CPU Rumors: Bulldozer Pricing, Phenom II EoL, Sandy Bridge-E Delays - HotHardware
CPU Rumors: Bulldozer Pricing, Phenom II EoL, Sandy Bridge-E Delays

CPU Rumors: Bulldozer Pricing, Phenom II EoL, Sandy Bridge-E Delays

Multiple bits of CPU data have crept out from under the woodwork in the last few days; here's a roundup of what's making the rounds. On the AMD side of the equation comes a rumor that the company is about to stop producing Phenom II X2 and X4 processors in favor of moving consumers along to the Fusion-based A8 hardware. Currently, the two APU's in stock at NewEgg--the A8-3650 (2.6GHz, $119) and the A8-3850 (2.9GHz, $139) offer significantly slower CPU cores than the Phenom II X4 955 BE (3.2GHz, $119) and Phenom II X4 965 BE (3.4GHz, $134) they'd replace.

TechEye, which relayed the rumor from Kitguru, claims that: "So far no one can think of a reason to restart the X2 and X4s" and implies AMD will fill all future orders from existing inventories. While that's certainly possible, it overlooks the fact that Llano has made a much bigger splash in mobile than it has in desktops. Our discussions with AMD and the company's own focus during its recent conference call indicate that it's far more concerned with pushing its new 32nm hardware into laptops and notebooks. The fact that notebooks command higher ASPs and Llano's power consumption improvements shine most brightly there doesn't hurt, either.

That said, Seifert did indicate that the company was currently split 50/50 between Fusion-based product production and 45nm Phenom II-derived manufacturing. He projected that the switchover should be complete by the end of the year. Those of you wanting to grab a budget Phenom II don't need to jump for it tomorrow, but keeping an eye on things is a good idea.

AMD rumor #2 comes courtesy of the company's own AMD FX give-away. Buried under the 'Rules & Regulations' page is this gem:



We've previously speculated that AMD would use the FX brand differently than it did seven years ago. When it debuted, an 'FX' processor was a $1000 enthusiast feather that delivered (at least, in theory) unbeatable performance in every category. Now, the company is applying the term more generically and apparently to a wider range of processors. A $300 price tag would match the CPU up squarely against the Sandy Bridge i7-2600 (3.4GHz/3.8GHz TB). The fairness of that price match is still anyone's guess; Bulldozer's hybridized module approach makes it impossible to predict how the two CPUs will compare against each other core-for-core or clock-for-clock.

Finally, there's disappointing news for Intel enthusiasts. The company's next-generation Sandy Bridge-E processors--that's the six-core replacement for Westmere rumored to be arriving later this year--now apparently may not ship until November. The X79 chipset, once rumored to carry server-level features like SAS (Serial Attached SCSI), is now rumored to be little more than a slightly beefed up P67. The chips, whenever they do launch, will supposedly carry 12-15MB of L3 cache and clock in at up to 3.9GHz in Turbo Mode.
0
+ -

I see Intel winning on pure X86 performance but AMD winning in the graphics department. And most users I would bet appreciate better graphics than more raw power.

It still will be a good fight seeing how Bulldozer stacks up to Sandy Bridge.

Let the benchmarks loose.

0
+ -

"So, you did not mention anything about the launch date for Bulldozer, which is "Rumored" to be September 19th, revealed in the FX comics video at 0:14 on the lower left corner,  so does that mean its not a rumor, its official. Anyhow, I dont care about SB-E anymore, Sandy Bridge is here and out already, I'm just excited about Bulldozer, after that, everything else in terms of CPU doesn't really matter to me anymore."

 

0
+ -

@ Optimus

You know what the scary part is? There is no T, what other month still yet to come this year ends like that? November. I wonder if AMD is not gonna do a paper launch given that sept 19 is out of their 60-90 day window they quoted us on June 1st.

0
+ -

@ DWooldridge

December also fits. ;)

0
+ -

@DWooldridge 

"Your right, good catch. but maybe, just maybe, I think that September is pretty safe seeing that they announced this contest, I have High Hopes for this. "

@stikxs

'Yeah, that would be very sad."

-Optimus

+3
+ -

Are the Ruby dolls life-size?

0
+ -

Super Dave:
Are the Ruby dolls life-size?

They usually are in Los Angeles,......

I think that this is fast becoming a good time to wait and see what develops in the long term. The next 6 or 8 months with paint an interesting picture for consumers. Bulldozer is greatly anticipated, but it's so secretive as to how it will perform. Intel promises some juicy new technology in the near future and this is exciting news too.

If there is something on the market now that will do everything you need it to do already, then just getting it over with right away may be a good idea. It seems as if there is always something new and exciting coming to retailers in the near future, and you could find yourself waiting, and waiting, and waiting,...............

 

0
+ -

If you can wait I'd suggest waiting at least until piledriver comes out next year. I'm sure bulldozer is a great new architecture, but piledriver will integrate the north bridge onto the same chip quite likely making the socket more future proof as well as providing a significant performance boost. Sandy Bridge E will be expensive and Intel has already announced their intention to artificially limit the performance of Ivy Bridge so it doesn't compete with their more expensive offerings. 

0
+ -

wuliheron:
Intel has already announced their intention to artificially limit the performance of Ivy Bridge so it doesn't compete with their more expensive offerings. 

Someone will 'un-limit' them if they do. Anything under the hood will be exposed, I'm sure.

0
+ -

This isn't some playstation hack. Its a 22nm processor with a billion transistors and hardware limitations built in. Par for the course for Intel. They have a 4 year lead on fabrication technology and routinely limit what people can do to their chips including not least of all overclocking.

 

0
+ -

Wait... Are they going to limit the performance on K series processors as well?

0
+ -

The "K" stands for overclocking meaning only that they can be overclocked.

To put this into perspective, roughly half the chips they produce can be worthless garbage they throw away. The rest they sort out according to how many cores work and how much they can be overclocked. AMD's "Black Edition" and Intel's "K" chips are those that can be significantly overclocked. Sometime you can find a chip that isn't "K" or "Black Edition" that can be overclocked significantly, but most can only achieve modest overclocks.

0
+ -

wuliheron:

The "K" stands for overclocking meaning only that they can be overclocked.

To put this into perspective, roughly half the chips they produce can be worthless garbage they throw away. The rest they sort out according to how many cores work and how much they can be overclocked. AMD's "Black Edition" and Intel's "K" chips are those that can be significantly overclocked. Sometime you can find a chip that isn't "K" or "Black Edition" that can be overclocked significantly, but most can only achieve modest overclocks.

You may need to get your facts straight... I thought you meant that Intel was going to put a performance cap/limit how much we were going to overclock our K series, I mean they're still putting out X branded CPU's and I thought they would put all the overclocking on the X chips and limit how much the K chips can do.

It's not just the black edition that's unlockable. All of AMD's processors are overclockable while Intel's recent Sandy Bridge series of processors is not overclockable unless you buy a K series chip. Anything that's under four digits is overclockable.

Well you are right in the fact that these chips that aren't "Extreme" or "Black Edition" aren't overclockable to a very certain extent but when talking about Intel's recent processor's, it's a completely different ballpark. We're finding the only thing overclockable is the multiplier count and well, the fact that they could possibly limit the processor's power (possibly including the K series) so they don't compete with the more powerful, enthusiast parts certainly scares us all.

 

0
+ -

 

wuliheron:
Intel has already announced their intention to artificially limit the performance of Ivy Bridge so it doesn't compete with their more expensive offerings.
wuliheron:
This isn't some playstation hack. Its a 22nm processor with a billion transistors and hardware limitations built in. Par for the course for Intel. They have a 4 year lead on fabrication technology and routinely limit what people can do to their chips including not least of all overclocking.
You said "artificially limit" and I took that to mean not a hardware lock out. If it's done with software, hackers will find a way to counter it.

 

0
+ -

Ivy bridge is not to be confused with sandy bridge. It is the die shrink of sandy bridge and they will be putting hardware lockouts on the first available ivy bridge chips to ensure they don't compete with sandy bridge E. That's all I said and if you misinterpreted it then I suggest you ask yourself why.

Manufacturers use a variety of different methods to limit overclocking and even to limit the number of cores people can use. Suffice it to say these are all artificially induced limits used for marketing purposes. Nor does a hardware lockout mean you can't overclock at all, it merely means there is a limitation built in to how much you can overclock.

0
+ -

wuliheron:
and they will be putting hardware lockouts on the first available ivy bridge chips to ensure they don't compete with sandy bridge E

wuliheron:
That's all I said

No, that not what you said, but ~this time you clarified~ and said "Hardware Lockouts".

wuliheron:
if you misinterpreted it then I suggest you ask yourself why.

No, I asked me and he said that your original statement was ambiguous and open to interpretation. Consider that unlocking more cores in AMD chips is handled though manipulation of the BIOS in your PC. (a software enabling hardware solution) You have clarified though and that's good.

0
+ -

So what socket will the Sandy Bridge be?

0
+ -

vorthex:

So what socket will the Sandy Bridge be?

Sandy Bridge-E... LGA 2011

Ivy Bridge... Also LGA 2011

Also think before you bump threads like this one; bumping threads while not adding much to it is mostly considered a tattoo around many online forums. I'm not a moderator but it somewhat irks me when people bump threads like this without thinking.

0
+ -

Super Dave:

Are the Ruby dolls life-size?

Not Quite Super Dave !

But Can definitely keep a '  on- guard '  up a Sapphire HD 6850 ! Smile

0
+ -

She definitely looks collectible! 

0
+ -

Super Dave:

She definitely looks collectible! 

here are some of the others ..just in case your interested

 

0
+ -

rrplay:
here are some of the others ..just in case your interested

I'm waiting for Agent Ruby Sandy Bridge Slayer! (same organization, different mission)

0
+ -

Super Dave:

Are the Ruby dolls life-size?

Not really Super Dave  but looking pretty fine to me !

 

0
+ -

Barbie's in trouble now,.........

Ken's gonna leave her for sure.

0
+ -

hahaha yea

1 2 Next
Login or Register to Comment
Post a Comment
Username:   Password: