Have any laptops shown up for sale yet? Or is aint they coming until June?
Printable View
Have any laptops shown up for sale yet? Or is aint they coming until June?
yeah say the same thing to joeavarage... thats what the whoel thing is about.. Im not talking about the 1% that knows how to upgrade.Quote:
Originally Posted by BeepBeep2
You, me the other forum users or basically 1% of the consumer base knows what to do and how to do it... the other 99% don't.
Average Joe goes to a local computer store, and gets an upgrade there. No warranty void there also.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
if someone has to go to the store to get ram added, the sure dont know that dual channel will make a difference on their apu performance. its the OEMs job to do that right, and its quite odd that not even one company out there would, and then advertise they do it right for extra sales. or that amd dosnt tell them to.Quote:
Originally Posted by Motiv
Well you would hope the local computer stores are owned by computer savvy techies. Surprisingly, they generally are.Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
I've no idea the benefits of Dual channel myself, but making out that warranties are broken, is absurd.
I was talking to you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hornet331
I can say the same thing to joe average (as long as joe did a little research or at the very least watched a tv shopping channel for 5 minutes) and he will get it too. "I doubled the memory in your computer from 4GB to 8GB, and the memory speed is now twice as fast as well because there are two highways for information to travel. Now, that doesn't mean your laptop will be twice as fast, but it does give the processor more room to move information from place a to place b. Anyway, manufacturers don't like it when you mess with the stock config, so if there is ever a problem with it, make sure to open up that spot right there, and take out one of the memory sticks."
"Okay."
Thing is those same people would probably think they are losing or erasing their "programs or files" by removing the memory stick. lolQuote:
Originally Posted by BeepBeep2
Wondering this myself. Hopefully they pop up in the wild soon!Quote:
Originally Posted by Mech0z
And hopefully there will be some non-vanilla designs
IPC ITX board from Jetway for Trinity (Comal) APUs.
Attachment 127152
Attachment 127153
Thank you.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Stilt
PCIe on the wrong side = perfect for AIOs or flat HTPCs with a graphics card + a 90° riser.
Edit: Yeah, IPC. Just saw the serial port.. Still, it says "gaming machine" in the description.
does it have 2 x mPCI?
So,FM2 and still A75 chipset?When is desktop trinity going to hit the shelves,mid july is a realitic date?
FS1r2 socket, Comal the mobile platform for Trinity.
The chipsets (A55, A75) can work with Trinity no problem, however the motherboards need some 'TLC'.
Extra crystals, PLLs and such ;)
There is also some speculation of a new A85 chipset joining the lineup as well, specs are still unknown.
FM2 Trinity (Virgo) board based on 'Hudson D4' (A85) FCH.
I have no specs available for this but I assume the FCH is A85 since there is 8x main SATA connectors and A75/A55 only support 6x.
Attachment 127256
Nice!
Very clever placement of the mini-PCIe.
DisplayPort + HDMI + DVI + VGA - covers every possibility.
I wonder which ports can be used for EyeFinity setups with 3 screens. Does HDMI + DVI work or is one or the other?
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Stilt
Thats a nice looking FM2 board. I really like the placement of the mini-pcie.
Soo whats with the placement of holes for heatsink mounting on the Jetway and MSI boards?
FM2 uses the same mounting hole pattern as Socket 940>.
MSI FM2 motherboard made for HP (by Pegatron) use customized pattern.
nice Stilt, I hope, Computex show us more motherboards of FM2
No reason it shouldn't. Unlike Llano, Trinity has 3 built in display clock generators so 3 screens work on 3 different digital interfaces connected directly to APU. 4th screen only in daisy chained mode with one of the first three via DP.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lightman
A85 board from ECS:
http://www.techpowerup.com/166974/EC...M2-Socket.html
AMD at mainpage officially show spec of Trinity desktop APU
http://www.amd.com/us/products/deskt...nstream.aspx#7
Cool!
We will find out release date tomorrow during their keynote
So Trinity reached bulldozer frequencies with a GPU and with a lower TDP :clap:Quote:
Originally Posted by FlanK3r
^ and half the cores...
FX4100 : 3.6GHz ->TB 3.8GHz >> 95W TDPQuote:
Originally Posted by boxleitnerb
A10-5700: 3.4GHZ -> TB 4GHz + 384Gpu @ 760MHz >> 65W TDP
but 4100 has +L3 cache....I think TDP is moral point. It can be same TDP and in practice 20W difference. Anyway Trinity seems good.
http://www.engadget.com/2012/06/06/a...-computex-201/
trinity transformer ;)
that thing is really thickQuote:
Originally Posted by tbone8ty
almost call that a laptop with removable keyboard. i dont think trinity is really designed for tablets which should have a power consumption around 5-10w, not 10-20w
true but its a prototype and at least they showing us something lol
where are the 17w trinity A10's????? jeez
anyword on desktop parts?
http://www.techpowerup.com/167290/AS...2A75-Pro4.html
nicest board ive seen so far for desktop trinity, love the all blacked out look
imagine a hybird tablet/laptop with amd chips:Quote:
Originally Posted by tbone8ty
screen has bobcat (or whatever the next ultra low power chip will be called, i honestly forgot),
and the dock has extra battery and a trinity.
if you need good battery life or doing some simple tasks you run the smaller chip, and when you need the higher performance you run trinity.
example:
student takes tablet portion and mouse/roll-up rubber keyboard to class if needed.
student then goes to the dorm to dock his screen and loads up some crysis to his big screen tv.
student is very happy.
we pay for every little piece of hardware, when many parts probably can be reused. getting 15 hours of use out of a transformer like table that has a keyboard/battery dock is great. but then the extra motherboard with a beefier chip is all thats missing to turn it into a gaming laptop. so why pay 1500-2000$ for a tablet and then a laptop, when for 1200 we can have a product that does both, by sharing the screen, hard drive, battery, case, keyboard, ports, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
hope people in AMD see this and seriously consider your opinion with real product coming.
AMD needs to innovative than just follow the footstep of mainstream manufacturer.
It would be great if the tablet running on bobcat could dual boot or virtual machine running Android ICS 4.0.
trust me you will see an AMD dual booting win8/andriod
http://www.amd.com/us/press-releases...2011oct20.aspx
So many things wrong with this. It is just a barrel of compromises. First off tablets are cheap enough and are not 1500-2000. Even priced separately, you can get a tablet for 400 dollars and core i5 laptop or llano laptop for about 600 dollars.Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
The biggest problem with your concept is that there isn't an interface at the current moment that supports enough bandwidth to do all this transferring. I.E Ram and memory sharing would be horribly bottlenecked. Sharing resources would be inefficient and slow. You would need an external connection that has to have enough bandwidth to support basically CPU work, SSD storage, Ram and graphics. This doesn't exist and wont for the near future. As a result, there would be a bandwidth catastrophe. Your better off keeping the Dock as a low bandwidth communication hub(keyboard, display output) where tasks would not be hampered by the low bandwidth available. Graphic docks are a complete failure in general because of this and they are not doing half as much as your concept is wanting to do.
Even if this imaginary connection existed, the driver setup would be a nightmare. Two different architecture communicating between two different CPU's, integrated to discrete, two different OS, sharing Ram and bandwidth. It would be an incredible task for a very very niche product and would probably be not worth the effort( 11" gaming laptops are niche enough, this would be even more niche considering your trying to sell a tablet along with your 10.1-11" gaming laptop).
And lets get back to reality, for the dock in essence to work and not be held back by memory bandwidth, the dock would have to have its own CPU, RAM, HD and graphics and at this point it is more of a sync point than anything, because it is self contained and more or less the guts of a real laptop.
As a result, the screen(which is a pain in the ass compromise as having a 10.1"-11" screen on your main laptop is annoying[which it better be at 1000+]) and I guess the keyboard(which will be terrible considering it has to be sized to fit a 11"-10" screen) are the only thing that can be shared between the two devices. In essence, you have two portable devices with extreme compromises in both ends.
This concept has more flaws than a convertible tablet PC(which doesn't have the interconnect problem, nor as much compromises in usability) and the convertible tablet market is a bust. This gaming hybrid(lets not forget Trinity is pretty scoffed at as a gaming solution) is so flawed that I don't think any company, even apple could make it a success.
Whats the point of this concept, when it cost the same as a both solutions put together and your stuck with an undersized, overly compromised gaming laptop in the end(with poor performance for a gaming laptop).
I am not an engineer, but I for one would never say never. It's all dependant on technology and R & D.Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
I see a lot wrong with your assumptions on issues. For one, there are already dual socket systems used all the time. And processors have more than one core and work fine, its the same thing really. All you have to do is get Microsoft to integrate a driver into Windows so people dont have to worry about installing it manually, and this driver just lets Windows know to assign tasks to the highest speed processor that is available. Architecture wise wouldnt be different, you can have the super low power one made on the same Piledriver core as Trinity. Pretty much all AMD processors are moving to that architecture. The interconnect is already available and simple to do. AMD would need to make a proprietary connector for their interconnect to use, like all tablet docks currently do. And as for sharing the RAM, we already have enough bandwidth for the current CPUs as is, and you could probably just make the memory commands pass through the primary processor, instead of some complicated setup with multiple traces. It would add a little bit of latency, but not a ton. For graphics memory you could either use 512MB of vram inside the dock wired directly to the graphics cores or you can make it share RAM like all current setups do, it too wouldnt be a big deal. hard drive bandwidth isnt any different since the connection bandwidth is far greater than the slow performance of the integrated eMMC flash memory used in tablets. You would MAYBE lose a handful of IOps from the connection.
And no there wouldnt be two different OSes. Where did you even pull that from? The person you quoted also said Why pay $1200-1500 for a tablet AND a laptop, not each one costing that much. And Trinity may be "scoffed at" as a gaming solution, but it is vastly more powerful than the current line of graphics on tablets.
a 500$ tablet, plus its 150$ dock, then a 1000$ laptop, and boom were right in the same price range that i gave you. a 600$ llano laptop will not be top of the line at all for the 35W segment, and 400$ is the starting price for any decent tablet. one that can run win8 and do almost anything a laptop can (poorly) should sell for more than 400$. 1200$ gives you room to put in an SSD and high quality cpus, but still saves your 300-800$Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
the dock would have an APU and RAM. the screen would only need like 2-4GB of non removable ram, while the dock can have 2 slots and let the user put in whatever they want. were talking about 20$ of replicated parts for the screens pc
who said it had to be an 11" square tablet? why not a 13" 16:9 with 1080p? if your thinking about whats already out there. then you are not thinking about what could be done.
the only thing that actually gets connected across the screen and dock is a monitors connection (hdmi/dvi/dp), the hdd which can run like an esta, and power. why would you waste all the extra effort to make the smaller chip try and use ram form the dock or the docks gpu. the goal is for the smaller chip is to run the most basic tasks. like watching movies and browsing the web and word processing.
A lot of new FM2 and 990FX boards in one place:
http://www.coolenjoy.net/bbs/cboard....ga=&cat=&vote=
Nice!
Would interested in finding outs new about the saber tooth R 2.0
What differences are there between the A75 and A85 chipsets?
A85 have eight SATA 3.0 ports (A75 - six) and it supports RAID 5.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
ThinkPad T520
Intel Core i5-2520M Processor (2.50GHz, 3M Cache with Turbo Boost up to 3.20GHz)
Genuine Windows 7 Home Premium (64 bit)
15.6" HD+ (1600 x 900) LED backlight Anti-Glare display, with Wireless WAN Antenna
NVIDIA Quadro NVS4200M Optimus technology (1GB)
4 GB PC3-10600 DDR3 SDRAM 1333MHz SODIMM Memory (1 DIMM)
UltraNav (TrackPoint and TouchPad) No Fingerprint Reader
320GB Hard Disk Drive, 7200rpm
DVD Recordable
6 Cell 2.6Ah Li-Ion Battery
Intel WiFi Link 1000
Mobile Broadband ready (no mobile broadband module)
This is the type of system you can get for about 600 dollars. 616 to be more precise.
Vostro 3550 w/Core i5-2450, 4GB RAM, 320GB HD, Radeon 6630M 1GB, Win 7, DVDRW - $549
HP Laptop, i5-2450M, Radeon HD7690M XT, 750GB, Bluetooth, WiDi, USB 3.0, $498
Both these setups have faster processors than trinity by quite a bit. At least according to anandtech. The thinkpad t series is hardly bottom of the barrel.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5831/a...m-a-new-hope/5
Thus, a $1000 dollar laptop would blow this thing away. As you can easily find a laptop with a near top shelf processor and discrete graphics for that much.
In addition, the dock is hardly necessary for a student with a laptop. And you get the rather new transformer ee pad with tegra 3 and 32gb of storage for 399(519 with dock).
So the only thing you would be sharing is storage and the screen when docked? Not Ram AND CPU and graphics? This hardly seems efficient at this point, since your not getting any benefit from powersavings when the thing is docked by using any of the resources in the tablet portion. Another problem with keeping storage associated with actual tablet portion is size. The largest modules at the current moment in tablets are 64gb and they come at a massive premium(200 dollar upgrade over a 16gb model). 64 gb seems hardly enough for a laptop, especially a gaming one. You can get a 240gb SSD that is crazily faster for under 200 dollars now.
A 13" tablet? Ever think about battery consumption. This is a tablet that has an equivalent bobcat like processor in it(18 watts). The run time is 3 and a half hours. Tablets get 10 hours in the same tests.
http://reviews.cnet.com/tablets/asus...wBody;paginate
Weight is another issue and a 13" tablet would simply weigh too much and the user would hate it for everyday usability.
That brings us to another related point. Bob cat is simply too power hungry. Arm processors use in the range of 1-2 watts range. Bob cat or any other x86 is much higher than that. Not to mention that this ee-pad costed 1100 dollars out of the gate. Putting and AMD equivalent would save max 200 dollars(as the ulv processor in the intel one cost 250). With the elaborate dock your putting in this thing, minimum 1400 bucks. The motherboard, ram, larger battery, processor, ports can't be done for 300 dollars.
Not to mention what makes or breaks a tablet at this point is their app marketplace. Keeping this thing windows 8, would be a death sentence at this point. MS partnered with the largest phone maker in the world and windows phones are in a downward spiral.
So many compromises it is not even funny. People don't want to pay 1400 dollars, which is getting really expensive and have trinity at the middle of this thing. It is simply too expensive for an AMD based solution and is much less practical and slower than a laptop and tablet separately.
Not much then. Thanks.Quote:
Originally Posted by superpyton
And 2x 8 CrossfireX
posting laptops that have no ssd, single sticks of ram, and low/medium grade gpus and wondering why the price is low?Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
simple math. i said start with a 1000$ laptop, add 200$ worth of additional hardware and some innovative case design, and you have what can be done with 1500$+
sharing a screen is easily the best way to reduce the cost of the table. look at the parts list for an ipad 3, lcd panel and touch screen make up 40%. the cpu is only 15$.
and it seems like your trying to contradict yourself all over the place. first you mention low priced tablets with cell phone chips. then you mention high priced tablets with laptop chips. pick you battle please. either you admit that it costs alot to make a powerful tablet, or your picking the wrong hardware for the comparison. i dont want to have an argument that you clearly turned this into, for i have no idea why. if you started thinking outside the box instead of posting old tech, maybe there could be a discussion here.
Well let's throw this one in for a change.
I reckon that we could have a tablet driven by OMAP5 and IPS 14 Inch running windows RT to perform all normal duties someone with a tablet would, you limit the amount of ports and peripheral on this device to allow a sizeable battery to be allocated.
when docked the computer on the tablet shuts down, however the 14 inch IPS is now used with the hardware on the dock and recharging the battery simultaneously.
Here is the thing Tajoh111, I reckon this can be put together using readily available technology and might actually be a lot simpler than what it sounds since all "docking" does is shut down the tablet computer, recharge your battery and make use of the glorious IPS screen as an actual screen.
If anything said in this post seems wrong or contradictory please debunk as you please.
What are you talking about.Quote:
Originally Posted by Manicdan
Trinity doesn't have that much power and is hardly real discrete graphics class.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5831/a...m-a-new-hope/6
The laptops I just shown have more CPU power and have similar graphic performance. So why scoff and call these low end - mid grade GPU when they are the same thing in a trinity solution but more CPU power. A thousand dollar laptop beats trinity up and down with core i7 processors and discrete graphics. They are uncomparable so it doesn't make sense to use them in your 1000 dollar comparison + tablet comparison.
http://shop.lenovo.com/SEUILibrary/c...%3A00001373%3A
Ivybridge quad core i7-3610qm
GTX 660m
8gbs of Ram
500gb HD.
$849
This laptop is well under a grand and would smack around a trinity laptop into the ground.
The reason I mentioned the standard priced tablet(hardly low as you can get transformer eepc is pretty well featured), is because a user is better off getting both a laptop and a tablet. Because there is less compromise for both and you are not spending as much as you have stated. You don't have to make the other product worse for it to make with the other product. They exist better as two different entities.
Sure there might be no ssd, but at total cost of about 1000 dollars, you can add a 240gb ssd in the laptop laptop for $200. This means you have are getting vastly more storage space(ssd based) for the same cost as your shared storage based solution. Even without this upgrade, in the 1000 dollar scenario, your getting the storage of the SSD in the tablet and the volume of a conventional HD opposed to simply having the storage in the SSD in the tablet to be shared between the two units.
The reason I mentioned the expensive tablet in the first place is your design isn't as cheap to implement as you think? You said 1200 dollars. So I took a 12.1 inch tablet(1100 dollars) that is already on the market, which although has a more expensive processor, your hybrid has two processors so there is no or barely any processor savings. You still need to add the motherboard, ram, cooling battery, battery, connectors and chassis to said dock and as a result your well above the 1200 dollars you mentioned.
A battery dock with a keyboard costs 150 dollars and isn't meant to house as much and has no logic inside really. So I am saying it is going to cost alot more than 1200 dollars. One of the reason's your design is more costly is because larger touchscreen IPS or OLED(needed for wide viewing angles in tablets) LCD panels are significantly more expensive to produce than there 10" counterparts as they are not as mass produced on top of being larger. In fact considering the amount of mass produced 10.1" lcd there are compared to 12.1-14 touch screen lcd panels, I think it may be cheaper to get a 10.1" ips or OLED screen and a regular laptop screen compared to a 12.1-13" screen touch with IPS or OLED. Mass production is everything. This is what makes your 1000 + 200 scenario not work. There is no laptop out there with a touchscreen based IPS or OLED screen that is 13". Your underestimating how much this is really adding to the cost and this Intel based device is the closest match, minus the processor.
The reason why I mentioned two different scenarios is one is to illustrate buying two separate devices isn't as expensive as you think and secondly to illustrate the cost savings of your hybrid designs are not as much as you think. Keeping them two separate designs has a lot of practicality.
Plus you haven't really addressed the battery life issue and the storage issue.
This is hardly thinking outside the box. It is just so impractical that it doesn't make sense.
Are 13" tablets practical?
Is a laptop stuck with 64GB of storage practical?
Is getting a 4 hours of battery life in a tablet(bobcat is closer to intel ULV in power usage than ARM) with limited APP selection practical?
Is paying 1400+ for a laptop powered by a budget CPU/GPU practical? Remember trinity has the CPU power of a core i3 processor with the power of lower end discrete graphics.
The last one is what really kills this thing along with the engineering problems.
I agree using an OMAP5 or ARM based solution is better physically. You keep your profile thin, battery life good and windows 8 is being programmed to work on ARM efficiently. The difficulty in this is that ARM and x86 are completely different languages, so the system who need dual OS systems on board.Quote:
Originally Posted by kuroikenshi
If the docking is only utilizing the storage and screen and not switching back between resources to increase battery life, your killing much of the what would be benefits if the design was possible and the interconnect existed. By combing this weird design, your getting a over sized tablet, a clunky design( this is going to be one thick screen lid) and have the solution stuck with 64gb of memory.
Wouldn't it be better to keep both ecosystems separately, since when combined they cost the same anyway if not cheaper. I doubt the public would pay this much for an AMD CPU based products, especially without the apple logo on it.
My idea was not meant to be limited to AMD Trinity.
Windows 8 WHQL support and ... Intel Thunderbolt support!Quote:
Originally Posted by tbone8ty
http://vr-zone.com/articles/asus-s-a...rt-/16207.html
I'm sold on trinity. When can I buy it?
Edit: Desktop parts that is.
perhaps if you would just reply : "Intel FTW". It would be more than enough.Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darakian
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd...ard,15922.htmlQuote:
AMD's Trinity desktop CPUs, originally scheduled with a June introduction date, are now expected to arrive no earlier than October.
October? Makes me wonder if we'll see Vishera this year at all..
since AMD is now at the disadvantage side, mobo makers opinion are important to AMD now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Olivon
oem desktop is shipping now
AMD has it's place and that is in budget minded laptops, where it doesn't have to compete against higher end core i7 or even core i5 combined with discrete graphics from Nvidia or AMD. Against core i3 or i5(in some instances) with only intel graphics, it is the better option for gaming minded people. Go into the 1000 dollar laptop plus range and your going against intel processors that commonly beat it by 50% percent in benchmarks and discrete graphics with something like double the power.Quote:
Originally Posted by haylui
It is not about Intel or AMD at that point, it is simply about getting a good laptop for your money.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
the pricing and positioning is not determine by AMD itself and alone.
most of the laptop makers put A6 Trinity system at SGD$1000 level, at this level there are much much more Intel options are available.
see Asus for example, A6-3420M selling for SGD$999 while i5-2450M for SGD$899.
http://itfairsg.com/pcshow2012/asus-...brochure-9090/ (AMD Trinity laptop pricing)
http://itfairsg.com/pcshow2012/asus-...brochure-9064/ (Intel i5 laptop pricing)
edit: the i5 system even comes with nVidia GT 610M with 2GB Graphic RAM on it.
Trinity desktop as in Piledriver desktop CPUs? Or the actual Trinity GPUs with integrated graphics? Because the Piledriver replacement for Bulldozer has been said for a LONG time to be released in October or November.Quote:
AMD's Trinity desktop CPUs, originally scheduled with a June introduction date, are now expected to arrive no earlier than October.
Quotes from AMD release 3.6.12:Quote:
Originally Posted by EniGmA1987
"Introduced in mid-May for notebooks and coming to store shelves in desktop systems starting this week, the second generation AMD A-Series APU enables a best-in-class PC entertainment and gaming experience, and introduces new features including: "
I don't understand something, AMD doesn't know the month of releases
http://ir.amd.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=74...850&highlight=
Ok, so the desktop version of Trinity then. So those werent the ones that have been scheduled for October+ release already. Still sucks that desktop Trinity got pushed back a few months :/Quote:
Originally Posted by Maxforces
Trinity was released in notebooks first, then in OEM desktops. They don't know when channel parts (retail build-it-yourself stuff) will be released yet.
It doesn't matter, performance of CPU won't change in retail.I'll be the same as oem.
Opteron APU's
http://www.brightsideofnews.com/news...n-q4-2012.aspx
AMD new CEO is making all the right moves
confirmed Amd's Trinity IS shipping!
http://i1183.photobucket.com/albums/...y/IMG_0317.jpg
lol
This is too much the local retailer said he will get stock in about 3 months, here was thinking Trinity will be available in a few days :(
I wanted to compare Trinity and Haswell ES in terms of GPU but its not gonna happen. Will get a ASUS Maximus V + 3470T or F1A75-V PRO + 3870K depending on mindset and money in account.
Opteron APU, Firepro. I like it!!
http://tbreak.com/tech/2012/06/amd-t...rmance-review/
hopefully this is not the final price ($800) way to much!
Agreed. I was thinking Trinity based notebooks were going to be in the $500 range.Quote:
Originally Posted by tbone8ty
For that kind of money I'd buy this: i7-3610QM, 4gb ddr3, gtx630m, 15.6" 1080p screen, 500gb hdd = $900
so spend $100 more give or take then.. but you want trinity for $300 less. please show me a $500 laptop that will get close to a trinity setup please. where are the power usage charts between those systems then? i bet the amd setup draws way less than the intel/nvidia one in that so called review.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew LB
4 SKUs announced http://blogs.amd.com/fusion/2012/06/...o-the-desktop/
AMD claims no delay with desktop Trinity:
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/news/...sktop-trinity/
true this so called "review" was kinda :banana::banana::banana::banana:tyQuote:
Originally Posted by nunchucka
i even commented on the post lol
have to wait for a reputable review site to give us a complete analysis
(http://tbreak.com/tech/2012/06/amd-t...rmance-review/)
This problem cannot be ignored. For 800 dollars you can get a core i5 or i7 with discrete graphics that exceed the capabilities of trinity on the GPU side and CPU side. Along with having much weaker branding than Intel in particular, they are not doing themselves any favors by pricing themselves so close to Intels and Nvidia based laptops. So either the partners are charging to much or the AMD is charging too much for trinity.Quote:
Originally Posted by tbone8ty
Regardless of how much you love and want AMD to succeed, against a Intel laptop with discrete graphics(from either company) with better performance, it has to be priced lower(much) because 90+% of the public will pick Intel at the same price point.
They need to undercut an Intel laptop by 15% plus because the performance delta is greater than that.
i totally agree! AMD definitely needs to undercut Intel,Quote:
Originally Posted by tajoh111
unfortunately i fear AMD's pricing for their top tier mobile Trinitys will be high and very close to "comparable" Intel/Nvidia laptops.
im hoping thats not the case and this laptops price is MSRP and will be much cheaper when on sale
also people pointed out the review didn't do battery life tests
waiting for legit reviews
Tom has made a review of desktop Trinity
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...400k,3224.html
WOW!!! 15%
At this year’s Computex, AMD announced that Trinity-based APUs for the desktop are already shipping in machines from Acer, Asus, HP, and Lenovo. The chips just aren’t available in the channel yet. And as a result, we don’t yet know what any of these processors are going to cost. Not that it matters—this is a preview and we’re not here to pass judgment. Motherboard BIOS bugs are still being worked out and drivers are still not quite complete.
What we’re left with, then, are initial impressions.
Let’s start with the Piledriver architecture, which everyone is hoping will show up in a desktop-class CPU sooner than later. Our per-clock cycle testing suggests that the revised design, as it’s implemented on Trinity, is as much as 15% faster than Bulldozer
Piledriver core looks nice compared to Bulldozer...
Indeed 15% is very nice, especially considering Trinity does not have any L3 cache.
Indeed it is. IF they manage 4Ghz stock clock for FX Next and L3 brings additional few % of performance over Trinity,FX Next may end up being significantly faster than 8150,think 25+%.Quote:
Originally Posted by ~CS~
damn drooling at the prospect of a cpu thats clock for clock 15pct faster and consumes much less power. Too bad i couldn't wait to upgrade my cpu :( kinda seems like another phenom 2 moment
15% is best case, most of the tests look much closer than that (although I am too lazy to figure out the actual percentage) and llano even wins a few of them. I'd wait for some more reviews before passing judgement though. Certainly the GPU looks like it will be a nice step up.
They should have included HD4000 results just for reference, given a chance i would have bought a 5800K combo but since its months away according to Tom and my retailer i bought 3770K with Z77 instead i would be interested to see how well a HD4000 stands against HD7660 in OCed mode and normal mode.
The comment about 15% IPC increase is versus Bulldozer,not Llano... Llano still has overall higher IPC. But the point is that Trinity is still faster due to design choices(higher lock speed,aggressive TurboCore,power savings etc.). Trinity is overall faster than llano, in numbers around 15% based on all CPU tests. GPU portion is ~25% faster than the one in Llano. On top of these positive increases in both CPU and GPU performance,Trinity is able to reach high clocks unlike LLano which tops at 3.7Ghz with high end air cooling. Trinity should be able to reach similar clock(or higher) than FX4100 ,so around 4.8Ghz on air cooling. This is more than enough to make it plenty faster than Llano @ max OC (~3.7Ghz). On top of all this,Piledriver core with no L3 cache is ~10-15% faster than Bulldozer core with L3. Even if Vishera with its 8MB of L3 is only 10% faster than 8150,it will clock higher (3.8-4Ghz stock) and this will make it a significant upgrade for AM3+ users. ~20% faster than 8150 means IvyBridge 3770K/2700K territory in many MT workloads,which is tremendous achievement.Quote:
Originally Posted by cobra_kai
HD4000 can't match Llano in desktop version(both desktop chips). Trinity is 25-30% faster than Llano in games with proper(read : decent) DDR3 memory. Trinity can OC the GPU part to ~1Ghz on air(according to AMD via THG article). All of this should tell you that HD4000 vs 7660D is no contest.Quote:
Originally Posted by ajaidev
Sweet! Can't wait for am3+ piledriver!
Well the difference between llano and HD4000 on desktop is night and day. So adding additional performance on that will make it bigger i assume. You can get an id with anandtech HD2500-4000 performance tests though... but be carefull it aint pretty.Quote:
Originally Posted by ajaidev
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5871/i...phics-tested/3
But 3770K is hardly a compititor for the 5800K. i3 and probably very lowish i5 might be where trinity lands for competition, so its seems weird to go either 5800K or 3770K. Thats probably more than double the price...
sigh, when AMD has a slightly competitive product, people start to look even further as they have never came across the performance of Bulldozer...
HP dv6 $699
A8-4500m
http://www.techpowerup.com/167727/HP...inity-APU.html
kinda expensive and I don't think it has a discrete gpu
Llano gpu parts were overclocking exceptionally well. If the same is true for the 7660d then I would expect it to reach hd5670/9600gt level of performance (after oc), which is not bad for an intergrated part...
Given that gpus is Amd's remaining edge a lot can be determined by 7660d 's performance...
trinity is showing up, 3 at HP, even the sleekbook with 17w
also at the egg
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16834215419
Did I miss something?Quote:
Originally Posted by tbone8ty
Not very impressed with those HP options - they are too big and heavy. I thought there were going to be ultrabook-esque offerings with trinity?
Give me something with a good 13 inch screen that weighs around 3 pounds and has a ssd option and I will be very interested.
HP sleek book
http://www.shopping.hp.com/en_US/hom...kbook-6-1010us
Has 17w trinity (A6-4455M)
4 threads,
decent turbo,
less than 1" thick,
9 hours of light use,
can play games probably very well compared to a bobcat laptop, (do we have estimated perf between that 7500m gpu and others?)
under 1000$ even after you swap out for an SSD and more ram
And backlite keyboard ;)