Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

Bulldozer - socket backwards compatibility

Last response: in CPUs
Share
a b à CPUs
September 11, 2010 9:52:29 PM

According to some posts,etc Bulldozer will NOT work with AM3 boards. However, AM3 CPU will work on Bulldozer based boards.
Score
0

Best solution

a b à CPUs
September 11, 2010 10:12:46 PM

I believe AMD stated that Bulldozer will use a new socket(AM3r2) that will allow older processors to be put into the socket, but Bulldozer won't work in older AM3 boards. They supposedly did this to make Bulldozer work at its best.
I don't think they will call the new socket AM4, since the # refers to the type of Ram used(AM2-DDR2/AM3-DDR3).
Share
Related resources
September 11, 2010 10:40:05 PM

AM3+ than?
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 12, 2010 12:15:15 AM

^ Probably.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 12, 2010 2:30:47 AM

Do you know what it adds? Another memory channel, or just more advanced circuitry?
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 12, 2010 4:28:29 AM

I haven't heard much about why they were doing this, but there must be a good reason.

I have heard that AMD is updating the memory controller(same memory speed=more throughput), so it could possibly be more channels.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 12, 2010 3:59:54 PM

To really see what Bullldozer may have, you could look at the chipsets,etc used with the Opteron G34 based CPUs. AMD has said Bulldozer WILL be compatible with G34 socket. So we could assume that pin out of the "Bulldozer" CPUs will be similar to the current "Magny-Cours" CPUs.
Score
0
September 12, 2010 4:15:17 PM

Server chipset feature set is different from client feature sets.

G34 has 2 processor dies and 4 memory channels so it will not look like a client socket.

The fact that you can put an AM3 CPU in an AM3+ socket should be your best indicator of what to look for.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 15, 2010 1:00:34 AM

^ lol yeah, I think a lot of people were counting on AM3 being able to support Bulldozer.

EXT64 said:
Do you know what it adds? Another memory channel, or just more advanced circuitry?

More RAM channels and I think more power,FP,etc units.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 15, 2010 1:13:02 AM

I don't really understand the ram part, of course Quad-Channel sounds sweet n all but all I do is game and my system barely uses 2.5 to 3Gb at the most under load. I'm just going to wait till DDR4 becomes mainstream, no need for any board/ram upgrades till Q1/Q2 2012.

Seems like upgrading to Zambezi will cost an arm and a leg since you will have to upgrade the Board/CPU and most likely will not be able to recycle your current ram :( 

Score
0
a c 148 à CPUs
September 15, 2010 1:23:07 AM

ddr4s still another year+ away :( 
Score
0
a c 127 à CPUs
September 15, 2010 2:01:14 AM

popatim said:
ddr4s still another year+ away :( 


DDR4 should be adopted by Intel in either 2012 or 2013. Which means AMD will adopt it a year after them.

As for Bulldozer, I doubt they are adding a thrid memory channel to AM3+ (AM3r2). The whole reason why Intel has two sockets right now is because one has 2 DDR3 channels and the other has 3 which requires more traces and more pins. So I highly doubt AM3 having 1 more actual pin than AM2 (940 vs 941) would grant them the ability to have tri-channel DDR3.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 15, 2010 3:49:16 AM

Quote:
I don't really understand the ram part, of course Quad-Channel sounds sweet n all but all I do is game and my system barely uses 2.5 to 3Gb at the most under load. I'm just going to wait till DDR4 becomes mainstream, no need for any board/ram upgrades till Q1/Q2 2012.

For desktops, it doesn't really matter. However, for servers/HPC it matters quite a lot. Given that the same die is used in consumer and server line up, it makes sense to have more RAM channels.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 15, 2010 4:00:42 AM

So is AMD ever going to go LGA rather than sockets? From a purely installation point of view, I guess I prefer sockets, though I did buy this i5 in part to experience LGA. I thought LGA gave some benefits (higher pin density), though I suppose that only matters if you can make the array correctly (*cough*Foxconn*cough*).
Score
0
a c 127 à CPUs
September 15, 2010 5:06:28 AM

EXT64 said:
So is AMD ever going to go LGA rather than sockets? From a purely installation point of view, I guess I prefer sockets, though I did buy this i5 in part to experience LGA. I thought LGA gave some benefits (higher pin density), though I suppose that only matters if you can make the array correctly (*cough*Foxconn*cough*).


I personally like LGA over PGA. Not only does it give higher pin density but it also maximizes contact space while lowering exposed areas. Plus it reduces the risk of breaking a pin on a CPU.

Its pretty hard to break a pin on a LGA mobo. You would have to try really where as a drop or slight touching of the pin on a PGA setup can bend one pin and the CPU could end up dead.

As for AMD, I have been wondering that myself. They know its the better way to go but who knows.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 15, 2010 12:55:30 PM

It seems it should be, but for a while I was helping fix bent LGA pins in the Motherboard/Systems section almost constantly. But that was probably more due to the bad QC that was occurring with those sockets at the time. LGA certainly is nice in that there is now only one delicate component - the motherboard (which always was delicate). Now you'd have to let your dog chew on your LGA CPU to kill it.
Score
0
a c 131 à CPUs
September 16, 2010 3:57:44 AM

jimmysmitty said:
As for AMD, I have been wondering that myself. They know its the better way to go but who knows.

If they follow through with what is rumoured (AM3 CPUs in AM3r2 motherboards), then it won't happen.
Score
0
a c 127 à CPUs
September 16, 2010 4:01:28 AM

^Oh I know it wont happen for AM3r2. Maybe AM4 but then again it would kill any and all backwards compatability.

I just wonder if they are hanging on to something futile that might be holding them back from even more.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 17, 2010 6:15:48 PM

Yeah...

No backward compatibility for Bulldozer. So all those people who were selling AM3 platforms to people (promising them compatibility as a sales pitch) and with whom I had arguments must now eat their words and apologize for misleading so many potential buyers.

The AM3 platform will likely get more CPUs (based on existing architectures) but advancement wise... it is pretty much dead (unless they release mainstream Bulldozer chips lacking features).
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 17, 2010 6:43:51 PM

ElMoIsEviL said:
Yeah...

No backward compatibility for Bulldozer. So all those people who were selling AM3 platforms to people (promising them compatibility as a sales pitch) and with whom I had arguments must now eat their words and apologize for misleading so many potential buyers.

The AM3 platform will likely get more CPUs (based on existing architectures) but advancement wise... it is pretty much dead (unless they release mainstream Bulldozer chips lacking features).


I would like to know who promised what.. AFAIK nobody yet has even planned on buying an AM3 board for Dozer since nobody knows yet if it will be a dual/quad channel platform.
Score
0
a c 83 à CPUs
September 17, 2010 6:57:50 PM

OvrClkr said:
I would like to know who promised what.. AFAIK nobody yet has even planned on buying an AM3 board for Dozer since nobody knows yet if it will be a dual/quad channel platform.


This forum has been flooded with people for months that have advised getting a Phenom II/AM3 combo and upgrading to Bulldozer later instead of getting an I5/I7 because they're on dead end sockets with no future. In fact, most any thread where the OP asked the question Phenom II or I5, the drop in Bulldozer cpu was usually mentioned.

There are also a number of people that falsely claim buying a Phenom II X2 555 will almost always result in a working quad core too, and they recommend them over Athlon II X4 processors for people who have clear use for quads. Different thing, but still AMD fan boys misleading people.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 17, 2010 7:08:12 PM

pins.. lga... i say we go back to the socket days... liek my socket celeron .. that bad boy overclocked to 500Mhz in its day :D 

but srsly yea anybody who bought a am3 board expecting to drop in bulldozr really just wasn't thinking. there woudl be no use for legacy support of ddr2 anymore and with such a drastic architecture change a new socket was inevitable
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 17, 2010 7:10:48 PM

loneninja said:
This forum has been flooded with people for months that have advised getting a Phenom II/AM3 combo and upgrading to Bulldozer later instead of getting an I5/I7 because they're on dead end sockets with no future. In fact, most any thread where the OP asked the question Phenom II or I5, the drop in Bulldozer cpu was usually mentioned.

There are also a number of people that falsely claim buying a Phenom II X2 555 will almost always result in a working quad core too, and they recommend them over Athlon II X4 processors for people who have clear use for quads. Different thing, but still AMD fan boys misleading people.

Threads like this you mean?
http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/281073-28-1366#t2102030
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 17, 2010 7:31:25 PM

loneninja said:
This forum has been flooded with people for months that have advised getting a Phenom II/AM3 combo and upgrading to Bulldozer later instead of getting an I5/I7 because they're on dead end sockets with no future. In fact, most any thread where the OP asked the question Phenom II or I5, the drop in Bulldozer cpu was usually mentioned.

There are also a number of people that falsely claim buying a Phenom II X2 555 will almost always result in a working quad core too, and they recommend them over Athlon II X4 processors for people who have clear use for quads. Different thing, but still AMD fan boys misleading people.


I have seen most of those threads if not all and i don't see anyone advising/recommending/suggesting to the OP or anyone on the thread that they should opt NOW for an AM3 board for the sole purpose of upgrading to Dozer once it launches. Now, on the other hand I do see where various users have said that they are certain that it will be an AM3 CPU but of course you would have to take that with a grain of salt because at that time NOBODY knew anything so it was all speculation.

As far as the 555 goes, i'm not really going to comment on that since most of us knew beforehand that the unlocking was never guaranteed and if anyone disagrees all the have to do is google it.

Quote:
AMD fan boys misleading people


One thing is an AMD fanboy that knows what he is talking about and the other is an AMD fanboy that likes to troll the forum. You have to differentiate one from the other ;) 
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 17, 2010 8:05:29 PM

OvrClkr said:
megaman and jennyh were the only one's that were posting not so great answers :lol: 

Yeah, spooky that! :lol:  But I just lobbed that up as an example of what loneninja might have meant because I too saw quite a few mentions that BD was definitely going to backwards compatible because only Intel change sockets every five minutes, not that any proof was provided of course but that was probably because there wasn't any.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 17, 2010 8:21:03 PM

kaspro said:
hey, i found this pic which shows that the new bulldozer will support AM3 Sockets!
http://images.anandtech.com/reviews/cpu/amd/FAD2009/desktoproadmap.jpg
and here's the article i found it in
http://www.anandtech.com/show/2871/2

You forgot to add the important bit though.
Quote:
Obviously guaranteeing motherboard support this early in the game is difficult, but AMD is usually good about maintaining socket compatibility. You may be able to slip a Zambezi into your current day Socket-AM3 motherboards.

And as has been shown with their graphic cards, specifications may be subject to change.
Score
0
September 19, 2010 4:24:18 PM

Best answer selected by idoln95.
Score
0
a c 127 à CPUs
September 19, 2010 7:33:58 PM

kaspro said:
hey, i found this pic which shows that the new bulldozer will support AM3 Sockets!
http://images.anandtech.com/reviews/cpu/amd/FAD2009/desktoproadmap.jpg
and here's the article i found it in
http://www.anandtech.com/show/2871/2


Thats almost a year old. Even when it came out I had reservations due to AMDs current history of changing their roadmaps on a dime.

I would expect a newer roadmap will be out that shows it only supporting AM3r2 by now but then again rumor does have it that BD was delayed till Q4 2011.

Plus it would make sense for AMD to be showing off BD at IDF if it was to hit Q1 2011.

And according to sources as well the next gen GPU is now set for release sometime in the very very near future, not 2011.

And most of the BD guaranteed to run in AM3 people knew a lot about AMD, only they would tend to trust that AMD loved them as consumers and not the truth that AMD loved their wallets like any company. So it blinded them.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
September 19, 2010 10:27:37 PM

This topic has been closed by Mousemonkey
Score
0
!