From: "Orson Cart" <ex-privat@parts.org>
Reply-To: "Orson Cart" <ex-privat@parts.org>
Subject: reason for AMD's Bulldozer fiasco?
Newsgroups: comp.sys.intel
NNTP-Posting-Host: $$9kwcj_imlnxp2.feeder.x-privat.org
Message-ID: <4ea169cc$1@x-privat.org>
Date: 21 Oct 2011 14:47:08 +0100
Organization: X-Privat NNTP Server - http://www.x-privat.org
Lines: 9
X-Authenticated-User: $$xs-7_q6xz085nc1qk
X-Complaints-To: abuse@x-privat.org
Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!weretis.net!feeder4.news.weretis.net!newsfeed.datemas.de!newsfeed.x-privat.org!x-privat.org!not-for-mail
Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.sys.intel:128


http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/display/20111013232215_Ex_AMD_Engineer_Explains_Bulldozer_Fiasco.html

Sounds plausible: way too many transistors plopped down by dumb automated design.
So they made an 8-cylinder CPU that is as good a Phenom X6 or an Intel quad
core...
On the other hand, what about the Interlagos? I haven't seen the tons of bad
reviews for that, and Cray bought the first 10,000 allegedly.
Aren't those things just bigger Zambesis that use ECC RAM?