http://translate.google.com/translat...otografiado%2F
http://www.imagengratis.org/images/3dnw3on.png
Printable View
good to see the A8-3500M is under 35w
i kinda wish they had more skus where some has much stronger cpus with slower gpus. i would have expected the A4-3310MX to have near 3ghz on its 2 cores
So, 1GHz turbo on updated k10 core. How much BD will have...
It's 1.2Ghz turbo increase on all cores according to someone clarification.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mechanical Man
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...&postcount=557
these turbos people can expect to be very agressive since they have a gpu to share their TDP withQuote:
Originally Posted by Mechanical Man
in theory we see a 1.5ghz quad with a decent gpu for 35w, OR we see a 2.5ghz quad with an idling gpu for 35w, but i doubt both unless they were conservative with the numbers. only testing will prove it though.
a little bit weak in cpu freq...
took a very very long time to leak all the specs :) (for me all M versions looks far more interesting then MX)
before all the compare and outperform talking starts, A8 will be situated only against i5..... it will win any GPU related bench, cpu on the other hand will by hard with the high single threaded perf of SB, but will do fine in multithreading.
yeah my office tools will be too slow against an i5 :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by qcmadness
op, is good aproach for BDQuote:
Originally Posted by Mechanical Man
Dual core E2 and A4 too less cpu power to go against the likes of Pentium SNB's. The top end quad more or less equal to N970 "Since 2.6max and 1.9base it has to work in between", N970 performance wise was between the i5 480 and i3 380 in most cases.
SNB has the headroom to murder the llano CPU performance wise with a higher clocked dual core SNB unless the efficiency of the CPU has increased.
When AMD goes with K10+GPU combo, they knew that they could not compete in raw CPU performance.Quote:
Originally Posted by ajaidev
At 45nm, the fastest quad-core CPU is X940 (2.4GHz / 45W TDP).
Either 32nm SOI is not mature or AMD is conservative...
But I would think AMD is designing too much on Llano...
512KB L2 cache per core and 320SP max would save 15% die size...
I thought IIano was an improved K10 design. Although I'm sure it still wouldn't match a SB cpu but better than PhenomII
AMD doesn't think so...Quote:
Originally Posted by thematrixhazune
http://www.techpowerup.com/img/11-05-23/121a.jpg
you are mixing desktop and mobile market...Quote:
Originally Posted by LordEC911
Sorry, when I see SB and Phenom II, I think desktop.Quote:
Originally Posted by qcmadness
Wonder why they have gone with the 400 SP gpu core for the mobile varient.. with that clock speeds and slow ram, it will perfrom worse then a stock HD5550 dedicated card (and this card only has 320 SP).
I'd rather would have seen less SP but higher clock speeds for the top models so at least they can saturate the 320 SPs..
CPU freq seems ok, nothing stellar but ok.
Eh, my Phenom II at 2.8 GHz runs pretty fine with a 4890, 2.6 or 2.5 GHz shouldn't take a hit would it? Unless you're purely talking about the stock speed, which I doubt is where the processor usually runs at. Games rarely fill up 100% of your processors anyway, so that's a lot of clock headroom.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
Looks good, though I keep wishing for a high/er clocked dual core with 400sp missing from the line up :(
Dual core
2.2ghz / 3ghz turbo
DDR3-1600 cl7
400sp ~600mhz +Xfire option
45w TDP
Would :rocker:
Read the topic this are mobile chips, so they will run stock most of the time, especial when you run games.Quote:
Originally Posted by blindbox
A 320 sp design with higher clocks would possibly use a bit more power.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
That's more 500MHz for all core, 1,2 GHz is wrong ...Quote:
Originally Posted by undone
And you think AMD didn't think about this in there designs??? difference in higher SP count vs higher Freq and the possible performance and TDP influence.....Quote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
and you know this already since you have them tested?Quote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
B940 and B950 2,0 and 2,1GHZ no HT and unknown turboQuote:
Originally Posted by ajaidev
are you so sure they will be that more performing then A4 3300M with 2,5ghz? E2 has the same price target of Brazos.
Correct me if I'm mistaken, but the Nehalem laptops I've seen have their turbo running whenever there's a bit of load. During gaming, I do not know. However, my linear guesstimate says that even at the stock clocks the chips will run fine.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
you are correct the only time Turbo did NOT run was when you loaded all 8 threads fully and even then it depended on thermals...Quote:
Originally Posted by blindbox
However I am willing to bet that Lano will be the same way for the most part in that it will almost never run at the lowest speced speed unless under massive load for the both the GPU and CPU.
I am however disappointed with the GPU clock speeds given. Couple that with the poor memory bandwidth to the GPU and it looks like GPU performance while being better than any other IGP in laptops will be nothing to write home about.
CPU performance will also be almost without a doubt slower than mobile SB in almost every way. The TDP for the solution however is impressive considering thats the CPU most of the NB and the GPU... I just don't see it being faster than SB.
with both platforms being on 32nm now, i think it would be interesting to see total system efficiency rather than just raw power of a single element.
there are of coarse multiple ways to compare. and one being price/performance, where if you had 800$ and bought something from either camp, what kind of perf do you get.
Official performance numbers for mobile Llano:
http://sites.amd.com/us/vision/promo...isclaimer.aspx
In comparison my I5-2410M scores 1900 in 3D Vantage P:Quote:
2011 VISION A4-based PC deliver up to 143% better visual performance than a 2011 VISION E2-based PC.
Tests conducted by AMD Performance Labs using FutureMark 3DMark Vantage Performance as a metric for visual performance. The 2011 VISION A4-based PC scored 1625 while the 2011 VISION E2-based PC scored 670. All scores rounded to the nearest whole number. The 2011 VISION A4-based PC consisted of the reference platform "Torpedo" with the AMD Dual-Core A4-3300M APU, with AMD Radeon™ HD 6480G graphics, 4 GB (2x2GB) DDR3-1333Mhz system memory, and Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit. The 2011 VISION E2-based PC consisted of the reference design "Inagua" with the AMD Dual-Core E-350 APU, AMD Radeon™ HD 6310 graphics, 4GB (2x2GB), DDR3-1066Mhz system memory, Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit. SBNB-I23
2011 VISION A6-based PC deliver up to 16% better visual performance than a 2011 VISION A4-based PC.
Tests conducted by AMD Performance Labs using FutureMark 3DMark Vantage Performance as a metric for visual performance. The 2011 VISION A6-based PC scored 1882 while the 2011 VISION A4-based PC scored 1625. All scores rounded to the nearest whole number. The 2011 VISION A6-based PC consisted of the reference platform "Torpedo" with the AMD Quad-Core A6-3410MX APU, with AMD Radeon™ HD 6520G graphics, 4 GB (2x2GB) DDR3-1333Mhz system memory, and Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit. The 2011 VISION A4-based PC consisted of the reference platform "Torpedo" with the AMD Dual-Core A4-3300M APU, with AMD Radeon™ HD 6480G graphics, 4 GB (2x2GB) DDR3-1333Mhz system memory, and Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit. SBNB-I24
2011 VISION A8-based PC deliver up to 51% better visual performance than a 2011 VISION A6-based PC.
Tests conducted by AMD Performance Labs using FutureMark 3DMark Vantage Performance as a metric for visual performance. The 2011 VISION A8-based PC scored 2842 while the 2011 VISION A6-based PC scored 1882. All scores rounded to the nearest whole number. The 2011 VISION A8-based PC consisted of the reference platform "Torpedo" with the AMD Quad-Core A8-3510MX APU, with AMD Radeon™ HD 6620G graphics, 4 GB (2x2GB) DDR3-1333Mhz system memory, and Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit.The 2011 VISION A6-based PC consisted of the reference platform "Torpedo" with the AMD Quad-Core A6-3410MX APU, with AMD Radeon™ HD 6520G graphics, 4 GB (2x2GB) DDR3-1333Mhz system memory, and Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit. SBNB-I26
http://3dmark.com/3dmv/3173935