Monday, June 13th 2011

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

Armed with a Radeon HD 6550D graphics core that has 400 stream processors, 8 ROPs, and full DirectX 11 support, AMD A-Series "Llano" accelerated processing unit (APU) was tested to be the fastest integrated graphics solution to date. The tests was run by a forum-member of TweakTown community with early access to engineering samples. On the test-bed was AMD A8-3850 APU, which has four x86-64 cores clocked at 2.90 GHz, and the Radeon HD 6550D IGP with engine clock of 600 MHz. Standard dual-channel DDR3-1333 MHz memory was used, even though the APU supports faster DDR3-1866 MHz. To seat the test bed, Gigabyte A75M-UD2H was used. It's important to note here that the CPU cores were overclocked to 3.773 GHz (145.13 MHz x 26.0), with an insane core voltage of 1.52V.

The setup was put though three generations of 3DMark benchmark, covering DirectX 9.0c, DirectX 10, and DirectX 11 performance. In 3DMark 06, the setup scores 10,492 points. In 3DMark Vantage, it scored P6160 (performance preset, validation). In 3DMark 11, it scored P1591 (performance preset, validation). More details can be read in the screenshots.


Source: TweakTown Forums
Add your own comment

85 Comments on AMD A-Series APU Smashes IGP Performance Records...Surprise

#1
de.das.dude
Pro Indian Modder
good time to wait to buy a laptop :D

man AMD is furious! bulldozer and these!
Posted on Reply
#2
Frick
Fishfaced Nincompoop
Heavy_MG said:
Of course the Intel is faster in a benchmark,many benchmarks are optimized for a Intel processor. Also,the SB chip has hardware optimizations to boost benchmark scores that the AMD Llano does not.
In day to day usage ( which is what Llano is made for) most users don't care,they will see that the GPU runs programs better than the Intel "HD" graphics.
Check out the mobile power use here- http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/a8-3500m-llano-apu,review-32207.html
It has better power consumption than the Intel,yet has a better GPU,and still good CPU power.
I thought the point was that Intel is faster. Of course you don't notice anything when playing Farmville and watch Youtube videos, but they are still faster. In real world applications, too, that require a lot of power.

But Llano is not about raw performance anyway, so it's kinda useless to debate it.
Posted on Reply
#3
MikeMurphy
Nesters said:
Is it really coming this year?
Maybe! Or I suppose more likely, Q1 2012.
Posted on Reply
#4
Jonap_1st
Frick said:
I thought the point was that Intel is faster. Of course you don't notice anything when playing Farmville and watch Youtube videos, but they are still faster. In real world applications, too, that require a lot of power.

But Llano is not about raw performance anyway, so it's kinda useless to debate it.
off course SB was a lot of faster in cpu calculation, how many times this should be discussed because we already knew that?

but the problem is that your forgot that this thread headline is about IGP performance not CPU, which SB graphics cant compete with APU..

so if you keep talking about raw CPU performance, its kinda useless to debate it here..
Posted on Reply
#5
Frick
Fishfaced Nincompoop
Jonap_1st said:
off course SB was a lot of faster in cpu calculation, how many times this should be discussed because we already knew that?

but the problem is that your forgot that this thread headline is about IGP performance not CPU, which SB graphics cant compete with APU..

so if you keep talking about raw CPU performance, its kinda useless to debate it here..
Totaly agree with you, but the topic did come up and people was saying that the difference wasn't so big it mattered. Which is wrong.
Posted on Reply
#6
Jonap_1st
Frick said:
Totaly agree with you, but the topic did come up and people was saying that the difference wasn't so big it mattered. Which is wrong.
hahahaha.. i understand that :laugh:

but, i cant discuss about the difference since there is no official benchmark,
so, lets wait and see...
Posted on Reply
#7
faramir
scazbala86 said:
You have to remember,it cost more to have them separate ...
I don't think it does. 3.2 GHz Phenom II is $115 and Radeon HD5670 is $60. According to rumors top of the line Llano that was featured here will be priced at $170 and above combination should easily mop the floor with it (not to mention the loss of whatever memory fGPU would take for its operation, which is avoided when using dGPU with its dedicated memory).

CPU: AMD Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition Deneb 3.2GHz 4 ...

GPU: HIS H567FO1G Radeon HD 5670 1GB 128-bit DDR3 PCI E...

AMD will have to drop those prices to make this happen, especially considering the fact that there is no upgrade path for people using existing AM3 boards so the buy-in is even higher than just the cost of APU and expensive memory for performance that is lower than a combination of AMD's existing offerings.
Posted on Reply
#8
micropage7
i hope it would trigger high performance on handheld or portable device
Posted on Reply
#9
Meizuman
Hustler said:
Holy Shit!!!!!

My Phenom II 955 @3.8Ghz with a 1Gb Radeon 4850 only gets 13450 in 3dMark 2006.....
Just the same thought here! Phenom 9950 @3.2GHz 512Mb HD4850 and it does something like 11-13k with 24/7 settings. I think I'm out of words here.

Trackr said:
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.
CPU's die kinda rarely (never if not OC'd?). And I am pretty sure that the GPU in it will not die any more probably. With a discrete card, you have much more components on the board that can die so... Thats how I see it.
Posted on Reply
#10
Thatguy
micropage7 said:
i hope it would trigger high performance on handheld or portable device
Look out ARM x86 has a competitor soon.
Posted on Reply