Trinity has dropped

yep. facepalm, especially since the A10 is realistically capped at 2.7ghz, and the A8 at 2.3ghz. And under full load, A10 averages 2.5ghz, and A8 2.1ghz

 

How does it do compare to i5?

 

Not well I'm afraid. The A10-4600m is comparable to an i3-2310m.

For pure CPU power an overclocked Llano is far superior, especially in multitasking.

Cinebench to compare:

A10-4600m (2.7Ghz): Single = 0.77, Multi = 2.03

Llano(3530mx @ 2.6Ghz): Single = 0.77, Multi = 3.03
Llano(3530mx @ 2.8Ghz): Single = 0.83, Multi = 3.23

I found a great comparison thread HERE

Trinity is slower than i5-2410m in single and multi by a fair deal. Llano holds in own in multi to an i7-2620m.

However you gotta remember that Trinity is not a true quad (2 dual core modules but each module gets 1 floating point, ect), and Llano is a true quad.

@atom_anti

I am interested to see if the A10-4600m will run in the older socket. Let us know how it goes.

 

The main thing that llano(2.4 pretty much is the max set up with just new paste and no mod ) brother me is game that like high clock and use only 1 or 2 core, was hoping if trinity get that by dropping some multithread, but seem not much improvement .

 

I do not know guys what Cinebench scores are meaning exactly or why so important, but I would prefer to see a Handbrake (x264) tests; overclocked Llano vs Trinity.

rmacgowa:

The part is on the way, hopefully early next week I can confirm if Trinity compatible with older Llano laptops.

 

Cinebench is a CPU bound rendering test. Since having Llano and Trinity on an identical GPU right now is not going to happen (Until you can prove the 4600m works in FS1), we cannot really see how well Trinity will perform gaming VS Llano, and CPU bound tests are the closest option.

@link and other trinity owners... why don't u go see BIOS-MODS about the possibility of some advanced options being unlocked. Who knows they may find something exciting in there.

 

Well, when some "real" desktop trinity review is made, then we can be more certain.

 

Tom's Hardware has had a desktop Trinity review up for a while.

 

I thought both Trinity and Llano were NOT true quad cores?

Thanks for being the first to try this upgrade. I am hoping that it works!

 

1-Don't use superpi, NEVER.
Superpi x87 code
AMD removed x87 code(same with 3dnow) since their modular arch appeared

Use handbrake/x264 HD 2nd pass latest builds (optimized for XOP intructions). Cinebench is USELESS for Bulldozer onwards.

It relies heavily in floating point:

Llano A6-A8 --> 4 floating point units
Trinity A8-10 --> 2 floating point units

2nd
A8 3530MX/3550MX --> 45w chip
A10 4600M --> 35w chip

The point with APU's is to strength a bit eh fp unit but sooner that job will go the gpu. Integer part recieve massive gains. Read tom's desktop prev for god's sake.

 

The setup was different. Llano had 2 to 4 seperate K10.5 cores, where as Trinity has 2 piledriver modules, and each module is a dual core.

Since these modules have to share specific operations like floating point.. it makes Trinity more like a hyper-threaded dual core system than a quad core. Go look at the Fusion info thread and you can get more info.

The thing that really confuses me is the reviewers saying that Trinity has a higher IPC (Instructions per Clock) than Llano.... yet we have proven that to be the exact opposite.

Ahhh looking at the post above me seems to make a lot more sense. So basically what you are saying is because the benchmarks rely on FP... that is why Trinity appears lagging behind Llano, yet in other real world situations (hopefully gaming) this will be opposite and Trinity will come out on top.

UPDATE: The TOMS hardware link specifically says Llano has a better IPC than Trinity, confirming what we have seen and showing opposite of what the A10-4600m review articles said.

I was referencing Llano in general. Users with the 35W Llano chips are also hitting 2.6Ghz and getting the same scores. Look at users with the A8-3500m. The 35/45 has shown little difference since we have begun overclocking. The only benefit the MX APUs have proven is the ability to run 1600mhz RAM, which has shown little to no improvement in performance. So yeah that argument (at least for Llano) has zero basis.

 

well as these benchmarks show. it's seems left alone trinity does beat llano but of course since we can over clock llano, trinity Is left sitting at stock performance (for now?)

 

hopefully someone can find a hack to OC.

 

some one asked for handbrake benchmarks? btw he is using and early openCL build not supporting 64bit configs

 

OC a mobile part and it's way beyond the tdp(you can also undervolt) but is a feature AMD didn't care about, same 99% of APU users and OEM with the most of time "just enough cooling".

Want to compare A10-4600?

A10-4600M stock vs A8-3520M stock

Now all future mobile APU's will be locked down on OC(it was meant to be that way, same for intel chips). You should consider Llano mobile OC a bug rather than a must.

 

Bug or not, the end result is that you can get better performance out of Llano than with Trinity.

Leaving the chips unlocked was one of the edges AMD had over Intel (what was the reason why I considered Llano over an i5 in the first place), and unfortunately AMD decided not to capitalize on that this gen.

 

Yes, so this test shows Cinebench scores are meaning not much. Need to test Trinity in real situations; games and programs that we are using.
Handbrake is a commonly used "useful" program, I would recommend to take more attentions to these scores than Cinebench. Handbrake pushes to work all the 4 available cores and we can see Trinity can beat the stock-clocked Llano.

 

try wPrime if you have spare time?

 

cinebench also pushes all 4 cores.
and Handbrake doesn't paint a better picture.

handbrake opencl uses igp, and the trinity igp is more powerful, so it sees an additional 3% boost over llano, compared to cpu-only.

In strictly cpu test for handbrake, You have to keep in mind that we are comparing 2.3ghz trinity to a 1.5ghz llano under full cpu load. Trinity has a more aggressive turbo, so it's more realistically 2.5 ghz. On the other hand, llano turbo does not work under full load, so you are stuck at 1.5ghz.

Trinity shows a 22-25% lead over llano. But it is also clocked 53-66% faster.
Think about that for a minute. You clock 53% higher, and only gain 22% benefit.....
simply OC your llano by a cool 25%, and you have A10 beat.

the only thing that trinity wins big in is battery life.

i can try that later, but what's so good about wprime ?

 

It just like super-pi as a synthetic bench, just more updated and supported.

"Pure CPU"

 

Cinebench are very good to know how the CPU behaves in content creation software. For start it is a proxy of Cinema4D rendering engine a professional application and specially relevant for anyone that uses softimage, 3dsmax, and independent render engines like vray,maxwell, arnold etc... and renders 3D images.
Cinebench represents a program that many are using, i would say that is more comprehensive than more simple benchmarks.

 

just did test.

A8-4500m
wprime 2.09
1024M - 1002.771 seconds.

Nothing else running in background

 

As can be seen Trinity is a disaster - yes that is the word- for CPU related stuff, specially content creation.

Here in 3dsMax Llano beats it. And it isn't overcloked.

Benchmark Results: Content Creation : AMD Trinity On The Desktop: A10, A8, And A6 Get Benchmarked!

 

I think amds biggest mistakes were not getting a 22nm process to compete with Intel, and not making their chip as easy to OC as llano is.

and another mistake forcing two cores to share that FPU, it's not even real quad core as far as that benchmark is concerned

 

Benchmark Results: Media Encoding : AMD Trinity On The Desktop: A10, A8, And A6 Get Benchmarked!
Benchmark Results: File Compression : AMD Trinity On The Desktop: A10, A8, And A6 Get Benchmarked!
Benchmark Results: Adobe CS5 And 6 : AMD Trinity On The Desktop: A10, A8, And A6 Get Benchmarked!

If you want something with 3D rendering, you shouldn't be even looking at Trinity.

 

2.2ghz 618sec while browsing
6xx sec is also what SB i5 do.

Try some game? consider D3 is unplayble for me on llano w.o CPU oc, maybe trinity can do better? game usually like high clock compare to more core.

 

I don't have d3. I've only played maxpayne3 on this, with normal settings. It's not very demanding, so it ran smoothly.

However, with all the apps and games we have today, it looks like this is just a pc with average performance. Any performance gains will be due to the faster igp, or pairing with faster dgpu.
But in cpu-bound games (like d3, i'm assuming), trinity sucks.

We already saw how the A10 was beaten by core i7 with the weaker hd4000.

 

I'm not sure... but the new Windows 8 Scheduler won't enhace the modular architecture from AMD? (Piledriver and Bulldozer)

 

that was rather disappointing

 

What? Man you start talking too much silly thing about AMD, A10 have never been beaten by i7, not even in CPU demanding games. In that particular D3 game, the strongest Ivy I7 (value $1000) far behind A10 ($157). Pretty sure even with my old A8-3550MX, I can beet all the Intel APUs...

 

I'm sorry but exactly how is the I7 + GT650 a more elegant setup? it's a mid range GPU, that can't interact at all with the CPU, and while you have this fantasy that AMD isn't willing to coorporate with anyone in making a switching mechanic reality disagrees with you.

I can think of a lot of reasons why not to support a company, anti competitive behaviour, clear criminal actions, not supporting an Open Source community, etc.

nVidia isn't given much choice are they?

What seems to escape everyone is that Trinity is focused on balance and power, it's a performance uplift from Llano while using less power, and having a more intelligent Turbo feature, you get more graphical performance out of it than you do out of any of Intels CPU's with HD4000, and it's power efficiency keeps up with Intels 22nm, what's not to like? And the CPU is faster, you show Cinebench, which still has issues with AMD's module design, when the CPU shows it's strength it acts much more like a Quad core.

 

I think people are mostly upset about how anti climactic trinity is. Llano was a budget gamers wet dream and you could over clock to your hearts content. AMD really has some nerve naming their technology cool things like "piledriver" and "bulldozer" when their BEST chips can't hold a candle to Intel's worst. If amd can get switchable graphics and crossfire to work properly then we would have something.

 

Llano is just one year old, Trinity brings improvements to both CPU and GPU, and don't give me the MHz comparison, it's irrelevant when talking about two differenct uarchs, Llano wasn't meant to be overclockable, outside of Desktops, so while I enjoy it myself with my Llano laptop, it was hardly a selling feature, and OC'ing CPU never helped gaming much anyway.

And the last line is simply incorrect, AMD's best CPU 8150 atm, is competitive with 2500K, hardly Intels worst chip, if you're refering to "APU's" you're way too focused on the CPU, for most tasks today you really don't need a core CPU, if I was thinking like you I could say exactly the same although with more accuracy, if I just focused on GPU, and there are intel CPU's outside Core I series, there are plenty of intel CPU's Trinity beats.

In any case, with Trinity you get a consistently better overall experience, than you do with any Intel "APU", so on it's own Trinity is a good improvement, it shows a few of BD's shortcomings, but in the mobile space it's as good a design as you can have for a market that's generally less demanding on CPU performance.

I haven't seen any indication that Enduro doesn't work.

 

Trinity is appealing to the general consumer, but for people with some dedication for best cost/performance(most of NBR), it is not there.

non OC'd llano with a midrange gpu like 6650/6750 has cpu bottleneck in many games.

I think it is nonetheless a good business direction(if it is intended), as getting money from people like us who place cost/performance ratio at top is impossible.

The advantage of trinity over low end cpu + low end gpu is probably reduced laptop size, battery life etc which is more appealing to the mass compare to people who oc any tiny bit of headroom out of their system.

 

I take back my agreement that the hd4000 beats the a10 It doesn't really, and i would wager getting an i7 worth hd 4000 is more expensive than getting an a10.

 

dv6-7010us A8-4500m introductory price is $550 at Staples.

needs to be below $450.

 

EDIT: Ok, nevermind. I think I figured out whats going on with these two computers and the sale at Staples. Apparently there is a $100 instant savings & $50 easy rebate. So that brings the dv6 down to $549.99 and the g6 to $399.99.

I am confused by the Video Graphics Memory of 2GB in the ad for the g6 and 3GB in the ad for the dv6. Could this just be a typo of some sort or am i reading this wrong? Do they include a discrete GPU or no? I think I will go to my local Staples and see if I can test them out.

See this link here:

http://slickdeals.net/f/4773582-Staples-Ad-Jun-24-30-100-back-in-SR-on-a-custom-return-address-stamp-HP-g6-2123-us-15-6-Laptop-399-99-HP-Pavilion-dv6-7010us-Laptop-549-99-AR-B-M-Coupons-and-more

The price says $699.99. I don't understand? $550 seemed a lot better, maybe even $450 if on special sale but this just isn't the case.

HP Pavilion dv6-7010us 15.6" Laptop | Staples®


Also worth noting, this HP g6-2123-us is offered with a Trinity APU while the g6 listed on HP's website currently isn't. What came to my mind was Trinity A10-4600M upgrade candidate! $549.99

On page 16, chapter 3 of this g6's manual lists spare part numbers for:
1. A10-4600M as one of the APUs compatible with this g6
2. Two different heatsink, one for UMA graphics and one for discrete
3. 3 system boards; UMA, discrete 1GB and discrete 2GB (but what GPUs? 7670M/7730M like the dv6? will it even be offered once CTO?)

On page 41 it lists compatible wireless cards with Bluetooth.


HP g6-2123-us 15.6" Laptop | Staples®

 

The c/p of trinity is meh atm, if trinity can get like 6650m performance , 550 is fine. But consider trinity is mere 20-40% ahead of HD4000/llano, and I can get a 6650m today for 400.

Unless people absolutely need to game on battery or if longer battery on a 15.6" really matters.

11"-13" would be appealing though.

 

oh boy.

trinity pricing is pretty sad.

Stripped models:
A6-4400m dual core G6 = $400
A8-4500m dv6 = $550.
A10 = $650

I'm pretty sure the core i3-3110m will beat the A6 for the same price.

 

Wow, these prices are very good, even the Brazos goes for more than $400.

 

Prices are good considering AMD has faster and more energy efficient APUs than Intel, however lack of overclocking ability makes me disappoint as well, especially Trinity not compatible with old Llano laptops.

 

i knew A10 would not work with our mobos; the pin config is different.

Now you just have to wait for some guy to upgrade his new A4 after they come out.

 

Nope, the pin layout exactly the same, otherwise would not fit into the socket. It is bios or who knows what kind of issue...

 

oh, interesting. maybe you just need to hack the bios and add the cpu string

seems like the motherboard chipset is the same as the llanos- a75/a70m. You may have to download a dell bios that supports trinity, and see what string you have to add.


oh wait, i just read trinity uses r2 version socket. appears to be a hardware limitation. no chance it will work.

 

This is sad news but was suspected. Thanks for being the brave one to test this Atom_Anti!

I would've bought the A6-4400M HP g6 + A10-4600M if I had the money right now but even that notebook isn't my ideal Trinity notebook. I hope Acer, Asus, Dell, HP, Lenovo, Samsung, Toshiba and others start releasing some Trinity notebooks. Its been very quiet and not much action going on.

I am also feeling disappointed for few reasons:

1. Prices are relatively high
2. Selection is scarce

 

The idiots need to include Displayports or some other killer feature into at *least* dv series and/or Envy.

I saw a laptop at Sam's Club with E-series APU for $400 a couple days ago, also the first A10-5700 desktop I've seen in the wild. Certainly at such a low price, the A6-4400M is a huge performance upgrade over E-series and should actually get that absurdly long battery life too. 2-3x faster than E-450 at...everything? For $400.

And I think the dv6z at HP starts around $550 again, apparently there's a coupon code which allows upgraded screen/gfx/CPU/keyboard for about $750-800. Which is pretty balanced in this market.

 

http://bizsupport1.austin.hp.com/bc/docs/support/SupportManual/c03216834/c03216834.pdf

This is the manual of the dv6 7000, somehow they say processor is soldered?

 

Could be. OEMs do this so you can't do the upgrades yourself and they can charge you for the better chip. Happens on some desktops/All-in-ones as well.

The Trinity sockets wouldn't fit Llanos anyway if this is what you were hoping for. The sockets are different (pin placements) due to the difference in die size and the new "unified" north bridge.

edit -just saw that's what the pdf states. Processor is indeed soldered onto the PCB.

 

haha. soldered........ as if there weren't enough Fail already.

 

Trinity HP g4 notebook (shares same motherboards as the Trinity HP g6), socketed up to A10-4600M, 7670M with 1 or 2GB 900MHz DDR3 video memory. I would've liked to have seen GDDR5 used instead. I wonder if we'll see these go online anytime soon (CTO).

g4
http://h10032.www1.hp.com/ctg/Manual/c03276119.pdf

g6
http://h10032.www1.hp.com/ctg/Manual/c03277661.pdf


According to notebookcheck, the 7670M (essentially a 6650M) is a little head of a Nvidia GT630M and just about tied with the integrated 7660G. It is however a bit slower (11%) than an older GT555M which isn't that bad actually.

"Dual-graphics" is supported but I wonder how good it actually is this time around?