Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

AMD Fusion APU Llano Bulldozes Sandy Bridge in Multi-Tasking Demonstra

Tags:
  • CPUs
  • Mobile
  • Performance
  • Sandy Bridge
  • Amd Fusion
Last response: in CPUs
Share
March 1, 2011 4:07:10 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mdPi4GPEI74

Impressive mobile performance.

More about : amd fusion apu llano bulldozes sandy bridge multi tasking demonstra

a c 127 à CPUs
March 2, 2011 11:46:38 PM

Hah. Such BS. Sorry but this is pretty useless.

Most people are not going to game and do the others on a laptop.

I want to see straight CPU benchmarks though vs Sandy Bridge.

I can has smoother performance while running 4 high CPU usage tasks NARF!!!!

Sorry but AMDs marketing is always a good laugh for me. I never really take them at their word because they like to do outrageous things. And although Intels HD3000 is quite a nice bump from the old HD graphics, I will never suggest it to someone for playing a extremley heavy graphical game such as FF 14 which even on desktops needs a decent GPU.
Related resources
a b à CPUs
March 3, 2011 12:26:53 AM

And if Intel was doing the test, Sandy Bridge would come out on top. What's your point?
a c 127 à CPUs
March 3, 2011 12:47:46 AM

^Pretty much. Still I want to find someone who plays Final Fantasy XIV, watches a movie, uses Excel to calculate and renders 3D models all at the same time on a laptop. Oh and they also listen to music. Oh and browse the web. Of and run Prime95 and FurMark.

All at the same time.

Hah.
a b à CPUs
March 3, 2011 1:04:10 AM

jimmysmitty said:
^Pretty much. Still I want to find someone who plays Final Fantasy XIV, watches a movie, uses Excel to calculate and renders 3D models all at the same time on a laptop. Oh and they also listen to music. Oh and browse the web. Of and run Prime95 and FurMark.

All at the same time.

Hah.

Don't forget folding too. You need to get those 3 points per day. :sarcastic: 

At least the AMD is smoother! :lol: 
a c 127 à CPUs
March 3, 2011 1:09:33 AM

^Damn straight. Give me my 3 points. And while I am doing all of this I will sip some tea, eat some pasta and play a few games on my cell phone/PSP.

Man can I multitask like crazy....
a b à CPUs
March 3, 2011 3:48:32 AM

jimmysmitty said:
^Pretty much. Still I want to find someone who plays Final Fantasy XIV, watches a movie, uses Excel to calculate and renders 3D models all at the same time on a laptop. Oh and they also listen to music. Oh and browse the web. Of and run Prime95 and FurMark.

All at the same time.

Hah.


must not have ever met a college student, who in case you havent notice buy a lot of laptops. just today i had 10 plus tabs open while running media player while running MATLAB and inventor. i also had 2 excel sheets and a word document open with prolly a few folders open as well all just to complete one class's homework assignment. i use 3ds max to render out short clips in the background occasionally too. so just because you or others do not multi task like in the video doesnt mean others do not because i am in a similar situation as that video, occasionally.


Btw i have a i7 laptop so im not toooo biased
a b à CPUs
March 3, 2011 3:54:53 AM

cbrunnem said:
must not have ever met a college student, who in case you havent notice buy a lot of laptops. just today i had 10 plus tabs open while running media player while running MATLAB and inventor. i also had 2 excel sheets and a word document open with prolly a few folders open as well all just to complete one class's homework assignment. i use 3ds max to render out short clips in the background occasionally too. so just because you or others do not multi task like in the video doesnt mean others do not because i am in a similar situation as that video, occasionally.


Btw i have a i7 laptop so im not toooo biased


Of everything you're saying there, pretty much everything is low demand except inventor and 3dsmax. Media players, internet browsers, and even Matlab (most of the time) don't actually use much CPU power. That kind of multitasking, while extremely common, is much more dependent on quantity of RAM than it is on the quality of your processor. The situation in the OP is much less common, and it's certainly not something you'd do on a laptop with an IGP.

Oh, and for the record, I'm also a college student, and I'm currently running media player, folding, google earth, 12 tabs of firefox, matlab, thunderbird, word, excel, and I have half life 2 minimized. Why? Because I rarely bother to close things. At any given time, only a couple will be actively doing anything, so the rest are basically sitting there idle
March 3, 2011 4:46:54 AM

I feel like crying after watching this(sob sob), all my stupid friends they have intel but i never ditched AMD they used to make fun of my cpu (amd athlon ii x4 635) which is still very powerful and cost effective by comparing with core i7 and now AMD finally made me proud by showing this demo and now i am eagerly waiting for Bulldozer demo..
March 3, 2011 4:49:52 AM

jimmysmitty said:
Hah. Such BS. Sorry but this is pretty useless.

Most people are not going to game and do the others on a laptop.

I want to see straight CPU benchmarks though vs Sandy Bridge.

I can has smoother performance while running 4 high CPU usage tasks NARF!!!!

Sorry but AMDs marketing is always a good laugh for me. I never really take them at their word because they like to do outrageous things. And although Intels HD3000 is quite a nice bump from the old HD graphics, I will never suggest it to someone for playing a extremley heavy graphical game such as FF 14 which even on desktops needs a decent GPU.

If you cant appreciate something then dont say anything bad about it.

Many people they do multi-tasking at the same time and thats what they wanted to show...which is very much acceptable.

We have seen with what they wanted to show, they proved also apu is gonna beat so called intel's sandy bridge.

"hype is for once, things they dont last forever"
March 3, 2011 6:11:29 AM

guys don`t forget that Llano is also for desktop
March 3, 2011 6:50:52 AM

h0devil said:
guys don`t forget that Llano is also for desktop

That makes it even better!! :)  cheers :bounce:  :bounce:  :bounce:  :bounce:  :bounce:  :bounce: 
a b à CPUs
March 3, 2011 8:27:07 AM

asiarules said:
I feel like crying after watching this(sob sob), all my stupid friends they have intel but i never ditched AMD they used to make fun of my cpu (amd athlon ii x4 635) which is still very powerful and cost effective by comparing with core i7 and now AMD finally made me proud by showing this demo and now i am eagerly waiting for Bulldozer demo..


Believe me, I'm optimistic about bulldozer, but this demo shows one thing and one thing only: AMDs IGP is better than Intel's IGP. This really shouldn't surprise anyone, and it doesn't change the fact that Sandy is THE processor for anyone who wants a high performance laptop with excellent battery life. If you want excellent graphics, honestly, neither of these is the way to go - a discrete GPU is a better choice. Intel still rules the CPU world, and that will definitely be true at least until Bulldozer (which I am genuinely curious and optimistic about).
March 3, 2011 8:38:44 AM

cjl said:
Believe me, I'm optimistic about bulldozer, but this demo shows one thing and one thing only: AMDs IGP is better than Intel's IGP. This really shouldn't surprise anyone, and it doesn't change the fact that Sandy is THE processor for anyone who wants a high performance laptop with excellent battery life. If you want excellent graphics, honestly, neither of these is the way to go - a discrete GPU is a better choice. Intel still rules the CPU world, and that will definitely be true at least until Bulldozer (which I am genuinely curious and optimistic about).

Wait for both fusion and bulldozer cpu's....cant forecast anything right now.

however still it will need less power and its good in multi-thread so we can say that this aint gonna be a bad deal, once their testing would be over and they will come up with the final product.
a b à CPUs
March 3, 2011 9:06:17 AM

jimmysmitty said:
Hah. Such BS. Sorry but this is pretty useless.


I'd like to argue that battery life is far more important.
a c 117 à CPUs
March 3, 2011 10:15:23 AM

jimmysmitty said:
Hah. Such BS. Sorry but this is pretty useless.

Most people are not going to game and do the others on a laptop.

I want to see straight CPU benchmarks though vs Sandy Bridge.

...

Sorry but AMDs marketing is always a good laugh for me. I never really take them at their word because they like to do outrageous things....



You're in denial, old man :lol: 

March 3, 2011 10:54:34 AM

Fanboys never cease to amaze.
March 3, 2011 4:16:03 PM

Theo Valich says that was only a 1.8 ghz llano apu.

http://www.brightsideofnews.com/news/2011/3/2/amd-x86-b...

Quote:
Even though AMD did not disclose the clocks, we believe that Godfrey was trying not to disclose the true performance of Llano, since AMD's A8-3510MX processor was a low clocked engineering sample running at 1.8GHz, while Sandy Bridge was running at 2.0GHz.
a b à CPUs
March 3, 2011 10:58:31 PM

amdfangirl said:
I'd like to argue that battery life is far more important.

Honestly, I'd be inclined to agree. So far, Sandy appears to be incredible in that department, and I'll be curious to see how llano fares by comparsion.
March 4, 2011 12:07:09 AM

cjl said:
Honestly, I'd be inclined to agree. So far, Sandy appears to be incredible in that department, and I'll be curious to see how llano fares by comparsion.

demo is to show that cpu will now onwards will have no graphics load and to do this intel will have to redesign their cpu architecture :bounce: 
March 4, 2011 12:09:39 AM

cjl said:
Honestly, I'd be inclined to agree. So far, Sandy appears to be incredible in that department, and I'll be curious to see how llano fares by comparsion.


The demos show power draw? It seems obvious enough that Llano is at least as good as sandy.
March 4, 2011 12:10:11 AM

bobdozer said:
Theo Valich says that was only a 1.8 ghz llano apu.

http://www.brightsideofnews.com/news/2011/3/2/amd-x86-b...

Quote:
Even though AMD did not disclose the clocks, we believe that Godfrey was trying not to disclose the true performance of Llano, since AMD's A8-3510MX processor was a low clocked engineering sample running at 1.8GHz, while Sandy Bridge was running at 2.0GHz.

I agree with that because its not yet finally prepared and they would never want their competiters to have any idea of low end cpu with that much power, cuz its not yet in the market and they dont want intel to come up with something like that so early ;) 
a b à CPUs
March 4, 2011 12:26:53 AM

Well, the demo shows the APU does have potential.

I didn't like the power draw when it was idle though. 26W compared to Sandy's 12W, I hope they bring that down.
March 4, 2011 12:35:31 AM

Haserath said:
Well, the demo shows the APU does have potential.

I didn't like the power draw when it was idle though. 26W compared to Sandy's 12W, I hope they bring that down.

well final product is yet to come, so hope they will bring down the idle power draw. :) 
March 4, 2011 12:42:54 AM

Quote:
What was the complete spec of both systems? From ram to disks used to driver versions the works. Certain two companies have shown us already what you can do with just a quick drivers tweak

it doesnt matter as of now, as we all know AMD doesnt have any high end cpu to compete with core- i5 750 to all higher models.

so we can just guess whatever it is it'll fill in the gap of i5(top model) to sandybridge and i hope real competition would be with bulldozer(hope it comes with apu :p )


oops correction

i am sorry correction now they have 1100t hexcore which is just 28-30% less powerful than core-i7 980 in performance and way too cheaper in cost....sorry to all AMD Fans :D 
March 4, 2011 12:57:44 AM

asiarules said:
I feel like crying after watching this(sob sob), all my stupid friends they have intel but i never ditched AMD they used to make fun of my cpu (amd athlon ii x4 635) which is still very powerful and cost effective by comparing with core i7 and now AMD finally made me proud by showing this demo and now i am eagerly waiting for Bulldozer demo..

:lol:  :lol:  :lol:  You look like fun. :D 
March 4, 2011 1:19:06 AM

Quote:
Amd fanboy posts again.

How many of us actually care how well an IGP performs


99% of computer buyers you idiot.
March 4, 2011 1:32:10 AM

Quote:
Amd fanboy posts again.

How many of us actually care how well an IGP performs

whatever......now AMD has proved they are no less than intel and i am pretty sure when final product would be out, it will crush intel's sandybridge(even if not it would be comparable in terms of graphics handling and multitasking) that too at as usual AMD's cheap and best cpu charges. :bounce: 

it is visible here in demo that sandybridge cant perform well while running multiple application (especially graphics oriented, cant say of other applications, it wouldnt be wise until final product comes out) :p 

and i am not denying OR refusing the fact that intel cpu's arent good or best, right now they are the king of performance but "expensive also"

competition has to be there and which AMD is maintaining and because of AMD's presence only cpu's are affordable and we have fast cpu's such as phenomii , athlon ii, i5, i3 i7 sandybridge blah blah :cry:  otherwise we still would've had PIII or PIV :D 

And i dont want AMD too die just like that. :pfff: 
a b à CPUs
March 4, 2011 1:42:05 AM

bobdozer said:
Theo Valich says that was only a 1.8 ghz llano apu.

http://www.brightsideofnews.com/news/2011/3/2/amd-x86-b...

Quote:
Even though AMD did not disclose the clocks, we believe that Godfrey was trying not to disclose the true performance of Llano, since AMD's A8-3510MX processor was a low clocked engineering sample running at 1.8GHz, while Sandy Bridge was running at 2.0GHz.



Theo Valich is the most accurate of sources.... :sarcastic:  :sarcastic:  :sarcastic:  :sarcastic:  :sarcastic:  :sarcastic:  :sarcastic:  :sarcastic: 
March 4, 2011 1:44:31 AM

Quote:
HAHAHHAHAHAHAH Ohh really? Moron

i grew up using intel cpu's(back in 1998 in internet cafes because internet and computers were not affordable at that time) later in 2002 my dad bought piii 800mhz, desktop for me(i was very happy at that time, even then computers werent that much afforable here in new delhi)
in 2004 my dad brought p-iv 2.6ghz desktop for me and later i brought core2duo with my own earning(pocket money and small time part time jobs) felt somewhat better but when i bought my first AMD cpu(phenom 9550) i realised why AMD is better, it's because they always maintain price=performance ratio.

phenom 1's were buggy however it was good enough at that time and pretty fast also, then i upgraded to 9950be they were much better and athlon ii x4 635(current) (extremely good quad) and in a week i would be buying either 965be or 1090t and after that bulldozer.

so in reality if you use commonsense you'll see maybe intel has faster cpu right now but they are charging you a lot.

a wise guy would never spend hard-earner money for something which is just 20-30% faster than the competiters(AMD) cpu.
March 4, 2011 1:46:19 AM

Quote:
Gamers can care less how an IGP perform's. Cry for me amd fanboy's

well you might have money to spare so you can do charity but i cant ;) 
March 4, 2011 1:54:42 AM

Quote:
Gamers can care less how an IGP perform's. Cry for me amd fanboy's

well if a gamer would get same performance of GPU in IGP then ofcourse everyone would care.

Do you even know people who buy desktops or laptops for personal use 6 out of 10 they do gaming(casual/hardcore) and only 2 out of 6 they buy gpu, so think how many people would appreciate this attempt. :) 
a b à CPUs
March 4, 2011 2:08:58 AM

bobdozer said:
The demos show power draw? It seems obvious enough that Llano is at least as good as sandy.

The demo shows full load power draw, which is pretty irrelevant to most users. Idle and low load power draw is more useful to most.
March 4, 2011 2:26:48 AM

So its only ultimate cpu performance that matters but also idle power draw? balls.

intel fanboys are a joke lol. Llano does more at lower power draw but now it has to be one or the other, not both same time. :D 
a b à CPUs
March 4, 2011 2:40:38 AM

bobdozer said:
So its only ultimate cpu performance that matters but also idle power draw? balls.

intel fanboys are a joke lol. Llano does more at lower power draw but now it has to be one or the other, not both same time. :D 

It's true...I don't want a laptop that is 10 times faster with the same power draw at load, but dies in 10 minutes while browsing the web.
Most of the time, people aren't doing tons of things at once on the laptop; there are some people that like to multi-task, but that isn't done all the time. I personally don't like to since it slows my other processes I'm dealing with down, and there are others like me.
a b à CPUs
March 4, 2011 2:54:35 AM

bobdozer said:
So its only ultimate cpu performance that matters but also idle power draw? balls.

intel fanboys are a joke lol. Llano does more at lower power draw but now it has to be one or the other, not both same time. :D 


Nope.

CPU performance matters when I care about performance, but the vast majority of times that I care about battery life, my laptop is at idle.

As for the GPU? All of the laptops I've ever owned have had discrete graphics, and I see no reason to change it now. Especially with Optimus, which gets rid of pretty much the only disadvantage discrete GPUs had.

In other words, that's exactly right. In a CPU, I care about:

1) CPU performance
2) Power draw, especially at idle.

I genuinely don't care about GPU performance from the CPU. It has nothing to do with me being any kind of a fanboy, and everything to do with my laptop usage.
March 4, 2011 2:58:54 AM

Haserath said:
It's true...I don't want a laptop that is 10 times faster with the same power draw at load, but dies in 10 minutes while browsing the web.
Most of the time, people aren't doing tons of things at once on the laptop; there are some people that like to multi-task, but that isn't done all the time. I personally don't like to since it slows my other processes I'm dealing with down, and there are others like me.

accept this fact that if something is good in multitasking than it should be good in single task as well.
do you even know how much load it puts on a cpu when you play games(hd), do calculation in excel(that too in office 10) , and 3d modeling(damn it needs full cpu share)
if it can bear the load of so many applications in one go then it should be awesome while processiing single application(and fast as well)

but as i said final product is yet to come...so no forecasts.
March 4, 2011 3:01:53 AM

cjl said:
Nope.

CPU performance matters when I care about performance, but the vast majority of times that I care about battery life, my laptop is at idle.

As for the GPU? All of the laptops I've ever owned have had discrete graphics, and I see no reason to change it now. Especially with Optimus, which gets rid of pretty much the only disadvantage discrete GPUs had.

In other words, that's exactly right. In a CPU, I care about:

1) CPU performance
2) Power draw, especially at idle.

I genuinely don't care about GPU performance from the CPU. It has nothing to do with me being any kind of a fanboy, and everything to do with my laptop usage.

Baby final product is yet to be released, thats just a demo.
a b à CPUs
March 4, 2011 3:14:20 AM

asiarules said:
accept this fact that if something is good in multitasking than it should be good in single task as well.
do you even know how much load it puts on a cpu when you play games(hd), do calculation in excel(that too in office 10) , and 3d modeling(damn it needs full cpu share)
if it can bear the load of so many applications in one go then it should be awesome while processiing single application(and fast as well)

but as i said final product is yet to come...so no forecasts.

Yeah, they still have some time before mass production. They just need to lower the idle power draw to be close to Sandy's idle then they will put up a great fight.
March 4, 2011 5:22:25 AM

Haserath said:
Yeah, they still have some time before mass production. They just need to lower the idle power draw to be close to Sandy's idle then they will put up a great fight.

But i am eagerly waiting for BULLDOZER, if they are not going to announce anything thing in a month or two then i'd be opting for Phenom II x4 970be or either 1100t
a c 172 à CPUs
March 4, 2011 5:42:37 AM

Hey, people. It's a freakin' demo.

I want benchmarks.
March 4, 2011 5:45:53 AM

jsc said:
Hey, people. It's a freakin' demo.

I want benchmarks.

let the right time come, it will come
a b à CPUs
March 4, 2011 11:29:00 AM

amdfangirl said:
I'd like to argue that battery life is far more important.


Depends on how close to a plug you are :p .

Or how long an extension cord you can borrow..

Anyway, my take is that I need two 'mobile' devices - one truly mobile with great (10 hour or so) battery life, light weight, small form factor and performance coming in near the bottow of the list (i.e., a tablet), and a desktop replacement that only occasionally travels. So I recently bought the latter - 17" Asus with quad-core I7 CPU, M460 GPU and about a 2-3 hour battery life depending on use. It sits in my so-called home 'office' mainly as a gaming/3D video machine but I'll take it with me when I travel. The tablet I'm still waiting on the dust to settle before buying one.
a b à CPUs
March 4, 2011 11:45:32 AM

IMO, Llano may make inroads on the low-end laptops where price is all-important, depending on how AMD sets the APU's price of course. But I also think that's sorta the market for Zacate too - can't see either one in a tablet form as the power draw is too high at the moment.

Also, a decent midrange discrete GPU should only add $150 or so to a laptop's price, so if you are spending $700 ~ $1K on one, that is just 15% ~ 20% additional.
March 4, 2011 11:28:20 PM

fazers_on_stun said:
IMO, Llano may make inroads on the low-end laptops where price is all-important, depending on how AMD sets the APU's price of course. But I also think that's sorta the market for Zacate too - can't see either one in a tablet form as the power draw is too high at the moment.

Also, a decent midrange discrete GPU should only add $150 or so to a laptop's price, so if you are spending $700 ~ $1K on one, that is just 15% ~ 20% additional.

amen!! :) 
a c 131 à CPUs
March 5, 2011 1:48:15 AM

Quote:
Gamers can care less how an IGP perform's. Cry for me amd fanboy's


Speak for yourself. When I want to play COD4 with a 10", 2.5lbs netbook that I can play on for 3-4 hours on battery with my little microsoft mouse, I want to be able to do it at a playable framerate.

When I watch a 1080p movie, I want it to play smoothly.

When I do anything that can be GPU accelerated, I want it to be smooth. Gamers don't just play games. Why are you assuming everyone here is a gamer anyway?
a c 127 à CPUs
March 5, 2011 4:37:54 AM

cbrunnem said:
must not have ever met a college student, who in case you havent notice buy a lot of laptops. just today i had 10 plus tabs open while running media player while running MATLAB and inventor. i also had 2 excel sheets and a word document open with prolly a few folders open as well all just to complete one class's homework assignment. i use 3ds max to render out short clips in the background occasionally too. so just because you or others do not multi task like in the video doesnt mean others do not because i am in a similar situation as that video, occasionally.


Btw i have a i7 laptop so im not toooo biased


Comparing running a pretty hard game (FF XIV while not amazing takes quite a nice system to run happily on max settings), with a 3D rendering program, an excel sheet thats calculating and watching a HD movie to thats not quite the same. I have met college students and honestly, most don't do as much as you are saying. Most of them just screw their laptop up with viruses.

Hell I work on a lot of college students laptops and beyond the normal programs, most don't have what you have on their. You are part of a minority, much like enthusiasts.

I am not biased either. I have only one Intel product in my home. My current Q6600 and P35 (I guess 2 then). I have 2 PCs with AMD CPUs and 3 with AMD graphics. (mine is a HD5870, fiance has a HD4870 plus a 760G chipset w/HD3200 running a Athlon II X2 250 and my HTPC is a Athlon X2 6000+ with a older 580 series chipset or something).

I guess stating that this marketing ploy is BS makes me biased though, right?

asiarules said:
If you cant appreciate something then dont say anything bad about it.

Many people they do multi-tasking at the same time and thats what they wanted to show...which is very much acceptable.

We have seen with what they wanted to show, they proved also apu is gonna beat so called intel's sandy bridge.

"hype is for once, things they dont last forever"


I didn't say anything bad about the APU itself, just AMD marketing. Thats all it is. Just like Intels marketing, its a bunch of BS Most people do multi-task but most do not multitask like THAT specifically on a laptop. They might browse the web while listening to music and downloading some files or typing in word while running a movie. Most heavy mutli-taskers tend to do that stuff on a desktop because it has the power to do all that.

And as for it beating Sandy bridge, I am pretty sure that in CPU intensive tasks it wont even be able to keep up. In games it will because it has a decent GPU and, as I have said before, as nice as it is from the older Intel IGPs it still wont be something viable for high end gaming. Low end, yes but not high end..

amdfangirl said:
I'd like to argue that battery life is far more important.


Absolutley. Which is why as nice as a lot of the things are pushing towards netbook arena, nothing comes close to beating Atom. If you want battery life, this sort of stuff is meaningless. If you want to do this though, I bet your battery wont last more than a hour or two at most if you are lucky. If you leave your laptop plugged in all the time, you might as well just get a desktop for this sort of work and a lower end laptop for travel/on the go.

Wisecracker said:
You're in denial, old man :lol: 


Not quite an old man (only 25 for crying out loud) and not in denial. I just laugh at people who take this marketing ploy seriously, especially for a laptop. I worked at one place exclusivley on laptops and now work on both DT and laptops. So far I have only seen maybe two high end laptops meant for more than the normal. One had a quad core i7 and a nVidia Quadro. Bet he can do ten times the tasks either of those could do. Yet his battery would dry out in less than an hour.

Llano is great. It will have a niche market like Atom. But taking the marketing seriously? Come on. I guess because Dell says their PCs are powerful it means they are better than any custom built PC.

Sheesh.

asiarules said:
AMD cpu(phenom 9550) i realised why AMD is better, it's because they always maintain price=performance ratio.


Not quite. In fact how you got that out of one of AMDs biggest failing CPUs is beyond me. AMD, like Intel, prices based on performance against the other company. You should have bought a Athlon 64. The you would have realized that when AMD has the upper hand, they like Intel, will price it higher. They had $1K+ Athlon FX CPUs up until almost a year after Core 2 came out. Then, and only then did they start to drop prices.

Phenom/Phenom II is only in the sub $300 range because it can't outperform Core 2/iX .

If Bulldozer is better han Core i7 Sandy Bridge CPUs, they will again have CPUs ranging from $200-$1K+ and the $200 dollar ones wont be like current AMD CPUs. They will be the lower performance ones.

This is the way of business. When a company is on top and in demand, they charge a premium. When they are not, they try to undersell the big guys.
March 5, 2011 5:36:29 AM

jimmysmitty said:
Comparing running a pretty hard game (FF XIV while not amazing takes quite a nice system to run happily on max settings), with a 3D rendering program, an excel sheet thats calculating and watching a HD movie to thats not quite the same. I have met college students and honestly, most don't do as much as you are saying. Most of them just screw their laptop up with viruses.

Hell I work on a lot of college students laptops and beyond the normal programs, most don't have what you have on their. You are part of a minority, much like enthusiasts.

I am not biased either. I have only one Intel product in my home. My current Q6600 and P35 (I guess 2 then). I have 2 PCs with AMD CPUs and 3 with AMD graphics. (mine is a HD5870, fiance has a HD4870 plus a 760G chipset w/HD3200 running a Athlon II X2 250 and my HTPC is a Athlon X2 6000+ with a older 580 series chipset or something).

I guess stating that this marketing ploy is BS makes me biased though, right?



I didn't say anything bad about the APU itself, just AMD marketing. Thats all it is. Just like Intels marketing, its a bunch of BS Most people do multi-task but most do not multitask like THAT specifically on a laptop. They might browse the web while listening to music and downloading some files or typing in word while running a movie. Most heavy mutli-taskers tend to do that stuff on a desktop because it has the power to do all that.

And as for it beating Sandy bridge, I am pretty sure that in CPU intensive tasks it wont even be able to keep up. In games it will because it has a decent GPU and, as I have said before, as nice as it is from the older Intel IGPs it still wont be something viable for high end gaming. Low end, yes but not high end..



Absolutley. Which is why as nice as a lot of the things are pushing towards netbook arena, nothing comes close to beating Atom. If you want battery life, this sort of stuff is meaningless. If you want to do this though, I bet your battery wont last more than a hour or two at most if you are lucky. If you leave your laptop plugged in all the time, you might as well just get a desktop for this sort of work and a lower end laptop for travel/on the go.



Not quite an old man (only 25 for crying out loud) and not in denial. I just laugh at people who take this marketing ploy seriously, especially for a laptop. I worked at one place exclusivley on laptops and now work on both DT and laptops. So far I have only seen maybe two high end laptops meant for more than the normal. One had a quad core i7 and a nVidia Quadro. Bet he can do ten times the tasks either of those could do. Yet his battery would dry out in less than an hour.

Llano is great. It will have a niche market like Atom. But taking the marketing seriously? Come on. I guess because Dell says their PCs are powerful it means they are better than any custom built PC.

Sheesh.



Not quite. In fact how you got that out of one of AMDs biggest failing CPUs is beyond me. AMD, like Intel, prices based on performance against the other company. You should have bought a Athlon 64. The you would have realized that when AMD has the upper hand, they like Intel, will price it higher. They had $1K+ Athlon FX CPUs up until almost a year after Core 2 came out. Then, and only then did they start to drop prices.

Phenom/Phenom II is only in the sub $300 range because it can't outperform Core 2/iX .

If Bulldozer is better han Core i7 Sandy Bridge CPUs, they will again have CPUs ranging from $200-$1K+ and the $200 dollar ones wont be like current AMD CPUs. They will be the lower performance ones.

This is the way of business. When a company is on top and in demand, they charge a premium. When they are not, they try to undersell the big guys.



Whatever it is, its a win win situation for consumers like us and thats why i dont competition to die.
      • 1 / 2
      • 2
      • Newest
!