Exodus from AMD Chief operating officer, Robert Rivet, left the company on Tuesday after eleven years at the world's second largest support of x86 microprocessors. The company also noted that Marty Seyer, corporate strategy officer, would also leave AMD. Marty Seyer senior vice president (SVP) and corporate strategy officer will also resign from AMD immediately with no obvious reasons given. ________________________________________________ Finally we will have INTEL World Domination !!!!! Let the prices skyrocket.... praised be! _____________________________________________________ Quote: Marty Seyer joined AMD in 2002 as the vice president of server business. In fact, the whole career of Mr. Seyer can be linked to server technology. Given the fact that the board of directors no longer wants an experienced server specialist to influence the strategy of the company, it may mean that the BOD does not see server chips and technologies as a top priority for AMD. AMD is pulling out of the server market? Why? To focus more on the server market with the new hyperthreading Bulldozer???
Normal business practice, if you have an upcoming great product, is to successfully launch the product and then say thank you to all the deserving.
You forget that the board just pushed out their CEO because of the mobile space. He's taking a stand. Not saying their future products aren't competitive.
This has nothing to do with Bulldozer. They canned those CEOs and VPs because they weren't staying competitive, not because they were pulling out of the market. For those looking for real information, I'll explain. Bulldozer will be set up in modules. Each module will feature two cores, 2MB cache per module and 8MB shared cache. So, programs that perform a lot of repetitive operations will see a performance increase here over past models. Each module will have two threads and will be able to perform four operations per clock per core. Each thread will have its own scheduler. Those features are meant to increase efficiency within the chip in order to get more raw performance and reduce the number of bottlenecks. The processors will also be capable of 256-bit operations to be compatible with Intel's new AVX instruction set. As for clock speed, each core will be capable of running at frequencies of 3.5GHz or more. The processors will also feature HT 3.1, carried over from the Opteron processors. That, alone, will increase memory access exponentially. The desktop processors and the server processors will be almost identical in design, except the server processors will be based on different pin configurations (G34 and C32).
AMD May Axe Microprocessor Brand-Names http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/di..._Can_Microprocessor_Brand_Names_Document.html Instead of traditional Phenom, Athlon and Sempron, AMD's product family will include FX-series, A-series and E-series microprocessors. For example, Mercedes does not name its cars, but has various classes (A, B, C, E, R, S, etc.) that may be based on similar chassis, engines, etc., but provide experience that is expected from a particular class (e.g., A provides maximum compactness, S provides maximum comfort).
Hilarious news: (X-Bit labs) AMD Plans Extremely Rapid Transition to New Micro Process Technology. Advanced Micro Devices seems to be planning extremely rapid transition of its desktop microprocessors to 32nm silicon-on-insulator fabrication process, a person with knowledge of the matter said. By the second quarter of 2012 virtually all AMD processors will be made using 32nm SOI technology and be based on new designs. In time while AMD will fully ramp up it's 32nm node Intel will be selling almost 50% smaller 22nm chips with much higher clocks.
Latest "leaks". The Bulldozer 2-core CPU module contains 213M transistors in an 11-metal layer 32nm high-k metal-gate SOI CMOS process and is designed to operate from 0.8 to 1.3V. This micro-architecture improves performance and frequency while reducing area and power over a previous AMD x86-64 CPU in the same process. The design reduces the number of gates/cycle relative to prior designs, achieving 3.5GHz+ operation in an area (including 2MB L2 cache) of 30.9mm2. "The folks over at Rumorpedia have apparently received engineering benchmarks comparing a new quad-core AMD Bulldozer CPU, named Zambezi, to Intel’s Sandy Bridge Core i7-2600K processor. If the benchmarks are to be believed, the new AMD Bulldozer CPUs should absolutely demolish the Sandy Bridge offering from Intel. Again, please remember that these are rumours and, as a couple of commenters at Rumorpedia pointed out, it is possible that these are 4-module CPUs with a total of 8-cores (Phenom II X8, anyone?). Plenty of unknowns at the moment. Anyways, according to the rumor, the Zambezi (AMD Bulldozer CPU) running at a stock 3.5GHz beats a stock 3.4GHz i7-2600K (Intel Sandy Bridge CPU) by nearly 15.6% in 3D Mark Vantage and manages to match an over-clocked 4.0 GHz i7-2600K. More impressively, an over-clocked Zambezi at 4.2GHz manages to beat the over-clocked 4.0GHz i7-2600K by about 16.6%. If Bulldozer can deliver performance similar to this rumour, AMD should be able to give Intel a run-for-their-money…until Ivy Bridge launches."
I would love for the rumors to be true and see AMD give Intel little bashing. 2 reasons, i like AMD stuff and secondly and more importantly, it'll keep intel real with their prices. Roll on Bulldozer.. Oh dear I sort of made a bad pun then
The last news release from AMD ""The U.S.-based CPU and chip maker AMD will present at CeBIT 2011 processors, which performance exceeds the current top models of the Phenom-II series by 50%," other news: the new Bulldozer CPUs are not solely AM3+ compatible; a BIOS update makes possible for them to function in an AM3 motherboard. AM3+ platform will double the connection between North and Southbridge. New platforms and CPU will probably debut at Computex in June.
no wai ! that would be nice upgrade for people with am3 boards, if bulldozer can get close to i5 2500k i'll be getting another amd cpu can't wait for reviews DD
Unfortunately if that is true, I think it would need to be a 4 module, 8 core design versus a 2500k to beat the pants off it. Everything coming out of both AMD and other for awhile now is that the new Bulldozer architecture is going to be an improvement on K10 by quite a bit, but still clock for clock and core for core probably isn't going to quite match the i3/5/7 series, let alone the i3/5/7 II (sandybridge) series. Only advantage is probably a better integrated graphics core (which matters little except for a low power HTPC setup or business workstation maybe) and more cores (at least at first, and maybe in the long run). More cores is better, but just look at Gulftown versus Westmere. Or heck, Gulftown vs. Sandybridge. There just aren't all that many applications where 6 cores is going to be an advantage over 4. Considering the 50% greater core advantage, the 2600k beats out the 980x in most benchmarks except for a small few where the 980x pulls ahead by maybe 10-20%. I am all for more cores, but there is a diminishing return in a workstation environment unless you use specific applications in large part. I doubt for 90% of what most of us do you'd see much more than a 15-30% increase in performance going from 4 to 6 cores (which is 50% more cores for those losing count) and I bet you wouldn't see more than a 10-15% boost going from 6 to 8 cores in most applications. Just some food for thought. IF bulldozer is faster, it is because it has more cores and in lightly threaded apps you aren't going to be able to take advantage of that, and a lot of apps are lightly threaded or single thread still. Intel is also going to have Ivy Bridge out not long after Bulldozer and also the 6 and 8 core versions of Sandybridge. This isn't to knock AMD. I am all for competition, its just that they haven't been able to be really competitive for several years now, and I just don't see bulldozer catching them up anymore than the Phenom and Athlon X2 series did to i3/5/7 (since Core 2 duo/quad performs clock for clock about the same). AMD for now seems to be destined to compete on price, not on overall performance or efficiency (and maybe not even price per GFLOPS). Now if they can manage a whicked implementation of an on-die GPU with their CPUs, they very well might own the lower end market for budget PCs for people. They might even edge up if they find a way to integrate a pretty whicked GPU along with interoperability w/ a discrete card. Crossfire support between the two would be pretty nice...maybe some kind of physics processing using the on die GPU and graphics with the discrete card, or a GPU that actually can brush the lower end of the mid market (5670 equivelent or better).
I think AMD has been using it's own crystal ball with bulldozer. Soon enough a limit will be hit with how fast a CPU can go, and it looks like we are very close to that limit. The way forward in multi-core CPU's for multi-threaded applications and this is becoming more and more clear. AMD is betting highly on this and hoping programmers adapt to GPGPU programming with OpenGL. If or when this happens then the bulldozer architecture may well wipe the floor with Intel (however Intels integrated graphics chip is very good) but it may not. I want AMD to fight back and be competitive in the high end market again I really do, but even with Bulldozer it's hard to believe it will make the huge gains it needs to overtake SB. However they could dominate the mid-range and below.
June 20th - begins the shipments of AMD FX-series high-end desktop microprocessors AMD's Bulldozer: -4 eight-core AMD FX8000 -2 six-core AMD FX6000 -2 quad-core AMD FX4000
