Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
AMD Stats Hardware

AMD Downgrades Bulldozer Transistor Count By 800 Million 149

Posted by timothy
from the but-who's-counting-is-the-actual-question dept.
Robadob writes "It has come to light that AMD PR had originally reported that the new Bulldozer processor's transistor count was 2 billion. AMD PR are now asking reviewers to correct this count to 1.2 billion from the original amount they provided ~3 months ago."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

AMD Downgrades Bulldozer Transistor Count By 800 Million

Comments Filter:
  • by Guppy (12314) on Sunday December 04, 2011 @07:22PM (#38260898)

    I guess the new figures make a little more sense. Bulldozer's performance was fairly similar to their previous (and smaller) Thuban Core, at 904 million transistors -- it was as if AMD decided to take more than half of their transistor design budget, heap it in a corner, and set it on fire.

  • What's a transistor? (Score:4, Informative)

    by scharkalvin (72228) on Monday December 05, 2011 @10:06AM (#38265026) Homepage

    Anybody that has ever looked at the schematic for a VLSI chip at the schematic level will have problems figuring out what the transistors are for because so many of them are actually being used as resistors, diodes, or capacitors. Many are bias regulators or interstage coupling voltage level translators. Transistors are the simplest things to put on an IC so there tends to be lots of them. The transistor count rarely translates into a true level of complexity for the device over all. Having said that the last time a transistor count on a microprocessor meant anything was with Motorola's first two major processors. The MC6800 actually had about 6,800 transistors. The MC68000 had about ... wait for it .... 68,000 of them!

"Love is an ideal thing, marriage a real thing; a confusion of the real with the ideal never goes unpunished." -- Goethe

Working...