Download the Tom's Hardware App from the App Store
The reference for current tech news
Yes No
Ads

AMD Starts Shipping "Bulldozer" CPUs

by - source: AMD Press Release

AMD has announced the shipments of the x86 “Bulldozer” architecture... unfortunately for the masses, it is the Opteron server based processors and not the Zambezi (FX Series) desktop processors.

AMD announced that the initial production of the world’s first 16-core x86 processor, codenamed “Interlagos” (Opteron Series) began in August, with shipments now underway to customers (OEM customers). The Opteron is compatible with existing AMD Opteron 6100 Series platforms and will be available to partner systems by Q4 this year. The Opteron processors are built on 32nm process technology, utilizing either 8, 12, or 16 cores (model dependent), quad-channel DDR3 memory controller, up to 16MB of L3 cache, and four HyperTransport links. 

“This is a monumental moment for the industry as this first ‘Bulldozer’ core represents the beginning of unprecedented performance scaling for x86 CPUs,” said Rick Bergman, senior vice president and general manager, AMD Products Group. "The flexible new ‘Bulldozer’ architecture will give Web and datacenter customers the scalability they need to handle emerging cloud and virtualization workloads.”

Read more at AMD's Server Platforms

Share:
111
Comments
X
Submit

Comments
Add your comment
ginnai 09/08/2011 11:15 AM
Hide
-20+

Yay! It has arrived!

billybobser 09/08/2011 11:15 AM
Hide
-20+

they exist :o

Ciuy 09/08/2011 11:15 AM
Hide
-19+

o.O

totalgenius 09/08/2011 11:17 AM
Hide
-20+

Yay its alive, can we get some benchmarks.

Still waiting eagerly for the Zambezi, AMD please release the i7 exterminators.

DjEaZy 09/08/2011 11:22 AM
Hide
-15+

... the desktop version is not far away...

reagansmash 09/08/2011 11:23 AM
Hide
-15+

and, halfway there...

j_davis_1980 09/08/2011 11:32 AM
Hide
-20+

still waiting for the desktop version.......

Archean 09/08/2011 11:36 AM
Hide
-11+

DjEaZy :
... the desktop version is not far away...



It will be good if they are at least able to compete with SNBs, but unfortunately Q1-12 will also see the launch of IVBs which would mean that AMD will again be behind Intel by at least a one full cycle.

xyster 09/08/2011 11:37 AM
Hide
-20+

do we really expect this to be competitive with IvyBridge or SandyBridge-E?

I really hope so, but I have my doubts..

Herr_Koos 09/08/2011 11:41 AM
Hide
-19+

Time will tell... Sooner or later, time will tell.

el33t 09/08/2011 11:43 AM
Show
billybobser 09/08/2011 11:43 AM
Hide
-1+

highly doubt this will be competitive, since it's quite a large change, but the iterations of this design that follow should be awesome.

iam2thecrowe 09/08/2011 11:44 AM
Show
Herr_Koos 09/08/2011 11:52 AM
Hide
-20+

el33t wrote :

wait....what about x64 processors??




All processors are in fact still built on the x86 architecture, so in reality, there is no such thing as x64, although it's a widely used term.

The correct way to write it would be x86-32 and x86-64.

fffffffffff 09/08/2011 11:59 AM
Hide
-7+
killerclick 09/08/2011 12:07 PM
Hide
--3+

Zambezi is going to be a disappointment, not because AMD sucks but because Intel is so good. In two years time ARM will be their only competitor.

AbdullahG 09/08/2011 12:13 PM
Hide
-5+

fffffffffff :
BD delayed againhttp://www.insideris.com/amd-bulld [...] l-q4-2011/


Most people already knew that. BD is suspected to launch in at least October. If you guys really want to keep track and stay up-to-date on BD, you should head over to the CPU & Components forum (sub-forum CPU) and check out the BD rumors thread. There's some pretty useful info there.

sykozis 09/08/2011 1:11 PM
Hide
-1+

Archean :
It will be good if they are at least able to compete with SNBs, but unfortunately Q1-12 will also see the launch of IVBs which would mean that AMD will again be behind Intel by at least a one full cycle.


This seems to come up with every CPU article. AMD uses a completely different release cycle from Intel. For AMD to be "at least one full cycle" behind Intel, they would have to be attempting to use the same or similar release schedule.

Archean 09/08/2011 1:18 PM
Hide
-8+

@sykozis
Well let me allow to clarify what I was saying, "AMD is just getting to 32nm process tech. and Intel is already preparing to launch 22nm processors, hence AMD is full 'process cycle' behind Intel (discounting all other architectural differences etc.)".

calguyhunk 09/08/2011 1:20 PM
Hide
-19+

Ironically, the very reason people choose AMD (choice)is being undermined by the guys at AMD themselves by delaying this thing since time immemorial.

Having said that though, I'd rather they bring out a perfect product from the get-go rather than a half baked one which will actually do them more harm than good especially at this stage.

Nobody buys AMD to compete with Intel. They buy it for...

1. Value for money.

2. Principle- Anti-monopoly.

Of course, the unlocked cores never hurt. But of course now, even that is a non-issue.

schizofrog 09/08/2011 1:21 PM
Hide
--1+

I wish AMD well but this seems to have dragged on for far too long now that I have my doubts about how competitive it will actually be against Intel's chips. If Bulldozer finally turns up on the desktop front (as Zambezi) and is mid range at best, it may not be the final nail in the coffin but it will be a MASSIVE stake through the undying heart of AMD-racula.

calguyhunk 09/08/2011 1:21 PM
Show
ulysses35 09/08/2011 1:38 PM
Show
back_by_demand 09/08/2011 1:40 PM
Hide
-20+

BENCHMARKS
ENCHMARKS
NCHMARKS
CHMARKS
HMARKS
MARKS
ARKS
RKS
KS
S
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

BSMonitor 09/08/2011 2:15 PM
Show
bin1127 09/08/2011 2:27 PM
Hide
-11+

we can benchmark the opeteron and see how they do right?

archange 09/08/2011 2:29 PM
Hide
-12+

This has got to be one of the lengthiest births - ever.
Hope the kid is worth the labor.

ScrewySqrl 09/08/2011 2:40 PM
Hide
--3+

I personally think the delay in Bulldozer (remember when it was due in April 2011?) is a nail in the coffin of AMD.

Herr_Koos 09/08/2011 2:47 PM
Hide
-8+

BSMonitor wrote :

Hmmm, guess WHY there aren't any benchmarks??

Because they don't touch Sandy Bridge..





Read your own personal quote lately?

Chewie 09/08/2011 2:53 PM
Hide
-20+

Oh how I long for the days of the Athlons. Anyone remember when an AMD core running at 1.25Ghz could kick a 2Ghz intel core to the kerb without even trying?

hixbot 09/08/2011 2:54 PM
Hide
-0+

No info on clock rates?


Ads

Best offers

Newsletters


OK
Ads