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
Server Roadmap
AMD’s previous CMO, Henri Richard, was a huge Ferrari fan. In turn, AMD became a sponsor of Ferrari’s Formula 1 team and some of AMD’s roadmap developed Italian-inspired codenames.
The Maranello platform is AMD’s high end server platform, due out in 2010. It supports the 8 and 12 core Magny Cours processors. These are multi-chip-modules with two quad or hexa core die on a single package.
With twice the die, you get twice the memory controllers. Magny Cours has four DDR3 memory channels. With more memory channels, Magny Cours needs a new, higher pincount socket which AMD is calling Socket G34. The chips will be branded as Opteron 6000 series.
San Marino is the second major server platform of 2010 and it’s for more normal servers. Four and six core Lisbon processors find their homes in San Marino. There’s also a low power Adelaide platform that’ll be available.
These Lisbon processors will be branded as Opteron 4000 series chips and will work in Socket C32.
In 2011 we get Interlagos and Valencia platforms, both based on AMD’s next-generation Bulldozer cores. Interlagos is a Socket-G34 platform supporting 12 and 16 core processors, while Valencia is Socket-C32 and can accommodate 6/8 core chips.
Final Words
Unfortunately for AMD, 2010 isn’t really interesting. The company will have to rely on aggressive pricing and the continued success of its graphics teams to carry it for the next 12 - 18 months.
Bulldozer, from what I know, appears to be a bold enough architecture to really challenge Intel if AMD can get it done properly. Bulldozer should arrive between Sandy Bridge and Intel's first 22nm CPUs. It's too early to tell how well Bulldozer's execution is going; AMD absolutely must sample in 2010.
It's disappointing that Llano won't use Bulldozer. With 32nm Phenom II cores, Llano will be roughly one to two architecture generations behind Sandy Bridge. The GPU side should be strong though, it is ATI after all.
AMD’s graphics strategy is much stronger. Bringing an already industry leading GPU architecture on die and then revving it every year is going to completely change the way we look at annual CPU releases. The big question here is what apps are we going to be running on these integrated GPU cores? The market has roughly two years to start finding out.
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.