AMD Fusion Info Thread

It's the Radeon 6310. I believe it bests the ION2 in most benchmarks/tests.

 

I had thought it was beaten out, very slightly, by ION2.

Hmm. Must research.

 

I think ION2 beats it in a few synthetic benchmarks but the 6310 wins in pretty much every real-world scenario

 

Okay, anyone following this thread, listen up because I'm no longer participating in this thread. Here are the facts:

1. AMD's CPU speeds are weaker than Intel's
2. For most people, this does not matter one bit because the CPU is almost never causing you to say, "Dang, I wish my computer was faster."
3. If you absolutely must have Intel for any reason, smart or stupid, buy it.
4. I have never bought an AMD based notebook until now because they have always sucked. They are now awesome.
5. AMD CPUs are now awesome because they provide more graphics power than the Intel at lower power consumption. This means you get longer battery life with a lighter weight.
6. AMD systems are just plain cheaper.

Here's a car analogy. Right now (2011), Hyundai makes cars that are equal or slightly better than your average Japanese car. But some people won't buy a Hyundai for whatever reason. Great. Don't buy it.

If you care about status or name brand or familiarity, then buy an Intel and buy a Japanese car.

But I, on the other hand, will always buy the best price to performance product for whatever purpose. Sometimes it's Intel and sometimes it's AMD. Sometimes Apple, sometimes Microsoft, sometimes Google.

EDIT: Yes, thank you for editing out the truth and allowing this fanboy to continue lying just because he presents it in a more tasteful package.

 

Anandtech did some benchmarks of the AMD E-350 and its competitors. The E-350 seems to pull ahead of the ION platform.

 

There's only one AMD cpu that you can buy today that's better than Intel in its segment and that's the E-350, which is a netbook CPU. For just a little bit more, there are laptops with ULV Arrandale's though and I personally wouldn't spend more than $400 for a E-350 machine.

 

So, to get back on topic, reports say we should start seeing Llano in notebooks in June. The A8-3530MX is supposed to be officially introduced at Computex and AMD claims that it is there fastest mobile CPU to date.

http://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-to...30MX-APU-at-this-year-s-Computex.53798.0.html

 

Whats up with AMD and putting small L2 cache memory on their CPUs? Does the CPU share that memory with the IGP? Intel have always had double the cache with their CPUs compared to AMD. A8-3530MX have 4MB, 2630/2720 6MB, and 2820/2920 have 8MB. That must translate in to some performance difference right??

 

Historically, AMD has always had less. While both AMD and Intel x86-64 processors share the same instruction set, you can't directly compare those specifications (similar to how you can't directly compare clock speed/cache between, say, a Pentium 4 and a Core 2 Duo processor)--the processors have different architectures, and AMD CPUs tend to rely less on L2 cache.

Back when Intel produced Pentium M CPUs with 2MB L2 cache, for example, AMD had equivalent-performing CPUs with 512KB -1MB L2 cache.

 

All of the new mobile processors, AMD's Fusion Llano series - Donanimhaber.com

 

They must have made a lot of improvements in the architecture to have clock speeds that low but still be faster than Champlain

 

Anyone hear about these for boards in Mini ITX format? Looking to build an HTPC with a Llano!

 

The E-350 would be a better choice for an HTPC though, not? It can be much lower power and smaller, maybe even fanless.

 

Wait Zacate is faster than Champlain? I just ordered an N620 for my brother's M5030..

 

No, Zacate is a much slower part with a low TDP. I think he was talking about Llano, but I'm not sure where he is getting the information from.

 

AMD has said that the A8-3530MX (1.9GHz) is their fastest mobile processor to date. If that is true than that is a huge increase in performance relative to clock speed. The fastest quad-core Champlain ran at 2.4GHz.

 

But it can Turbo up to 2.6GHz, no? I think their statement is much more likely to refer to that than a 25% increase in performance with practically the same architecture.

 

Maybe, maybe not. I don't remember if AMD's statement was their fastest mobile CPU or fastest quad-core mobile CPU. I don't know if Turbo Core allows all 4 cores to go up to 2.6GHz

 

It might actually be able to go up to 2.6 GHz with all 4 cores. A big fraction of that die is the GPU. If the only thing the latter is doing is Windows Aero, I don't see why the CPU can't take advantage of the thermal budget to bump up the clock speed.

 

If that is the case then it will probably be AMD's fastest mobile to date.

 

Yeah, but for certain capture cards, the CPU still isn't quite enough

If there's a mobile Llano integrated into mini ITX solution that's possible, it would be perfect - low enough power with enough CPU oomph to get over any rendering issues + good enough GPU power for light gaming too

 

HP is first.

Llano powered HP notebook listed

 

That is surprisingly cheap given that they've stuffed a 6750M in there on top of the iGPU. It's like they're going for a gaming laptop, but many games will almost certainly be CPU-bound...

 

I am very interested to see how well the hybrid graphics work.

 

Wow, very nice figures for that price. Link to a retailer: http://www.passiontec.de/_fenster.p...9092fa085f497c44728ec3129eb98d2&affId=1376965

Quad Core + 6750M w/ 6520M CF

 

HP? I bet it's ugly, heavy and 1366x768 screen. Who's with me?

 

Well, it's definitely 1366x768 (at least in the linked German shop). Kind of a waste given the amount of GPU hardware in that machine.

The interesting question is still battery life. I am curious if they manage to get it to something reasonable (particularly since you're unlikely to get a quality battery with such a cheap laptop). Oh well, not long now.

 

It will probably use the same chassis as the current dv6t

 

Yep, probably the dv6 chassis, which looks pretty good. 1366x768 will also probably be standard, but that's the case with all laptops AMD or Intel; HP should offer a 1600x900 upgrade as a customization on their site.

 

If the crossfire/hybride solution works well, and this thing has decent battery life we could be looking at some nice power at a low $ here, finally some competition for Intel, god knows the market needs it.

 

It it has the CF between the Llano GPU and the 6750M, were talking 800 Shaders, 128-Bit bus and GDDR5. Sounds like a lower clocked 5850! This could have some serious gaming potential. Also, considering HP just put 1080p in the DV6qe, there may be an option.

Edit: wrong shader count 320+480=800

 

I am very curious how this will work. The 6750M has a 128-bit bus and GDDR5, but the integrated GPU is stuck with system RAM (i.e. 128-bit DDR3 access to which must be shared with the CPU). Has anyone tried CrossFire with such highly asymmetric GPUs?

 

Presumably that won't even be the most powerful combo, either ( link). The 6620G will likely be paired with a 6770 in something, which would mean 880 shaders with higher clock speeds for both the IGP and discrete graphics.

 

Maybe this will make intel get off their bums and try to improve the IGPs of future devices to something that is closer to mid-level and competitive. But, yes I kind of want to see how crossfire will work on this and if this will work its way down to future Zacate models.

 

As usual >80% of the general laptop buying public has no use for anything more than what's in SB or Arrandale IGP. This is good for the other 20% who wants to save a little money I guess. Competing on price is not good for profits, especially when manufacturing large silicon.

Of course, the other side of the pie is that C2D performance is also good enough for the >80% of general laptop buying public, and it'll all boil down to how energy efficient Llano turns out to be.

 

Everyone's saying that it will only have C2D performance, but I'm pretty sure that a Phenom II X4 is about the same as a Q6600. I'm betting the CPU will be closer to the first gen, 45nm i-series CPU's. It won't be competitive CPU wise until Bulldozer.

 

I think that, clock-for-clock, it will be slightly better than C2D and close to Arrandale. Like soguxu said, though, that is more than enough for the large majority of users.

If Llano can offer battery life comparable with SB and the quad-core versions do come in at about $700-750 or cheaper, which we have reason to believe because the earlier listed model comes with an AMD 6750 and is only $830 in Germany with the 19% VAT, then Llano should do well. Personally, I would rather buy a Llano quad + 6750 for than an SB dual + 6750 for the same price.

 

Completely different thermal envelopes for those two though. A dual SB is 35W but 10W is for idle graphics when using discrete so 25W CPU + 25W GPU = 50W vs. Llano will be 45W+25W=70W, requiring beefier cooling, will be in a larger, thicker laptop, etc.

I don't see how the same architecture, which is slower than C2D clock per clock, but this time more power (not performance) optimized, without the benefit of Phenom II's huge L3 cache can as fast as an Arrandale. I maintain C2D level performance at best from Llano, which isn't a bad thing if they have the low power consumption to match.

There's also the fact that low clocked quads aren't as good as higher clocked duals for games and Llano doesn't have as sophisticated method of dynamic voltage and clock speed adjustment like Intel finally did with SB. In any case, the market for crossfire GPU laptops is miniscule.

 

Maybe. But the current-gen dv6 is available with SB quads and the 6770, so 65W under full load, and it handles it just fine. Assuming the same cooling system, I don't see why they couldn't put Llano in there.

You are also assuming that the IGP can be fully utilized, thus maxing out the 45W TDP, at the same time as the discrete graphics. If that is the case, then I wouldn't mind a slightly beefier notebook because the performance difference would be huge. There is also a 35W Llano quad, anyway.

It is not the exact same architecture. Granted, it is almost the same but they have made improvements. Also, mobile Phenom II did not have L3 cache.

Agreed, but the difference in games is usually small. My point is that if it comes down to buying a Llano notebook with a discrete GPU as well or a SB notebook with the same GPU, I would seriously consider the Llano even at the same price. If it is $50-100 cheaper then the decision wouldn't even be hard for me.

 

I'm not sure those %'s are really accurate anymore. More and more people watch HD content and play games (casually), and the GPU is almost always the first thing to limit the performance of a notebook for most users

 

No. HD content and casual games are easily handled by any modern GPU, including even Intel's GPUs from a generation ago, never mind Sandy Bridge. The first thing to limit the performance of an ordinary consumer's notebook is definitely the hard drive. The GPU will only be a bottleneck if said consumer wants to play 3D games -- for most other non-professional applications, any GPU is good enough. Given the state of PC gaming, the CPU is much more likely to be a bottleneck than the GPU.

 

How do you arrive at that figure? SB Quads are 45W but 10W is for GPU which will sit idle, so the CPU part of the SB Quad is only 35W.

Just because all the shaders are working doesn't mean it's efficiently utilized Crossfire and SLI have lots of power inefficiencies due to their nature of operation. By the way, I was comparing Desktop C2Q to Desktop Athlon II without L3 cache and even the C2Q is faster than that.

Well you need a GPU without needing much CPU, I guess you don't play much Starcraft or Civ V, and it might be good for you. I'd still wait for some benchmarks. In any case, PC gaming is a niche and not on most consumers' radars.

 

Would be good if you could explain that a bit further.

 

As Althernai said, any Intel GPU starting with the 4500MHD (C2D generation) is able to accelerate HD video and play casual games (that don't even require 3D acceleration) just fine. The people who play Call of Duty etc. on the PC are a minority, most have migrated to consoles and continue to do so.

 

Are you likely to watch two videos or crunch two Excel sheets?
I guess, I'm doing both on my E-350.



1. 45+ minutes of Pi.
2. NBC video podcast in background.
3. Hulu 480p foreground.
4. 1.15v (undervolted from 1.3v default)
5. Fan is now 100% off at machine idle (0.80v).

This is an AMD E-350. This is for netbooks.

 

I don't know if Second Life is a casual game or not, but the 2 months I played it, the intel 4500hd in my Vaio couldn't really handle it, even on low settings. I personally want a cpu a little faster than the ULV SU9300 in Vaio(SL9400 would do fine for my needs), but I want an IGP that is more on par with the current Zacate cpu(6320 is it?).

 

Second life is like World of Warcraft, and I wouldn't consider that a casual game. That being said, SB GPU is pretty decent for that kind of stuff as well and beats the Zacate GPU, but I wouldn't use any of the earlier Intel GPU's for 3D acceleration.

 

Plus 30W for the 6770. 35+30=65

True. Even if they can only add 50% of their performance, though, that is pretty good.

I don't play any Starcraft or Civ but even if I did, Llano would be more than enough

 

You should know that MOST games will be GPU limited if you have a Llano quad or SB HT dual. Only if you pair an SB Dual with say, a 485M, are you going to find a severely CPU limited situation. There are some games, like BFBC2, that are more CPU bound than GPU, but it is a rarity.

 

So, we know HP is coming out with a Llano laptop. Are there other manufacturers that traditionally offer Intel and AMD options for the same model? If a Llano was put into the Acer TimelineX or the Asus U series, that's pretty much what I'm waiting for.

There's so few AMD based laptops out now and what is out is big & heavy as opposed to thin & light. What are the chances of seeing availability change with Llano's release?