Bobcat

If Bulldozer is the architecture that will compete with Nehalem, Bobcat is what will compete with Silverthorne. Bobcat is yet another ground up design from AMD, also due out in the 2009 timeframe, but it will address a more power constrained portion of the market. Systems that require a 1 - 10W TDP will use Bobcat, while Bulldozer is limited to the 10 - 100W range (obviously with some overlap between the two).

Bobcat is a far simpler core than Bulldozer, which allows AMD to place it in ultra low power devices (think TVs, set top boxes and smart phones), but it also means that costs will be low. Much like Intel's Silverthorne, Bobcat will be a part of a new class of extremely low priced x86 cores designed primarily for the consumer electronics market.

We asked AMD's CTO, Phil Hester, how simple of a core Bobcat would be - and the answer he gave us was quite telling. Two years ago Intel used the following chart to illustrate the need for multi-core CPUs, the driving factor being that you can no longer get good performance scaling by simply improving single core performance:



What isn't depicted on this chart is the relationship of power consumption to all of this, but as you can guess, the power consumption curve looks much like the multi-core curve. Incremental improvements in single core performance now require exponential increases in power consumption, which was a major driving factor behind the move to multi-core. By achieving higher performance through minor core improvements and adding more cores, we can maintain the sort of year-over-year performance increases we need while keeping power consumption in check.

Phil told us to imagine a graph of power consumption vs. instructions per clock over the history of microprocessor cores, which you can imagine would be linear for a while, before turning exponential.

We are presently in the very non-linear portion of the chart, where minor increases in IPC require significant power expenditures. Bobcat, takes the non-linear portion of this graph and chops it off, going back to a much simpler x86 core that can be built extremely efficiently on today's manufacturing processes.

If you can imagine a Pentium or Pentium Pro class microprocessor, built on a 65nm or 45nm process, you can already guess that power consumption would be quite low. Now add in a few optimizations that AMD's designers have learned over the years and you may be able to picture what Bobcat's architecture might look like. It harks back to a much simpler time in x86 history, but then again that's exactly what's necessary for the type of low power, low cost devices that Bobcat will end up in.

Bulldozer Performance Expectations Fusion
Comments Locked

31 Comments

View All Comments

  • kilkennycat - Friday, July 27, 2007 - link

    Highly likely that nVidia will solve this problem at both high and low end with their next family of GPUs. Stay tuned for the end of 2007. The first part out of the chute is also likely not to be the highest end but that which replaces the 8800GTS at a price close to $200 with full HD hardware decode... nVidia is very well aware of the cost-performance hole left by both AMD/ATI and themselves in their current GPU line.
  • strikeback03 - Friday, July 27, 2007 - link

    with that Phenom demo box, I think they have finally found use for a 1000W+ power supply
  • Spoelie - Friday, July 27, 2007 - link

    Given the size of the heatsink on the cpu, I'd venture power consumption is inline with other engineering samples, 120w or less max TDP
  • Spoelie - Friday, July 27, 2007 - link

    Oh my bad, you're right when taking the three 2900XTs in consideration.

    Where's my edit button :(
  • Spoelie - Friday, July 27, 2007 - link

    At least 2 times in the article, the text builds up anticipation for a graph, but it never comes, the most telling example is on page 6, but one or two pages before it it happened also. Both graphs are supposed to be from Intel.
  • Justin Case - Monday, August 13, 2007 - link

    Exactly. They say "Two years ago Intel used the following chart to illustrate the need for multi-core CPUs", and then the image is an AMD slide, not an Intel graph.
  • Omega215D - Thursday, July 26, 2007 - link

    If they plan to integrate an on die PCIe controller on the CPU how would this affect overclocking?
  • Regs - Friday, July 27, 2007 - link

    I'd imagine just like how it was when AMD intergrated the memory controller, mobo makers will just have to add more bios options.
  • yacoub - Thursday, July 26, 2007 - link

    While paging through the article, the thing that stood out most to me was the AMD graphic on page 5 supposedly demonstrating how much more performance Bulldozer is going to offer without a single number on the graph. I guess they want us to measure its performance increases in pixels. hehe :)
  • LTG - Thursday, July 26, 2007 - link

    Anand you're really good at distilling out the bottom line from massive amounts of marketing talk and slide ware.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now