AMD Trinity FM2 APU Preview

[mechtech]

Nice preview.

I read the AMD embargo here
http://techreport.com/blog/23638/amd-attempts-to-shape-review-content-with-staged-release-of-info

Are you allowed to post undervolting tests at least?

 

[Benetanegia]

Sorry. I'm an English native so I forget that others here it's their second language.

When I said fix I meant "to rig" or "falsify" the reviews.

There was a few situations in the past a few reviewers confessed to Intel or Nvidia blackmailing them. Saying no samples if you don't falsify the benchmarks in their favour.

It's ashame I can't find any links, this is going back maybe 5-12 years so the Google links are removed and broken.

It was ONE site that got backlisted and it was far from being one of the big ones, influence zero, which means that it's stupid to try to "influence" this site alone. So are you suggesting that every other site (including TPU) "fixed" their reviews? From what I read, you're suggesting that ALL sites (again including TPU) have been doing this for 12 years and have said nothing...

tsk tsk W1zz, bad guy. <- sarcasm

 

[TheMailMan78]

Nice preview Dave. Look forward to a full review.

Sorry. I'm an English native so I forget that others here it's their second language.

When I said fix I meant "to rig" or "falsify" the reviews.

There was a few situations in the past a few reviewers confessed to Intel or Nvidia blackmailing them. Saying no samples if you don't falsify the benchmarks in their favour.

It's ashame I can't find any links, this is going back maybe 5-12 years so the Google links are removed and broken.

I know Dave and a few members outside the forum and Ill be the first to tell you Dave isn't blackmailed by anyone. He will put a chopper in the ground the second someone demands anything AT ALL. Blackmail Dave and the review will get tanked. Ill put money on it. TPU reviews are 100% honest as far as the writter knows. If they make a mistake they "fix" it ASAP.

 

[brandonwh64]

I am thinking about going FM1 or FM2 ITX for my next HTPC build.

 

[cadaveca]

TPU comes before techreport on my daily routine of checking tech sites - already read the preview before I knew AMD was trying to hide their x86 performance .

I know you guys gotta do what you gotta do it just bugs me when companies try to unduly manipulate things in their favor.

Actually, I had my chip in July, long before TechReport was contacted.


I can also post my other emails from AMD where all of TechReports claims would be pointed out as lies.


I have permission to post all those things he does not. I chose not to.


And I'll just leave it at that, except for four points:


I got my APU in July, and was given free reign to post whatever I wanted. I posted nothing.

Three things were requested to be held back, yes. Price, which i wouldn't post anyway since these chips aren't listed.

OC...OC is luck of the draw anyway.


CPU Benchmarks. Um, this is an APU, not a CPU, so really, what importance do CPU-related benchmarks have on a chip that was designed for other purposes?

 

[cdawall]

OC...OC is luck of the draw anyway.

Luck of the draw especially with a chip as old as your particular unit is. It is very well documented than later model AMD chips typically overclock better. AMD wanting to keep Piledriver OC's under the mat is very understandable.

CPU Benchmarks. Um, this is an APU, not a CPU, so really, what importance do CPU-related benchmarks have on a chip that was designed for other purposes?

I am personally curious about the performance of it in itself. It would be nice to start knocking some of the high power draw Phenom's I own out with some 65W chips with similar performance all around. Especially with A85 offering 8x/8x crossfire.

 

[cadaveca]

I included three game benchmarks that should tell you all.


Prices...I can give those as well...TechReport's writer must have just got his big boy pants.

 

[TRWOV]

Strange that you're saddled with an A75 board and preview, yet Anand has an A85 and review...you forget to send Christmas cards to Sunnyvale ?

"AMD let us know that we could go ahead and post a preview"

Didn't happen to get the same email as Scott Wasson by any chance ?

That's a preview. Anadtech just choose to call it "Review Part 1":

Today we have the first half of the Trinity desktop launch. Widespread APU availability won't be until next month, but AMD gave us the green light to begin sharing some details including GPU performance starting today.

I'm pretty sure the review (Review Part 2 in Anand's case) will go live when the NDA lifts.

TPU comes before techreport on my daily routine of checking tech sites - already read the preview before I knew AMD was trying to hide their x86 performance .

I know you guys gotta do what you gotta do it just bugs me when companies try to unduly manipulate things in their favor.

How are they manipulating things in their favor? The NDA states that reviews will be posted on October XX and AMD allowed reviewers to post an early preview with some details. Where's the manipulation? And TR can choose to not post the preview and that'll be the end of it. If anything TR is taking advantage of the favor AMD is doing them (allowing for an early preview) by trying to create a mountain out of a molehill and drive some traffic towards them.

If they are against previews so much, why did they run a Conroe preview?

http://techreport.com/review/9538/intel-conroe-performance-previewed/1

We were not allowed to look inside of the case of either PC, and the scope of the benchmarks we were allowed to run was defined by Intel.

 

[cdawall]

I included three game benchmarks that should tell you all.


Prices...I can give those as well...TechReport's writer must have just got his big boy pants.

Yup I know and so far it looks like stick with the power hungry Phenom II's.

 

[cadaveca]

Yup I know and so far it looks like stick with the power hungry Phenom II's.

Well, I got say, that the 3D performance is actually pretty good. Eyefinity on a APU? Yeah, you can do it. Not wit hevery titles, but quite a few remain more than playable.


Honestly, I don't see what all the fuss is, anyway. AMD said "We're not competing with Intel".



So, uh, why does everyone expect them to?

 

[Super XP]

Trinity looks good.

This is great. Trinity clock for clock vs. Bulldozer blows it away by as much as 15%. Piledriver will have the L3 cache and larger L2 cache including other desktop design improvements. This in reality sounds like desktop Piledriver clock for clock should be about 20% to 30% faster than Bulldozer. NICE......

 

[cadaveca]

Trinity looks good.

And who posted that?

I'd say more, but I'm bound by 3 different contracts to not say anything.



And, I would totally NOT be saying what you're expecting I would, too.

 

[cdawall]

Well, I got say, that the 3D performance is actually pretty good. Eyefinity on a APU? Yeah, you can do it. Not wit hevery titles, but quite a few remain more than playable.


Honestly, I don't see what all the fuss is, anyway. AMD said "We're not competing with Intel".



So, uh, why does everyone expect them to?

It still looses to the A8@2.9ghz the phenom and athlon I want to replace at @3.4 and 3.8ghz respectfully and would appear to smoke said chip. Now with overclocking in the picture that may change only time will tell.

 

[Tonim89]

How are they manipulating things in their favor? The NDA states that reviews will be posted on October XX and AMD allowed reviewers to post an early preview with some details. Where's the manipulation? And TR can choose to not post the preview and that'll be the end of it. If anything TR is taking advantage of the favor AMD is doing them (allowing for an early preview) by trying to create a mountain out of a molehill and drive some traffic towards them.

If they are against previews so much, why did they run a Conroe preview?

http://techreport.com/review/9538/in...ce-previewed/1

I totally agree. AMD isn't pressuring anyone to shape the results, since the NDA is still up. The conditions are clear and it's up to the reviewer to post or not.

NDA is a normal posture in this market, and any tech-entusiast should know it.

Nvidia always shows some P scores on 3D Mark, but never shows the GPU score until the card is out... so they are manipulating results too?

The purpose of previews is tease the consumer, and it seems they are acomplishing the mission very well

 

[Ferrum Master]

I am reading this review, and Metallicas Too Late Too Late is ringing in my ears.

 

[PopcornMachine]

I think it would have been better to present this information in the context of a complete review instead of just the parts AMD wants people to see.

People will for the most part not be fooled by this apparently desperate ploy by AMD, but I don't get why a partial review is necessary.

 

[cadaveca]

People will for the most part not be fooled by this apparently desperate ploy by AMD, but I don't get why a partial review is necessary.

Very few sites actually have info early. I surmise that like myself, these are the sites that have had hardware for months, and have had the opportunity to provide either AMD or AMD's partners with feedback on these products prior to launch.


If you cannot understand why I'd want to reelase as much as possible, as early as possible, with AMD's blessing, well...I'm not EVER going to be able to explain it. Nah, I don't want to be able to post exclusive info, nah, never!

Fact of the matter is that I was given like 4 days to write this, make the pictures I needed to, decide what to say, and then, as you can see by the OP< on September 24th, I began working on it.



Frankly, I think that any site that does not have content, simply either does not have enough traffic, pissed AMD off in the past by leaking info, or was too lazy to write up a preview over the weekend, like I did.

 

[Dent1]

So are you suggesting that every other site (including TPU) "fixed" their reviews? From what I read, you're suggesting that ALL sites (again including TPU) have been doing this for 12 years and have said nothing...

tsk tsk W1zz, bad guy. <- sarcasm

No the article I read was between 5-12 years ago.

The reviewers wrote articles in their forum and blog about the being approached by Intel and Nvidia. I never said they did it.

 

[TheMailMan78]

No the article I read was between 5-12 years ago.

The reviewers wrote articles in their forum and blog about the being approached by Intel and Nvidia. I never said they did it.

Knowing the reviewers on TPU I would love to hear that conversation go down.

 

[cadaveca]

Knowing the reviewers on TPU I would love to hear that conversation go down.

I could probably post chat logs and emails, but I won't.


I love the whoel "BIAS" arguement, too. It seems most people do not understand how much work goes into doing reviews.

I mean, I work TPU like a full time job. And not becuase I'm getting paid...but because I love doing it.


W1zz, man, that dude has some dedication, let me tell you.

And not once...has W1zz told me what to say. Nor, actually, has any OEM. I still manage to sign NDAs from time to time, and I still manage to get parts that should have an NDA, without one being signed...those items, it's simply an verbal agreement that certain products can not have reviews published until a certain date.


If any company wants me to review specific things, I tell them no. However, in my books, a preview and a review are two different things, and previews will always have a decent amount of marketing material in them.


My actual APU reviews will probably take a slightly different slant than what other reviewers do.

In the end, I'm surprised that more sites don't have previews...

 

[Solaris17]

what happened to our last CPU reviewer?

 

[HTC]

Are you allowed to post undervolting tests at least?

Wondering this myself.

 

[PopcornMachine]

If you cannot understand why I'd want to reelase as much as possible, as early as possible, with AMD's blessing, well...I'm not EVER going to be able to explain it. Nah, I don't want to be able to post exclusive info, nah, never!

If you can't understand my question to wait, 1 or even 2 weeks, to present a complete review instead catering to AMD's desire for a censored, partial review, then I will never be able to explain it to you.

Further, the result is that these chips have a good IGP. I would be surprised if 5% of the readers here use the IGP on a desktop system. What real value is this info?

Again, if you don't get that, I can't explain it any better.

 

[TheMailMan78]

If you can't understand my question to wait, 1 or even 2 weeks, to present a complete review instead catering to AMD's desire for a censored, partial review, then I will never be able to explain it to you.

Further, the result is that these chips have a good IGP. I would be surprised if 5% of the readers here use the IGP on a desktop system. What real value is this info?

Again, if you don't get that, I can't explain it any better.

Do you know how much traffic a PREVIEW brings in? Also do you know the difference between a REVIEW and a PREVIEW?

 

[cadaveca]

Again, if you don't get that, I can't explain it any better.

Seriously though, you're wrong. About 80% of PC users think the HDD is the case. There is far more to the market than just "enthusiasts", and the preview is for them, who want the details, but don't put oo much into benchmarks. TPU is one of the world's sources for tech info, period, thanks to W1zz and his wonderful GPU tools, and the network of sites that have previews live today and earlier, form the base of educating those other media outlets with information about these products. You don't find "TPU" or "WiFi PowerUp!" on ASUS motherboards for no reason.


BTW, I did NOT sign an NDA with AMD. You're assuming that what TechReport has posted applies to me, and really, it doesn't. I posted a pic of my APU in July, and that pic is still there in the Sexy Hardware thread. I've been free to post whatever I want from day one, and although AMD did ask me to do a preview covering certain topics only, that's because I requested the ability to post early from them.