Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

AMD "Trinity" APU Models Release Schedule Details Leaked

By - Source: DonanimHaber | B 38 comments

In a recently leaked roadmap on AMD's desktop product lineup in 2012, Trinity is set for the second quarter 2012.

Based on leaked slides coming from Turkish website DonanimHaber, AMD will launch its next-generation accelerated processing unit, codenamed Trinity, in second quarter 2012. The Trinity will start with its quad-core A10 and A8 processors in the second quarter then followed by dual-core A6 and A4 processors in the third-quarter of 2012.

Image Leaked by DonanimHaberImage Leaked by DonanimHaber

The A10 lineup consists of quad-core APUs that come with Radeon HD 7660D graphics. The A10-5800K has four "Piledriver" architecture cores, clock speeds of 3.80 GHz (4.20 GHz Turbo Core), 4 MB L2 cache, DDR3 1866 support and 100W TDP.  Next in line is the non-Black Edition A10-5700, which has a base clock clocked at 3.40 GHz (4.00 GHz Turbo Core) with a 65W TDP. The HD 7660D has 384 Graphics CoreNext stream processors.

The A8 lineup consist of quad-core APUs that come with a Radeon HD 7560D graphics. The A8-5600K has clock speeds of 3.60 GHz (3.90 Turbo Core), 4 MB L2 cache, DDR3 1866 support and 100W TDP. The A8-5500 has a base clock clocked at 3.240 GHz (3.70 GHz Turbo Core) with a 65W TDP. The HD 7560D has 256 Graphics CoreNext stream processors.

The A6/A4 lineups consist of dual-core APUs that come with a Radeon HD 7540D/HD 7480D graphics. The A6-5400K will have an unlocked multiplier (clock speeds not currently listed), 1 MB L2 cache, DDR3 1866 support, 65W TDP and HD 7540D graphics. The HD 7540D has 192 Graphics CoreNext stream processors. The lowest priced A4-5300 will support 1 MB L2 cache, DDR3 1866 support, 65W TDP and HD 7480D graphics (clock speeds not currently listed). The HD 7480D has 128 Graphics CoreNext stream processors. The HD 7480D will lack dual-graphics support, which would allow users to pair an APU graphics processor with a compatible discrete GPU to make the two work together.

Image Leaked by DonanimHaberImage Leaked by DonanimHaber

Please keep in mind, of course, that these specifications are from a leaked source to DonanimHaber. We won't know for sure until AMD shares official information. Stay tuned!

Display 38 Comments.
This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 25 Hide
    alterecho , February 15, 2012 9:52 AM
    Quote:
    I can't wait for this, it will DESTROY wimpy ivy bridge!


    One of the most optimistic statements of this year!
  • 22 Hide
    SteelCity1981 , February 15, 2012 9:57 AM
    Pretty impressive. Def see a perfomance boost over Llano.
  • 17 Hide
    vaughn2k , February 15, 2012 10:17 AM
    If the A10 line-up really has the 7660D, and this performs on par with HD6750/HD5750, this would be an awesome-enough-for-casual gaming platform PC... Should wait for the bench soon...
Other Comments
  • -7 Hide
    stuartl , February 15, 2012 9:30 AM
    I can't wait for this, it will DESTROY wimpy ivy bridge!
  • 25 Hide
    alterecho , February 15, 2012 9:52 AM
    Quote:
    I can't wait for this, it will DESTROY wimpy ivy bridge!


    One of the most optimistic statements of this year!
  • 22 Hide
    SteelCity1981 , February 15, 2012 9:57 AM
    Pretty impressive. Def see a perfomance boost over Llano.
  • 5 Hide
    ajrm , February 15, 2012 10:06 AM
    Hopefully nor another overhyped underacheiving line up... I want to buy something AMD ... but there is nothing out there worth buying from these guys..E350 is probably the only AMD setup that trounces something from Intel.
  • 17 Hide
    vaughn2k , February 15, 2012 10:17 AM
    If the A10 line-up really has the 7660D, and this performs on par with HD6750/HD5750, this would be an awesome-enough-for-casual gaming platform PC... Should wait for the bench soon...
  • -7 Hide
    billybobser , February 15, 2012 11:43 AM
    The name will be misleading, like the mobile moniker for their gfx cards.

    a 6990m will not resemble anything near a 6990 for example.

    I wouldn't like to guess what's coming from AMD, it's been a mixed bag which has been generally disappointing.

    Though I would love a graphically capable Llano, as it should be the future if done right.

    (graphics core to boost performance where consumers want it, games and video playback, and cutting down on space requirements/power requirements)

    I don't hold much hope for anything AMD though.
  • 1 Hide
    salgado18 , February 15, 2012 11:47 AM
    I was expecting them to release at least a six-core trinity APU, with the A10 name. After all, if they mean to compete with Intel on APUs, the other guys have bad GPU paired with an i5. Maybe the TDP would be too high, but I think it would reach something like 125W, which is acceptable.

    Oh, well, let Piledriver come before making judgements...
  • 12 Hide
    halls , February 15, 2012 11:48 AM
    Bummed to see AMD drop out of the enthusiast desktop race with Intel, but I have to admit it looks like they made a good decision. If those APUs have as much video processing power as it looks like they do it could be an amazing budget choice.
  • 6 Hide
    goodsyntax , February 15, 2012 1:06 PM
    Quad-core 3.8GHz/4.2Ghz Turbo looks nice, especially paired with 7660 graphics.

    I will have to wait and see if the graphics are as nice as the model number implies, especially considering that they are way too optimistic with their labeling (I doubt the integrated 7660 would be as nice as a 6950, which by the way is still about $250 for a discrete card). We will have to find out what type of hardware acceleration is included with the APU. At a minimum, I have to assume that better hardware support for transcoding is included. There is simply no reason why Intel's Quick Sync is faster than AMD's solution.

    I had hoped that the TDP would be a little lower as well, 100W, though nice, should be more like 85W or even 65W like the A10-5700. I suppose that the graphics component adds to the bottom line, but with the advances in power management and core deactivation, I had hoped for a little bit better.

    Time will tell if the revised Piledriver is better than Bulldozer (which is a disappointment to say the least). If the hype is to believed and the graphics performance is on par with a 6950, then methinks that AMD has a winner here. Price may very well determine whether this revised lineup will be a success, or a flop.

    Here's hoping for an AMD comeback, so we aren't held captive by Intel in the upper-midrange market. I've been putting off purchasing a new rig because the total cost to move to an Intel 2500K /2600K (including processor, motherboard and a graphics card to replace the pathetic integrated HD graphics) is too much to bear, especially for an AMD fanboi like myself.
  • 4 Hide
    Super_Nova , February 15, 2012 1:25 PM
    This looks quite promesing. I might not get one for a gaming rig but I will defitily get one for a nice SFF HTPC build.
  • 3 Hide
    Anonymous , February 15, 2012 1:33 PM
    quote: vaughn2k 02/15/2012 1:17 PM
    "If the A10 line-up really has the 7660D, and this performs on par with HD6750/HD5750, this would be an awesome-enough-for-casual gaming platform PC... Should wait for the bench soon..."

    Well the HD7750 has 512 GCN cores and the same core speed and has 15% more performance than HD6750/HD5750. 7660D has 384 GCN cores, that is 3/4, so the performance will be about 10-15% behind the HD6750/HD5750, that is assuming the memory bandwidth is good enough, so the system should have fast enough memory.
  • 7 Hide
    Vorador2 , February 15, 2012 1:50 PM
    Doubtful it will be able to beat Ivy Bridge in the enthusiast market. Unless Piledriver improves Bulldozer by a lot.

    But it will be awesome for HTPCs and ultrabooks.
  • 1 Hide
    nezzymighty , February 15, 2012 2:41 PM
    alterechoOne of the most optimistic statements of this year!


    I am an AMD fan, and I even found your comment hilarious!!!!! I agree with both the humour and sarcasm!!! +1
  • 2 Hide
    friikazoid , February 15, 2012 2:56 PM
    This may sound nooby, but I noticed the package says FM2, while the current APUs are FM1. Anybody know if AMD is basically going to a whole new socket with this, or will FM2 be usable on FM1 boards?
  • 1 Hide
    heinlein , February 15, 2012 3:11 PM
    I wanted to build a computer with an A8 3800 - 3820; but have yet to find either chip. Will the A10 5700 actually be available at the consumer level?
  • 2 Hide
    kinggraves , February 15, 2012 3:39 PM
    vaughn2kIf the A10 line-up really has the 7660D, and this performs on par with HD6750/HD5750, this would be an awesome-enough-for-casual gaming platform PC... Should wait for the bench soon...

    Assuming they keep the same hybrid graphics set ups, perhaps it will combine with a 7700 series GPU to get power near that of a 7800 series in Xfire enabled games. That would be a pretty good setup.
    goodsyntax I will have to wait and see if the graphics are as nice as the model number implies, especially considering that they are way too optimistic with their labeling (I doubt the integrated 7660 would be as nice as a 6950, which by the way is still about $250 for a discrete card).

    Why would it equal a 6950? The first number is the generation, 950 is higher than 660. I read it as "slightly under a 7670" which still might be a pretty large claim considering 384 vs 480 shaders.
    goodsyntaxI had hoped that the TDP would be a little lower as well, 100W, though nice, should be more like 85W or even 65W like the A10-5700. I suppose that the graphics component adds to the bottom line, but with the advances in power management and core deactivation, I had hoped for a little bit better.

    Even 100w is impressive and likely a bit underquoted. A DDR3 7570 is quoted at 44w, which combined with a 65w CPU would make something more around 110w. You can't compare the power draw to Intel until you combine it with an equal discrete card. Power management isn't considered when claiming a maximum TDP, it could run much lower at idle. Intel will likely still draw less power though, they have a 22m process.

    All in all, looks like a pretty good GPU upgrade, but how will that CPU perform? I'm skeptical here due to use of "cores" when Piledriver uses modules. Is the A10 a 2 module chip then? 2 modules may not perform as well as a true quad core, even if they repair their IPC woes.
  • 0 Hide
    ammaross , February 15, 2012 4:00 PM
    Quote:
    This may sound nooby, but I noticed the package says FM2, while the current APUs are FM1. Anybody know if AMD is basically going to a whole new socket with this, or will FM2 be usable on FM1 boards?

    Remember AM2 vs AM2+ vs AM3? An AM3 processor could be dropped into an AM2 board, so likely they'll allow an FM2 proc in an FM1 board, but have FM2 boards with better feature sets to fully support the new proc.

    As for "core" counts in the slides, I doubt they'd bill something as an AM10, and have it only have 2 modules (4 "cores") when an A8 can be had with 4 modules (8 "cores"). The "core" column is likely equivalent to "modules," just AMD blasting past the marketing hype and semi-accurately going with the 4core/8thread mentality of Intel's marketing. I was hoping for a 6-module/12-core A12 chip myself :(  If you're going to combat Intel, might as well one-up them, even if AMD's official stance is only to match Intel's thread count with "real" cores... Such a loss.
  • -3 Hide
    Anonymous , February 15, 2012 4:29 PM
    Question?!? This actually sounded like a very interesting product and then I remembered it is bulldozer core. Does the 4 core really mean 2 cores like Bulldozer, or ahem, 4 'integer' cores? In other words, is this 4 cores like Intel's dual hyperthreaded cores or is it truly 4 actual full CPU cores? If it is a true 4 core, I might take a stab at one of these. If it is really a dual core with extra integer cores, then I'll go with Ivy instead.
  • 0 Hide
    blazorthon , February 15, 2012 4:34 PM
    salgado18I was expecting them to release at least a six-core trinity APU, with the A10 name. After all, if they mean to compete with Intel on APUs, the other guys have bad GPU paired with an i5. Maybe the TDP would be too high, but I think it would reach something like 125W, which is acceptable.Oh, well, let Piledriver come before making judgements...


    Why would they do something that would hurt performance? Gaming needs high performance per thread. Bulldozer cores have horrible IPC so they need high clock rates just to get half decent performance. Increasing core count means there's less room for higher clock rates and doesn't help gaming much so it would be rather counter intuitive to cripple their APUs in such a way. Besides that, AMD's APUs are intended for consumer, low budget areas where highly multi-threaded work is a lot less common, so the extra cores wouldn't be much help at all even outside of current gaming.

    A 6 core APU would give APU users two nearly useless cores that increase power usage and heat generation and increase the die size, making it more expensive and have poorer yields, making it even more expensive and/or have fewer in stock.

    Besides that, APUs aren't high power devices and aren't meant to be. AMD has received enough criticism about their processors using more power than much faster Intel processors use. For example, many of AMD's CPUs use the 125w TDPs, but Intel's Sandy Bridge i7s are faster than anything AMD has on the consumer side in everything yet use equal to or less power than most of AMD's mid range and high end CPUs!

    With Ivy Bridge coming out, only AMD's low power, horribly performing processors can keep up in power usage with Intel's fastest Ivy Bridge i7s. Point is that AMD does not want 125w TDPs where they can avoid them.

    Moving on, I have to wonder how AMD's increasingly powerful graphics on these APUs is doing with its minute amounts of memory bandwidth. APUs are meant for low budget systems where highly overpriced RAM is much less of an option. As the GPU performance increases, so too does the memory bottleneck. I also have to wonder if the bottleneck affects the CPU cores as well.
  • 8 Hide
    SteelCity1981 , February 15, 2012 4:50 PM
    In Memory of the Intel Atom, you will not be sadly missed. May you rest in peace. 2008~2012.
Display more comments