Llano IGP vs SNB IGP vs IVB IGP

Erinyes said:
Yep my 50 % estimate was considering the 33% increase in EU's and say 15-20% increase in clocks(possibly also greater perf/EU as they're going for DX11 compliance as well).

Have Intel publicly mentioned that they're targeting 7x over SB? I havent come across that anywhere

I expect Llano will still be competing with IB for at least a quarter. I dont expect Trinity to be out until late Q2. IB is slated to be out in early Q2 as per the latest roadmap. And given how slow AMD have been to ramp up Llano, it remains to be seen how fast they can ramp up Trinity production. Yes the CPU performance will be far better hopefully, and with better clocks as the process matures
Click to expand...

Look at their ultrabooks presentation.
 
Alexko said:
Isn't Ivy Bridge supposed to double EU count?

Anyway, I imagine Intel intends to stack some DRAM on their APUs…
Click to expand...

Nope Ivy bridge increases EU's from 12 to 16.

DRAM Stacking according to Charlie is coming with Haswell.

mczak said:
That depends, my impression was it was about the same performance overall.

50% faster is not enough to beat 6450 (well not the review edition). It is enough to beat the 6450 ddr3 however.
That would be close to the lower-end Llanos but not quite up there with the 400 SP versions.
Click to expand...

Nope, in most cases the HD 3000 is 10-20% faster than HD 5450(DDR3). And the 6450(GDDR5) is about 40-50% faster than the HD 3000. It varies but thats pretty much the case.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4263/amds-radeon-hd-6450-uvd3-meets-htpc/5

rpg.314 said:
Look at their ultrabooks presentation.
Click to expand...

Saw that. They state 7X graphics improvement for ultrabooks in general. Given that there are a few ultrabooks already shipping this generation, do we even know what they are comparing to when they say 7X graphics improvement?
 
Erinyes said:
Nope, in most cases the HD 3000 is 10-20% faster than HD 5450(DDR3). And the 6450(GDDR5) is about 40-50% faster than the HD 3000. It varies but thats pretty much the case.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4263/amds-radeon-hd-6450-uvd3-meets-htpc/5
Click to expand...
Well because the performance is still all over the place compared to competition it really varies depending on what games were tested. I think though newer drivers improved it quite a bit in some titles, so an improvement of 50% of IVB over SB might really be enough to beat HD6450 gddr5, and not just draw about even.
 
I need to understand how Llano turbo core works in real world scenarios

My notebook can't boot no more and is out of warranty, and just today i have seen on a depliant the asus x53ta-sx016v equipped with A6-3400m (1.4GHz/2.3GHz) and a 6650 1GB for 499€.
My last notebook had a dual core turion2 M520 running at 2.3GHz, and was barely fine.

When the A6 will run at 2.3GHz? and how many cores? would it depend on he gpu workload?
would it be a continuous overclock or only the "some clock" one?

I've tried online but there are not two identical explanations, and even the review apperas to be made on defective pre production sample and not on retail notebook

:?::?::?:
 
Well since nobody can get realtime clocks out of the CPU, it's tough to verify how their Turbo is working. Performance in single threaded apps does seem to look like it should for a CPU like a low end desktop Athlon II though. Tech Report made it sound like their Turbo is still rather rudimentary compared to Intel's however (using load instead of thermal sensors).

I have a ASUS G73 with the Core i7 720QM, the 2009 low end i7 for notebooks. It's a 1.6->2.8 GHz CPU. I wonder how it compares to Llano. I have a feeling that the 720QM is faster unfortunately.

I know there are a bunch of Llano notebooks available now but I'm having a hard time figuring out how to find all of them. I'm mainly searching out 13.3" or smaller. All that I see though are just new budget 14"+ options.
 
fehu said:
I need to understand how Llano turbo core works in real world scenarios

My notebook can't boot no more and is out of warranty, and just today i have seen on a depliant the asus x53ta-sx016v equipped with A6-3400m (1.4GHz/2.3GHz) and a 6650 1GB for 499€.
My last notebook had a dual core turion2 M520 running at 2.3GHz, and was barely fine.

When the A6 will run at 2.3GHz? and how many cores? would it depend on he gpu workload?
would it be a continuous overclock or only the "some clock" one?

I've tried online but there are not two identical explanations, and even the review apperas to be made on defective pre production sample and not on retail notebook

:?::?::?:
Click to expand...

Idea: but the laptop and educate us :D
I'm curious about it as well.
In case you can sustain 2.3GHz on Llano core it will easily outperform Turion M2 clock for clock. But base clock of 1.4GHz is on a low side ...
I'm on T5500 1.6GHz lappy so for me it would be massive upgrade, but I will go for 45W models once available with decent base clock.
 
The 720QM is a quad-core, eight-trheaded i7 Clarksfield, definitely not a "low-end i7" as there are many dual-core i7 models for notebooks (no Apple laptop has a quad-core i7, for example).
Furthermore, it turboes with all cores activated to 1.86GHz.

Given the substantially higher performance-per-clock in the Nehalem architecture compared to Phenom II, it's no surprise that the i720QM will be faster than any mobile Llano.

Nonetheless, you're comparing two completely different power envelopes. 720QM's TDP is 50W for CPU alone, whereas the top performing mobile Llano (A8-3530MX) does 45W for CPU+(midrange)GPU+Northbridge.

I have no doubts we'll find Llanos in 13.3" notebooks. The killer combo of Llano + discrete GPU should be harder to find in that form factor, though.
 
I don't really care for discrete graphics in 12-13.3" because that usually creates a lot of heat that gets poorly dissipated. I've been there. That's why Llano is interesting to me in small notebooks. The CPU is decent, it has an excellent GPU built-in, and should be cooler and more battery saving than the usual CPU + discrete GPU subnotes.

BTW, I still get a Cyrix MediaGX feeling from these CPUs with IGPs and northbridges inside. ;)
 
from what i understand reading the sildes and the (bios flawed) review, the maximum overclock happens when the gpu is at the lowest usage, and temporally based on the TC2 algorithm
then it scales down when reactivate a core or the gpu
what means "maximum overclock" it's a mistery for me, and how fast scales down too
i don't understand if in a scenario i can count on at least two cores running a 2.3GHz

i don't understand the llano positioning too
doing better research i've found an hp with N930 and switchable 5650 for 489€
it's less elegant, consumes a little more, but overall is more powerfull and cost less 0_0
 
I do wish somebody would take a close look at its Turbo behavior in various scenarios. For example I don't see how a Core 2 Duo E6400 (2.13 GHz Conroe) could beat A8-3500M (2.4 GHz max) by ~80% if it was clocking up properly. This test is a single core affair AFAIK.

I experimented with my Phenom II X2 BE (PhenomMSRTweaker!) and it achieves the score shown in that review at ~1.7 GHz (unganged DDR2-800 and 8800GT discrete).
 
swaaye said:
I do wish somebody would take a close look at its Turbo behavior in various scenarios. For example I don't see how a Core 2 Duo E6400 (2.13 GHz Conroe) could beat A8-3500M (2.4 GHz max) by ~80% if it was clocking up properly. This test is a single core affair AFAIK.
Click to expand...
From all the numbers I've seen, I came to the conclusion that Llano Turbo Core pretty much never reaches the Turbo Clock. Well not for significant amounts of time, not even when only one core is really used. At best it seems to give some speedup which is somewhere between the low and high clock for single-threaded benchmarks. I don't know though if that behavior could be tweaked with microcode/bios updates or if it's just that bad.
 
I looked over the Anandtech desktop Llano performance again. I wonder if what's happening to the mobile version is that they are trying to fit it into a TDP that's just too low for the design and as a result the Turbo Core is severely power restricted and essentially not helpful. The load-based design of Turbo Core may also just not be good enough at taking advantage of light load opportunities.

Too many possibilities...
 
cal_guy said:
Garlic operates on the Northbridge clock - up to 720MHz for notebook versions
http://www.realworldtech.com/page.cfm?ArticleID=RWT062711124854&p=2

That's much slower than the Phenom and Athlon right?
Click to expand...

I don't know if it's faster or slower than their internal busses, but gives far higher bandwidth than Phenom II's or Athlon II's have in their hand to memory (or the bandwidth Llano has to memory)

Phenom II X6 at Legion Hardware (first bench from google) got ~13.6GB/s measured memory bandwidth when accompanied by DDR3 PC3-12800, while according to the link you provided Llano gets around 17GB/s measured
 
no-X said:
Angle dependancy is exactly the same as on ATI's DX8.1 generation hardware (~2001). The only difference seems to be support for trilinear AF :smile:
Click to expand...

I remember the radeon 9200SE, it was good enough to run the half-life 1 engine but not quite, and this is why. the slider control in the driver claiming 16x aniso filtering didn't make it look really good.
a geforce 3 or 4's 8x filtering was vastly better.
 
Erinyes said:
Nope Ivy bridge increases EU's from 12 to 16.

DRAM Stacking according to Charlie is coming with Haswell.
Click to expand...

That's unfortunate. If Trinity does indeed have 512 VLIW4 shaders, unless it runs into severe memory bandwidth limitations, it might actually widen the graphics performance gap with Ivy Bridge.

Then again, 22nm may allow for significantly higher clocks.
 
Alexko said:
That's unfortunate. If Trinity does indeed have 512 VLIW4 shaders, unless it runs into severe memory bandwidth limitations, it might actually widen the graphics performance gap with Ivy Bridge.
Click to expand...
But it's on the same process as Llano so that extra performance won't come for free - it will be a pretty big chip. I wouldn't be surprised if AMD kept selling Llano for quite some time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top