D
Deleted member 13524
Guest
I shall patiently wait for the hat-eating to comence.
Trinity vs Ivy Bridge
- Thread starter rpg.314
- Start date
I shall patiently wait for the hat-eating to comence.
50% over IVB in 3DMark Vantage, where they extrapolate IVB performance as 30% over SNB.
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.
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.
Last edited by a moderator:
itsmydamnation
Veteran
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
Veteran
aren't we talking about GPU here?
D
Deleted member 13524
Guest
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?
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/hc...3.19.921.SandyBridge_Power_10-Rotem-Intel.pdf
From the footnotes your pictures refers to. And from Intels ark nee processorfinder website.
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.
Last edited by a moderator:
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
.
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
.itsmydamnation
Veteran
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.
D
Deleted member 13524
Guest
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..
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..
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.
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.
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-zenbook-ux31-review-video.html
IVB has been tested scoring 12.17 fps - http://ultrabooknews.com/2012/01/29/ivy-bridge-performancehints-come-via-stealthy-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?
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-HD-Graphics-3000.37948.0.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.
http://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-Radeon-HD-6620G.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-Fusion-A83500M-ASeries-Llano-APU-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 a moderator:
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.