Welcome, Unregistered.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Reply
Old 04-Feb-2012, 23:25   #301
ToTTenTranz
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 3,561
Default



I shall patiently wait for the hat-eating to comence.
ToTTenTranz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-Feb-2012, 01:35   #302
Paran
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 211
Default

Over 50% to which GPU competition exactly? HD3000?
Paran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-Feb-2012, 02:01   #303
nAo
Nutella Nutellae
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 4,323
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paran View Post
Over 50% to which GPU competition exactly? HD3000?
50% over IVB in 3DMark Vantage, where they extrapolate IVB performance as 30% over SNB.
__________________
[twitter]
More samples, we need more samples! [Dean Calver]
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win. [Mahatma Gandhi]
The opinions expressed herein are my own personal opinions and do not represent my employer's view in any way
nAo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-Feb-2012, 09:44   #304
CarstenS
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 2,980
Send a message via ICQ to CarstenS
Default

Interesting that they extrapolated from only the second fastest ULV ci5 (2537M). There's a 2557M, which interestingly enough, provides a maximum graphics turbo frequency exactly.... 30% higher than 2537M (900 vs. 1200 MHz). I find it hard to believe, that Intel would not increase graphics performance at all for IVB.

So, they are basically comparing this-gen Intel-CPU vs. next-gen AMD-APU.

Additionally, they are using an A6-Trinity for this 17-Watt ULV comparison. Isn't A6 a triple-core APU right now? In the footnotes, there's an A10 Low-Voltage APU in the 25 Watt TDP marked as reaching 3600 Vantage points.
__________________
English is not my native tongue. Before flaming please consider the possiblity that I did not mean to say what you might have read from my posts.
Work| Recreation
Warning! This posting may contain unhealthy doses of gross humor, sarcastic remarks and exaggeration!

Last edited by CarstenS; 05-Feb-2012 at 10:02. Reason: spelling
CarstenS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-Feb-2012, 10:17   #305
itsmydamnation
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 835
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CarstenS View Post
Interesting that they extrapolated from only the second fastest ULV ci5 (2537M). There's a 2557M, which interestingly enough, provides a maximum graphics turbo frequency exactly.... 30% higher than 2537M (900 vs. 1200 MHz). I find it hard to believe, that Intel would not increase graphics performance at all for IVB.

So, they are basically comparing this-gen Intel-CPU vs. next-gen AMD-APU.

Additionally, they are using an A6-Trinity for this 17-Watt ULV comparison. Isn't A6 a triple-core APU right now? In the footnotes, there's an A10 Low-Voltage APU in the 25 Watt TDP marked as reaching 3600 Vantage points.
it depends, just because its a turbo value doesn't mean it will actually ever hit it within the target TDP or for long enough to make any real difference. that said i cant find a good review that covers performance and power usage of the 2557.
itsmydamnation is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-Feb-2012, 10:29   #306
CarstenS
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 2,980
Send a message via ICQ to CarstenS
Default

IIRC the game tests for Vantage are not heavily threaded.
__________________
English is not my native tongue. Before flaming please consider the possiblity that I did not mean to say what you might have read from my posts.
Work| Recreation
Warning! This posting may contain unhealthy doses of gross humor, sarcastic remarks and exaggeration!
CarstenS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-Feb-2012, 11:05   #307
itsmydamnation
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 835
Default

aren't we talking about GPU here?
itsmydamnation is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-Feb-2012, 11:32   #308
ToTTenTranz
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 3,561
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CarstenS View Post
Interesting that they extrapolated from only the second fastest ULV ci5 (2537M). There's a 2557M, which interestingly enough, provides a maximum graphics turbo frequency exactly.... 30% higher than 2537M (900 vs. 1200 MHz). I find it hard to believe, that Intel would not increase graphics performance at all for IVB.

So, they are basically comparing this-gen Intel-CPU vs. next-gen AMD-APU.

Additionally, they are using an A6-Trinity for this 17-Watt ULV comparison. Isn't A6 a triple-core APU right now? In the footnotes, there's an A10 Low-Voltage APU in the 25 Watt TDP marked as reaching 3600 Vantage points.
Where are you getting all those specs from?
Mobile Llano A6 are all quad-core. And I don't think there can be odd numbers of cores in the bulldozer/piledriver architecture.

Furthermore, has anyone seen socket info about desktop trinity?
Is it really a new socket for everyone, as rumoured?
ToTTenTranz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-Feb-2012, 11:34   #309
CarstenS
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 2,980
Send a message via ICQ to CarstenS
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by itsmydamnation View Post
aren't we talking about GPU here?
Maybe I'm confusing things, but do GPU and CPU not share a chip-wide power budget?
edit: This presentation supports my recollection. http://www.hotchips.org/archives/hc2...otem-Intel.pdf

Quote:
Originally Posted by ToTTenTranz View Post
Where are you getting all those specs from?
From the footnotes your pictures refers to. And from Intels ark nee processorfinder website.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ToTTenTranz View Post
Mobile Llano A6 are all quad-core. And I don't think there can be odd numbers of cores in the bulldozer/piledriver architecture.
That's why I wrote "Isn't A6 a triple-core APU right now?", but you're probably right, uneven number of cores do seem unlikely.
__________________
English is not my native tongue. Before flaming please consider the possiblity that I did not mean to say what you might have read from my posts.
Work| Recreation
Warning! This posting may contain unhealthy doses of gross humor, sarcastic remarks and exaggeration!

Last edited by CarstenS; 05-Feb-2012 at 11:51.
CarstenS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-Feb-2012, 11:58   #310
Lightman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Torquay, UK
Posts: 1,176
Default

Small correction: current A6 APU's come in 3 and 4 core flavours.
A6 36xx are Quad-Core and A6 35xx are Tri-Cores.

Anyway as already noted by ToTTenTranz Trinity based APU's should only be Dual or Quad cores due to modular nature of Piledriver cores.

I'm eagerly awaiting new info and release of these into the market.
I'm both looking for laptop solution as well as unnecessary upgrade from A6-3650 to Trinity based APU for my HTPC .
Lightman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-Feb-2012, 12:12   #311
CarstenS
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 2,980
Send a message via ICQ to CarstenS
Default

Ok, then please disregard that part of my posting.
__________________
English is not my native tongue. Before flaming please consider the possiblity that I did not mean to say what you might have read from my posts.
Work| Recreation
Warning! This posting may contain unhealthy doses of gross humor, sarcastic remarks and exaggeration!
CarstenS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-Feb-2012, 12:45   #312
itsmydamnation
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 835
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CarstenS View Post
Maybe I'm confusing things, but do GPU and CPU not share a chip-wide power budget?
yes, but you miss my point. my point is can the GPU hit max turbo in under 17watt TDP regardless of what the CPU is doing.
itsmydamnation is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-Feb-2012, 13:27   #313
ToTTenTranz
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 3,561
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lightman View Post
I'm eagerly awaiting new info and release of these into the market.
I'm both looking for laptop solution as well as unnecessary upgrade from A6-3650 to Trinity based APU for my HTPC .
You do know there's a good chance you'll have to change motherboard as well, right?
I haven't seen any official confirmation, but word is that Trinity will use socket FM2 and won't be compatible with FM1 motherboards..


Quote:
Originally Posted by itsmydamnation View Post
yes, but you miss my point. my point is can the GPU hit max turbo in under 17watt TDP regardless of what the CPU is doing.
I don't get your question.
If the 17W Trinity has a max clock value for CPU turbo and GPU turbo, then of course this max clock can be reached on either the CPU or GPU.

Are you asking if these max turbo values are going to be the same between the 17W and the 35W parts? Of course not..
ToTTenTranz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-Feb-2012, 14:07   #314
CarstenS
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 2,980
Send a message via ICQ to CarstenS
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by itsmydamnation View Post
yes, but you miss my point. my point is can the GPU hit max turbo in under 17watt TDP regardless of what the CPU is doing.
Let me put it this way. The TDP for the whole package is 17 watts, shared by CPU and GPU cores as outlined in the PDF I've linked. The 1.2 GHz GPU is specced in the 17 watt part I mentioned, so it should be able to reach higher than minimum values when - again, IIRC - 2-3 out of four threads in 3DMark Vantages Game Tests are idling, since there is a bigger portion of the TDP for GPU to consume.

The same obviously should be true of Trinity.
__________________
English is not my native tongue. Before flaming please consider the possiblity that I did not mean to say what you might have read from my posts.
Work| Recreation
Warning! This posting may contain unhealthy doses of gross humor, sarcastic remarks and exaggeration!
CarstenS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-Feb-2012, 15:30   #315
fehu
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Somewhere over the ocean
Posts: 806
Default

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/other/d...s_for_AMD.html
fehu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-Feb-2012, 18:05   #316
Lightman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Torquay, UK
Posts: 1,176
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ToTTenTranz View Post
You do know there's a good chance you'll have to change motherboard as well, right?
I haven't seen any official confirmation, but word is that Trinity will use socket FM2 and won't be compatible with FM1 motherboards..

....
Yes, I do .
I'm fine with that. That's also the reason why I've picked cheap A55 FM1 board and not any higher end solution.

I like new technologies and so far I've had no experience of Bulldozer architecture because it was not good enough for my needs. So I want Trinity for both new CPU and iGPU tech.
Lightman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-Feb-2012, 19:46   #317
jimbo75
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,211
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CarstenS View Post
Interesting that they extrapolated from only the second fastest ULV ci5 (2537M). There's a 2557M, which interestingly enough, provides a maximum graphics turbo frequency exactly.... 30% higher than 2537M (900 vs. 1200 MHz). I find it hard to believe, that Intel would not increase graphics performance at all for IVB.
There is actually a 17W i7 2677M as well - http://ark.intel.com/products/54617

It scores 8.81 fps in cinebench opengl - http://laptopreviewshop.com/asus-zen...iew-video.html

IVB has been tested scoring 12.17 fps - http://ultrabooknews.com/2012/01/29/...lthy-ces-test/

So that's what, 38% faster than the old model in this test which I guess will be as close to best case as it will get?
jimbo75 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-Feb-2012, 19:47   #318
DavidC
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 307
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by itsmydamnation View Post
it depends, just because its a turbo value doesn't mean it will actually ever hit it within the target TDP or for long enough to make any real difference. that said i cant find a good review that covers performance and power usage of the 2557.
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-H...0.37948.0.html

The lowest i5-2557M score is 1414, which is 22% higher than the AMD footnote number. It's also interesting the 1158 score they quoted exists in Notebookcheck database.

Then there are much higher performing ones like the Macbook Air's 2557M getting 1712 points and UX21's 2677M getting 1661. That's over 40% higher than the footnote number.

Quote:
So that's what, 38% faster than the old model in this test which I guess will be as close to best case as it will get?
http://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-Rad...G.54675.0.html

The 35W Llano is getting 15 points in the same benchmark, meaning if 17W Trinity is equal to it, is only 25% faster than that Ivy Bridge.
DavidC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-Feb-2012, 20:17   #319
jimbo75
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,211
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidC View Post
http://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-Rad...G.54675.0.html

The 35W Llano is getting 15 points in the same benchmark, meaning if 17W Trinity is equal to it, is only 25% faster than that Ivy Bridge.
According to this the A8-3500M scores 23.33 -



http://hothardware.com/Reviews/AMD-F...Review/?page=8

Even the 320 SP's A6 scores over 20 fps - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M88-YsVr8xQ

I think this 20 fps mark will be nearer what the 17W Trinity will score.

Last edited by jimbo75; 05-Feb-2012 at 20:22.
jimbo75 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-Feb-2012, 20:37   #320
Paran
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 211
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimbo75 View Post
There is actually a 17W i7 2677M as well - http://ark.intel.com/products/54617

It scores 8.81 fps in cinebench opengl - http://laptopreviewshop.com/asus-zen...iew-video.html

IVB has been tested scoring 12.17 fps - http://ultrabooknews.com/2012/01/29/...lthy-ces-test/

So that's what, 38% faster than the old model in this test which I guess will be as close to best case as it will get?

Maybe the OpenGL performance is flawed due to bad drivers or others reasons. The more important d3d performance should be much better. If it was an Ultrabook possibly it was an ES model with lower GPU clock. The Ultrabook CPUs are a little bit behind schedule wise.
Paran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-Feb-2012, 20:51   #321
jimbo75
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,211
Default

Well that was just the 1.7 GHz chip and there will be a 2GHz one so it will rise by a little more. I think what is going on is intel has benched IVB vs older chips in order to get the 60% figure that was talked about. It'll be closer to 50% best case, and generally 30%-40% faster in my opinion.

Even if this 17W Ivy Bridge hits 13 fps, Trinity @17W will be a good 50% faster at ~20 fps. Again I believe this is also as good as it will get in a comparison and Trinity will be further ahead in actual gaming.
jimbo75 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-Feb-2012, 21:01   #322
Paran
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 211
Default

I meant GPU clocks. And again, OpenGL benchmarks could differ to d3d Benchmarks. Intel is weak in OpenGL. AMD supports OpenGL 4.2 whereas Intel just 3.1.
Paran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-Feb-2012, 21:55   #323
ToTTenTranz
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 3,561
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimbo75 View Post
Well that was just the 1.7 GHz chip and there will be a 2GHz one so it will rise by a little more. I think what is going on is intel has benched IVB vs older chips in order to get the 60% figure that was talked about. It'll be closer to 50% best case, and generally 30%-40% faster in my opinion.

Even if this 17W Ivy Bridge hits 13 fps, Trinity @17W will be a good 50% faster at ~20 fps. Again I believe this is also as good as it will get in a comparison and Trinity will be further ahead in actual gaming.
Not to mention the fact that the top-performer 17W Trinity will probably cost like 1/3rd of the top-performer 18W Ivy Bridge.
ToTTenTranz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-Feb-2012, 22:55   #324
Paran
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 211
Default

17W Ivy Bridge.
Paran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-Feb-2012, 23:16   #325
CarstenS
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 2,980
Send a message via ICQ to CarstenS
Default

Intel actually promises an almost 3x increase for "Vantage Performance" performance compared to a somehow strange Ci7 2600k with HD2000 graphics - at least for desktops:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/dis..._Partners.html

TBH, I don't know how much the clock targets for IVB-graphics differ from desktop to mobile to ULV, but this might give a notion for the gains we can expect from an architectural overhaul.
__________________
English is not my native tongue. Before flaming please consider the possiblity that I did not mean to say what you might have read from my posts.
Work| Recreation
Warning! This posting may contain unhealthy doses of gross humor, sarcastic remarks and exaggeration!
CarstenS is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply

Tags
amd, fusion, intel, ivy bridge, trinity

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:30.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.