Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

AMD Llano 3x more powerful than Intel SB?

Last response: in CPUs
Share
June 21, 2011 9:24:32 PM

My apologies if Im posting this in the wrong place but I don't think my question fit in graphics forums

Just Read This:

http://arstechnica.com/business/news/2011/05/latest-gpu...

Seems like it paints a pretty grim future for nvidia, (which was news to me)


Intel's upcoming Ivy Bridge platform will feature an on-die GPU that begins to threaten the mid-range of the discrete market the way that Sandy Bridge threatens the bottom end; and the on-die GPU with AMD's Llano is rumored to be some three times the performance of Intel's Sandy Bridge.

My question is this: How accurate is this information? AMD Llano is 3 times as powerful as Sandy bridge? When is it supposed to hit the market? When is Ivy Bridge Supposed to release? Is the expectation that it will be around the same time?
a b à CPUs
June 21, 2011 9:38:20 PM

Llano is an 'ok' cpu, with adequate laptop-grade graphics built into it; the Llano's integrated graphics is indeed superior to Sandy's HD2000/3000 integrated graphics. To say simply that the 'CPU' is superior is a bit of a stretch, unless limited to graphics workloads, and relying solely on integrated graphics solutions.
m
0
l
June 21, 2011 9:45:27 PM

This wont affect Nvidi much at all if any. These type of CPU/GPU combos wont replace dedicated GPU's at least for a long wile. They might take a chunk out of the on board low cost Nvidia graphics but thats all. For any gaming type of use people will still need much more powerful dedicated GPU's.
m
0
l
Related resources
a b à CPUs
June 21, 2011 9:47:29 PM

Since llano is an APU, the GPU that's integrated does count as part of it, so three times isn't a stretch, Look up HD5570 vs HD3000.

Mobile llano is out already though, Desktop versions should hit market early July.

Ivy is going to take a while however, Q2 2011? There's even a slim chance AMD's next generation of APUs "Trinity" hitting the market before Ivy does.
m
0
l
June 21, 2011 9:54:34 PM

Timop said:
Since llano is an APU, the GPU that's integrated does count as part of it, so three times isn't a stretch, Look up HD5570 vs HD3000.

Mobile llano is out already though, Desktop versions should hit market early July.

Ivy is going to take a while however, Q2 2011? There's even a slim chance AMD's next generation of APUs "Trinity" hitting the market before Ivy does.

Q2 2011? are the Ivy chips out yet? Did I miss the release? Lol you mean 2012 right?
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
June 21, 2011 9:56:24 PM

cburke82 said:
Q2 2011? are the Ivy chips out yet? Did I miss the release? Lol you mean 2012 right?

:pt1cable: 
Ah, Lemme teleport back to 2011 from 2010.
m
0
l
June 21, 2011 10:01:34 PM

Timop said:
:pt1cable: 
Ah, Lemme teleport back to 2011 from 2010.

lol the other day I was going on about the 2400k Intell CPU that was so cool LMAO.

On an another note I havent heard about the trinity APU's are they the next step after bulldozer?
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
June 21, 2011 10:06:47 PM

cburke82 said:
lol the other day I was going on about the 2400k Intell CPU that was so cool LMAO.

On an another note I havent heard about the trinity APU's are they the next step after bulldozer?

lol, you gotta pair that with crossedfired Nvidia HD560Tis.

On Trinity, Trinity is to Ivy bridge like Llano is to Sandy bridge; while Bulldozer is the CPU architecture for trinity.

From what it looks like now, Trinity is one or two of "enhanced" Bulldozer modules (2-4 "cores") plus N.I. VLIW4 (HD6000) graphics on the same 32nm process.
m
0
l
a c 127 à CPUs
a b À AMD
June 21, 2011 10:12:41 PM

Timop said:
Since llano is an APU, the GPU that's integrated does count as part of it, so three times isn't a stretch, Look up HD5570 vs HD3000.

Mobile llano is out already though, Desktop versions should hit market early July.

Ivy is going to take a while however, Q2 2011? There's even a slim chance AMD's next generation of APUs "Trinity" hitting the market before Ivy does.


Well with that idea then HD3000 is part of the SB unit even though you don't have to use it by using a P67 mobo. If you throw a discrete GPU in with Llano, only certain ones will hybrid CF from what I have seen so its not truly part of the CPU, its just on the die just like HD3000 is on the SB die.

IB will change a lot of things. We know the GPU will get a beefing with more EUs plus the 22nm can help add even more if they use it to stack DDR on the die for fast access.

Whos to say. In GPU, Llano is faster than SB but in CPU it is much slower.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
June 21, 2011 10:20:57 PM

jimmysmitty said:
Well with that idea then HD3000 is part of the SB unit even though you don't have to use it by using a P67 mobo. If you throw a discrete GPU in with Llano, only certain ones will hybrid CF from what I have seen so its not truly part of the CPU, its just on the die just like HD3000 is on the SB die.

IB will change a lot of things. We know the GPU will get a beefing with more EUs plus the 22nm can help add even more if they use it to stack DDR on the die for fast access.

Whos to say. In GPU, Llano is faster than SB but in CPU it is much slower.

I don't get your logic here. What does hybrid CF have to do with anything?
My point in the HD5570 is that the top tier on-die GPU of Llano is approximately that, 400SP@~600Mhz and DDR3 RAM, which is about 3X the performance of the HD3000, making the statement in the original article accurate.

What will IB change though? From what I know, its simply a 22nm shrink of SB with added EUs. The closest thing to "revolution" is the stacked RAM, ie on die sideport memory.
m
0
l
a c 127 à CPUs
a b À AMD
June 21, 2011 10:39:02 PM

Timop said:
I don't get your logic here. What does hybrid CF have to do with anything?
My point in the HD5570 is that the top tier on-die GPU of Llano is approximately that, 400SP@~600Mhz and DDR3 RAM, which is about 3X the performance of the HD3000, making the statement in the original article accurate.

What will IB change though? From what I know, its simply a 22nm shrink of SB with added EUs. The closest thing to "revolution" is the stacked RAM, ie on die sideport memory.


A little more than that. 22nm allows for stacked transistors in general. That means they can stack RAM, cache, processors or anything. And the on die RAM would be much different. Since it would be directly connected to the CPU/GPU the latency would drop tremendously and the transfer rates would jump by a lot. A current Intel CPUs L1 cache, which is on die for example, has transfer rates of about 125000MB/s. Put 1GB of memory on the die for the GPU to access at faster data rates than system RAM, such as GDDR5, and the GPU will perform better. By how much is hard to say.

As for my point, I was basically saying that just because the GPU is better does not mean the CPU itself is better. If you plan CPU intensive applications, then Llano is the wrong way to go. If you want good onboard GPU performance, then Llano is the best way to go currently.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
June 21, 2011 10:43:39 PM

jimmysmitty said:
A little more than that. 22nm allows for stacked transistors in general. That means they can stack RAM, cache, processors or anything. And the on die RAM would be much different. Since it would be directly connected to the CPU/GPU the latency would drop tremendously and the transfer rates would jump by a lot. A current Intel CPUs L1 cache, which is on die for example, has transfer rates of about 125000MB/s. Put 1GB of memory on the die for the GPU to access at faster data rates than system RAM, such as GDDR5, and the GPU will perform better. By how much is hard to say.

As for my point, I was basically saying that just because the GPU is better does not mean the CPU itself is better. If you plan CPU intensive applications, then Llano is the wrong way to go. If you want good onboard GPU performance, then Llano is the best way to go currently.

Oh, lol. I was merely proving that like the quotes article said, Llano does have ~3x the graphics performance of SB.


Since you mentioned it, is stacking is allowed with 22nm in general? Haven't read much on it, but I thought it was with the Tri-gate process intel is using WITH 22nm? :heink: 
m
0
l
a c 127 à CPUs
a b À AMD
June 21, 2011 10:58:46 PM

^yea its the Tri-Gate tech Intel developed. I just say 22nm since thats the first process it will be used on.

As to if AMD or anyone else will us tri-gate at 22nm is a question I want the anwser to.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
June 21, 2011 11:53:03 PM

The GPU is certainly faster, but the CPU not so much. The picture will probably look better for Trinity which will have a similar GPU but a much better Bulldozer CPU core and perhaps more integration between CPU and GPU. It will eat away a little from nVidia's low end market share, but as long as Intel is still Chipzilla nVidia will be supplying PC makers with low end GPUs as a step up from Sandy Bridge integrated graphics, which kinda takes away the quick sync advantage ^_^
m
0
l
June 22, 2011 12:08:24 AM

22nm tri gate is going to be Intel only. TSMC should have 28nm out before too long, it remains to be seen how good that will be in comparison and how bad of a hit AMD is going to take for being behind.

As for Nvidia going down the tubes because of good integrated graphics. Yeah they might take a hit. APU's might kill discrete graphics in all but gaming laptops. Nvidia might be pushed out of the low end and midrange in mobile and low end in desktop. But that does not mean the company will go under. They are making CPUs now, their Tegra 2 chip seems quite popular with the Android phones and tablets, and they have a solid business there, and they will continue to have a solid business with high end discrete graphics as well.

And Windows 8 will be on Arm, so Nvidia could well become a huge cpu manufacturer for tablets and netbooks and low end laptops.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
June 22, 2011 12:36:33 AM

stm1185 said:
22nm tri gate is going to be Intel only. TSMC should have 28nm out before too long, it remains to be seen how good that will be in comparison and how bad of a hit AMD is going to take for being behind.

As for Nvidia going down the tubes because of good integrated graphics. Yeah they might take a hit. APU's might kill discrete graphics in all but gaming laptops. Nvidia might be pushed out of the low end and midrange in mobile and low end in desktop. But that does not mean the company will go under. They are making CPUs now, their Tegra 2 chip seems quite popular with the Android phones and tablets, and they have a solid business there, and they will continue to have a solid business with high end discrete graphics as well.

And Windows 8 will be on Arm, so Nvidia could well become a huge cpu manufacturer for tablets and netbooks and low end laptops.

AMD is using Glofo for 28nm IIRC, which claims to pack density higher then Intel's 22nm (?).

And with Nvidia and ARM, how many OEMs are doing ARM? Qualcomm, TI, ST-e, Samsung and that's just the big ones.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
June 22, 2011 1:51:48 AM

Summary: woe to those that read "Llano is 3x more powerful than SandyBridge", and then actually buy a MB and CPU/APU to build a gaming system around it, only to discover that most games are pathetically slow at even 1024x768. If such motherboards are available for it with a PCI-e(x16) slot to allow a nice graphics card, the system will still be slower than SB (and X4 based rigs) when both are given an actual GPU.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
June 22, 2011 1:57:16 AM

mdd1963 said:
Summary: woe to those that read "Llano is 3x more powerful than SandyBridge", and then actually buy a MB and CPU/APU to build a gaming system around it, only to discover that most games are pathetically slow at even 1024x768. If such motherboards are available for it with a PCI-e(x16) slot to allow a nice graphics card, the system will still be slower than SB (and X4 based rigs) when both are given an actual GPU.

First of all "Llano is 3x more powerful than Sandy Bridge" is incorrect paraphrasing, "the on-die GPU with AMD's Llano is rumored to be some three times the performance of Intel's Sandy Bridge" is the reality.

Second, a quad core llano would max out most games at 1024*769 and 1366*768.

Thirdly, llano performs almost the same compared to a Phenom II X4 clock for clock, so your last point is partially incorrect.
m
0
l
a c 127 à CPUs
a b À AMD
June 22, 2011 3:35:22 AM

Timop said:
AMD is using Glofo for 28nm IIRC, which claims to pack density higher then Intel's 22nm (?).

And with Nvidia and ARM, how many OEMs are doing ARM? Qualcomm, TI, ST-e, Samsung and that's just the big ones.


GloFlo talks a big game but 28nm packing a higher transistor count in the same space as 22nm? Even higher than 3D Tri-gate? I doubt this very much. You have to look at the technology of the process itself. If a box is 5 inches cubed can you pack more boxes into a foot cubed than boxes that are three inches cubed? No.

Now 28nm having a higher transistor density than 32nm, absolutley. But there is no way that 28nm will have a higher transistor density in the same space as 22nm. Its just not logical. Add in tri-gate and that alone means a CPU die can hold more in the same die size due to the stacking ability.

And while Intel will be the first to have 3D Tri Gate tech, it doesn/t mean they will be the only one. They were the first to HK/MG but AMD and the others are moving towards it for 32nm.

Timop said:
First of all "Llano is 3x more powerful than Sandy Bridge" is incorrect paraphrasing, "the on-die GPU with AMD's Llano is rumored to be some three times the performance of Intel's Sandy Bridge" is the reality.

Second, a quad core llano would max out most games at 1024*769 and 1366*768.

Thirdly, llano performs almost the same compared to a Phenom II X4 clock for clock, so your last point is partially incorrect.


The only time I saw the GPU in Llano actualy outperform HD3000 by 3x (300%) was if they were also using a discrete HD6630 GPU and doing a hybrid CF setup. Alone, the A8-3500 APU wasn't as much faster as being claimed than HD3000. It was faster, but not nearly as much as the claims were. Same with power usage. SB and Llano were about the same for power usage.

As for the CPU performance of Llano, from what I have read its actually about the same as a AthlonII X4 which is still weaker than Phenom II due to a lack of L3 cache.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
June 22, 2011 4:11:52 AM

jimmysmitty said:
GloFlo talks a big game but 28nm packing a higher transistor count in the same space as 22nm? Even higher than 3D Tri-gate? I doubt this very much. You have to look at the technology of the process itself. If a box is 5 inches cubed can you pack more boxes into a foot cubed than boxes that are three inches cubed? No.

Now 28nm having a higher transistor density than 32nm, absolutley. But there is no way that 28nm will have a higher transistor density in the same space as 22nm. Its just not logical. Add in tri-gate and that alone means a CPU die can hold more in the same die size due to the stacking ability.

And while Intel will be the first to have 3D Tri Gate tech, it doesn/t mean they will be the only one. They were the first to HK/MG but AMD and the others are moving towards it for 32nm.



The only time I saw the GPU in Llano actualy outperform HD3000 by 3x (300%) was if they were also using a discrete HD6630 GPU and doing a hybrid CF setup. Alone, the A8-3500 APU wasn't as much faster as being claimed than HD3000. It was faster, but not nearly as much as the claims were. Same with power usage. SB and Llano were about the same for power usage.

As for the CPU performance of Llano, from what I have read its actually about the same as a AthlonII X4 which is still weaker than Phenom II due to a lack of L3 cache.

It is skeptical, but I am willing to believe that it is somewhat true, there are variances in density even with apparent "identical" processes. (ie. how llano packs 1.14b in 228mm2, while SB only packs 995m in 216mm2, same goes with AMD and Intel's 45nm, how the Phenom packs a little more per mm2 than Nehalem.) Though everything is pretty much out of AMD's hands (sadly), as what Little stake they still have in Glofo means nothing more than a shareholder.

On the GPU, Desktop Llano A8 @2.9Ghz consistently doubles frames of the 2500K in anand's desktop "preview", and AMD claims a 6% IPC increase over Atlon II due to the extra L2 and optimization, it should be safe to say the GPU is ~3X powerful while the CPU is pretty much on par with Phenom II (which wah ~10% better than Athlon II X4) isn't it?

IIRC, the Compal samples AMD's sent out with the 3500M all had broken turbos, which pretty much invalidates their performance as Turbo is major for Llano. (Why would AMD do this I have no idea.)
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
June 22, 2011 6:03:12 AM

Timop said:
Thirdly, llano performs almost the same compared to a Phenom II X4 clock for clock, so your last point is partially incorrect.


"Almost the same"....meaning....perhaps not 'faster', yet, not quite 'identical' performance, but....it is ....'slower'? :)  (to be expected, given cache differences)

Benchmarks I saw had it more on par with an Athlon II X4/635 or 645, vice matching any of the Phenoms at/near equivalent clockspeeds...; naturally, Llano might be quicker than the slowest Phenom II X4 (910 at 2.6 GHz), if/ when the latter is at a clock deficit...

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4448/amd-llano-desktop-pe...

I think it is an impressive laptop solution, as designed, and might do just fine as a low cost dekptop for my kids' Facebook, iTunes, websurfing, etc...; but I can't imagine anyone choosing it to build a gaming system.


m
0
l
a c 479 à CPUs
a c 118 å Intel
a c 121 À AMD
June 22, 2011 8:42:19 AM

A Llano based laptop will at least raise the minimum bar for an inexpensive gaming laptop. True, while gaming performance is not going to be breath taking, it will be a good improvement on the low end compared to previous integrated solutions.

I thought that Intel's HD 3000 graphics core was a pretty significant performance boost from their previous IGP, the 4500mHD. Although, it would have been nice if all the Sandy Bridge CPUs has the HD 3000.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
June 22, 2011 11:18:33 AM

Timop said:
I don't get your logic here. What does hybrid CF have to do with anything?
My point in the HD5570 is that the top tier on-die GPU of Llano is approximately that, 400SP@~600Mhz and DDR3 RAM, which is about 3X the performance of the HD3000, making the statement in the original article accurate.


That article was written before anybody had actual Llano systems to bench however. When the rubber hit the road, Anandtech says Llano only 58% faster in GPU than SB, which is a far smaller amount than 300% faster:

Quote:
Llano vs. Sandy Bridge: Finally, Acceptable Processor Graphics

On average the A8-3850 is 58% faster than the Core i5 2500K. If we look at peak performance in games like Modern Warfare 2, Llano delivers over twice the frame rate of Sandy Bridge. This is what processor graphics should look like. While I believe Sandy Bridge was a good start for integrated GPU performance, Llano is my ideal for 2011. Update: We've added results from the latest 2372 driver for the 2500K. Most performance results remain unchanged however a few problematic areas for Sandy Bridge have been addressed as a result. Llano still maintains a significant performance in the majority of cases.

Games that are more CPU bound however do show Llano's weakness. Both Dragon Age and Starcraft II have Sandy Bridge either outperforming or coming very close to Llano in frame rates. Those are most definitely the exception rather than the rule however; for the most part AMD is able to deliver entry-level discrete GPU performance with Llano.


Quote:
What will IB change though? From what I know, its simply a 22nm shrink of SB with added EUs. The closest thing to "revolution" is the stacked RAM, ie on die sideport memory.


IIRC S/A thinks it'll do "3X" increase in GPU over SB :p .. Actually no numbers yet of course but the on-die dedicated (not shared with the CPU) DDR2 might actually double or triple performance, given the huge & low-latency memory pipe.. I'm thinking L2 or L3 cache speeds..
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
June 22, 2011 11:24:23 AM

Timop said:
First of all "Llano is 3x more powerful than Sandy Bridge" is incorrect paraphrasing, "the on-die GPU with AMD's Llano is rumored to be some three times the performance of Intel's Sandy Bridge" is the reality.

Second, a quad core llano would max out most games at 1024*769 and 1366*768.

Thirdly, llano performs almost the same compared to a Phenom II X4 clock for clock, so your last point is partially incorrect.


Make that an Athlon II X4 (no L3 cache) and I'd agree with youl From the same Anandtech Llano desktop preview:

Quote:
CPU Performance: Pretty Much an Athlon II X4

As we found in our look at mobile Llano, the A8 isn't impressive as a general purpose x86 microprocessor. In general the chip is somewhat faster than the Athlon II X4 635 and I'd say it performs more like a 645 based on the numbers I've seen here. Again, nothing to be impressed by but if you're building a value gaming PC it may not matter.

Note that heavily-threaded applications actually favor the A8-3850 to the Core i3 2100 (its most likely target based on pricing rumors) thanks to its four cores. They may not be as efficient as the i3's cores, but you sure do have more of them. We have been discussing this tradeoff with AMD for quite a bit over the past couple of years. You lose out on single-threaded performance but you do gain better performance in heavily-threaded workloads. I had assumed that Turbo Core would partially solve this with Llano but 2.9GHz is going to be the fastest SKU AMD offers and it doesn't ship with any turbo enabled.


m
0
l
a b à CPUs
June 22, 2011 11:51:54 AM

jaguarskx said:
A Llano based laptop will at least raise the minimum bar for an inexpensive gaming laptop. True, while gaming performance is not going to be breath taking, it will be a good improvement on the low end compared to previous integrated solutions.

I thought that Intel's HD 3000 graphics core was a pretty significant performance boost from their previous IGP, the 4500mHD. Although, it would have been nice if all the Sandy Bridge CPUs has the HD 3000.


I've heard IB will have 16 or 24 (double) the EU's of HD3000, with some optimizations possible as well, so hopefully the GPU performance will bump up nicely even if the stacked on-die DDR2 rumor from SemiAccurate turns out to be the 50% wrong info :p .. I'd guess it might be, seeing as how they got the tri-gate rumor correct - now they're overdue for being wrong if they wanna keep the "semi" in SemiAccurate :D ..

As for the GloFlo transistor density claims for 28nm, all I ever heard was their claiming 'gate first' HKMG at 28nm would be 'up to 20% more dense than the competition's (read TSMC) gate-last HKMG 28nm process'. Stands to reason since extra processing steps for gate-last (depositing a place-holder gate for self-alignment of source & drain, annealing the substrate at 1000+ degrees Centigrade, then removing the temp gate and depositing the HKMG final gate) all tend to require some extra slack in how closely you can place the features in each process layer.

But, it seems GloFlo along with the other IBM consortium members will be switching to gate last HKMG at 22nm, simply because baking the hafnium compound at 1000+ degrees requires too much compromise to survive the high temp, reducing the effectiveness compared to gate last where Intel (and TSMC) can optimize the gate composition for performance, not surviving high temps. With the even thinner gate insulation layer needed at 22nm vs. 32nm or 28nm, having the right composition becomes even more important apparently.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
June 22, 2011 2:33:49 PM

And people in the BD thread wondered why I wanted a test with both SB and Llano using a Discrete GPU...

Llano is about 20% slower then SB in most all tasks. The Llano APU is about 20% more powerful then the Intel HD3000.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
June 22, 2011 5:48:30 PM

gamerk316 said:
And people in the BD thread wondered why I wanted a test with both SB and Llano using a Discrete GPU...

Llano is about 20% slower then SB in most all tasks. The Llano APU is about 20% more powerful then the Intel HD3000.


Heh, after AMD's "huge announcement" of slapping the FX name on some BD's, a couple weeks ago, plus no BD's shipping anytime soon, I gave up on that thread.. Now that Bobdozer got banned again or just left, I think JDJ generates over half the posts in there anyway - probably needs to 'moderate' himself a bit :p ..

Isn't Llano on a different socket than AM3+? If so, then with Trinity BD coming out sometime next year to replace it, seems like a pretty short-lived investment..

Personally, I don't see that much difference between Llano's GPU and SB's HD3000 - 30 fps on some games using medium settings, vs. 22 fps. Either one is gonna seem kinda choppy when you're used to 60+ fps on high settings, which is why I got a 460M discrete card on my gaming lappy - not that it's the greatest, but OK for gaming when I travel.. Dropping the res and eyecandy and still going down to 30 or lower fps - why bother?
m
0
l
a c 479 à CPUs
a c 118 å Intel
a c 121 À AMD
June 22, 2011 8:59:49 PM

gamerk316 said:
And people in the BD thread wondered why I wanted a test with both SB and Llano using a Discrete GPU...

Llano is about 20% slower then SB in most all tasks. The Llano APU is about 20% more powerful then the Intel HD3000.


From a gaming perspective, I would say that Llano should generally outperform SB by a little bit when using the integrated graphics core. Most games are limited by the GPU than the CPU. It would be interesting to see a couple of those laptops go head to head.

At the very least a poor college student may actually get some decent gaming from an inexpensive laptop.
m
0
l
June 22, 2011 9:12:31 PM

jaguarskx said:
From a gaming perspective, I would say that Llano should generally outperform SB by a little bit when using the integrated graphics core. Most games are limited by the GPU than the CPU. It would be interesting to see a couple of those laptops go head to head.

At the very least a poor college student may actually get some decent gaming from an inexpensive laptop.

Thats the whole point of that APU right? Its not supposed to be for the high end gaming PC's or am I way off? I know SB has AMD beat hard but it seems like most people think your going to get double frame rates with a SB. I get maybe 5-6 less FPS on average when I compare my avg FPS to a benchmark done with a SB most of the time Im pegged at 60 FPS on VSYNC so I would not be seeing that extra 5-6 FPS at least 80% of the time anyway. That being said I wish I had a SB lol. I think the full on desktop APU's coming out should at least catch up to SB at least I hope that way we can all have some healthy competition again.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
June 22, 2011 9:13:32 PM

these graphics solitions will nearly allways be second rate

think of it in terms of an engine what puts out your engine or a luxery yaught

they both use petrol/desil engines

its the same concept the one that has more availive space usually has a higher potential
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
June 22, 2011 9:17:09 PM

Llano will give you good performance using integrated graphics, and if you happen to be running a discrete AMD GPU, the graphics will still get a boost from the Llano APU via CrossfireX technology. The processing cores will be more than enough to keep any mobile discrete GPU happily satisfied. To e honest, I envision this being the ultimate low to mid range mobile gaming platform, with the high end being twice to three times the price for a marginal performance gain.

Personally, I can't wait to see a home theater PC that is built around Llano. I have been underwhelmed by the performance I have see from the Atom/Nvidia Ion combo. I'm just salivating at the thought of AMD video acceleration tied to some real processing cores. When I consider the Atom, I think of the first 4 cylinder cars that Detroit rolled out in the 70s...where is the other half of the engine?
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
June 22, 2011 9:38:06 PM

It would be good to see graphics move to the next level when it comes to gpu/cpu based solutions..

It is a natural progression that power will increase but then again so will the complexity of graphics in games..

Intel have always been known for their build worthiness in graphic capabilities compared to ATIs technology and Nvidia technology.. but then again whos to say that Intel are not working on something to whip AMD's but - Sandy Bridge did that big time..

I really wouldnt be suprised if Intel buys out Nvidia sometime soon.

I really cant see what anyone gets excited about in onboard stuff as nothing has really impressed me and you can get a resonable video card now for reasonable money.

Im more impressed with the SSD's comming out of Intels R&D/
m
0
l
a c 479 à CPUs
a c 118 å Intel
a c 121 À AMD
June 22, 2011 9:38:48 PM

cburke82 said:
Thats the whole point of that APU right? Its not supposed to be for the high end gaming PC's or am I way off?


Yep, that's right.

Throw in an inexpensive solution for a media PC as well.

A Llano or Trinity (next year) laptop might be a nice toy to buy to play games on the road if they are relatively inexpensive ($500 - $600).
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
June 23, 2011 1:02:05 PM

jaguarskx said:
At the very least a poor college student may actually get some decent gaming from an inexpensive laptop.


Heh, I would characterize it more as inexpensive gaming on an inexpensive laptop, for both SB and Llano using the on-die GPU..

I've been playing Dungeon Siege III this week on my Asus RoG laptop with all settings maxed out, using an i7 quad & the 460M GPU in 3D mode, and it is decently playable with no noticeable stuttering or lags. I'd like to see some comparable reviews when LLano finally ships, using its GPU..
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
June 23, 2011 1:09:20 PM

Hellboy said:
It would be good to see graphics move to the next level when it comes to gpu/cpu based solutions..

It is a natural progression that power will increase but then again so will the complexity of graphics in games..

Intel have always been known for their build worthiness in graphic capabilities compared to ATIs technology and Nvidia technology.. but then again whos to say that Intel are not working on something to whip AMD's but - Sandy Bridge did that big time..

I really wouldnt be suprised if Intel buys out Nvidia sometime soon.

I really cant see what anyone gets excited about in onboard stuff as nothing has really impressed me and you can get a resonable video card now for reasonable money.

Im more impressed with the SSD's comming out of Intels R&D/


Hey, HB - glad to see you're still alive & kickin' :) .

Yeah, I agree - add an $80 discrete GPU to just about any recent dual-core or better CPU and you'd match or beat Llano's GPU, plus you can always upgrade it (although not too easy on a laptop :p ). Now if AMD gets their asymmetrical Xfire or whatever they call it going, with more than a few discrete GPUs, then it might be a different story. However I don't think Llano is going to be around, at least mid to high performance range, once Trinity comes out next year..
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
June 23, 2011 4:30:23 PM

Quote:
Thats the whole point of that APU right? Its not supposed to be for the high end gaming PC's or am I way off?


More or less.

My point is though, because sites are NOT doing tests with even a cheap discrete GPU as a comparison, to the uninformed, it appears that Llano is far more powerful then it really is, across the board, and not just because of its APU. And this, we end up with "Llano 3x more powerful then SB?" threads.
m
0
l
June 23, 2011 5:03:58 PM

gamerk316 said:
Quote:
Thats the whole point of that APU right? Its not supposed to be for the high end gaming PC's or am I way off?


More or less.

My point is though, because sites are NOT doing tests with even a cheap discrete GPU as a comparison, to the uninformed, it appears that Llano is far more powerful then it really is, across the board, and not just because of its APU. And this, we end up with "Llano 3x more powerful then SB?" threads.

I think this one is meant to replace discrete graphics in laptops and netbooks. So from what ive seen thats what they are testing them on and against so in that way they may very well be 3x more powerfull. I have yet to see an Intel integrated graphics perform well at all so if this adds any gaming value to a base model laptop or net book thats great.
m
0
l
June 23, 2011 8:24:22 PM

cburke82 said:
I think this one is meant to replace discrete graphics in laptops and netbooks. So from what ive seen thats what they are testing them on and against so in that way they may very well be 3x more powerfull. I have yet to see an Intel integrated graphics perform well at all so if this adds any gaming value to a base model laptop or net book thats great.



Sorry, but most folks buying Lap Tops aren't gaming so AMD Looses that Ace-In-The-Hole. Then folks will still be buying Tablets and Net-Books more than some thing advertised as having better Gaming performance. Still gaming on any of these from Intel or AMD sucks compared to the Cheapest Desktop Gaming PC with a even a Cheap AMD-6XXX or nVidia 5xx or even a 460 is a poor joke.

That said, consumers aren't benchmarking but will only look at Battery life and thank goodness AMD is doing very well there. They should get very good sales to the OEM's and do well with these processors. IMHO, gaming will have little to NOTHING to do with Sales.
m
0
l
June 24, 2011 2:01:22 AM

gamerk316 said:
Llano is about 20% slower then SB in most all tasks. The Llano APU is about 20% more powerful then the Intel HD3000.


Don't be ridiculous Llano's graphics are 50% faster to usually twice or more depending on resolution.
m
0
l
June 24, 2011 2:05:45 AM

fazers_on_stun said:
Personally, I don't see that much difference between Llano's GPU and SB's HD3000 - 30 fps on some games using medium settings, vs. 22 fps. Either one is gonna seem kinda choppy when you're used to 60+ fps on high settings, which is why I got a 460M discrete card on my gaming lappy - not that it's the greatest, but OK for gaming when I travel.. Dropping the res and eyecandy and still going down to 30 or lower fps - why bother?


You must travel very short distances. How long does an i7 and 460M's battery last while gaming anyway, 30 minutes?
m
0
l
June 24, 2011 3:37:21 PM

Donnie27 said:
Sorry, but most folks buying Lap Tops aren't gaming so AMD Looses that Ace-In-The-Hole. Then folks will still be buying Tablets and Net-Books more than some thing advertised as having better Gaming performance. Still gaming on any of these from Intel or AMD sucks compared to the Cheapest Desktop Gaming PC with a even a Cheap AMD-6XXX or nVidia 5xx or even a 460 is a poor joke.

That said, consumers aren't benchmarking but will only look at Battery life and thank goodness AMD is doing very well there. They should get very good sales to the OEM's and do well with these processors. IMHO, gaming will have little to NOTHING to do with Sales.

There are threds on this website all the time with people talking about "How can I game on my laptop" Usualy people who have the lower cost one that think they can upgrade them. Plenty of people try to game on laptops but a lot of them just cant. What this APU will do is make it possible for someone to purchase a $500-600 laptop and still play games on low settings were before you needed a more expensive laptop with a mobile GPU.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
June 24, 2011 3:57:49 PM

amdstars said:
You must travel very short distances. How long does an i7 and 460M's battery last while gaming anyway, 30 minutes?


Actually I generally confine myself to visiting places with electricity (and indoor plumbing) while traveling on vacation... :sol:  I do have a portable generator should I ever develop a nutty desire to game (or poop) in the deep woods however.. :whistle: 

Currently the main reason I buy gaming laptops is for when I am forced to go visit my wife's family for a month in Saigon. As you might suspect, the conversations, TV shows, magazines, etc etc etc are all in Vietnamese, which I have yet to learn to speak or read. So when I get tired of quaffing Heinekins and making sign language with the brothers-in-law, then maybe I'll catch up on some current games.

I used to participate in LAN parties as well - a hell of a lot easier to take a 10-lb laptop than to try lugging a 40lb desktop, maybe a 30lb monitor & keyboard & mouse & headset, even with a case on casters.. Of course that went out with high-speed Internet connections, so now it's just for travel purposes.

Haven't actually timed gaming on the battery, since the power has yet to go out at my house, my car has a 120V adapter, and next time I go overseas I'm planning on flying business class (with those handy 120V outlets at every seat) as well, as I know some people who can get me the upgrade for like $200 over economy class. But I can vouch for the fact that I can get through 1.5 BD movies on one charge, with the screen brightness about halfway as I did try that once.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
June 24, 2011 4:31:50 PM

cburke82 said:
There are threds on this website all the time with people talking about "How can I game on my laptop" Usualy people who have the lower cost one that think they can upgrade them. Plenty of people try to game on laptops but a lot of them just cant. What this APU will do is make it possible for someone to purchase a $500-600 laptop and still play games on low settings were before you needed a more expensive laptop with a mobile GPU.


Except I think Anandtech said the price of their Llano lappy was around $600-700, didn't they? I'd agree it would be a better value at the lower price, but then as I mentioned before, somebody who is limited to $500 (e.g., college student stuck in a dorm) isn't too likely to be buying a lot of $50 console-port games either (which is what Dungeon Siege III is turning out to be - disappointing). And if they do, they're probably going to be disappointed anyway - small screen, choppy action, small keys, have to use an external mouse or gamepad - why not just buy a console to hook up to that 40" TV?

m
0
l
June 24, 2011 5:22:26 PM

fazers_on_stun said:
Except I think Anandtech said the price of their Llano lappy was around $600-700, didn't they? I'd agree it would be a better value at the lower price, but then as I mentioned before, somebody who is limited to $500 (e.g., college student stuck in a dorm) isn't too likely to be buying a lot of $50 console-port games either (which is what Dungeon Siege III is turning out to be - disappointing). And if they do, they're probably going to be disappointed anyway - small screen, choppy action, small keys, have to use an external mouse or gamepad - why not just buy a console to hook up to that 40" TV?

Perfect for WoW at med settings :) 
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
June 24, 2011 8:54:50 PM

cburke82 said:
Perfect for WoW at med settings :) 


Hmm, forgot about World of Warcrack :p  - you're right about that, although my wife's nephew seemed quite happy playing it on his mom's Mac which I think has a pretty low-end GPU as it was the cheapest one she could find (not that any Mac is cheap, of course).

m
0
l
June 24, 2011 9:23:56 PM

fazers_on_stun said:
Hmm, forgot about World of Warcrack :p  - you're right about that, although my wife's nephew seemed quite happy playing it on his mom's Mac which I think has a pretty low-end GPU as it was the cheapest one she could find (not that any Mac is cheap, of course).

Yeah what are the "cheap " Macs going for now $1200 lol better be able to play wow lol.
m
0
l
a c 103 à CPUs
a b À AMD
June 24, 2011 10:18:57 PM

In my opinion Llano is great for most average PC users in both desktops and laptops as it will mean for the 1st time you can play any game (most at low res. &/or detail) on one of the cheapest Dell, HP etc PCs which has never before been possible. And for the 1st time to can play games on a fairly small laptop and get good battery life. Also great for HTPCs. 90%+ of people who buy a PC will never use the power of Sandy bridge but could benefit from slightly better graphics.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
June 25, 2011 2:11:29 PM

simon12 said:
In my opinion Llano is great for most average PC users in both desktops and laptops as it will mean for the 1st time you can play any game (most at low res. &/or detail) on one of the cheapest Dell, HP etc PCs which has never before been possible. And for the 1st time to can play games on a fairly small laptop and get good battery life. Also great for HTPCs. 90%+ of people who buy a PC will never use the power of Sandy bridge but could benefit from slightly better graphics.


http://www.logicbuy.com/deals/alienware-m11x/25668.aspx

Quote:
HOT! Alienware m11x with Intel Pentium U5400 Overclockable CPU for $799 - $200 off = $599 with free shipping. Also features Nvidia GeForce GT 335M 1GB graphics, 802.11a/b/g/n Wi-Fi, 320GB Hard Drive, 4GB RAM.


Looking up the GT 335M on http://www.notebookcheck.net/Comparison-of-Laptop-Graph... I see that it is rated higher than the 6620G which is the GPU in Llano. So it would come down to battery life I guess. Anyway, this is probably what AMD would need to set pricing at in order to compete, as I'm sure Dell is still making some big $$ off that sale..
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
June 25, 2011 2:17:17 PM

fazers_on_stun said:
http://www.logicbuy.com/deals/alienware-m11x/25668.aspx

Quote:
HOT! Alienware m11x with Intel Pentium U5400 Overclockable CPU for $799 - $200 off = $599 with free shipping. Also features Nvidia GeForce GT 335M 1GB graphics, 802.11a/b/g/n Wi-Fi, 320GB Hard Drive, 4GB RAM.


Looking up the GT 335M on http://www.notebookcheck.net/Comparison-of-Laptop-Graph... I see that it is rated higher than the 6620G which is the GPU in Llano. So it would come down to battery life I guess. Anyway, this is probably what AMD would need to set pricing at in order to compete, as I'm sure Dell is still making some big $$ off that sale..

The CPU is hopelessly slow though, like almost E-350 slow.
m
0
l
!