fat, "I told ya so!"
Well, if the Sisoft bungle is any indicator, it'll be balls slow. Bla bla bla pre-production blah blah drivers optimization blah the Intel numbers are skewed...
Well, if the Sisoft bungle is any indicator, it'll be balls slow. Bla bla bla pre-production blah blah drivers optimization blah the Intel numbers are skewed...
Really hope AMD has some magic in the works.
I've read other leaks that have it ripping Intel up on different benchmarks. It's all speculation until one of our boys gets his hands on it for testing.
Here is a link to some more info about Bulldozer, much more technically worded but meaty and broad and full of detail tidbits that were leaked over time - some of it was from insiders to AMD's CPU chip plans and efforts.
Comments
Financially, this would be the prudent move for AMD: When production is not fully ramped up, service the commercial markets first, where the higher profits are. As production increases - yields improve at the foundry - then ship to the retailers. I'm beginning to believe the rumors that foundry yields are not as high (yet) as AMD had hoped, that there's not enough volume to supply the server market as well as the desktop market. I hope I'm wrong.
On a personal level, do I wait longer to see desktop BD results or do I just go for the known entity - 2600K?
Thanks Leo. And with that said, here is a little something more to fuel this vague mystery, from Anand. AMD Ships Bulldozer for Servers, Desktops to Follow in Q4
I'm holding out for reviews. Zambezi would almost have to be a real turd for me not go for it. Especially where F@h is involved, but I need it to do everything else that I do (gaming, professional, ...etc.) at least as well as the 2600K alternate.
I can't say much, but I can say this:
There's not much of a mystery going on.
I thought 90% of your performance yield came from the graphics card when folding. Assuming you have enough to feed the grahpics cards, is there really going to be any value to having the absolute top of the line CPU? :confused2
Gamers and general use demands must be expressed by others, as my requirements are somewhat singular.
Multithreaded CPU processing is king right now in Folding's molecular modeling simulations.
You said it for me Leo. I have a full functioning system listed in my sig. So, I can afford to wait it out and make a decision based on what I see in reviews. I also have all of the components that I need for a new build, which will be zambezi, if I like what I see.
Leo, perhaps you remember the thread which was based on a folding rig? Well this is where it has taken me. So, I don't regard any of the above as a hijack but as a reasonable, and welcomed response, and opinion. We have similar interests in zambezi - is what it amounts to I believe.
And that's why I have such high hopes for Zambezi - to state again - multi-threaded performance. How well will the new AMD archicture function as compared to the Intel core/Hyperthreaded virtual core architecture? I haven't had this much interest in a new series of CPUs in years!
Edit: Oh, Tushon, you wrote "PPD/$" GPUs. Well, yes, within reason. If the $ part of the equation isn't too high and if power consumption isn't crazy.
8150 @ $230? I can't believe it. Something must be wrong with these chips.
Sorry this is just my first/gut reaction. I still want one though.
I think the best news in that article was this:
just announced i7-2700K
"2700K" Humm, if it's only 100-200MHz faster than the 2600k, it's a big yawn from me. If it will overclock just as high or higher with less of a voltage boost, then
AMD Sets World Overclocking Record with 8.429GHz Bulldozer Processor
But what's in an overclock w/o benchies right? I still say Zambezi is a mystery and Scooby is at the helm.
don't care about it's stock speed over the 2600k
I care about the price of the 2600k lowering with the release of the 2700k
nice overclock, those guys are nuts
Seriously though, the days of shelling out about a grand for the top of the line chip are over, and it is a good thing for all of us. Chip fabrication has advanced so far in the past decade, it's almost unfathomable how far we have come. I actually read a little while back that the Athlon II quad core chips they were selling for around $100, they were actually turning a pretty good margin on those at that price, that's how good manufacturing has become over the past few years, they can run quad core chips, box them plop in a little heatsink and a sticker and still make a nice margin at $99. There has never been a better time to be a desktop PC enthusiast, we are building rigs we could barely dream of a few short years ago at a fraction of the cost.
I don't think a top of the line "enthusiast" "gamer" chip can garner more than $300 or so these days. There will always be the few that will pay anything for the fastest part, but when you look at the competitive nature of the market, and the reality that a very small number of desktop users that honestly require more power than they already have available to them, it honestly would not surprise me if AMD makes a smokin fast chip and sells it for around $230 a pop while turning a nice little margin on it because their fab is actually that efficient. Obviously, this is speculation based on speculation, but I think its at least as likely as "OMG Bulldozer is gonna blow if it's not priced through the roof!"
Not that anyone who knew their ass from a hole in the ground ever thought that was a good idea.
This is true. "About a grand" is a bit of an exaggeration for illustrative purposes. I'm just saying, and I know, I've always been a bit of an optimist when it comes to AMD, but I would not be surprised if we could buy their top of the line CPU for under $300 and compete with every other chip on the market, it not beat it this time out. I would not be surprised if the AMD / Global Foundries partnership is capable of this.
I can't wait to give Icrontic a big fat, "I told ya so!"
Really hope AMD has some magic in the works.
I've read other leaks that have it ripping Intel up on different benchmarks. It's all speculation until one of our boys gets his hands on it for testing.
says the man with a 980X, a $999 CPU
that would be cool
Thrax old buddy, isn't it time to spill some beans yet?
Here is a link to some more info about Bulldozer, much more technically worded but meaty and broad and full of detail tidbits that were leaked over time - some of it was from insiders to AMD's CPU chip plans and efforts.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulldozer_%28processor%29