Unfortunately, we didn't get a test platform and were only briefed a few days ago but here's the article nonetheless:
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum...e-new-apu.html
:)
Printable View
Unfortunately, we didn't get a test platform and were only briefed a few days ago but here's the article nonetheless:
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum...e-new-apu.html
:)
I hope they release an 11.6" notebook w/ Trinity, and sweet jesus give me the ipad's screen on that notebook too please!
Unimpressive.
http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/ima...nimpressed.png
11.6" notebook w/ a 9.7" screen... what?Quote:
Originally Posted by Raqia
meh, trinity is an improvement, yes, but disappointing it doesnt 100% handle Intels HD4000 graphics
suppose this is due to cpu limitations
however I am impressed with Trinity's battery life compared to Ivy-Bridge, that is a huuuge win!
You know what I mean, pixel density and screen quality have just got to improve. Not that I would even mind a 9.7" screen of that quality on an 11.6" netbook. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by The Jesus
yeah idk what is up with that? i mean it looks as if it is the spu, because the games where ivy won are cpu intensive....but in those tests it was pretty much on par....only like 5 points difference?Quote:
Originally Posted by tbone8ty
Batterly life isn't suprising since the ivB is a 45W model i thought..Quote:
Originally Posted by tbone8ty
Would be interesting if anand would have done batterly life under load tests. since now we are comparing cpus where one has close to 30% more tdp. which should affect the batterly life under load significantly.. But we only have idle behavior as a way to go for.
yah guess yur rightQuote:
Originally Posted by flyck
http://hothardware.com/Reviews/AMD-T...eview/?page=12
we will have to see when retail laptops start emerging and final product can be tested
either way trinity is better in every way to llano, at least they got that right this time lol
now AMD for darn sure better have 28nm steamroller/GCN ready for Haswell
nice guys, looks overall good n this segment :)
I was surprised the difference in 3D is so small. When Intel guys were talking about this, saying stronger cpu plus a bit weaker gpu will give AMD run for its money, I was a bit skeptical.
Anyhow, I couldn't wait for IB, just bought myself Acer M3 the other day.. Seeing those Anand benchs, I don't think I messed up.
At least battery life is good, but wonder how it will perform once dualcore IBs with HD4000 are here.
I'm kinda curious to see if higher speed ram would make much of any difference in these tests. Llano seemed to love the extra boost from that. I still like there was a improvement, but I'm going to hold off on one of these and stick with a tablet for now. See what the next AMD APU brings next year I guess.
very good results:
a solid improvement on the same process, battery life improved while performance also improved, whats there to complain about.
the hd4000 graphics were built to be twice as fast as hd3000 because its on 22nm, and that was a 45w cpu. look at its battery life test, its at the bottom of every one. i think intel might feel a little hurt they didnt push the gpu a little more since they got bullied around by a 35w 32nm chip vs their 45w 22nm chip.
i would love to see what the A10-4655M can do considering its performance is only slightly less, but is a 25w chip. also the package is different FS1r2 vs FP2, so that could include more power savings outside of just the cpu. that would probably be the chip i buy if i was going to be getting a laptop anytime soon
Pretty nice work by AMD, especially with respect to power. If I were going to get a new laptop it would definitely have trinity in it. That being said I think AMD better watch out - intel closed the gap quite a bit since sandy bridge. It will be interesting to see what happens in the next generation.
Just opened the anandtech review, and its normal if you compare vantage and 06, the cpu score will win a big amount of the final score .... It is too clear in some games where at extremely low level graphics, Ivy will pass over, the cpu count more on this level, and at the moment you push a bit the detail ( in medium quality ), it invert the score .. I think AMD should really watch the cpu performance .. But anyway, there's too a big difference to the aimed price sector. As for a laptop, it will be interessant to have a price/perf/watt ratio ( ofc we need laptop for compare this )..Quote:
Originally Posted by tbone8ty
AMD will have die area and TDP room to push forward on CPU front with 28nm Steamroller core. There we may see some more significant IPC changes and clock speed increases. GPU part is already known, it will have ~512 GCN "cores" which is pretty big uplift versus Trinity and Llano. I think AMD will have no problems on the GPU side and if they are a bit more aggressive on CPU front they may close the gap to IB with SR core(Haswell will be main opponent but not immediately and not in all segments) .
Thought of going IB, but Trinity is simply better for my needs. Faster gaming, cheaper, similar battery life (wtf?), less cpu performance which is masked by a fast ssd. I never thought id say this so soon but AMD have a winner with trinity and i cant wait to see what they come up with in the future with steamroller/gcn/smaller node. Bring it on.
next review is at Hexus http://hexus.net/tech/reviews/cpu/39...m-trinity-apu/
GPU performance of Trinity was little bit over-hyped. Seems like A8-4600 is a natural competitor for dual-core IB parts but those have half of die size of Trinity which is not good for AMD's margin. Also I wonder how A6 parts with cut-down GPU/CPU will perform against IB i3 parts with "full-size" HD4000.
Well when IB matches Trinity's GPU it does it usually in a few CPU bound games in low quality modes. Where it loses ,it does so by a very large margin. Worst case scenario for Trinity is to lose more in those few titles where IB is competitive against fully fledged A8/A10 and come close(r) in those titles where it trailed it by a large margin before.
I'm interested in 45W Trinity parts. I see no reason for AMD not to make those(we have IB,SB and Llano in this power band). It would be interesting to see how much the iGPU can scale with those 10 additional watts.
considering how long amd has been using 32nm its not quite as simple as saying, bad for margins. contracts and yields and other factors, could make its cost them less to produce some of the last 32nm with a bigger chip vs early 22nm parts as a smaller chip.
for A6 vs i3 your still limited by tdp when it comes to such things. a full 4000 could be running at lower clocks to maintain 25w or less tdp
in anands test the battery life of trinity vs hd4000 was about equal for their gaming (it was only mentioned in the text briefly, but it would be good to see how it really performs per watt in gaming)