It is hard to know exactly what to say about Bulldozer. It is not a complete fail for in multithreaded applications it sits in between the performance of the i5-2500 and i7-2600, which it was intended to. Power consumption at idle has been improved but not at load which hurts, but not as much as the poor single threaded performance which is far worse than we had hoped. SemiAccurate traced the long 5+ year history of the Bulldozer to see where AMD went astray from the dream that was. The length of the story is certainly a part of it, 5 years is too long for silicon to languish especially when part of the delay was due to problems with the 45nm process. Read on to hear about the struggles AMD underwent to get this chip to market as well as what corners were cut, or at least rounded, to get the chip on shelves.
"The story of Bulldozer and why it does what it does, both good and bad, can be summed up as death by 1000 cuts. There isn’t really any high point to the architecture, nor are there any really low points. To make matters worse, there isn’t any obvious smoking gun as to why things ended up so, well, meh. What you can get now, what you should have been able to get, and what you will be able to get from this new architecture is a long and complex story. Lets get started."
Here is some more Tech News from around the web:
- Ultrabook players to adopt hybrid HDD to save cost @ DigiTimes
- Drawing Circuits in Conductive Ink @ MAKE:Blog
- SSL creator warns of further attacks @ The Inquirer
- iCloud on the Desktop: A Look at OS X 10.7.2 and iCloud for Windows @ AnandTech
- Apple iOS 5 @ AnandTech
The story of Bulldozer and
The story of Bulldozer and why it does what it does, both good and bad, can be summed up as death by 1000 celexa dosage cuts. There isn’t really any high point to the architecture, nor are there any really low points.Great to read about it.