AMD's 2010 - 2011 Roadmaps: ~1B Transistor Llano APU, Bobcat and Bulldozer
by Anand Lal Shimpi on November 11, 2009 12:50 PM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
It’s got roughly one billion 32nm transistors, fabbed at Globalfoundries. Four CPU cores and a single graphics core. It’s what AMD calls an Accelerated Processing Unit (APU). And we’ll see it in 2011.
Unfortunately that’s a bit late. The APU, codenamed Llano, was originally scheduled for 2010 but got pushed back. In 2009/2010 Intel will be the first to deliver on-chip graphics with Clarkdale/Arrandale, and in late 2010 Sandy Bridge will have on-die graphics.
The first die shot of AMD's 32nm Llano APU based on 32nm Phenom II cores
Above is what I believe to be a die shot of AMD’s first APU. The CPU doesn’t use AMD’s next-generation microarchitecture, that’s only for the server and high end in 2011. The first APU will use the existing Phenom II architecture on the same die as DX11 graphics, but at 32nm. Sandy Bridge will use a brand new microprocessor architecture on 32nm but with updated Intel integrated graphics. It looks like Sandy Bridge will have the CPU advantage while Llano might have the GPU advantage, assuming Intel can't get their GPU act together by then. Llano is on schedule to debut in 2011 with OEM sampling happening before the end of the year.
Also on schedule is AMD’s next-generation microarchitecture, codenamed Bulldozer. AMD listed its client PC goals for 2010 at this year’s Financial Analyst Day, one of them is to start sampling its next-generation microprocessor next year - in 2010. If the chip is ready for OEMs by the end of 2010, that means it’ll go on sale as early as 1H 2011.
Unfortunately AMD isn’t talking much about Bulldozer architecture, I suspect we won’t see that disclosure until mid to late 2010. It’s not to keep things secret, we already have many estimates of what Bulldozer’s architecture is going to look like. And if the public already knows, then Intel is also well aware of what AMD has coming in 2011. Updated: AMD has given a high level overview of its Bulldozer and Bobcat architectures here
A major focus is going to be improving on one of AMD’s biggest weaknesses today: heavily threaded performance. Intel addresses it with Hyper Threading, AMD is throwing a bit more hardware at the problem. The dual integer clusters you may have heard of are the route AMD is taking...
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
59 Comments
View All Comments
JonnyDough - Thursday, November 19, 2009 - link
Agreed. More information = better. Giving a detailed look at the competition first for a back-of-mind comparison is a good thing. These readers must be a bit slow if they can't look past the first page.JonnyDough - Thursday, November 19, 2009 - link
Agreed. More information = better. Giving a detailed look at the competition first for a back-of-mind comparison is a good thing. These readers must be a bit slow if they can't look past the first page.yyrkoon - Wednesday, November 11, 2009 - link
Oh, and anand . . .removing a post by someone because you do not agree with what they have said, despite whatever they say about you is not professional behavior.I also did not agree with what he said, but he has the right to voice his opinion too, no matter how misguided. Best to just ignore such people. You know, like how you ignore me, when I am being (overly?)critical . . .
DotNetGuru - Wednesday, November 11, 2009 - link
Jeeez, get over yourself guy.I understand that this was a roadmap overview type story, but it still seems appropriate to balance that with the real question of whether all this even matters when Intel will be 1 to 2 years ahead. I'm sorry you don't like the facts, but this is AT. Perhaps you should try some religion to protect you from reality instead of reading AT for the next couple years until Intel lets AMD catch up.
Anand Lal Shimpi - Wednesday, November 11, 2009 - link
I didn't remove anyone's post :) I believe that's our new Report Post feature working as it's intended :) If a certain number of readers submit reports on a particular post the post is automatically hidden. We implemented that after the silliness that happened with some of the reviews earlier this fall.I have no problems with people voicing their opinion, it only becomes a problem if we end up with the majority of comments in an article thread being dominated by someone not contributing anything to the discussion.
The new site will help fix a lot of this with post rating and auto hiding, we just needed a stopgap measure until then since we've had issues with a few folks.
Take care,
Anand
leexgx - Thursday, November 12, 2009 - link
whatnot an Vote system better in that case (like dailytech)he must of posted something really annoying or self inserted post, for more then 5-10 users to press report post
yyrkoon - Wednesday, November 11, 2009 - link
Anand . . . perhaps the AMD 2010 priority slide is the one you should have led off with.If you want a bit of free advice . . . when it comes to roadmaps, or non comparison type reviews. I think it would be best if you just stuck to one item at a time. The reason why should be obvious. We, your readers do not give a rats behind what Intel is doing, when we are reading about an AMD thing. Write an Intel thing later if you must, but leave it out of the AMD article.
Now, I myself like Intel, and AMD in equal measure. So, there is no bias in my case. Well, I take that back. I am biased. I am biased towards the parts/technology that suite me the best in a given time frame.
I for one have in the past given you guys a hard time about being biases towards one company or another. But for the most part, I was just giving a tough time. This time, you surely did it to yourself, and if you did not know what you did was wrong here, you should have.
Anand Lal Shimpi - Wednesday, November 11, 2009 - link
Honestly, I did it simply to give readers background. Not everyone keeps up on codenames, I figured the image would augment the text. I didn't have an issue with it being up until it started to derail the discussion thread in the comments. I want this comment section to be useful, it ceases to be that if the discussion isn't on topic.Personally I don't believe you can read about one company (AMD or Intel) without referencing the other where it makes sense. Ignoring Sandy Bridge and Intel's roadmap while talking about AMD's roadmap for the next two years seems to leave out a major part of the story.
I appreciate the feedback though, I'll keep image order in mind for next time :)
Thanks for the comments :)
Take care,
Anand
yyrkoon - Wednesday, November 11, 2009 - link
I personally do not keep up on code names, and to be perfectly honest. I do not care about either AMD's, or Intels roadmaps. Why ? Its not here and now, and things often change, or are just a serious let down by the time they arrive.Now, with the above said, I still enjoy reading about technology. But if I am reading about say AMD, I do not want the name "Intel" interjected 50 times. I just want the scoop on AMD, and their current technology. If you want to voice your opinion, fine, do it at the end of the article, or in a separate article all together. I can make my own judgement calls.
With all of the above said. You guys at Anandtech do get to talk to the different companies about the various technologies that you write about. This also means that you're more than likely better informed than the rest of us technology Joe's. So I would like to hear your thought absolutely. But not at the expense of another topic. Isolation; keep it separate.
JonnyDough - Thursday, November 19, 2009 - link
If you don't care about roadmaps why even click the link to read the article? I didn't bother reading the rest of your comment.I for one care about both. Its interesting to see what tech is supposed to be coming to us. I keep an ear out for specific CPUs, so I know what to compare in the future should I do a build.
I don't know why everyone is whining about the article. Its for our benefit. Free information is free information. I really don't get why people are complaining about the order of pictures and whatnot. Everything said in the article was factual, or stated as opinion. IMO Anand, you did a great job.