http://www.techpowerup.com/159062/AM...-Desktop-.html
I'll take this quad-channel rumor as a grain of salt. If amd wanna do this, what I worried about is the platform cost. Unless the second generation FX is an intel-killer.Quote:
Originally Posted by erek
still cheaper than tri channel tho?Quote:
Originally Posted by undone
can buy 4's instead of 6's ?
I dont believe this. G34 will be server socket, Vishera in desktop at AM3+ (990FX or maybe 1090FX).
1090FX will come with USB3.0 integrated,several tweaks maybe,but no pci-ex 3.0...
piledriver cores using the same cores as trinity?
difference is having L3 or notQuote:
Originally Posted by demonkevy666
There are some results in 3dMark11 of a supposed Trinity eng sample(1D32246W4K44_38/32/22_2/8):
http://3dmark.com/3dm11/2417633
http://3dmark.com/3dm11/2584681
but this GPU is what???? This can not be 7950 radeon...
Finally! i was thinking about the G34 option too!!!
it has what AMD needs against Intel 2011 socket
Quad channel Memory with 8 Dims!
and you can get up too 10~16 cores like in servers!
and G34 platform not so expensive! you can get single socket MB for less then 300$
My Photoshop Images!
http://img689.imageshack.us/img689/4554/amdfxx2.jpg
http://img835.imageshack.us/img835/7...2bulldozer.jpg
Lol
not what I asked but that would really only be about 5% less cpu performance. with out L3 cache.Quote:
Originally Posted by undone
without L3 cache, the core logic is the same between Trinity and second generation FX(Komodo/Vishera).Quote:
Originally Posted by demonkevy666
I find another one.Quote:
Originally Posted by sergiojr
http://wccftech.com/amd-trinity-a8-e...-11-benchmark/
http://wccftech.com/wp-content/uploa...1/trinity2.png
the graphic score is kidding me right?
Update: someones find out the CPUID is for 8 physical cores, which represent an ES FX with 4 cores disabled.
http://www.planet3dnow.de/vbulletin/...&postcount=751
http://www.planet3dnow.de/vbulletin/...&postcount=754
(pls translate by yourself)
seem to be fake.
result is from Mister O..B.......:rolleyes:
thx for link :)
You don't need to look at the Physics test It's misleading, you won't know how It really performs.
Here are two link with the same CPU(APU) and look at the physics score
http://3dmark.com/3dm11/2584681
http://3dmark.com/3dm11/2417633
The difference is 11.5% for the same cpu(apu) :shrug:
I found an interesting comparison for this test on the same cpu but different gpus
http://www.lostcircuits.com/mambo//i...1&limitstart=2
P.S. It's not even sure this is a Trinity
Physics test is just not good metric for comparison since it varies wildly with different graphics cards(as the LS link above demonstrates). Not to mention that in 2 instances of Trinity 3dmark11 runs we have 2 scores that are more than 10% apart... This tells us that either the user OCed or down-clocked the chip or something else was responsible for the discrepancy.
PS Never mind that dumb OBR didn't see the freaking title of the 3dmark11 which has Radeon 7950 listed as a GPU. He thinks this is the iGPU in Trinity... Yeah right,3x faster than Llano while AMD officially said 30% better on desktop. Not even a magic pixie could make Trinity's iGPU 3x faster. But hey,he is "good old" OBR :D
Attachment 123808Quote:
Originally Posted by informal
EDIT: image y u show up as attachment, y u no?!
I doubt any IPC increase and only a decrease in power.
Piledriver will have a moderate IPC increase (e.g. ~5-8% is predicted) mostly coupled to module optimization...then again, I only care about server side stuff so....ymmv on the desktop. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by demonkevy666
d
what applications? game? compare to what? llano or bdver1 or deneb? and btw i'm fed up with hearing any comment or complain about IPC, let's say 'performance per clock' rather than IPC, ok? cuz these two are different.Quote:
Originally Posted by demonkevy666
Which means higher clock is possible. Certainly higher clock with lower power is much impressive than just lower power with same clock. need to wait and see.Quote:
and only a decrease in power.
-----unrelated message----
anyone see FX-8170(or second wave of bdver1) news or rumor?
There's an ETA for piledriver yet? 6 months from now? 1 year?
Thanks.
I have no idea how fast the Piledriver core might be over Bulldozer, but I expect a decent rise in clock speed for Trinity over Llano- the A10 should end up at 3.6G atleast.
Current info talks of Mid-2012 launch - whether that means April-May or September I have no clue.Quote:
Originally Posted by Piotrsama
I am thinking about getting a unlocked Trinity and OCing the hell out of it, if its not as power hungry as bulldozer.
so Llano is awesome, and trinity will wipe the floor with it <3
10% higher In single thread would be my guess that's over "Phenom II/LLANO" not bulldozer.Quote:
Originally Posted by undone
higher clock bulldozer would need cool down with lower power too.
not always possible with lower VIDs on chips.