good to see the A8-3500M is under 35w
i kinda wish they had more skus where some has much stronger cpus with slower gpus. i would have expected the A4-3310MX to have near 3ghz on its 2 cores
2500k @ 4900mhz - Asus Maxiums IV Gene Z - Swiftech Apogee LP
GTX 680 @ +170 (1267mhz) / +300 (3305mhz) - EK 680 FC EN/Acteal
Swiftech MCR320 Drive @ 1300rpms - 3x GT 1850s @ 1150rpms
XS Build Log for: My Latest Custom Case
So, 1GHz turbo on updated k10 core. How much BD will have...
It's 1.2Ghz turbo increase on all cores according to someone clarification.Originally Posted by Mechanical Man
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...&postcount=557
these turbos people can expect to be very agressive since they have a gpu to share their TDP with
in theory we see a 1.5ghz quad with a decent gpu for 35w, OR we see a 2.5ghz quad with an idling gpu for 35w, but i doubt both unless they were conservative with the numbers. only testing will prove it though.
2500k @ 4900mhz - Asus Maxiums IV Gene Z - Swiftech Apogee LP
GTX 680 @ +170 (1267mhz) / +300 (3305mhz) - EK 680 FC EN/Acteal
Swiftech MCR320 Drive @ 1300rpms - 3x GT 1850s @ 1150rpms
XS Build Log for: My Latest Custom Case
a little bit weak in cpu freq...
took a very very long time to leak all the specs(for me all M versions looks far more interesting then MX)
before all the compare and outperform talking starts, A8 will be situated only against i5..... it will win any GPU related bench, cpu on the other hand will by hard with the high single threaded perf of SB, but will do fine in multithreading.
yeah my office tools will be too slow against an i5
Last edited by duploxxx; 05-23-2011 at 11:41 AM.
op, is good aproach for BD
Dual core E2 and A4 too less cpu power to go against the likes of Pentium SNB's. The top end quad more or less equal to N970 "Since 2.6max and 1.9base it has to work in between", N970 performance wise was between the i5 480 and i3 380 in most cases.
SNB has the headroom to murder the llano CPU performance wise with a higher clocked dual core SNB unless the efficiency of the CPU has increased.
Coming Soon
When AMD goes with K10+GPU combo, they knew that they could not compete in raw CPU performance.
At 45nm, the fastest quad-core CPU is X940 (2.4GHz / 45W TDP).
Either 32nm SOI is not mature or AMD is conservative...
But I would think AMD is designing too much on Llano...
512KB L2 cache per core and 320SP max would save 15% die size...
I thought IIano was an improved K10 design. Although I'm sure it still wouldn't match a SB cpu but better than PhenomII
AMD doesn't think so...
Originally Posted by motown_steve
Every genocide that was committed during the 20th century has been preceded by the disarmament of the target population. Once the government outlaws your guns your life becomes a luxury afforded to you by the state. You become a tool to benefit the state. Should you cease to benefit the state or even worse become an annoyance or even a hindrance to the state then your life becomes more trouble than it is worth.
Once the government outlaws your guns your life is forfeit. You're already dead, it's just a question of when they are going to get around to you.
you are mixing desktop and mobile market...AMD doesn't think so...
Sorry, when I see SB and Phenom II, I think desktop.
Originally Posted by motown_steve
Every genocide that was committed during the 20th century has been preceded by the disarmament of the target population. Once the government outlaws your guns your life becomes a luxury afforded to you by the state. You become a tool to benefit the state. Should you cease to benefit the state or even worse become an annoyance or even a hindrance to the state then your life becomes more trouble than it is worth.
Once the government outlaws your guns your life is forfeit. You're already dead, it's just a question of when they are going to get around to you.
Wonder why they have gone with the 400 SP gpu core for the mobile varient.. with that clock speeds and slow ram, it will perfrom worse then a stock HD5550 dedicated card (and this card only has 320 SP).
I'd rather would have seen less SP but higher clock speeds for the top models so at least they can saturate the 320 SPs..
CPU freq seems ok, nothing stellar but ok.
Last edited by Hornet331; 05-24-2011 at 12:03 AM.
Eh, my Phenom II at 2.8 GHz runs pretty fine with a 4890, 2.6 or 2.5 GHz shouldn't take a hit would it? Unless you're purely talking about the stock speed, which I doubt is where the processor usually runs at. Games rarely fill up 100% of your processors anyway, so that's a lot of clock headroom.
Looks good, though I keep wishing for a high/er clocked dual core with 400sp missing from the line up
Dual core
2.2ghz / 3ghz turbo
DDR3-1600 cl7
400sp ~600mhz +Xfire option
45w TDP
Would
Read the topic this are mobile chips, so they will run stock most of the time, especial when you run games.
A 320 sp design with higher clocks would possibly use a bit more power.
That's more 500MHz for all core, 1,2 GHz is wrong ...
And you think AMD didn't think about this in there designs??? difference in higher SP count vs higher Freq and the possible performance and TDP influence.....
and you know this already since you have them tested?
B940 and B950 2,0 and 2,1GHZ no HT and unknown turbo
are you so sure they will be that more performing then A4 3300M with 2,5ghz? E2 has the same price target of Brazos.
Last edited by duploxxx; 05-24-2011 at 05:06 AM.
Correct me if I'm mistaken, but the Nehalem laptops I've seen have their turbo running whenever there's a bit of load. During gaming, I do not know. However, my linear guesstimate says that even at the stock clocks the chips will run fine.
you are correct the only time Turbo did NOT run was when you loaded all 8 threads fully and even then it depended on thermals...
However I am willing to bet that Lano will be the same way for the most part in that it will almost never run at the lowest speced speed unless under massive load for the both the GPU and CPU.
I am however disappointed with the GPU clock speeds given. Couple that with the poor memory bandwidth to the GPU and it looks like GPU performance while being better than any other IGP in laptops will be nothing to write home about.
CPU performance will also be almost without a doubt slower than mobile SB in almost every way. The TDP for the solution however is impressive considering thats the CPU most of the NB and the GPU... I just don't see it being faster than SB.
CPU: Intel Core i7 3930K @ 4.5GHz
Mobo: Asus Rampage IV Extreme
RAM: 32GB (8x4GB) Patriot Viper EX @ 1866mhz
GPU: EVGA GTX Titan (1087Boost/6700Mem)
Physx: Evga GTX 560 2GB
Sound: Creative XFI Titanium
Case: Modded 700D
PSU: Corsair 1200AX (Fully Sleeved)
Storage: 2x120GB OCZ Vertex 3's in RAID 0 + WD 600GB V-Raptor + Seagate 1TB
Cooling: XSPC Raystorm, 2x MCP 655's, FrozenQ Warp Drive, EX360+MCR240+EX120 Rad's
with both platforms being on 32nm now, i think it would be interesting to see total system efficiency rather than just raw power of a single element.
there are of coarse multiple ways to compare. and one being price/performance, where if you had 800$ and bought something from either camp, what kind of perf do you get.
2500k @ 4900mhz - Asus Maxiums IV Gene Z - Swiftech Apogee LP
GTX 680 @ +170 (1267mhz) / +300 (3305mhz) - EK 680 FC EN/Acteal
Swiftech MCR320 Drive @ 1300rpms - 3x GT 1850s @ 1150rpms
XS Build Log for: My Latest Custom Case
Official performance numbers for mobile Llano:
http://sites.amd.com/us/vision/promo...isclaimer.aspx
In comparison my I5-2410M scores 1900 in 3D Vantage P:2011 VISION A4-based PC deliver up to 143% better visual performance than a 2011 VISION E2-based PC.
Tests conducted by AMD Performance Labs using FutureMark 3DMark Vantage Performance as a metric for visual performance. The 2011 VISION A4-based PC scored 1625 while the 2011 VISION E2-based PC scored 670. All scores rounded to the nearest whole number. The 2011 VISION A4-based PC consisted of the reference platform "Torpedo" with the AMD Dual-Core A4-3300M APU, with AMD Radeon™ HD 6480G graphics, 4 GB (2x2GB) DDR3-1333Mhz system memory, and Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit. The 2011 VISION E2-based PC consisted of the reference design "Inagua" with the AMD Dual-Core E-350 APU, AMD Radeon™ HD 6310 graphics, 4GB (2x2GB), DDR3-1066Mhz system memory, Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit. SBNB-I23
2011 VISION A6-based PC deliver up to 16% better visual performance than a 2011 VISION A4-based PC.
Tests conducted by AMD Performance Labs using FutureMark 3DMark Vantage Performance as a metric for visual performance. The 2011 VISION A6-based PC scored 1882 while the 2011 VISION A4-based PC scored 1625. All scores rounded to the nearest whole number. The 2011 VISION A6-based PC consisted of the reference platform "Torpedo" with the AMD Quad-Core A6-3410MX APU, with AMD Radeon™ HD 6520G graphics, 4 GB (2x2GB) DDR3-1333Mhz system memory, and Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit. The 2011 VISION A4-based PC consisted of the reference platform "Torpedo" with the AMD Dual-Core A4-3300M APU, with AMD Radeon™ HD 6480G graphics, 4 GB (2x2GB) DDR3-1333Mhz system memory, and Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit. SBNB-I24
2011 VISION A8-based PC deliver up to 51% better visual performance than a 2011 VISION A6-based PC.
Tests conducted by AMD Performance Labs using FutureMark 3DMark Vantage Performance as a metric for visual performance. The 2011 VISION A8-based PC scored 2842 while the 2011 VISION A6-based PC scored 1882. All scores rounded to the nearest whole number. The 2011 VISION A8-based PC consisted of the reference platform "Torpedo" with the AMD Quad-Core A8-3510MX APU, with AMD Radeon™ HD 6620G graphics, 4 GB (2x2GB) DDR3-1333Mhz system memory, and Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit.The 2011 VISION A6-based PC consisted of the reference platform "Torpedo" with the AMD Quad-Core A6-3410MX APU, with AMD Radeon™ HD 6520G graphics, 4 GB (2x2GB) DDR3-1333Mhz system memory, and Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit. SBNB-I26
http://3dmark.com/3dmv/3173935
Last edited by kl0012; 05-24-2011 at 05:48 PM.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks