Wow more than ten time faster. Sorry I'm wary about AMD power figures, those 100Watts part burns close to 130 Watts.
Um, what?
Wow more than ten time faster. Sorry I'm wary about AMD power figures, those 100Watts part burns close to 130 Watts.
Well I may have misread the graph in the link I gave but I don't think so. Richland burns up up to 128Watts (measured at the plug and down ~5 Watts from trinity), Intel part 92 Watts.Um, what?
That's a good point. But think about it. If an archtecture is not scaling without an EDRAM, and the other is good to go without any help, which is the better solution at the price of the transistor usage?A well-thought machine is made of parts that have been specifically designed to work together with certain trade-offs. If you take a piece off in order to compare it to another one you often reach the wrong conclusion. You can't simply take the eDRAM and pretend the rest was not architected to use it.
It is specified what those APU are running at the time of measurement. The measurement are made "at the plug" for all the systems.128 Watts full system load under Furmark, which is a power virus. There's no way that cpu is drawing anything near 130W.
Intel and AMD TDP are definitely not the same. You can read here.Sorry I'm wary about AMD power figures, those 100Watts part burns close to 130 Watts, I will wait for review and yes the Next Atom aims at higher perfs per watts enough to fit in a phone (review will tell if INtel succeeded).
The HD 4760 pushes 432 GFLOPS, trinity Richland 50% (640GFLOPS), FLOPS only say that much about a GPU. Not too mention that is far from x10.
Anyway now I'm sure that the point of that discussion has nothing to do with architectural detail and where Intel is heading. I don't want to get trap in a useless discussion about comparing different implementations of an arch, without actually caring for the architecture in question be it GCN or Gen6/7.
I'll wait for something constructive like sebbbi answer to my post wheter it made sense or not
You are making the same mistake again, you can't take it away and then say that it doesn't scale it without it. You are implicitly assuming that without it the the rest of the machine would have been identical, which is not likely to be the caseThat's a good point. But think about it. If an archtecture is not scaling without an EDRAM, and the other is good to go without any help, which is the better solution at the price of the transistor usage?
Not sure I follow you. There are multiple (lower power) GT3 SKUs that don't use eDRAM.But they can make a GT3 design without the EDRAM, and they don't do it. Why don't they prove it if they design is faster? Face to face, with an A10-6800K, and a Core i7 with GT3 iGPU without the EDRAM.
Maybe because desktop APUs with big IGP portions are pretty dumb, as the lack-of-market has demonstrated?Face to face, with an A10-6800K, and a Core i7 with GT3 iGPU without the EDRAM.
Lack-of-market because the "brainwashing marketing", which is too strong. But you know what I see. I told many people to try an AMD APU (mostly I recommend Trinity, but it doesn't matter). They switched from Clarkdale/Sandy Bridge/Ivy Bridge system, and all of them told me that the APU is incredibly good. One of them are very happy because Minecraft is playable now (at 100 fps on the AMD APU, when he just got 15 fps with Sandy Bridge).Maybe because desktop APUs with big IGP portions are pretty dumb, as the lack-of-market has demonstrated?
The A10-6800K IGP is the fastest solution, in the socketed CPU market. Make a faster socketed solution, than Intel can criticize it. Also make better drivers for it. Civilization V, Minecraft, Shogun 2, ... are painfully slow on any Intel IGP.At best, you're admitting that A10's are unbalanced, bandwidth-starved GPUs that should have spent more transistors on memory hierarchy and fewer in other areas. I don't see why other GPUs should be forced to make the same mistake for "comparison's" sake.
Well it is not dishonesty but a mistake, I simply forget that AMD has yet to introduce GCN in its APU and that is all there is too it. Still I'm not the one that want absolutely to compare product A to product B, it is more like some people can't read someone stating : "it looks to me that Intel 1) does great GPU and in some regard is ahead of the competition". It is plain derailing imo...I find your point of view intellectually dishonest. Sure they are comparable products but your not comparing comparable technology. If you where to compare to technology which is what you are discussing you would be looking at GCN not VLIW but that doesn't support your position so you don't.
From the perspective of the hardware Intel is not bad. But if we count the drivers, than Intel is sucky. My wife can't play her favorite games (CIV5 - slow, MineCraft - slow, Gothic 3 - 1 fps, SW: Kotor - doesn't run) on a Sandy Bridge laptop. She is using my Llano notebook for this.Between the people that are still too willing to vouch Intel iGPU as sucky and those that feel like they have to defend anything AMD to a pathological extend, well there is obviously not much to discuss.
In the first round there won't be GDDR5 version.About Kaveri, does somebody hear something about GDDR5, or AMD will stick again to DDR3?
Maybe because desktop APUs with big IGP portions are pretty dumb, as the lack-of-market has demonstrated?
Well I'm not sure anything has been announced so far but looking at the high price (/really high price) I would be surprised if the part made it in any laptops outside of high end ultra-book and Macs.How many design wins for Iris Pro?
From the perspective of the hardware Intel is not bad. But if we count the drivers, than Intel is sucky. My wife can't play her favorite games (CIV5 - slow, MineCraft - slow, Gothic 3 - 1 fps, SW: Kotor - doesn't run) on a Sandy Bridge laptop. She is using my Llano notebook for this.
No matter if IvyB or Haswell ... CIV5, MineCraft and Gothic 3 is still much slower than my mobile Llano. The only advantage is that SW: Kotor can be executed with the newest driver on IvyB and Haswell, but not with SandyB.Based on SB. In the meantime IVB and HSW launched. Also a new driver. Move on.
No matter if IvyB or Haswell ... CIV5, MineCraft and Gothic 3 is still much slower than my mobile Llano.