Dent1I love how you deliberately ignored my previous post which was aimed directly at you. My arguments were too water tight for you:)

Again I say: The slide says "56% increase in visual performance" - AMD didn't say gaming. Visual performance can be any moving 2D or 3D effect. You jumped to the conclusion that they meant gaming.

No I ignored it because it was stupid. First of all you almost insult my friends, great. And second yes, they probably mean that Llano plays movies 56% faster. Yeah I was thinking about that. pff please...

BenetanegiaNo I ignored it because it was stupid. First of all you almost insult my friends, great.

No. You ignored me because you had no defence against my logic.

Firstly, I never insulted your friend. I just stated that your friend should take accountability for a bad purchase decision. He bought an low end APU thinking it was enthusiast grade. His fault!

BenetanegiaAnd second yes, they probably mean that Llano plays movies 56% faster. Yeah I was thinking about that. pff please...

Not all 2D and 3D visual visuals are games and movies. Duh

ahhh love it AMD! now wheres my cheap ultrabook? :D

need to replace my APU Bobcat

Dent1No. You ignored me because you had no defence against my logic.

Keep dreaming.

Firstly, I never insulted your friend. I just stated that your friend should take accountability for a bad purchase decision. He bought an low end APU thinking it was enthusiast grade. His fault!

Not at all. AMD has marketed their APUs as gaming capable and they also heard from people like Vulpesveritas. Did you even read this thread? Almost everyone is telling me it can play games, even though I know that's a stretch, because at the settings that it can a SB can too, so it's a moot point. But thing is they were expecting it to play some of the games they had, not the latest and greatest, but at least on decent settings and 1080p. Not even expecting to use AA. They had HD3870 and 8800 GTS (G80) and based on what people say, and the fact that it has 400 SPs vs 320 on HD3870, they thought that Llano would be better. Not a chance.

Not all 2D and 3D visual visuals are games and movies. Duh

So what is it? lol come on explain what exactly requires the superior AMD GPU that is not gaming or video acceleration. Enlighten me. I guess it's 56% on DirectDraw? OH because if that's the case, it's a must have!!

I sure hope amf delivets on their performance claims because im tired of explainjng to folks that there is nothing wrong with their laptop. Yes after,just installing an antivirus program and office and a program or 2 your new machine crawls because that great bargin is at its limits. Weak cpu skimpy memory and tiny hdd full of photos.:shadedshu

BenetanegiaSo what is it? lol come on explain what exactly requires the superior AMD GPU that is not gaming or video acceleration. Enlighten me. I guess it's 56% on DirectDraw? OH because if that's the case, it's a must have!!

CAD, 3D Modelling software. Studio Max, Maya, Softimage etc

It could be 56% on any visual task; if you want the answer please email AMD and one of their representatives will tell you specifically. But "visual performance" doesn't necessarily mean gaming otherwise the word "gaming" would have been used in the slide. It could very well be gaming, but we dont know for sure, so stop making assumptions.

BenetanegiaKeep dreaming.



Not at all. AMD has marketed their APUs as gaming capable and they also heard from people like Vulpesveritas. Did you even read this thread? Almost everyone is telling me it can play games, even though I know that's a stretch, because at the settings that it can a SB can too, so it's a moot point. But thing is they were expecting it to play some of the games they had, not the latest and greatest, but at least on decent settings and 1080p. Not even expecting to use AA. They had HD3870 and 8800 GTS (G80) and based on what people say, and the fact that it has 400 SPs vs 320 on HD3870, they thought that Llano would be better. Not a chance.


So what is it? lol come on explain what exactly requires the superior AMD GPU that is not gaming or video acceleration. Enlighten me. I guess it's 56% on DirectDraw? OH because if that's the case, it's a must have!!

Well, one of llano's biggest issues is, as we all probably know, memory bandwidth
That aside, visual/ flash heavy websites may benefit.

Dent1It could very well be gaming, but we dont know for sure, so stop making assumptions.

dont tell him to do that. I find it quite amusing how much of an ass he makes out of himself when he thread craps in any news topic that has to do with AMD.

That right there is the epitome of a democRATicextreemist
:rolleyes:
:laugh:

eidairaman1dont tell him to do that. I find it quite amusing how much of an ass he makes out of himself when he thread craps in any news topic that has to do with AMD.

That right there is the epitome of a democRATicextreemist
:rolleyes:
:laugh:

Yeah sorry to break the bubble for you fanboys. It's fun to see how AMD and Apple fanboys have come to be of the same type.

Meanwhile, somewhere in the real world:

www.anandtech.com/show/5626/ivy-bridge-preview-core-i7-3770k

It's simple, 3/4 of people just don't game so they don't need a GPU. Of the rest of people, the gamers, use dedicated GPUs.

store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/videocard/

I don't see many iGPUs there.

And the rest of people with very low gaming standards and/or requirements are served mostly equally by Llano/Trinity and SB/IB. Maybe SB was too slow in some situations, IB just isn't.

And the bottom line is that in most of the cases when someone is looking for a CPU the CPU that is faster wins. When someone is looking for a GPU, the fastest GPU wins, and this one is always of the discrete kind, either AMD or Nvidia. It's simple.

In the meantime Llano and Trinity have their purpose and their user base, and a market segment where they do a better job than the competition, I never denied that, but this market, as much as it hurts to the poor AMD fanboy, is small and it does not represent a circusntance in which AMD is superior in any form or way in the large picture. For the average joe, for most of them, Intel is still a much better option right now. Granted better prices from Intel would be nice, but from their perspective and the retailers why should they lower the price when they face so little competition? So here's hoping that AMD brings something good eventually, Trinity IMO, based on AMD's marketing slide is not. Why? Because I've come to know them and I know perfectly that their 29% and 56% figures mean that real performance will be much much worse.

So that is all and please by all means keep taking it personal with me, because I find it extremely amusing how deluded AMD fanboys are, expecting miracles after every turn, and being angry at anything or anyone who dares bringing in some chunk of reality. I was an AMD fanboy back in the days BTW, but after two strikes (Core2, Phenom) I came back to reality, that wonderful place where people actually get the best CPU that they can buy, without having to resort to wet dreams and rainbows and unicorns to pretend that their CPU is the best.

you make me laugh with your fanboy chat ,and the fact your in a trinity thread bashing AMD in your free time so much, as is obvious to everyone on this forum, ie AMD thread posted youll be in their pissing on amd all day , effin looser ,get a life ,their ya go thats just aimed at you, take that personal

no one is so deluded ,besides your friends(who get advice from? u) so as to think a lano or trinity system does all a high end pc gamer wants but then again add a cheap, not dear discrete gfx in xfire and it will play anything. tell your mates that , give them some of your good advice intsead of us lot that way they wont be disapointed with what they get ,id advise anyone asking you anything to look at wizzs review from now on though as you chat shit too much

BenetanegiaI was an AMD fanboy back in the days BTW

now you switched to the dark side eh, so you have allways been a fanboi tard then, i favour none of em ,im quite happy the arm powered future is on the horizon more cpu vendors means more competition ,lower prices etc and hopefully less fanboi tards

oh and from an earlier snipe my rigs listed faggot ,yours aint ,too shit??? mines amd biased due to the time i bought and rescources only not because i believe a phenomII is better in any way then anything intel make ,but for 96 quid they didnt have a competeing chip(intel) simples

theoneandonlymrkno one is so deluded ,besides your friends(who get advice from? u) so as to think a lano or trinity system does all a high end pc gamer wants but then again add a cheap, not dear discrete gfx in xfire and it will play anything. tell your mates that , give them some of your good advice intsead of us lot that way they wont be disapointed with what they get ,id advise anyone asking you anything to look at wizzs review from now on though as you chat shit too much

Yeah I am not going to be so retard to tell my friends to buy a crappy CPU with decent low end iGPU, just to tell them to buy a dedicated GPU afterwards or along with it. That is the most stupid thing I've ever seen. Did you just lost your second neuron or your red tinted glasses are blinding you too much?

I never told them to buy Llano, I'm not stupid and if you had pay any attention instead of trying to insult me in every turn because you don't like the reality that your beloved AMD has to face, you'd have noticed that when someone wants to game, even the slightest, my ONLY recommendation is going with discrete.

I reccomend you read before posting and like I said, really, refrain from replying with posts that make no sense and are so stupid.

Now regarding reviews, Wizzard's reviews in particular, if you actually read them instead of being an asshole and a little badmouthed boy, you would have noticed that Llano+dedicated GPU is only marginally better than the GPU alone and often times the dedicated GPU alone is better.



(And this is with Llano as the base system btw, if the dedicated GPU had been used along with SB, it would probably match or exceed the LLano+GPU result)

So for the nth time. For anything related to gaming dedicated GPU all the way. Scrap intermediary iGPUs that are useless in any real gaming situation and go for what it's best for you*.

Eagerly awayting the next insult and failed attempt at a reply.

* And what is this best thing? Well if you can't afford SB because your local retailers rapes you with Intel prices, then the best is an Athlon II and maybe even Phenom II is suitable on your price range. But don't buy overpriced (as a CPU) APU if you intend to game, buy the $50 cheaper CPU that is exactly just as fast and then buy a dedicated GPU.

Oookay quick point back to reality, A: theoneandonlymrk while I do feel ben has a slight bias against AMD, I do agree with him you have to take this with salt given AMD's marketing department lately. He backs up most things with facts, and therefore holds at least some credibility for his words, and insults are juvenile.
@ben in the end, most people don't need the power of a core 2 duo. Or the igpu of llano. Llano 's IPC is actually quite close to a core 2 as well.
And with web browsers becoming GPU accelerated, the main part of what most people do will be just as fast on AMD or Intel. If you really want to make someone see a faster computer for a "normal person " give them an SSD instead of a HDD.

I am a huge fan of H61+Pentium G840 for ultra low-end solutions. I am not entirely sold on Llano for anything but HTPC's and standard desktop use (not really gaming per say). The CPU-side of Llano is very, very, weak, and the GPU is only good for light tasks.

BenetanegiaEagerly awayting the next insult and failed attempt at a reply.

because your an arguement loveing troll:p


your entitled to your opinions ,as am i, and my main advice to you is to not advise your mates
your not seeing the whole picture by all accounts HSA again, an average joe buying a shit prebuilt over the last few years has ended up with an intel GMA system 9 out of 10 times, they may now end up with a lano or trinity one, you and i both know which is going to seem the better system to these begewled playing muppets and its not intels, simples.

anyone who knows whats what, wont buy one i agree and i understand your point that an intel with a discrete can do the same job for a bit more money ,but stateing that these are not needed and useless is over the top ,they will play 99% of games on a laptop at playable levels to most, they may be stepping up from an exbox or a shitter pc ,so for the money they dont seem so bad,
again im no fanboy ,that be you, though your not a perm fanboi ,you move around co's yes

VulpesveritasI do feel ben has a slight bias against AMD

I have a bias against AMD fanboys and ther retarded hive mind. It reminds me so much of Apple fanboys lately. If AMD has to succeed it has to do it on its own, not because of the fanboyism of some and the charity of others. I'm not going to suggest slower and more power thirsty AMD CPUs just for the sole purpose of helping AMD.

@ben in the end, most people don't need the power of a core 2 duo. Or the igpu of llano. Llano 's IPC is actually quite close to a core 2 as well.
And with web browsers becoming GPU accelerated, the main part of what most people do will be just as fast on AMD or Intel. If you really want to make someone see a faster computer for a "normal person " give them an SSD instead of a HDD.

I've never said that Llano would be useless, and for the average guy both will do the job, but if Intel is offering a better option at the same price or lower, it's just biased not to head your recomendations that way. Llano is anough and so is a SB based Pentium G CPU and the latter is way cheaper in most cases. So why not say it? Well because AMD fanboys will jump at you I guess, but I never back up from a challenge.

And yes my main point in this thread has always been that these slides are probably extremely exagerated, not to mention they are based on estimates and not actual performance data. So the fact they said 29% and 56% and not something like 100%-200% is quite revealing. Of course we can also assume tey made a U turn and AMD marketing team is being honest, but unicorn hunting season does not start until November so...

theoneandonlymrkprebuilt over the last few years has ended up with an intel GMA system 9 out of 10 times, they may now end up with a lano or trinity one, you and i both know which is going to seem the better system to these begewled playing muppets and its not intels, simples.

Most of them will probably end up with a SB system and they will love it, because they don't need GPU grunt and the CPU is much faster.

And if you are really comparing Intel's old GMA's to Sandy or better yet, Ivy Bridge and putting them in the same bag in any kind of form, really, get yourself informed ok? This is not 2008.

For a mobile solution at a decent price point Trinity doesn't seem bad at all considering the 720p resolution that will dominate that landscape. I wouldn't recommend a desktop Trinity product for a guy (or gal) that wants to max everything out but for media and basic tasks an APU isn't a terrible choice. A lot of what I'm reading here is basically stating "under no circumstances is Llano/Trinity a reasonable choice". Yeah a Pentium and gt 440 will work for most people but that isn't the only end all solution.

BenetanegiaOriginally Posted by Vulpesveritas
I do feel ben has a slight bias against AMD

I have a bias against AMD fanboys and ther retarded hive mind. It reminds me so much of Apple fanboys lately. If AMD has to succeed it has to do it on its own, not because of the fanboyism of some and the charity of others. I'm not going to suggest slower and more power thirsty AMD CPUs just for the sole purpose of helping AMD.


Quote:
@ben in the end, most people don't need the power of a core 2 duo. Or the igpu of llano. Llano 's IPC is actually quite close to a core 2 as well.
And with web browsers becoming GPU accelerated, the main part of what most people do will be just as fast on AMD or Intel. If you really want to make someone see a faster computer for a "normal person " give them an SSD instead of a HDD.

I've never said that Llano would be useless, and for the average guy both will do the job, but if Intel is offering a better option at the same price or lower, it's just biased not to head your recomendations that way. Llano is anough and so is a SB based Pentium G CPU and the latter is way cheaper in most cases. So why not say it? Well because AMD fanboys will jump at you I guess, but I never back up from a challenge.

And yes my main point in this thread has always been that these slides are probably extremely exagerated, not to mention they are based on estimates and not actual performance data. So the fact they said 29% and 56% and not something like 100%-200% is quite revealing. Of course we can also assume tey made a U turn and AMD marketing team is being honest, but unicorn hunting season does not start until November so...

and my main point to you is stop being so extreme , you stated intel as light years ahead of amd in cpu design ,not true

and slightly unimportant my AMD system, ultras all games ,and ive not had to wait around for something to happen since dual cores died out(for main use)

and also your drumming down projections on a slide ,and makeing purchaseing descisions based off them , this is stupid get what the reviews says is best now for the money you can afford, ie hold off the mega harsh criticism of a product untill the things out ,and even then what makes you the expert to tell all whats best to buy, thats wizz's job , judeging by the my mates comments you have passed out your not the Source for top tips.

if you arent a troll try and be more constructive and realistic, and if i were a fanboi why havent you and all, seen me trashing intel and nvidia, you wont ill pick and choose sku's, to not like not companys, thats stupid a company cares not for me, i care not for it and even now ive an Intel and AMD system and i use both at the same time all, the time and do note from my honestly listed Sig rigs that the onbaord gmahd300 on my intel pc is so bad you cant even watch films on it(yeh its from the dark past)so has a GT240 in it(oh no its nvidia ill burn)

dzeroA lot of what I'm reading here is basically stating "under no circumstances is Llano/Trinity a reasonable choice".

Nope, that's not the point being made. In most circunstances users buying low end systems will benefit a lot more from the 50% faster CPU than they will from the 50-100% faster GPU. The ones that would benefit from the faster GPU, most of them, if they were properly informed, they would buy a dedicated GPU. The only crsunstances in which LLano is a better option is:

1- Enthusiasts or very informed people who know exactly the use that is going to be given to it. That is, they want it for light gaming and they know exactly which games are going to be run on them. A controlled situation where no surprises are going to happen in the form of "Oh it doesn't run this game and it's the only one I bought the system for".

2- As a very last resort parachute, in which the completely uninformed buyer, buys a system with iGPU, but still intends to use it for gaming, in which case with Llano they would end up with a lightly better, yet still dull situation for what PC gaming is, and would have been much better off if someone informed them properly.

And that's it, as enthusiast we will be much more helpful to others if we recommend the fastest CPU to the ones who are going to benefit more from it, and recommending the best GPU for those who are going to use them. And better GPU is always dedicated.

@theonearonlymrk

Intel is 50% faster than AMD when comaring chips of same size, FFS, come back to reality, that's certainly being light years ahead.


www.anandtech.com/show/5626/ivy-bridge-preview-core-i7-3770k/5

How can I not claim you're a fanboy when you constantly tell me that Llano or AMD CPU in general is equal to Intel when there's no much clear evidence against it? Don't you see it smells of blind fanboy?

Sorry Mussels I'm just trying to explain myself, this is all.

sigh... just stop. we'll have to resort to infractions or deletions if this continues.

BenetanegiaIntel is 50% faster than AMD when comaring chips of same size, FFS, come back to reality, that's certainly being light years ahead.

no thats not light years fella, if intel were selling quantum computers ,that would be light years, set your scale to that deffinition

and back in the real world joe blogs has two new bought laptops one a lano based apu system ,one an intel dual core ivy with HD3000/or 4000 , guy(probably lady:D:p) presses load page ,to play bejewled , which cpu looks faster /better to her , neither she'll not notice.

as someone else said an ssd put in the lano or the SB/ivy lapy would be the only thing that would change her experience.

now the same girl as does many plays sims, not a heavy gfx game , which is she going to think is the best lapy, if neither had ssd and the lano was trinity v IB then the trinity wins hands down imho based on speculative nonesense but also commen sense

ps i know this lady and her daughter and her daughters mate ,theyre all sims mad

BenetanegiaHow can I not claim you're a fanboy when you constantly tell me that Llano or AMD CPU in general is equal to Intel when there's no much clear evidence against it? Don't you see it smells of blind fanboy?

not once have i said amd's cpu element or any sku is equal to intels, what i have said is that in this price bracket trinity will make a better experience for the end user all round and i have repeatedly said that AMD is not That far behind intel in cpu performance, ie in everyday use the average man can do all he wants on amd or intel sufficiently and i count my own rig as quite capable for the money spent ,i could have gone intel this round but i simply couldnt get enough pciex lanes out of intel for the money,

you need to understand that not all of us need/want the same things, im not out for the absolute fastest cpu, i simply could not afford it ,hardly anyone can as itll be an intel:p
all i needed was all my games maxed at 1080P, and for 96 quid ,despite what your saying intel had NO quad chip for that money and HT makes not a QUAD

theoneandonlymrknow the same girl as does many plays sims, not a heavy gfx game , which is she going to think is the best lapy

Both, since SB will handle it perfectly.

However she will later try to compress many files, she will try to run some macros or compile a few things and then she will see a 50% faster experience on the SB/IB. Tadda. Case closed.

BenetanegiaHowever she will later try to compress many files, she will try to run some macros or compile a few things and then she will see a 50% faster experience on the SB/IB. Tadda. Case closed.

no not at all , in the HSA future the AMD chip will destroy the intel in compresion etc
but till then she'll probably do what she has done for the last 10 years and go and make a brew whilst it finishes compressing:p

no one gives a shit about compression speeds when they go pc world and grab the shiniest:nutkick: lapy fool

and no IB is not as capable in the Gfx department as trinity/lano and no it isnt as feature rich in its gfx department , IB has no steady video etc etc and in gpgpu terms IB gpu is incredibally poor , a long time ago maths co proccessors came out , do you remember that, i remember maths co pro cards :roll: well a gpu in the next Couple of years will make them look pretty poor at maths and AMD's is way ,way more advanced then intels :banghead:HSA, HSA HSA hSA
google HSA and this isnt something AMD are moveing towards on their own Nvidia Arm even intel are stepping down this GPGPU path that you cant see and havent apparently used:confused:

you not used cuda , i mean bringing up compresion , my shit phenomII could equally use winrar GPGPU accelerated version and beat an IB in compression speed

@ben when an A6 and a Pentium powered laptops are the same price, yes I'll sell the A6 over the pentium as the better decision, and i do have a preference for AMD over Intel. as i feel its both a better buy much of the time with budget products and they dont have the criminal record intel has.
Also@ ben do you feel that makes me a fanboy? :or rather, in your opinion am i part of that 'hive mind?'

theoneandonlymrkand no IB is not as capable in the Gfx department as trinity/lano and no it isnt as feature rich in its gfx department , IB has no steady video etc etc and in gpgpu terms IB gpu is incredibally poor

How does a normal user, the every day "joe blogs" you were talking about, benefit from GPGPU functionality? Exactly. HD2/3/4000 is fine for most users, sure, the GPU in Llano is faster (although not by much) but at the cost of the CPU being maybe half as capable.

theoneandonlymrkyou not used cuda , i mean bringing up compresion , my shit phenomII could equally use winrar GPGPU accelerated version and beat an IB in compression speed

:confused:

BenetanegiaYeah sorry to break the bubble for you fanboys. It's fun to see how AMD and Apple fanboys have come to be of the same type.

So pointing out that you misread, misunderstood or misconstrued the fact that "visual performance" doesn't mean gaming necessarily makes us a fanboy?

Had the slide been about an Intel processor, we would have said the same thing "visual performance" doesn't necessarily mean gaming regardless of whom makes the processor.

I guess I'm an Intel fanboy now?

Edit: on a serious note. I would agree for gaming and APU's don't mix. A dedicated card is required for any level of performance and longevity if one intends on gaming, Trinity probably won't satisfy the needs of a real gamer. But on balance "visual performance" still doesnt mean gaming necessarily. So lets wait it out.