Llano vs Sandy Bridge Compute Capacity

[-Boris-]

would be really nice to plug a couple chips of gddr into the motherboard (into a pci-e slot???? hmm...) for quick performance upgrade

Probably defeats the whole purpose of buying a processor with integrated GPU.

[Nintendork]

No, I think that it is more likely to be 240SPs@~280mhz vs 80SPs@500mhz for E-350. That would explain the higher power efficiency.

A3300M has 160SP.

[duploxxx]

No, I think that it is more likely to be 240SPs@~280mhz vs 80SPs@500mhz for E-350. That would explain the higher power efficiency.

The A4-3300M has a 35W tdp
A series LIano have from 240-400SP and GPU clock is way higher then 280

A3300M has 160SP.

No

I'm not sure if anyone knows yet, but will it be possible for Llano to use "Side Port" memory instead of just system ram?

To be honest, if this chip does what I think it might, it's really looking good to me...
I'm only hoping here, but if it supports sideport and Hybrid Crossfire (or even better, a more powerful VC that could be throttled down when not needed), it would be the ultimate HTPC chip!
Low power when just doing HTPC things, but still have some nads if you wanted to game on the big screen...

I really don't think my usage ideas are that rare. Hopefully AMD see's the potential for this type of application.

Zacate seems fine for a low powered HTPC only rig, but Llano's K10.5 cores are plenty strong enough for gaming and most other uses...

If they get Turbo and power throttling right this seems like a killer settup to me!

LIano will support HC but it is depending on CPU serie and GPU serie, so mainstream GPU can be combined on all A series but not E, performance gpu only on higher A series.
Also the switchable graphics are available.

From what we know now, native dual-core Llano chip is designed to have 160SP. I would expect a ~400MHz iGPU clock.

Ref:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/dis...arter_AMD.html

the main problem is that there are 2 streams of LIano, mobile and desktop. Both have different specs, what has been shown so far are always the mobile parts.......

[saaya]

would be really nice to plug a couple chips of gddr into the motherboard (into a pci-e slot???? Hmm...) for quick performance upgrade

+1!

[Calmatory]

LLano LIano LLanno LIanno IIano........

EL EL EI EN OU, L L A N O.

Thank you.

[Hornet331]

nothing at all? Correct me if I'm wrong but the cache system affects pretty much everything you do on a CPU. Didn't you say sandybridge will see an ipc boost across the board from its improved cache system among other things?

Let's say this test doesn't depend a lot on the cache system...
You're saying yourself that its impressive to see that many threads run on those cpus. Why impressive? Because there is a limitation of resources that need to be rained and shuffled between those tasks, correct? And that has nothing to do with the cache system? Nothing at all?
Then please tell me, what is a good cache system test?

I agree that the whimpy gpu is the main thing holding Intel back in this test, but it doesn't explain everything...

I gotta say though I'm not impressed at all by some purely synthetic test.. is that the only scenario AMD does well in? : l

On amd it has nothing to with the cache sub system because the gpu part is not connected to it. The only part where it is connected is the memory controller.

So the test you see runs on 3 different parts, the Video runs on the UVD logic, the cfd simuation on the gpu and hyper pi on the cpu.
On the intel system only the video runs on dedicated logic, the rest as you have said, battels for resources on the cpu.

Thats why I said it shows nothing about the cache system on the amd system, because it doesn't get strained at all...

[Manabu]

would be really nice to plug a couple chips of gddr into the motherboard (into a pci-e slot???? hmm...) for quick performance upgrade

+1!

I disagree completely.

I would preffer to put one or two more DDR3 1600mhz for a tri/quad-channel, 192/256 bits memory interface. Even the default 128bits memory interface with some 1600~1800mhz ram won't be a big bottleneck for the GPU speed in llano, unless the CPU is also hungry for bandwidtch.

Adding another type of high-speed memory controler on-chip, probably adding logic to swich between the DDR3 and GDDR for the GPU, adding some proprietary/expensive/high-latency interface to plug GDDR in the motherboard and additional PCB traces and layers needed for it, etc. It would be very inefficient and expensive.

The A4-3300 has a 35W tdp
A series LIano have from 240-400SP and GPU clock is way higher then 280

So, how do you explain this video that informal posted here? You think it is fake? The 160SPs@400mhz for this lower TDP dual-core version seems most likely now.

EDIT: Now reading X-bit labs link, A4-3xxx series Llano seems to have 160SP.

[duploxxx]

So, how do you explain this video that informal posted here? You think it is fake? The 160SPs@400mhz for this lower TDP dual-core version seems most likely now.

EDIT: Now reading X-bit labs link, A4-3xxx series Llano seems to have 160SP.

link is down, as mentioned in previous post, differences between mobile lineup and desktop. secondly the xbitlabs list have a lot of guessing and unknowns... so source reliable???