So ?
I saw DDR3 1866 from the beginning. It was already updated when I first looked at the review
Even with DDR3 1866, it was less than 2 times the speed of HD3000 most of time. And HD3000 was using DDR3 1333. At least they should compare it with similar DDR3 speed. Not to mention that not many people use DDR3 1866 specially laptop users, because a decent DDR3 is going to cost you money $$ (I rather buy a dictated GPU than waste money on a decent DDR3)
EDIT: The word "slightly" is subjective. THe reason why I used this word is because Llano was expected to be several times faster than HD3000. I never imagined that llano is going to be less than 2 times the speed of HD3000. I was shocked.




Reply With Quote

Bookmarks