bit-tech.net

Leaked slide details AMD Bulldozer models

Leaked slide details AMD Bulldozer models

The leaked slide details the TDP and core-counts of AMD's forthcoming Bulldozer CPUs.

An allegedly leaked slide from an in-house Asus presentation appears to detail the specifications of AMD's forthcoming Bulldozer line-up of CPUs.

The slide recently appeared on the ZOL forums, and has a number of figures erased from it, including the clock speeds. This was apparently carried out in order to protect the anonymity of the person who leaked the slide.

However, the slide's remaining information confirms that both the top-end Bulldozer chips, the FX-8130P and the FX-8110, will feature eight cores. According to the slide, the latter will apparently even have a TDP of just 95W, despite all the processing cores.

The slide also suggests that AMD’s new processors will come with a revised version of the TurboCore technology that enabled later Phenom X6 CPUs to dynamically boost their core speeds depending on the workload.

Some intrepid forum users have attempted to guess at the figures erased on the slide by looking at the remaining outlines of the numbers. We’d recommend taking these figures with an unhealthy measure of salt, but the current numbers being bandied around are a stock speed of 3.8GHz (4.2GHz with Turbo Core) for the top-of-the-line FX-8130P. This is followed by the FX-8110 at 3.6GHz (4GHz with Turbo Core).

Are you frustrated by the lack of concrete information about AMD's new processors? Do you think they will be able to compete with Intel's Sandy Bridge chips? Let us know your thoughts in the forums.

UPDATE: Asus has since been in touch with us to state that this slide is not from within their company and is in fact a fake. The company claim that they never use the term mainboard or use plain white slides in their presentations.

Leaked slide details AMD Bulldozer models Leaked slide details Bulldozer pricing and clock speeds

34 Comments

Discuss in the forums Reply
l3v1ck 24th May 2011, 15:18 Quote
If the default frequencies are really that high, I'd be worried. Do AMD really need to clock such a new architecture so high to compete right at the start of its life cycle?
[USRF]Obiwan 24th May 2011, 15:20 Quote
Who said the frequencies where high. Maybe its ultra low.
Hustler 24th May 2011, 15:36 Quote
"Do you think they will be able to compete with Intel's Sandy Bridge chips?"

Clock for clock, core for core....no

I'm still going to assume a SB 2500k @ 4.2Ghz will be faster than a 4 core BD @ 4.2Ghz.

But as usual with AMD, they will use 6 & 8 cores to outpace the SB 4 cores...which is fine if the game/app your using is well multithreaded...not so great if you need all the single core speed you can get.
schmidtbag 24th May 2011, 15:38 Quote
I agree with both of the first 2 comments. Frequencies that high is really a big step for a brand new product, however, a frequency like that might actually be low. There are some IBM PPC based processors that operate at 5ghz for it's standard speed. Since this is a brand new architecture, 3.8ghz might actually be like what 2.6 used to be.
MrJay 24th May 2011, 15:52 Quote
Lets just wait and see : )
Birdy 24th May 2011, 15:57 Quote
^+1

As fun as it is, we shouldn't be passing judgement when we only have some people's guesses and opinions to go on, and who says that the slides are genuine anyway?

Looking forward to it coming out though - is it June or July or what?
CrapBag 24th May 2011, 16:02 Quote
Rumoured to be the week of the 20th June.

Rumoured

Bindi's hint on another thread about waiting two weeks before upgrading has me wondering if they might be a little earlier.
tad2008 24th May 2011, 16:07 Quote
Being able to upgrade from a dual core running at 3Ghz to 8 cores at 3Ghz+ would me a monumental upgrade and huge jump in performance for me.
Evildead666 24th May 2011, 16:08 Quote
I thought it was more of 3.3GHz stock, 3.8GHz max turbo on all cores, and a max turbo on one core of 4.3/4.5GHz.
All of the chips in the slide can turbo at max over 1GHz, for a single core.
We already know that the desktop chips will turbo 500MHz max when all the cores are being used fully.

Not long to wait before the reviews come in ;)
DST 24th May 2011, 16:12 Quote
I don't know about you but I'm tired of hearing "bulldozer this, bulldozer that". I don't care about leaks regardless of how amazing they look or what they tell.

Until I see head to head comparison of Intel- and Amd-based systems (similarly priced) - all these leaks are VAPORWARE to me
l3v1ck 24th May 2011, 16:53 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by [USRF]Obiwan
Who said the frequencies where high. Maybe its ultra low.
Errr. The article you just read did (or at least it speculated).
Quote:
but the current numbers being bandied around are a stock speed of 3.8GHz (4.2GHz with Turbo Core)
I'd have hoped a newer more efficient architecture would have been able to compete at lower clock speeds leaving room to improve in the future.
Action_Parsnip 24th May 2011, 16:57 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by l3v1ck
If the default frequencies are really that high, I'd be worried. Do AMD really need to clock such a new architecture so high to compete right at the start of its life cycle?


(Oh noes the clockm speeds are soo high!) + (Oh noes the clock speeds are soo low!) = Derp
Goty 24th May 2011, 17:57 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by l3v1ck
Quote:
Originally Posted by [USRF]Obiwan
Who said the frequencies where high. Maybe its ultra low.
Errr. The article you just read did (or at least it speculated).

"High" and "low" clockspeeds are relative. As mentioned earlier, there are designs that hit several GHz higher than what we're used to now, so launching at even slightly below 4GHz would equate to a "low" clockspeed part. It's all dependent on the architecture.
warejon9 24th May 2011, 18:21 Quote
Yea i think its CPC performance, i mean look at the i7 920 compared to the x4 965 in encoding etc etc. I hope that whatever AMD put out it will be good :) I think Intel has learned their lesson from the netburst eira. I feel sorry in a way for AMD considering how much bigger Intel is slightly unfair.

Also didn't SB launch with clocks in the range of 3ghz for the higher tier stuff? So who cares what speed they launch at, as long as their CPC is good and they don't burn a hole in your mobo.
OCJunkie 24th May 2011, 19:21 Quote
Either way I'm excited, CPC performance might still land behind SB but for the price difference (I asssume) that's something I'm willing to accept. The article didn't mention any clocks but knowing AMD they'll have plenty of headroom... my 955's @3.8 on air and stock volt so I know it can do even better, and I expect BD to have that kind of flex too.
Bindibadgi 25th May 2011, 04:35 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrapBag
Rumoured to be the week of the 20th June.

Rumoured

Bindi's hint on another thread about waiting two weeks before upgrading has me wondering if they might be a little earlier.

No, I said wait for the announcements and reviews before making a decision. I never commented on launch dates :)
confusis 25th May 2011, 04:49 Quote
And so begins the mhz(ghz) wars again.

I'm hoping these are the low end of the clocks, or they have mahoosive o/c potential :)
Aracos 25th May 2011, 05:06 Quote
Don't think anyone's said this yet but might aswell, could be that they want to obliterate Intel with their superior architecture so they have high stock speeds! Well, one can dream :P

Or it could just be that AMD is trying to increase expected clock speeds by pushing higher speeds for stock. We can't possibly stay in the 3GHz area forever.....or can we? :-(
Bindibadgi 25th May 2011, 05:32 Quote
I've just confirmed with the motherboard dept.

This slide is FAKE

It is NOT from ASUS. We never use the term 'mainboard' or plain white slides without NDA information. ;)

Dear Paul, would you mind adjusting the news story to reflect this :) Thank you!
xaser04 25th May 2011, 08:56 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by warejon9


Also didn't SB launch with clocks in the range of 3ghz for the higher tier stuff? So who cares what speed they launch at, as long as their CPC is good and they don't burn a hole in your mobo.

Yes:

i5 2500k - 3.3GHz Turbo to 3.7GHz
i7 2600k - 3.4GHz Turbo to 3.8GHz

Assuming the top tier Bulldozer parts are comteting with these SB models stock clocks of 3.6-3.8GHz are not *that* much higher.
Material 25th May 2011, 10:35 Quote
The news article has now been updated.
Bindibadgi 25th May 2011, 10:37 Quote
Much appreciated, Paul :)
azrael- 25th May 2011, 12:24 Quote
Those "8 cores" aren't by any chance supposed to be the 8 FPU cores? Because those cores share 4 Integer cores. So in a way one could say that Bulldozer is a "hybrid" 4C/8C (or 2C/4C) processor.
SexyHyde 25th May 2011, 17:04 Quote
When will bit-tech be doing previews/reviews.
Xtrafresh 25th May 2011, 17:13 Quote
Come on guys! An asian company would never in a milion years use plain white slides like that! Also, the WordArt NDA labels and ssupposedly greyed out numbers just make my skin crawl. Why on earth are you even publishing about this?

Bindi, can you show an (old) slide just to show how horrible this fake is? I'd post a Gigabyte one, but that would be rude :p
Bindibadgi 25th May 2011, 17:45 Quote
Oh yea hold on let me just go get my Crosshair V slides... OHWAITAMINUTE I SEE WHAT YOU DID THERE
slothy89 26th May 2011, 04:22 Quote
What screams fake to me is the "AM3+ Processors Ready" logo on the top right. Why would an internal slide contain a retail marketing icon?

Any way, the only useful information the "leak" gives us is possible model numbers. And even then are they real? *sigh*
azrael- 26th May 2011, 09:21 Quote
Just saw an article over on Fudzilla with a pretty good image of the upcoming ASUS Crosshair V Formula.

It looks to be a pretty tricked-out board. Which makes me infer that if ASUS deems it worthwhile to bring this board to market it probably also deems Bulldozer to be a worthwhile purchase. Am I way off in my assumption?
xaser04 26th May 2011, 10:40 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by azrael-
Those "8 cores" aren't by any chance supposed to be the 8 FPU cores? Because those cores share 4 Integer cores. So in a way one could say that Bulldozer is a "hybrid" 4C/8C (or 2C/4C) processor.

Isn't it the other way round?

Each Bulldozer "module" has two integer "cores" and one shared FPU unit (very simplisticly speaking) so the 4 module part (FX8xxx) has 8 "cores".

http://techreport.com/articles.x/19514
Quote:
Originally Posted by TR Article

AMD didn't take that approach, though. Instead, the team chose to integrate two cores together into a fundamental building block it calls a "Bulldozer module." This module, diagrammed above, shares portions of a traditional core—including the instruction fetch, decode, and floating-point units and L2 cache—between two otherwise-complete processor cores. The resources AMD chose to share are not always fully utilized in a single core, so not duplicating them could be a win on multiple fronts. The firm claims a Bulldozer module can achieve 80% of the performance of two complete cores of the same capability. Yet McKinney told us AMD has estimated that including the second integer core adds only 12% to the chip area occupied by a Bulldozer module. If these claims are anywhere close to the truth, Bulldozer should be substantially more efficient in terms of performance per chip area—which translates into efficiency per transistor and per watt, as well.
azrael- 26th May 2011, 11:25 Quote
I might have gotten it the wrong way around, but my point is still valid. It's neither a true quad core nor a true octa core.
Xtrafresh 26th May 2011, 11:55 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bindibadgi
Oh yea hold on let me just go get my Crosshair V slides... OHWAITAMINUTE I SEE WHAT YOU DID THERE
Haha, that would be nice, but i genuinly was looking for an old slide just to unmask this fake thing :p

Now that you made it a challenge though... Here's what our slides look like :D

http://forum.giga-byte.nl/upload/files/File1-Media%20Kit_990FXA-UD7%20rev1.023.jpg
http://forum.giga-byte.nl/upload/files/File1-Media%20Kit_990FXA-UD7%20rev1.045.jpg
http://forum.giga-byte.nl/upload/files/File1-Media%20Kit_990FXA-UD7%20rev1.050.jpg
http://forum.giga-byte.nl/upload/files/File1-Media%20Kit_990FXA-UD7%20rev1.051.jpg
http://forum.giga-byte.nl/upload/files/File1-Media%20Kit_990FXA-UD7%20rev1.055.jpg

And yes, these have been released before, check the german gigabyte facebook page :)
azrael- 26th May 2011, 12:21 Quote
One thing that's been puzzling me is whether or not Bulldozer will still support ECC memory "out of the box" as all K8+ processors have done so far.
r8bwp 26th May 2011, 13:39 Quote
After upgrading my faithfull e6600 to the 2600k im impressed with the speeds of it. By the time bulldozer is released won`t be long before the ivy bridge comes along. 6 months ive heard about bulldozer (yawn boring change the record) talk about catchup and never being caught.

Shame intel screed the chipset up but impressive to get that sorted out in two months maybe 3
r8bwp 26th May 2011, 13:39 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by r8bwp
After upgrading my faithfull e6600 to the 2600k im impressed with the speeds of it. By the time bulldozer is released won`t be long before the ivy bridge comes along. 6 months ive heard about bulldozer (yawn boring change the record) talk about catchup and never being caught.

Shame intel screwed the chipset up but impressive to get that sorted out in two months maybe 3
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums