Llano will be the "bread and butter" chip for amd, so basically thats the cpu you'll find in dell/hp etc. desktops/notebooks.
The large oems love integrated parts, the more the better, since it reduces there costs.
Printable View
Llano will be the "bread and butter" chip for amd, so basically thats the cpu you'll find in dell/hp etc. desktops/notebooks.
The large oems love integrated parts, the more the better, since it reduces there costs.
Very artfully said David!:clap:Quote:
Originally Posted by Movieman
Movieman being the "processor related arguments" peacemaker as usual :p:
Llano does not target ppl who need discrete gpu power. BD is for them. Btw, i tought that lowerend of llanos start from 45W some watts for desktop, lower for notebook.Quote:
Originally Posted by M.Beier
An 80W TDP is fine. We're talking about OEM machines here where the customer is going to get integrated graphics or the cheapest discrete the OEM can possibly find. Those customers are going to receive a big boost in capability which is a plus for them and it's a plus for us, since ultimately we're the ones who get conscripted into working on their crap when they inevitably break it by installing Super PC Registry Mechanic Maximum Antivirus 2017 Deluxe Not-A-:banana::banana::banana::banana:-Dialer Edition to make it run faster since they were too cheap to buy a faster unit to begin with. In other words: Par performance for low-end and midrange gear is improving a lot with these products.
The majority of desktops sold don't have graphic cards in them, so I'll disagree with this statement.Quote:
Originally Posted by M.Beier
If things dont change in the software industry and the GPU resource is left underutilized llano will not stand much of a chance against the might of THOR amm scratch that i mean SNB. The thing is that CPU wise Intel has the upper hand and CPU have a long history of computing stuff and running app's but AMD with its new GPU is better than a CPU philosophy cant stand a chance if the GPU does not run all those computing stuff and running app's on its own.
The lack of software support is why i have to return my X120e its the reason why i have to buy a much expensive X220 for the same bit of work that the X120e just could not do. This is no encoding work but the day to day working of a employ who has to present his result in a flashy flash based web presentation.
:rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by Particle
Well you can try it for free, what's the harm lol :D, except for when you get your phone bill from then on...
:shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMojoZ
No vga card..., at least it came with a sound card then... beep beep, ah it booted... beep beep.. I'm chatting on facebook.
:)
Latest video on youtube shows Llano dual core @ 0:48 mark vs Zacate E350.
Mobile Llano has model number A4 3300M and IGP has model number 6480. There is roughly 7 watts of difference under full load so my guess is that Llano is 25W mobile part.
Llano has 50% more GPU compute performance than Zacate,meaning it has roughly 80x1.5=120 SPs. CPU cores are also notably faster,even if they run at 1.6Ghz too.Not a bad tradeoff ,7W more power for 50% better GPU and definitely better pure CPU performance.
Yes, I do try to do that but what I said is what I truly feel.Quote:
Originally Posted by h0bbes
Also the title of this thread is a bit misleading as this really isn't about computing power IMO..
More on the video end than cpu..
Any official info about smallest motherboard size for these chips? Just if I can fit one in my Silverstone SG05 (Mini-DTX / Mini-ITX motherboard & SFX PSU compatible) would be a nice small machine for some gaming
ITX should be perfect for theseQuote:
Originally Posted by Mech0z
pair up llano with a 4x pcie slot gpu of about 60$ and you should have a pc thats the size of a console, with better graphics, and runs windows.
full system load should be under 150w for llano + small gpu + all the other parts
Well for my gaming I think the onboard IGP should be plenty, if you want a small gpu you can just get a Ahtlon X4 now?Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
its about pairing up fusion gpu in addition to a dedicated gpu.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mech0z
option A: use llano gpu, games are fun
option B: use llano + dedicated 60$ for 80% more performance, games look great
option C: spend 200$ on a gpu to get speeds 50% faster than hybrid, might aswell be a gaming desktop mid tower.
Why a small GPU? surely Llano's intergrated is already better then any small gpu. The whole platform will fail if it isnt lol.Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
you need to match equal performance for best scalingQuote:
Originally Posted by EvilOne
with ATI cards, if you pair a 6950 with 6970, then its going to scale as if you had 2x 6950s (this is how its been for a while, but i havnt seen any reviews of it recently and not sure how true this still holds)
by small gpu im talking about something with 400 shaders and high clock speeds, so like 5600s
basically the most powerful half height gpu should do perfectly.
I honestly not to sure what the big fuss about Lano is so far.... AMD is really starting to tick me off when they show these demos as they pick as many GPU accelerated apps to show off. Now I realize that they are comparing similar "platforms" and associated costs. for the average home user but the problem is they are not using apps that the home user would use... they are using a wide range of specialty apps that support OpenCL acceleration. a question for everyone on XS....
how many OpenCL apps do you use on a regular basis? I know that I use NONE. in fact I have NEVER used an OpenCL accelerated app for... anything really. And I'm a power user... The chances of an average home user that would be using the type of system demoed, using a single GPU accelerated app (let alone 3) is extremely small. The only apps that I have seen that a home user would use that support GPU based acceleration are based on CUDA.
The part of the picture AMD does not show you however is the CPU based performance. Which I can assure you (unless AMD discovered something magical) is nothing compared to an i7 2600. I think the average home user would notice a much higher performance increase in day to day computing in using a faster CPU system compared to a faster GPU system... the average consumer uses Windows Live Movie maker, IE 9, Windows Live mail and maybe photoshop... none of which support GPU acceleration on AMD based GPU's and all of which will greatly benefit from a faster CPU.
What I do LIKE about fusion however is the gaming potential it provides for cheap people. a 400SP integrated GPU is far better than any integrated GPU form any camp... so that promising. However if you have any type of money you are still be off with even a 5570 1GB card as the RAM bandwidth going into a Lano chips GPU aspect can only be so much... not to mention shared system RAM...
I'm all for AMD making faster integrated GPU's but I think they need to focus more on the CPU performance side first as that was most people are going to notice and want more of...
At the same time, the average home user will hardly see a difference between the speed of any half decent CPU and upward. I'll bet you could replace someone's Athlon X2 with an i7 and they would hardly notice anything since both do a great job at Word and Solitaire :p:
I replaced my parents' old Athlon X2 4400+ with a C2D e8500 which is most certainly faster. My mom totally hasn't noticed a thing lol, and I knew that would happen. But, I knew the e8500 would do much better at WCG than the old X2 4400+ :D
You also bring up a good point. I can tell the difference in day to day tasks (yes I can tell the diff in CPU speed from an AMD system to say an i7 in web browsing) but most people will not... if they fire up Photoshop Elements or Movie maker they sure will though...Quote:
Originally Posted by Sparky
Lol, how much computing power does chess need exactly? and would there be any tangible benefit to upping compute power...Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePointer
How do you tell a difference in web browsing from AMD to Intel? Have you eliminated any other factors in the 2 systems?Quote:
Originally Posted by [XC] hipno650
You can't, once you have a half decent cpu, the only thing that noticeably speeds up day to day computing, such as web browsing etc. is an SSD (or faster HDD).Quote:
Originally Posted by eXa
Im sceptical myself. But if there is something ive missed i would like to know about it.
Well youre right that theres not much in opencl/gpgpu atm.Quote:
Originally Posted by [XC] hipno650
However i think thats outstanding what amd does.Because when theres starts to be large enough user base.It will start being implemented.
Something in the line, "build it ,and they will come" philosophy.And we all are gonna cash in on that, desktop cards are going to get much more use also.
Plus much more demanding UI`s for next gen operating systems etc etc.
And i think photoshop/ movie maker types of apps are going o be one of the first ones to utilize this.
that was sort of my point, the people that will benefit from this are the ones needing an econo solution, and those people will most likely not be crunching numbers. :shrug: i just think that anyone building a system around these parts arent building the system for crunching numbers or gaming... unless they are adding a seperate graphics card.... its like drag racing a prius vs a hybred ford focus... who cares if one is faster then the other when you only really care about gas mileage?Quote:
Originally Posted by OutSider