Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Bulldozer AM3 compatability?

Last response: in CPUs
Share
February 5, 2011 10:31:13 AM

Will AMD's new range of CPU code name 'Bulldozer" be compatible with my AM3 motherboard?
I have a Gigabyte GA MA790XT UD4P.
So my question is can I put a new bulldozer CPU into the motherboard I have just mentioned (Gigabyte GA MA790XT UD4P).

Thanks :) 
February 5, 2011 10:34:25 AM

From what I read NO. You will need an AM3+ mb.
m
0
l
a c 133 à CPUs
a b V Motherboard
February 5, 2011 10:43:56 AM

Nope its a brand new architecture so it will be on a new socket.
m
0
l
Related resources
a b à CPUs
February 5, 2011 2:57:55 PM

Yep all current AMD socket motherboards are a dead end.
However within the next couple of months AM3 CPU's might be drastically lowered in price (phasing them out) so one might be able to get a good deal on a upgrade CPU for those older platforms (AM3,AM2+ etc.).
m
0
l
a c 127 à CPUs
a b V Motherboard
February 5, 2011 10:16:17 PM

AMD has said that they are not going to sacrifice features and performance for compatability so AM3 wont be able to support a BD CPU even though AM3 and AM3+ have the same amount of pins.

However, AM3+ can support AM3 CPUs.
m
0
l
a c 161 à CPUs
a c 302 V Motherboard
February 6, 2011 1:03:59 AM

AM2>AM2+>AM3

AM3>AM3+>???

AMD will not kill the best feature that they have for the moment.
m
0
l
February 6, 2011 2:18:04 AM

However, what about llano? Wonder if those midrange chips will be available for AM3.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
February 6, 2011 2:54:13 AM

While AM3+ CPUs may not be usable in AM3 boards, rest assured that AM3 CPUs can and will be compatible with AM3+ boards, or at least that is my understanding. So when the new AM3+ boards come out, you can upgrade the mainboard and keep your CPU, then eventually upgrade to the new AM3+ CPU when your budget is more agreeable.
m
0
l
a c 127 à CPUs
a b V Motherboard
February 6, 2011 2:58:32 AM

saint19 said:
AM2>AM2+>AM3

AM3>AM3+>???

AMD will not kill the best feature that they have for the moment.


I never understood why AMD always put compatability before features and performance. I mean they had a rough start (939/940 got canned way too fast and pissed a lot of people off) but still. Its fine to do two gens, maybe three on the same socket but by the third gen its normally been 3 or so years and the other technology on the board will severly limit the CPU.

Still AM3+ might change the game since it should push BDs full potential.
m
0
l
February 6, 2011 11:59:29 AM

I think AMD did that because intel was dominating, and lets face it, they needed cash. What better way to keep current customers than to offer them cheap upgrade paths?
m
0
l
a c 161 à CPUs
a c 302 V Motherboard
February 6, 2011 1:39:32 PM

SB and IB will be compatible, you won't need change the mobo, so, AMD needs something better to stay on the market.
m
0
l
a c 127 à CPUs
a b V Motherboard
February 6, 2011 4:35:02 PM

ohiou_grad_06 said:
I think AMD did that because intel was dominating, and lets face it, they needed cash. What better way to keep current customers than to offer them cheap upgrade paths?


They still did it with Athlon X2 with AM2/AM2+. Instead of pushing a new socket for their dual cores they used the same. And they were the dominant player back then, hell they sold all of their CPUs and couldn't keep up with demand.

And IB being compatable is understandable since its the same arch just tweaked and shrunk. If it was a completley new arch then I would expect a new socket due to major changes. While SB takes from Nehalem, it has many major changes that Gulftown didn't and is probably why a SB CPU can keep up with a 6 core Gulftown.
m
0
l
February 6, 2011 4:52:13 PM

jimmysmitty said:
They still did it with Athlon X2 with AM2/AM2+. Instead of pushing a new socket for their dual cores they used the same. And they were the dominant player back then, hell they sold all of their CPUs and couldn't keep up with demand.

And IB being compatable is understandable since its the same arch just tweaked and shrunk. If it was a completley new arch then I would expect a new socket due to major changes. While SB takes from Nehalem, it has many major changes that Gulftown didn't and is probably why a SB CPU can keep up with a 6 core Gulftown.

C2D was about to dominate by the time AM2 was released (late may 2006, with real production ramping in July/August 2006), making AM2 a lame duck at launch. The performance was usually the same or worse than socket 939, deeming the need for DDR 800 ram to make up for the higher latencies of DDR2. Brisbane did not help matters either, with less L2 cache and higher cache latency. Most telling is how fast the prices on AM2 cpus dropped after the launch of C2D. The Athlon X2 3800 went from approx $300 to $90 within 9 months time to entice buyers away from the cheaper/faster entry level C2Ds and later the Pentium Dual Cores. AMD was OVERSTOCKED with AM2 CPUs, and ony after securing OEM deals with Dell and others did they find a viable avenue for dumping their product. As for AM2+, it was for the original phemon and flopped initially, due to the continual pushing back of release date and the low clocked, buggy xx00 Phenoms. To make matters worse, despite rumors and guarantees from AMD, most AM2 motherboards were never updated to support AM2+ phenoms at launch nor down the road. ONLY after the AM3 movement did manufacturers start remaking old GF6100 AM2 boards with am2+ and am3 compatibility. I have first hand knowledge of that farce, as I'm currently typing this on my pre-phenom AM2-only board with o'ced sempron. The best I can do is the Athlon X2 6200 (I have an X2 6000 waiting in a box whenever I deem the sempy no longer fit for daily use).
m
0
l
!