AMD Needs to Boost Clock-Speed of FX 'Bulldozer' Chips

More and more negative rumours are spreading about Bulldozer. Not sure what to think about this, but 2.5GHz sounds ... bad.

The long-awaited central processing units (CPUs) featuring the code-named Bulldozer micro-architecture are now fully-functional and work without flaws, according to a person who wished to remain anonymous. The problem with the delay of the AMD FX family of chips is that they currently cannot operate at truly high-speeds and thus cannot achieve performance levels that AMD wanted them to. As result, AMD will need to design a new stepping of the processor and therefore delay the commercial launch to September.

The currently available B0 and B1 stepping Zambezi/Bulldozer processors can function at around 2.50GHz/3.50GHz (nominal/turbo) clock-speeds and at such frequency they cannot deliver performance AMD considers competitive, a person with knowledge of the situation said on Monday. As a consequence, AMD needs to tune the design of the processor and create B2 stepping of the chip with better clock-speed potential amid similar thermal design power (TDP), which will take several months to complete. Therefore, the Sunnyvale, California-based chip designer will release its highly-anticipated Bulldozer processors for desktops in September, not in June, as planned.


Czech Republic OBR says:

Its true, many ES ive seen was at 2.5 GHz ... but they are from february, we have here new ES batch with more better clocks 3 GHz + trust me :)

United States BenchZowner says:

There are 3.4GHz ES. But the point is... where do they stop ? If they're like 200MHz below their max 24/7 stable OC on air/water then it's no good.

Hong Kong imamage says:

That's sad :(

Czech Republic OBR says:

dont know, but my sample is going from 3,2 to 3,7 GHz ...

Norway knopflerbruce says:

BenchZowner said: There are 3.4GHz ES.
But the point is... where do they stop ?
If they're like 200MHz below their max 24/7 stable OC on air/water then it's no good.

I dont think 200 MHz is realistic, because of TDP they have to keep the voltage pretty low. Lower VID => higher overclocks. 400 MHz above stock, at least, is my guess.

United States BenchZowner says:

knopflerbruce said: Lower VID => higher overclocks.

That's not necessarily true.
Actually it has been proven wrong before, in both the QX9650 & E8600 era.
Higher chances yes, not always though, and not absolute, a lot of times a 1.2V VID 980X can clock better/much better on air than a 1.15V VID 980X, etc etc.

Norway knopflerbruce says:

I was thinking about cores, not individual chips. If all BD chips HAVE to run at 1.25v max to stay within specs, then we can add another 0.25v, and get nice numbers on air/water, which we can't if the VID is 1.35v (unless alot of chips have alot of headroom even at stock voltage, and that doesn't make sense because of the competition).

Belgium Massman says:

VID's the new ES :p

Please log in or register to comment.