Yeah but most netbooks are still single core, and I am not sure if Flash has support for any of the Atom gpus(maybe the GMA500, but again not sure).
-
Of course there's the whole reality that very few people need anything more than an Intel IGP in a computer to begin with. -
-
abaddon4180 Notebook Virtuoso
I am also curious as to what notebook you got with a 6630 for only $750? -
-
abaddon4180 Notebook Virtuoso
My point, however, is if everything just listed about two notebooks is equal but one comes with Llano for $700 and the other comes with Arrandale/5650 for $800, I would rather have the Llano. -
-
-
Quad cores + 400SP's would make a pretty big chip. Can't be that cheap to manufacture either.
Given that my 6630M with 480SP's at 480Mhz and 800Mhz dedicated DDR3 can't quite overtake the 5650, I doubt the Llano GPU with less shaders, lower clock frequency and reduced memory bandwidth (shared with the CPU) will do any better. -
-
Mr_Mysterious Like...duuuuuude
Not only that, but clock speeds are not the whole picture when it comes to CPUs, they are complex machines capable of many different things.
You're just going to have to accept that while CPUs differ from each other on an individual basis, but also Fusion and Sandy Bridge are just two completely different architectures from 2 different companies.
Mr. Mysterious -
My this, my that, blah blah blah...
I think we should way and see...
BTW: for me Llano based laptop would be awesome, probably even Zacate would fit my needs. With current T60 (details in signature) only sometimes I wish for GPU with HW acceleration. -
This is why I said that unless AMD has made significant changes to the architecture, Intel dual-cores will probably continue to beats AMD quad-cores across the board. In fact, depending on how Llano is priced, it may even be cheaper to get a Sandy Bridge dual-core with discreet graphics (though I doubt it; Intel likes to keep much higher margins than AMD so I expect Llano to be cheaper). -
Mr_Mysterious Like...duuuuuude
My point is: For most people that don't need bleeding-edge performance, Llano and other AMD fusion processors will be more than enough for them, and at a good price point too
Competition is good and more is needed.
Mr. Mysterious -
Here is a cheap laptop with dual sandy bridge and GT 540M. $829.
http://www.xoticpc.com/asus-k53sva1-p-3076.html?wconfigure=yes
Yeah competition is good. -
-
Mr_Mysterious Like...duuuuuude
So what is wrong with buying an intel system with a discrete card? Or even a Llano system with a discrete card? It's just a few dollars more and very much worth it...
Mr. Mysterious -
I don't understand why people don't understand what is very easy to understand.
THE CPU DOESN'T MATTER FOR MOST PEOPLE.
If you want an awesome CPU, don't buy an AMD. Nobody cares. Get your Intel.
Why is it hard to understand that an AMD Phenom with SSD will be much faster than a Core i5 with HDD? Moving up to Core i7 will still be slower. The CPU isn't the bottleneck for most people. And if, in fact, it is the bottleneck for you, your computing needs are not the same as most people. Most people's CPUs sit idle. Anyone else seeking out Intel CPUs are doing so out of habit and ignorance.
EDIT: I meant to say LLano with SSD (not Phenom), but I wouldn't be surpised if a Phenom + SSD was generally faster overall than a Core i5 + HDD. -
-
-
Well, I've come across this and thought it would be interesting. MAny were expecting such a thing.
Basically, an ATI Mobility HD 5650 (the lower clocked ones) for the GPU part of the product. I guess "integrated graphics" just got a whole lot better xD.
More mobile Llano specs leaked
Cheers! -
And even then, if you are REALLY concerned about speed, you might be better off doing RAID 0 on SSD rather than going from Core i3 to Core i7.
Here's my problem with this entire discussion. There's a complete disconnect between what people think affects speed. Most people still (surprisingly) don't have SSD systems. So they're still shopping between Core i3 i5 and i7. They have no frickin clue that if they just buy the SSD, what they THINK they need (faster CPU) is not going to really affect what they REALLY need (faster drive).
-
SSD's are the biggest impact to performance, but right after that, comes the CPU, not the GPU for most people. And AMD mainstream (not netbook) CPU's are inferior to Intel CPU's, not just in performance, but in performance per watt as well.
-
All day power, good enough graphics, good enough CPU. That's what laptops are all about. I wouldn't buy an AMD desktop, but this forum isn't for desktops. -
Sandy Bridge gets as good of a battery life as the E350, and it's much faster. -
I have been looking at the HP DM1Z with the E-350 since before it came out since I read it could take on 1080P. But I haven't really been keeping up with changes in CPU/GPU since I got my old laptop.
Currently running Core Duo T2300 with ATi X1400 512MB. I looked on a site that compiled benchmarks and found that the E-350 was very similar to the setup I have now. However, I know that benchmarks don't really tell everything.
So would I be getting an upgrade or getting something similar in power but using less juice and much smaller form factor?
Also read (from this thread) that AMD might refresh the E-350 with Turbo? -
-
Your second point about Sandy getting good battery compared to the AMD E350 is not correct.
The diminishing importance of CPU power is a fact and has been accepted by the mighty Intel. -
Mr_Mysterious Like...duuuuuude
Hmm...looks like my netbook in the next few months will be one of three choices, in no particular order:
1) HP DM1z
2) Acer 1810T
3) A ULV i3 Laptop to be discussed
It's hard to prioritize but....gun to my head, I'd say...
Battery Life (6+ hours on high performance, brightness all the way down and playing HD videos with the sound down and the wireless off), Ability to play 1080p streaming video online, weight (under 4lbs.)
So far, my 1005PR does all of that nicely...but the processor is getting outdated and very rarely struggles.
Mr. Mysterious -
-
You know the difference between 5.86 and 7.67 is actually 31%, right? Those aren't just "tiny" numbers. If Sandy lasts 5 hrs, AMD gets 6.5 hrs. Numbers are quite a bit different when you actually put it into perspective.
We'll find out more definitively when LLano hits and we compare battery life in
systems with larger screens. Scale should be similar to the E350 and we'll find out very, very soon. If not, I won't buy one. There's value to a notebook just being on and idle. That's what notebooks do a lot of the time. They sit there in class, in a meeting, connected to the internet. That instantly available notebook is more important than actual flops.
As far as marketing spin for AMD, I'll grant you that's true. I'll admit it because i'm not a fanboy like you are with Intel. That still doesn't change the fact that ppl don't need CPU power. Yes, AMD is bad at making fast CPUs. When have I not ever admitted that up front. It's also true that most people don't need fast CPUs. If you see any of my previous posts, I mention that time and time again. How many different ways can I say this? I can't. So this is my last effort for anyone so thickheaded to not get the point:
When does your system ever hang and you think to yourself, "Gee, I wish I had a faster CPU." I'll tell you when I think that. It's when I'm rendering in Adobe Premiere. That's it. I never need my CPU to be any faster. What percentage of the population complaining about system speed is really complaining about their CPU? Here's MG Siegler who didn't realize until October 2010 how fast an SSD really is. And he's tech writer at Tech Crunch. If he didn't know, what percent of the general population doesn't know?
Why do you want to keep talking about how good your horseshoes are or how bad AMD is at making horseshoes when we all drive cars now? -
Incidentally, I don't have the same dislike towards Brazos. It was a big improvement relative to Atom in terms of both CPU and GPU and the first time in years that AMD has pushed Intel to compete (Atom was pitiful and it was going to stay that way; they weren't even trying). But Llano is really just more of the same from AMD: worse CPU, better integrated graphics. They've been doing this for years with the only difference being that the integrated graphics are now on the CPU die and they have a much snazzier marketing term than before. It can work for the mass market if it's cheap and has a long battery life, but it's not an exciting product. -
It's impossible for Llano to be as power efficient as SB, with 400 idling shaders on chip.
They should make an 80SP version if they want to compete on power. That's what most people need and anyway since GPU power beyond video/flash acceleration is a lot less important than CPU power.
I also wouldn't consider E-350 CPU as adequate, I had an ULV C2D and it was dog slow with an SSD. -
-
-
-
Mr_Mysterious Like...duuuuuude
Yes, in the majority of these you need a very good GPU more than a good CPU.
Mr. Mysterious -
LOL yeah video gamers will use Llano. And if you as a gamer, somehow ended up with deciding between IGP and a discrete GPU, you would pick one of the laptops with upper medium discrete GPUs that crush the IGP. They compete with Llano with the price, the GPU laugh at the IGP, the laptop feature Optimus which gives you better battery time and you get a faster CPU.
But of course, you could pick the Llano instead of the Sandy bridge and have an discrete GPU inside the laptop as well. If so, what is the point with the awesome IGP? You will use the discrete GPU anyway, and you pay the price by picking the CPU that is the weakest...
I don`t see why people would pick Llano instead other than being brand (AMD) loyal -
Mr_Mysterious Like...duuuuuude
Umm? I don't think I'm a fanboy Cloudfire...I'm a fan of Intel's processors and AMD's discrete GPU's
edit: Can anyone confirm me if the E-350's iGPU (6630M, if I'm not mistaken) is better than NVIDIA's ION2?
Mr. Mysterious -
Out there (outside NBR forum) is plenty of people who need laptop for facebook, YouTube and movies who would be more satisfied with Llano/Zacate then Sandy Bridge/Atom.
-
abaddon4180 Notebook Virtuoso
I agree that more people would want/need a powerful GPU than a powerful CPU. Maybe not on these forums, but for most users Llano will offer more than enough CPU power.
I also think that Sandy Bridge offers enough graphics power for most users, though. To me Llano will compete because of price, providing battery life is comparable -
-
Mr_Mysterious Like...duuuuuude
You really want to alienate everyone here by talking about consoles?
Mr. Mysterious -
YouTube - Flash 10.1 YouTube 1080p HD Video on 11.6" CULV Notebook - Works Great!
-
Mr_Mysterious Like...duuuuuude
Your original point was that there is a bigger market for CPU-hungry users than GPU-hungry users.
I'm sorry, but I must respectfully disagree. In the spirit of peace, let's just agree to disagree. I'm dropping this discussion.
Mr. Mysterious -
Competing with Intel on price is not going to be good for AMD's profit margins though, especially since the chip's going to be bigger thanks to those 400 SP's that'll stay unused. They'll be forced to sell bigger chips for less money, just like they've been doing with the X6's. They should release a Llano with 80SP's to better compete on price with Intel.
-
Mr_Mysterious Like...duuuuuude
Lol, no. Just don't want to antagonize the mods. Plus, life is too short to quibble over minor details
Mr. Mysterious -
But I guess it is great for a portable computer. Maybe just not for a replacement. Seems to me the Llanos would drain more batteries, and might not be in a small form factor.
These machines are a rip-off in Canada. All around $500 at Best Buys... -
abaddon4180 Notebook Virtuoso
That sucks. Notebooks with Llano are supposedly gonna start at $500 here.
AMD Fusion Info Thread
Discussion in 'Hardware Components and Aftermarket Upgrades' started by Jayayess1190, Aug 1, 2010.