Want Trinity? You Need A New Motherboard
Perhaps the biggest downer for early adopters of AMD’s Fusion initiative is the quickness with which the company is deprecating support for the Socket FM1 interface used to enable desktop-class Llano APUs. In much the same way that Intel replaced LGA 1156 with a very similarly-sized LGA 1155, AMD’s existing 905-pin socket is giving way to a 904-pin one.

Presumably, changes to the FM2 interface came about due to power delivery, since the PCIe and DDR3 I/Os shouldn’t be any different. Whatever the reason, though, Llano-based APUs won’t drop into FM2-equipped boards, and Trinity-based APUs won’t work in platforms with Socket FM1. As you can see in the image above, Socket FM2, on the left, and FM1, on the right, are keyed completely differently.
Meet The New A85X FCH
Although Trinity-based APUs are not socket-compatible with Llano, there’s nothing precluding motherboard vendors from attaching existing Fusion Controller Hubs to the new processor’s four-lane UMI interface. We actually have two FM2-equipped motherboards in the lab: ASRock’s FM2A75 Pro4 and a platform based on A85X, formerly referred to as Hudson-D4.
In reality, the two chipsets are pretty hard to tell apart. Basically, A85X gives you eight SATA 6Gb/s-capable ports, RAID 5 support, and the ability to divide the APU’s 16 lanes of PCI Express 2.0 into a pair of x8 links.
Otherwise, you’re looking at the same combination of USB 2.0 and 3.0 ports (4 + 10), the same four-lane Unified Media Interface, four lanes of second-gen PCIe, and four-channel audio (along with FIS-based switching, mSATA support, legacy PCI, and so on). AMD has not yet added PCI Express 3.0 support to any of its platforms, and isn’t expected to for some time.
More than likely, you’ll look to A75-based boards with Socket FM2 interfaces to save a little money, or A85-based platforms as a more feature-complete step up.
- Trinity: Coming Soon To A Desktop Near You
- Piledriver: Half Of The Trinity Story
- Turbo Core Finds Its Way Into APUs
- Graphics: Fewer Shaders, Better Efficiency
- Memory Bandwidth Scaling: Feed The Beast
- Socket Compatibility And The A85X FCH
- Test Setup And Benchmarks
- Benchmark Results: 3DMark 11
- Benchmark Results: Sandra 2012
- Benchmark Results: Adobe CS5 And 6
- Benchmark Results: Content Creation
- Benchmark Results: Productivity
- Benchmark Results: Media Encoding
- Benchmark Results: File Compression
- Benchmark Results: Batman: Arkham City
- Benchmark Results: World Of Warcraft: Cataclysm
- Benchmark Results: The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim
- Benchmark Results: Diablo III
- Benchmark Results: OpenCL
- Power
- Trinity On The Desktop: Already Announced, But Enthusiasts Must Wait

Once they are pitted against each other, that will be A TRUE measure of the APU Trinity's marketability
Well at least in gaming
really the question is what gpus are able to hybrid crossfire with it. the information was never public. not all amd gpus will hybrid crossfire with it.
Once they are pitted against each other, that will be A TRUE measure of the APU Trinity's marketability
i mean what is the processor usage during the benchmark ? are all CPU cores used? or only one?
Good question--I'll take a look for you.
It was public... It will crossfire with up to the 7670, which is a rebranded 6670 from what i know, but with some slight improvements.
Thats what I was wondering... every time you get an intel cpu review they always throw in an amd or two for comparison. Why didnt they do that here? Cant make an informed purchase if you compare 3 versions of the same car make and model when there are other makes and models out there to look at.
Oh and Jill... amd only has 10% of the market even with the APU's out there. So if they fail intel only goes from 89-99% of the market... dont see them changing their pricing plans over that.
Dual Graphics is actually in there ;-)
Because this is an article of amd's apus. They've already done a comparison between trinity's igp's and intels 4000 series.
Anyone tell me if I'm wrong and why.
EDIT: Oh wait, they're clocked higher, but not by that much, though it is substantial. I would think it's still a big architectural improvement.
Also, I've noticed that in multiple articles, the writers are strapped for time. This isn't good though it could be understandable. Maybe TH should hire more "hands" or something?
I'm not sure how we'll find out when that video mentioned of the comparison with the A8-3870K and the i3-2100/2105 would show up. Well, unless we constantly check back.
Don't worry TH, you haven't lost me as a fan. It's just constructive feedback. I love you guys!
Don't worry--I'm working on the data right now. As it stood, this story took more than a week of all day/all night testing, troubleshooting, new BIOS installing, and re-testing to nail down. It can go on indefinitely if you let it ;-)