Trinity vs Ivy Bridge
- Thread starter rpg.314
- Start date
Actually I'm wondering about another problem, there also seems to be no improvement in intel's Z series Atom for a long time...
You missed the Z2460? Or are you talking about the cpu core? In this case yes not much progress has been made. That surely needs to change for Silvermont (and it is indeed supposed to) otherwise it will look silly against all those Cortex-A15 SoCs...
Even Wikipedia lists Krishna/Wichita as canned, it must be true
.
Yeah, someone heard GloFo is having issues and that they need to be redesigned for TSMC "from scratch",the news spread like wildfire, and everyone ignored the 6 months earlier info saying TSMC is doing at least part of them anyway.Even Wikipedia lists Krishna/Wichita as canned, it must be true
I guess a 1 module, 3 shader cluster Trinity would still be somewhere along ~150mm². Cheaper yes, but that's still quite big. Speaking of that, what happened to the dual-core Llanos? I mean true dual-cores not downrated four core ones. Do they exist? Some of the internal designations floating around for the graphics part (SUMO vs. SUMO2) seems to suggest there are indeed two parts, but that might also be a result from simply disabling some stuff. If they exist, I've never seen anything indicating transistor count or die size.
a few Trinity presentation slides from CES:
http://www.computerbase.de/news/2012-01/amds-trinity-apu-kommt-zur-mitte-des-jahres/
look at "Update 18:13 Uhr"
http://www.computerbase.de/news/2012-01/amds-trinity-apu-kommt-zur-mitte-des-jahres/
look at "Update 18:13 Uhr"
Yes, but it doesn't say anything about the performance while achieving this. It might be possible some battery profile downclocks the gpu (or disables some units). Not saying that's happening but there are so many unknowns in these slides it's difficult to draw any conclusions.
Is it built on a 28nm or 32nm process?
So Charlie was right on the spot with his "the die size is within an hair of 240mm²".
32nm of course.
Exactly.
AMD's first 28nm APU taped out almost a year ago at TSMC...
There was at least one more in the pipeline as well, though I'm not sure when that one taped out.
itsmydamnation
Veteran
http://www.computerbase.de/news/2012-01/amds-trinity-apu-kommt-zur-mitte-des-jahres/
now its upto 25% x86 performance increase....
now its upto 25% x86 performance increase....
Well, those "up to 25%" are for 35W TDP. The fastest mobile 35W Llano is the 3520M, with only 1.6 GHz base clock (900 MHz turbo, but iirc, reviews indicated that Llano's turbo rarely kicks in).Compared to Llano (this time), not to BD module
Beating the 3520M by "up to 25%" shouldn't be that hard, even with lower IPC.
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=23777
Another AMD CES interview. Clears up some things I was wondering: Originally Brazos was targeted for Fall 2011. Brazos got out half year early. That pretty much explains why the follow up hasn't yet shown up. AMD also stated that they are targeting Trinity for sub 500$ laptops (slightly lower price point than Llano's goal of 600$). That would overlap with the top of the line Brazos laptops (the most popular high end Brazos laptop, the HP dm1z was 400$-550$ based on configuration). That would explain why the Bobcat based APUs aren't agressively scaled up (scaling Bobcats down to tablets would be more important for AMD, as 17W Trinity can cover the high end netbooks and ultraportables).
Another AMD CES interview. Clears up some things I was wondering: Originally Brazos was targeted for Fall 2011. Brazos got out half year early. That pretty much explains why the follow up hasn't yet shown up. AMD also stated that they are targeting Trinity for sub 500$ laptops (slightly lower price point than Llano's goal of 600$). That would overlap with the top of the line Brazos laptops (the most popular high end Brazos laptop, the HP dm1z was 400$-550$ based on configuration). That would explain why the Bobcat based APUs aren't agressively scaled up (scaling Bobcats down to tablets would be more important for AMD, as 17W Trinity can cover the high end netbooks and ultraportables).
D
Deleted member 13524
Guest
They also DOUBLE-CONFIRM the cancellation of Krishna/Wishita in favor of the 17W Trinity.
Given that the 17W Trinity is in fact a 2-module/4-core APU, they should be able to eventually release a 1-module/2-core model while lowering the power consumption by a handful of watts (I don't know if that's in the current roadmap or if it's interesting to them in any way).
But the best thing is that they're actually trying to get Trinity to replace higher-end Brazos models in ~400€ subnotebooks (HP DM1, EeePC 1215B, etc).
This means we're looking at some 400% GPU and CPU performance difference between a 2011 model and a 2012 one.
That's a lot!
I may feel a bit too compelled to replace my 2,5 year-old Ferrari One 200.
Given that the 17W Trinity is in fact a 2-module/4-core APU, they should be able to eventually release a 1-module/2-core model while lowering the power consumption by a handful of watts (I don't know if that's in the current roadmap or if it's interesting to them in any way).
But the best thing is that they're actually trying to get Trinity to replace higher-end Brazos models in ~400€ subnotebooks (HP DM1, EeePC 1215B, etc).
This means we're looking at some 400% GPU and CPU performance difference between a 2011 model and a 2012 one.
That's a lot!
I may feel a bit too compelled to replace my 2,5 year-old Ferrari One 200.
Some error in that article it mentions Brazos and Llano came in "traditional" packaging, whereas Trinity will be available in BGA. Well Brazos certainly was BGA only.
I think that's a tad optimistic. Surely low-end versions of the chip (such as used in these sub-500$ subnotebooks) would not be fully enabled Trinity (separate die or not). Just like the current E-series Llano (which I don't know if someone is actually using it). I'd expect more like one module, low clocked, with half (at best) of the simds enabled. That would be more like twice as fast (for both cpu and gpu) as your typical Brazos. Still, certainly a notable improvement!ToTTenTranz said:
itsmydamnation
Veteran
why only one module ?
there is a 35watt 8 core bulldozer @1.6 with turbo to 2.8
so you get rid of 8mb of L3,2 modules an updated core and a chance to learn from any mistakes they made in the physicals of bulldozer. We will see much better power features then Llano and likely an improvement over bulldozer as well.
put that all together and i think we will likely see 4 core somewhere around 1.5ghz, but i agree it wont have all SIMD's, unless having a super low clock with more SIMD's is more power efficient then having a low clock with less SIMD's.
cheers
edit: i dont think bobcat will be going anywhere, if i was AMD my role for bobcat would be a dual role. 1. high performance tablets, do whatever needs to be done to hit that market and FFS put a 3G/LTE transceiver in it! Second would be take that core and clock it as high as you can for a given TDP ( i guess something around 40watts) and sell that product just in emerging markets.
if bulldozer does low power well, you dont want to be selling big chips to "poor" people when it can be put in expensive *books and a little chip can service the "poor" people.
poor== its all relative right?
edit2: clarification, i don't care what bit of silicon the LTE/3G transceiver sits on, i just want it in the damn tablet.
there is a 35watt 8 core bulldozer @1.6 with turbo to 2.8
so you get rid of 8mb of L3,2 modules an updated core and a chance to learn from any mistakes they made in the physicals of bulldozer. We will see much better power features then Llano and likely an improvement over bulldozer as well.
put that all together and i think we will likely see 4 core somewhere around 1.5ghz, but i agree it wont have all SIMD's, unless having a super low clock with more SIMD's is more power efficient then having a low clock with less SIMD's.
cheers
edit: i dont think bobcat will be going anywhere, if i was AMD my role for bobcat would be a dual role. 1. high performance tablets, do whatever needs to be done to hit that market and FFS put a 3G/LTE transceiver in it! Second would be take that core and clock it as high as you can for a given TDP ( i guess something around 40watts) and sell that product just in emerging markets.
if bulldozer does low power well, you dont want to be selling big chips to "poor" people when it can be put in expensive *books and a little chip can service the "poor" people.
poor== its all relative right?
edit2: clarification, i don't care what bit of silicon the LTE/3G transceiver sits on, i just want it in the damn tablet.
Last edited by a moderator: