AMD Fusion Info Thread

[inm8#2]

Please, AMD...don't screw this up.

[davidricardo86]

AMD Trinity launches May 15th

I might be getting Trinity-powered graduation present! Good to know.

[Helios22]

if Trinity is successful then it's good times ahead!

[Atom Ant]

What is that Integer Speed 38% better? Is it mean GPU speed?

[TheBluePill]

if Trinity is successful then it's good times ahead!

I have no doubt.. People will be nuts to get anything other than an AMD in the $500 and lower category.

[Deks]

Ok... so AMD states that Trinity will effectively provide a rough 29% performance boost on the CPU front.

It's a step in the right direction, but, how would that stack up against SB/IB?
We know IB will provide (at most) 10% realistic boost over SB entirely... and how much is SB base quad faster than Llano fastest Quad in cpu power exactly?

Better yet... how does Llano's best quad stacks up against SB?
What would be its equivalent in cpu performance (when multithreaded of course)?
And i3 or i5?

[HTWingNut]

Ok... so AMD states that Trinity will effectively provide a rough 29% performance boost on the CPU front.

It's a step in the right direction, but, how would that stack up against SB/IB?
We know IB will provide (at most) 10% realistic boost over SB entirely... and how much is SB base quad faster than Llano fastest Quad in cpu power exactly?

Better yet... how does Llano's best quad stacks up against SB?
What would be its equivalent in cpu performance (when multithreaded of course)?
And i3 or i5?

See here... A8-3510MX @ 2.4GHz.

Intel beat out AMD?

[Althernai]

People will be nuts to get anything other than an AMD in the $500 and lower category.

This would also be true with Llano, but the $500 and lower category is not really the place where people care about processors. At that price point, it's much more important to have a decent display, keyboard, etc.

It's a step in the right direction, but, how would that stack up against SB/IB?

It's not going to catch up to Sandy. Unless you overclock Llano, the quad-core Sandy Bridge laptops are literally more than twice as fast (see here) and even the i5s are faster. Overclocking evens the odds a bit, but it's still nowhere near the CPU performance of a quad-core i7. I don't know where that 29% is expected to come from -- the architecture is unlikely to be improved that much (Bulldozer is slower than K10.5 clock-for-clock and Piledriver is a revision of the former) so I'd guess a lot of it comes from clock speed. In that case, you might not get as much out of overclocking. On the other hand, the graphics performance is essentially the reverse: Ivy is not going to catch Llano and Trinity improves on the latter.

[HTWingNut]

No it can't compete with i7 quad core but it can easily hold its own against an i5. See HERE. Sure you may have to overclock a bit, but it's possible with the Llano, and simple to do. I think AMD did themselves a disservice by setting such a high voltage and low clock. It's great for overclocking, but would have fared better to the general public with benchmarks showing it on par with an i5.

However with Trinity with the shared fpu, it may be a bit problematic, but I don't see it as any worse than Llano.

What I am hoping out of all this is finally a 13" notebook that is gaming capable at 720p, possibly even 900p without need for a dedicated card and costing $1500+

I've carried a 15-17" + netbook for many years now, and it would be nice to have everything in a nice 13" package.

[Althernai]

However with Trinity with the shared fpu, it may be a bit problematic, but I don't see it as any worse than Llano.

It depends on the details of Piledriver. Keep in mind that when AMD says Trinity is 30% faster or whatever, that is relative to Llano at stock clocks. Your overclock which makes it comparable to the i5s is at least 50%. Thus, at stock clocks, Trinity will be significantly slower than your overclocked Llano. The question is: did they leave as much performance on the table as with Llano or will you only be able to overclock a little bit?