Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

The AMD A8-3500M APU Review: Llano Is Unleashed

The AMD A8-3500M APU Review: Llano Is Unleashed
By

Code-named Llano, AMD’s first desktop-class APU arrives today. This single-chip combination of the Stars CPU architecture and Radeon graphics brings unique strengths (and weaknesses) to the table, and we’re here to compare them to Intel's Sandy Bridge.

Just after the turn of the century, AMD took a big gamble on K8—better known as Athlon 64—and gave up the pursuit of clock speed in the interest of successfully executing more instructions per clock, in addition to introducing native 64-bit extensions. Meanwhile, Intel leveraged its manufacturing superiority to push the NetBurst architecture as fast as possible. It expected to see the Pentium 4 hit 10 GHz, in fact.

Of course, the Pentium 4’s high clocks quickly ran into the immovable walls of physics and power usage, and the realistic limit turned out to be closer to 4 GHz. If you wanted the highest-performing CPU money could buy at that time, you probably bought an Athlon 64; back then, Pentium 4 processors cost more and achieved less. It took a while for the market to accept it, but AMD’s David was beating Intel’s Goliath.

But Goliath didn’t give up; rather, it woke up. Intel moved on from the Pentium 4’s doomed NetBurst design and started over with the Core architecture—though it wasn’t really starting over at all. The tenets of Core were born from earlier efforts in the mobile space. Naturally, it came out better, faster, and less power-hungry. If you do a lot of fast-forwarding, the Nehalem-based Core i7 came next, followed most recently by the Sandy Bridge-based 32 nm desktop Core i3/i5/i7 CPUs.

Somewhere along the line, AMD allowed its unexpected advantage in computing to shrink and then disappear. Now, to be brutally honest, AMD’s fastest Phenom II processors fare better against Core 2 Quads than modern Core i7s. In fact, the $125 dual-core Core i3-2100, manufactured at 32 nm, stands right up to AMD’s $150 quad-core Phenom II X4 955 (a 45 nm part) in many benchmarks. AMD is more than a generation behind when it comes to desktop CPU performance, and continues to leverage the same Stars architecture that it first introduced more than two years ago. Squeezing out an extra hundred MHz every couple months kept the company’s momentum moving forward. However, when your main competitor is launching new architectures, it’s almost impossible to compete through incremental speed-ups. Frankly, it’s hard to recommend the AM3 platform for a new build today.

Perhaps realizing that it didn’t have the R&D resources of its primary competitor, AMD made another gamble back in 2006: it acquired ATI, the graphics card company responsible for the Radeon products many of you know and love. Shortly after the merger, AMD’s Fusion initiative was announced. The plan was to combine central processing and graphics processing resources on the same die. It took five years, but the first commercial Fusion processors were released earlier this year on the Brazos platform, and the E- and C-series APUs have already proven very viable in the notebook and netbook space. AMD even claims that it sold out of these APUs in Q1 2011. From the graphics angle, no Intel Atom-based platform can compete. Brazos even outclasses Atom when it’s complemented by Nvidia’s Ion 2 platform. 

While low-power netbooks are an ideal market for Fusion, the laptop and desktop segments are far more competitive. All Sandy Bridge-based Core i3/i5/i7 processors are equipped with Intel HD Graphics, which is fairly capable when it comes to basic productivity tasks in Windows, video playback, and even light gaming. If Fusion is to prove itself on its own terms, it has to deliver something special: true discrete-class graphics performance, along with competitive CPU performance.

Today we get our first taste of the Llano APU, which is intended to address mobile and desktop customers. Here’s where we see if the gamble pays off. And it needs to. The current Phenom II and Athlon II have little to offer beyond the $100 price point compared to the competition. Sure, a case can be made for the $160-and-over Phenom II X6 processors if you’re into heavily-threaded applications. But in general, Sandy Bridge-based chips are kicking butt in comparisons based on performance, power, and value.  

Notebooks First

AMD needs a way to differentiate itself from Intel in order to woo customers. The Fusion initiative might be the key to that goal in the notebook space. After all, the company claims Llano offers better battery life and graphics performance compared to a similarly-priced Sandy Bridge-based platform, with the added promise of OpenCL compute potential from the Radeon core’s shaders. AMD is serious about Fusion's future; over half of its notebook processors are APUs right now, and it anticipates that these will represent more than 90% within a year (Ed.: This isn’t surprising, of course, given AMD’s lack of a commanding presence in the notebook space up until now).

We expect the Fusion initiative to struggle for a foothold a little more in the desktop space, where it’s relatively easy to add discrete graphics. But AMD has a benefit to offer here, too: Llano’s graphics engine can work in conjunction with an add-in card in Dual Graphics mode. In layman’s terms, Dual Graphics is a flexible asymmetrical version of CrossFire that allows the APU’s resources to render in cooperation with a Radeon HD 5000- or 6000-series board for a frame rate boost.

Of course we’d be remiss to ignore AMD’s next-generation micro-architecture, code-named Bulldozer. The Stars replacement should arrive in the third quarter of this year—within the next three months, basically. This represents the first fundamental retooling of AMD’s CPU design since the Athlon 64. So, right out of the gate, Llano’s days are numbered, and its replacement (code-named Trinity) is already slated to swap the CPU block with Bulldozer-derived silicon.

But let’s not get ahead of ourselves. It’ll be 2012 before we see Trinity, and that’s if it’s on time. Let’s just focus on the here and now.

What are Llano’s sexiest attributes? Roughly half of its die is a Phenom II X4 CPU stripped of the 6 MB L3 cache, but with L2 cache doubled to 4 MB. The other half is composed of something very similar to a Radeon HD 5570, with up to 400 Radeon cores (what AMD used to call Stream cores; apparently that name went out of vogue already) and an updated UVD3 video block. All of this is plumbed together on a single 32 nm chip. 

That’s the short explanation. Of course, there’s a lot more going on here and we’re about to dig in to the details. Having said that, if you know what a Phenom II X4 and a Radeon HD 5570 can do together then you already have a pretty good idea of where we’ll end up in this piece.

Display all 134 comments.
This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 24 Hide
    stingstang , June 14, 2011 4:23 AM
    Good job, AMD. You finally made a better cpu/gpu combo than intel in terms of graphics power.
    ....big win there...
  • 23 Hide
    gmarsack , June 14, 2011 5:09 AM
    This looks like a fantastic solution for notebooks. Can't wait to finally see more of these systems in the wild. :)  Good job AMD. I would think this will help boost the company along until Bulldozer arrives. Way to survive! :) 
  • 23 Hide
    billj214 , June 14, 2011 4:35 AM
    This APU being somewhat low power and good graphics almost deserves to be in a tablet PC since CPU processing is not critical in tablet PC's and graphics is something that can help with media and games.

    Ditto on the "Good Job AMD" definitely on the right track.
Other Comments
  • 3 Hide
    vz7 , June 14, 2011 4:11 AM
    Do you know when the desktop review for llano will be out?
  • 24 Hide
    stingstang , June 14, 2011 4:23 AM
    Good job, AMD. You finally made a better cpu/gpu combo than intel in terms of graphics power.
    ....big win there...
  • 23 Hide
    billj214 , June 14, 2011 4:35 AM
    This APU being somewhat low power and good graphics almost deserves to be in a tablet PC since CPU processing is not critical in tablet PC's and graphics is something that can help with media and games.

    Ditto on the "Good Job AMD" definitely on the right track.
  • 18 Hide
    cangelini , June 14, 2011 4:38 AM
    vz7Do you know when the desktop review for llano will be out?


    The NDA is up on the 30th.
  • -4 Hide
    niceview , June 14, 2011 4:43 AM
    two things:

    1) What happened to the Game Charts results for the Radeon HD 5570, when the games were benchmarked? I thought you made a point to say you were going to compare the APU's 6620G with a discrete card (that has the same number of SPs and same clock). So much for that, unless you thought only comparing the two with a synthetic test was enough. Oh well. Tom's can be such a tease!

    2) I'm just a little disappointed that the APU's graphics power was not able to double Intel's.... Under the best of circumstances, AMD's latest integrated graphics came close to being twice as fast, but i guess that is ok since we are not playing horseshoes. I just thought it would be nice if it had made a nice even doubling, or more. Now, i'm worried IVY BRIDGE will beat it....
  • 8 Hide
    niceview , June 14, 2011 4:56 AM
    sorry, i guess that should be:

    we ARE playing horseshoes...

    and i have to give credit where credit is due: props to AMD for almost doubling Intel's HD Graphics in the integrated space....
  • 22 Hide
    sinfulpotato , June 14, 2011 5:02 AM
    What I find most exciting is the battery life saved. THIS is what will make this chip a winner. When if Sandy bridge is faster your average consumer won't be able to notice... PERIOD. However battery life... is a HUGE win.

    I don't play favorites, AMD needs market share.... FOR OUR SAKE. If Intel and AMD where on the same terms we would see faster progression and SAVE MONEY.
  • 23 Hide
    gmarsack , June 14, 2011 5:09 AM
    This looks like a fantastic solution for notebooks. Can't wait to finally see more of these systems in the wild. :)  Good job AMD. I would think this will help boost the company along until Bulldozer arrives. Way to survive! :) 
  • 11 Hide
    ikyung , June 14, 2011 5:14 AM
    fstrthnuAMD is kind of in a fix here, the more enthusiast gamers won't even bother looking at the Llano computers while this is kind of overkill for casual gamers. MAYBE money-pressed college students or something, but most people will just skip this and either buy a regular gaming computer or build their own using one of the guides from this very site! Going for good graphics in cheap desktops is kind of a futile exercise, the people who will care will just get the more expensive stuff anyways. Notebooks are more understandable, but the prices on the decent gaming desktops are just too good for Llano to be very competitive (and also, the CPU portion will be a letdown for the average person. Noticeably slower than the comparable Intel Core i5.)

    Well, Llano's market is the mobile space. Not desktop. Yes, they are bringing out desktop Llanos, but just like the article said, Trinity is what the enthusists are waiting for. I honestly don't think Llano's aim in the desktop market is for hardcores. I could see Llano's popularity in HTPC, and casual gaming/workstations though. Lower power, GPU over CPU tradeoff, etc. IF AMD releases the right drivers for the APU+Discrete CPU to work together, I see the market being even bigger.
  • 17 Hide
    striker410 , June 14, 2011 5:23 AM
    I suppose we need to stop suggesting i3-2100 and H67 over in the forums then? Go AMD!
  • -4 Hide
    Anonymous , June 14, 2011 5:37 AM
    How much for the A8 3500M? and it is a 1.5 GHZ chip with turbo to 2.4. I think its price point is more consistent with the I3 2310M @ 2.1 GHZ. Would have like to see you compare it to that instead of a I5 @ 2.5 GHZ
  • 6 Hide
    cleeve , June 14, 2011 5:49 AM
    SlaughteremHow much for the A8 3500M? and it is a 1.5 GHZ chip with turbo to 2.4. I think its price point is more consistent with the I3 2310M @ 2.1 GHZ. Would have like to see you compare it to that instead of a I5 @ 2.5 GHZ


    AMD didn't supply pricing for the processors, they only supplied pricing for the laptops. Accorsing to the price they gave us, the i5-2520M is fair competition.

    Having said that, does it matter? No matter how you slice it, Llano's GPU will beat Intel HD graphics and Llano's CPU will be beaten by Intel. You'll see different degrees of advantage but this point won't change, not until Trinity at least.
  • 12 Hide
    cleeve , June 14, 2011 5:52 AM
    just another user...modern games that aren't worth playing and CADs that can make use of a GPU...

    ...There is no single reason to prefer Llano over Sandy bridge, and I really cannot understand your excitement about it.


    You just listed two. :) 

    Obviously everyone will have their own priorities, but I think it's safe to say that you will find the majority of people will be more concerned with graphics performance than the ability to encode or render media. That's really what it comes down to; you're not going to notice a difference while surfing the net.
  • 6 Hide
    sparkle_ftw , June 14, 2011 5:57 AM
    How AMD will still be important to gamers: Use Llano profits from mainstream sales to continue funding and improving production of AMD's discrete gpus. Those kick some serious butt.
  • 18 Hide
    AppleBlowsDonkeyBalls , June 14, 2011 6:01 AM
    Decent review, though a bit unfair. What's the point of comparing the performance of a CPU that will be in $600 laptops (A8-3500M) to one that will be in $700 laptops (i5 2520M)? The A8-3500M competes with the Core i3 2310M, while the A8-3830MX competes with the Core i5 2520M. Given that, CPU performance for Llano is better than what is painted in the review.

    With Sandy Bridge, I think you're giving up a lot of GPU performance for some additional CPU performance. I think the choice is clear for most users.
Display more comments