AMD A-Series APU Smashes IGP Performance Records...Surprise

[inferKNOX]

If the APU is doing so well, I can't wait for see Zambezi in action!

[TheMailMan78]

Its amazing. This is the future of computers.

[Thassodar]

Originally Posted by TheMailMan78

Its amazing. This is the future of computers.

I have to take a screenshot of this:

TheMailMan78 saying something POSITIVE for once. The end is nigh puny mortals, for this is surely a sign of the Apocalypse.

[TheMailMan78]

Originally Posted by Thassodar

I have to take a screenshot of this:

TheMailMan78 saying something POSITIVE for once. The end is nigh puny mortals, for this is surely a sign of the Apocalypse.

I say postive things all the time. Your just new.

[dir_d]

Originally Posted by TheMailMan78

I say postive things all the time. Your just new.

if all the time is every 6 months then yea you do say positive things all the time

[TheMailMan78]

Originally Posted by dir_d

if all the time is every 6 months then yea you do say positive things all the time

I can't help my superior intellect is wasted upon the masses. It over flows with levels of win that cannot be comprehended with the force of one thousand suns.

[Dj-ElectriC]

That performance level is somewhat weird, its not HTPC but not gamer. somewhere in the middle
but i have to say, im a bit suprised from the scores, they are even higher then i expected

[beautyless]

HD 5570 TDP avg = 35w
AMD Phenom II 925 @ 2.8GHz = 95w.
AMD 890FX Northbridge Chipset = 18w.
AMD SB850 Southbridge Chipset = 4w.
Total = 152w.

AMD A8-3850 APU = 100w.
AMD Hudson D3 = ??w
Total = 1xx w.

many of desktop fusion processors tdp are stay at 65w.
and notbook part tdp is 35 - 45w.

And don't forget that fusion processors physical are smaller than PhenomII + First chipset + Second chipset + Graphic card + Video memory.
It's cut Graphic card, Videos memory and second chipset while performance still close neck to neck.

And today IGP is far slower than fusion graphics.

The only possible platform that closer in overall performance to Llano is Intel sandy bridge with HD 3000 graphics with some optimization.

[lashton]

Originally Posted by Sihastru

Looks OK-ish, unfortunately it's probably a suicide run (probably) on water at more then 1.5V... not very indicative of the retail product. I don't want to know the TDP at the time of testing...

I'm more interested in the CPU part of the APU, if that's not competitive, it could have a gazillion SP's on the integrated GPU and still not sell. AMD always had a better integrated GPU then Intel, and still their CPU's did not sell as hot cakes.

And judging by the intensity their marketing department up-talks the GPU part, their CPU part looks like a flop. Because a "balanced" APU is not just about the GPU.

where have you been hiding thier Phenom II and Athlon II Range have been massive retail performers for them! lets face it and people forget the Phenom II line is 2 generations behind Intel right now

[NC37]

Originally Posted by Thatguy

Heres where you off balanace, users judge computer speed by the interactivity of the GUI and how it responds to user requests. given the way these chips can handily accelerate many of the new gui's, this should be a pretty big seller. Even better is the fact that these chips also support opencl. Once opencl gets more adoption for things like transcoding, the cpu power will become less relevant.

the benefits to laptop/oems is going to be lower parts counts and cheaper boards not to mention lower power requirements. this is a win/win for many market segments. AMD is planning for a bulldozer APU in 2012 and I have a feeling they are going to move to all bulldozer cores at some point. They do have some super low wattage apu's for tablets etc to. AMD is right where they need to be to make a strong comeback in the high volume OEM market, which will lead to better enthuasist market parts.

Not to mention that even if they doubled the cpu performance, it might or likly won't equal a doubling in computer performance as x86 cores aren't really good at heavy lifting. I told everybody months ago that AMD had a winner with these designs and look at the fact that they are flat out on production on these with massive orders, I think I am correct on this. Hopefully we see them really ramping production and we see the market become a bit less intel dominated. Nothing could be better for the consumer then intel being the underdog for a while and having to play catchup.

Aye I told people months back too that these would blow away Intel's new SB offerings on the GPU side. Most of them Mac users all horny for SB. Totally wouldn't believe me.

Man I love it when these "I told you so" moments happen.

[meran]

seems impressive ,lets hope laptop vendors don't couple it with 1066 ddr3

[Imsochobo]

Originally Posted by NC37

Aye I told people months back too that these would blow away Intel's new SB offerings on the GPU side. Most of them Mac users all horny for SB. Totally wouldn't believe me.

Man I love it when these "I told you so" moments happen.

I imagine 28NM will be good for theese, they'll increase memory speed.
Increase cpu speed.
Keep gpu somwhat the same

My guess, just getting the gpu in was the hard part, but they have loads of shaderpower for an APU to be, just need tiny bit more clocks and memory bandwidth.

[beautyless]

For comparing
ATI HD 5570 DDR5 default speed + i5 2500@3.3Ghz.

Source

[Dj-ElectriC]

Im sorry but there is not tini tiny chance that HD5570 can get 8373GPU on 3DMARK V thats seems impossible even with overclocking for this graphics card. i remember that HD4870 and GTX260 192SP were getting those kind of scores

[devguy]

Originally Posted by meran

seems impressive ,lets hope laptop vendors don't couple it with 1066 ddr3

They won't. It'll be coupled with DDR3-800 with CAS 7.

But I wanna see someone put some DDR3-1866 CAS 6 on these desktop babies!

[crazyeyesreaper]

hmm from the looks of the 3dmark 06 and Vantage benchs above,

the IGP on the Fusion chip is roughly equal to 8800gt / 9800gt 4830 / 4850 / 4770

Roughly in 3dmark 06 the Fusion chip beats out most of the reviewed DX10 gpus
in 3dmark Vantage it proves its capable of matching said gpus as well when comparing gpu scores directly

http://www.bjorn3d.com/read.php?cID=1376&pageID=5538

from the looks this should greatly help in terms of the lowest common denominator in PC gaming, as it essentiall means anyone running an AMD fusion rig is getting a decent CPU + 8800gt performance.
THe below graphs are with said gpus + AMD X3 8750 triple core, so performance looks to be like having an athlon II series + 8800 or 4800 series gpu

[random]

Hmm imagine how many mobile devices would want this tech. I am very impressed with the results and glad that I am holding out to buy a laptop.

[crazyeyesreaper]

Im glad because DELL , HP etc cant fuck these things up discrete gpus you can water down by tadaa going to IGP, but the fact you can now get a quadcore + 8800gt performance this helps the PC Gaming markets bottom line on hardware it essentially means the cheapest PC you can possible make is more powerful then a console, and developers will know it lol, This should lift the bottom end up a bit in the coming year and offer a better outlook for gaming capable PCs since consoles are expected to remain the same for another 2 years. so these CPUs are great for 720p console ports

[ap4lifetn]

when is this supposed to be released?

i want one for my htpc

[Nesters]

Originally Posted by crazyeyesreaper

the IGP on the Fusion chip is roughly equal to 8800gt / 9800gt 4830 / 4850 / 4770

There's something wrong with your estimates.

higher clocked 640+ shader cores discrete would definitely be faster than 400 shader core iGPU.
From graphs i looked at i can say that iGPU is around HD38(50/70) performance level(400 vs 320 cores, 600 vs 668/775 Mhz).

Originally Posted by ap4lifetn

when is this supposed to be released?

i want one for my htpc

Released in June, available in 1st half of July?

[crazyeyesreaper]

hmm architectural improvements, better designs, um a newer cpu thats not a dual core pushing it, better Ram standards. and the GPU score dosent lie, at least in comparable tests in 3dmark 06 and Vantage, its the same. dont nit pick on it, its a regular review vs a leak, but i would honestly expect a more optimized architecture in the chip compared to what we saw back then your also looking at 65nm and 55nm gpus vs 40nm or 32nm or w.e hmm that could account for some changes as well.

then again the CPU in the APU package is also much better then the Triple Core Phenom I based x3 8750, and since 3dmark tends to give the CPU more weight then games it could account for the difference but that said it wouldnt impact the GPU only scores and in those situations the GPU here compares favorable to older tech, but again were comparing 5 year old 8800 series vs IGP theres been advances in technology, simple shader vs shader doesnt really mean squat, as AMD changed the schedular and bunch of other aspects with the 6000 series architecture, and made tweaks. Granted we will have to wait for actual reviews but then again these dont scream fake either and no ones debunked them yet with simple logic. so Ill take it with a grain of salt and stand by my post that it brings the performance it should,

and for all the awesomeness of a 4850 its still only 25% faster then a 3870 while having double the specs so yea. care to elaborate why double the specs didnt double performance hmm?

From looks of the graph below the GPU in the APU is around 4830 performance well what do you know a 4830 is only around 10-12% better then a 3870 hmm all things considered this would appear to be believable, So yea comparing multi reviews around the web and those right here on TPU it would appear to me that the APU performs right where it should for the specs it has. granted it WILL lose at higher resolutions but im willing to bet at 1280x720 1280x1024 1440x900 this APU will be right at home.

[Heavy_MG]

Originally Posted by crazyeyesreaper

Im glad because DELL , HP etc cant fuck these things up discrete gpus you can water down by tadaa going to IGP, but the fact you can now get a quadcore + 8800gt performance this helps the PC Gaming markets bottom line on hardware it essentially means the cheapest PC you can possible make is more powerful then a console, and developers will know it lol, This should lift the bottom end up a bit in the coming year and offer a better outlook for gaming capable PCs since consoles are expected to remain the same for another 2 years. so these CPUs are great for 720p console ports

I wouldn't be surprised if HP or Dell screwed with it in one way,such as underclocking the GPU in the mobile Llano so they can go cheap on cooling.

Originally Posted by devguy

They won't. It'll be coupled with DDR3-800 with CAS 7.

But I wanna see someone put some DDR3-1866 CAS 6 on these desktop babies!

Only DDR3-800?

Originally Posted by Imsochobo

I imagine 28NM will be good for theese, they'll increase memory speed.
Increase cpu speed.
Keep gpu somwhat the same

My guess, just getting the gpu in was the hard part, but they have loads of shaderpower for an APU to be, just need tiny bit more clocks and memory bandwidth.

AMD is going to make Bulldozer cores a part of Llano in 2012 for the "Trinity" APU. Maybe it will be a 28nm chip?
The GPU must have been the hard part,because there is no L3 cache.

[Trackr]

This is great.. for people who are allergic to graphics cards..

To me it seems like having two perfectly good baskets, and then placing all your eggs in one of them.

Even to OEMs.. does it matter if you have a CPU and a Graphics Card instead of a CPU that has a GPU inside of it?

It's actually worse, because the user would have to replace both the CPU and GPU if one of them died, since they are in the same package.


I think that instead of creating more powerful Integrated GPUs, for the "We don't know what a graphics card is" crowd..

You should educate people that a graphics card is better.

[Steevo]

There is one missing here.













































Will it run Crysis?



Everyone who is hating on it needs to remember that he was running lower speed RAM, and that bandwidth is shared with the GPU on the die, so as much as we need fast GDDR5 memory on newer cards to prevent idling, this needs it more as it is feeding four cores, and a GPU on relatively slow RAM.

And as mentioned above, the lack of cache on the chip means a huge performance penalty when either the CPU or GPU is demanding bandwidth. I'm sure with another die shrink or a respin they will find a way to add some dedicated or shared memory on die to improve performance.


This is exciting, I can see one of these running crossfire where the CPU/GPU runs physics and uses the actual processing capability of the system correctly, two of them and accelerated openCL video editing and you have a hell of a workstation. Or when they add them to the bulldozer even with minor gains in IPC if they can get openCL rolling......

[f22a4bandit]

Originally Posted by Trackr

This is great.. for people who are allergic to graphics cards..

To me it seems like having two perfectly good baskets, and then placing all your eggs in one of them.

Even to OEMs.. does it matter if you have a CPU and a Graphics Card instead of a CPU that has a GPU inside of it?

It's actually worse, because the user would have to replace both the CPU and GPU if one of them died, since they are in the same package.


I think that instead of creating more powerful Integrated GPUs, for the "We don't know what a graphics card is" crowd..

You should educate people that a graphics card is better.

Except that most people don't care what's in their computer as long as it works. This saves OEMs money on their bottom line, which is about as far as they care. It's a smart move by AMD, especially since these APUs will provide stellar performance in the tablet market, which is where everything is moving.