Laptops......laptops.



What laptop has higher than 1920 resolution?


Mine has 1366 X 768 and games play fine on it, I am more concerned with IPC increase than clockspeed increase.



Look at the steam hardware survey.

xenocideHow does a normal user, the every day "joe blogs" you were talking about, benefit from GPGPU functionality? Exactly. HD2/3/4000 is fine for most users, sure, the GPU in Llano is faster (although not by much) but at the cost of the CPU being maybe half as capable.

come on guy they didnt cut bits out of stars, they work as good if not better due to a better IMC then an am3 athlon or phenom



HSA , on the way as is gpgpu file compression;):D and when this kind of thing becomes OS led and invisble to the user ,thats when everyman will be benefiting from HSA/ gpgpu ,,, FUTURE ,my ass its a godam repeat of the past , maths co pro's had to be written into the OS kernal before they became usefull to the many and a gpgpu is just a many headed maths co pro to a cpu with dsp properties , the future is not yet in stone but its deffinately going to be different from this present PC model and intel ,AMD and any come lately's place in the future is far from certain , this is especially true of tech companies, if that caustic ray tracer card had been 1000 times better then it was ,we would probably be all chaseing the next best ray traceing card now instead of a rasterizing fake box that modern gpu's are

Kay a few things@ xeno, gpgpu can be used to accelerate all programming theoretically, and gpu acceleration is becoming normal in web browsers.
@steevo, I'm more concerned about performance/ watt than IPC. You could have great ipc, but without decent clocks it will still be a crappy chip.
And yes, stars is the highest ipc core design amd has yet made.

Very few processors clock lower than 2Ghz anymore unless you are talking about smartphone and other chips, and even they are getting close if not there.


Quad core at 2.8Ghz with 25% higher IPC is much better than a quad at 3.4Ghz, and will consume less power on average as shown by the industry.


We have been promised hardware accelerated everything for years, and while flash, and a few very specific things work now, the problem is the driving force behind it. Unless the majority of users support it, it won't happen.

SteevoVery few processors clock lower than 2Ghz anymore unless you are talking about smartphone and other chips, and even they are getting close if not there.


Quad core at 2.8Ghz with 25% higher IPC is much better than a quad at 3.4Ghz, and will consume less power on average as shown by the industry.


We have been promised hardware accelerated everything for years, and while flash, and a few very specific things work now, the problem is the driving force behind it. Unless the majority of users support it, it won't happen.

See ie9 and google chrome.
That aside,such a case is not exactly the rule when it comes to processors, though it has been the trend.

On topic and hopefully ending all this, if Trinity is half the improvement AMD is claiming, it will still be a significant improvement on the 32nm node, and will give more or less just under SB or just at SB i3 performance, and have a GPU faster than a Radeon HD 6570, support for a number of extras for visuals, and allow for 3 screen productivity without a discrete GPU. So it should be nice.

SteevoWe have been promised hardware accelerated everything for years, and while flash, and a few very specific things work now, the problem is the driving force behind it. Unless the majority of users support it, it won't happen.

your not wrong, the problem has and is that the hardware and software need to be right for the job ,only now are both those criteria being filled, imho their will be an explosion on gpgpu software in comeing years as the fastest way to do some things becomes by gpu, but importantly this needs to be implemented better into the OS's kernal so it becomes less invasive( special software and drivers etc) and more invisible to the user

First of all not only AMD will benefit from GPGPU. For example check this:



I wouldn't say the HD4000 is in a disadvantage there. ;)

And really stop using HSA as an argument because it will not be made real until 2014 according to AMD's roadmap. For Trinity that's absolutely irrelevant. And Trinity is a separate GPU and CPU, so no HSA architecture.

And in the very same minute that GPGPU becomes a reality a discrete GPU will be the way to go fro great performance anyway, not an iGPU.

Vulpesveritas@ben when an A6 and a Pentium powered laptops are the same price, yes I'll sell the A6 over the pentium as the better decision, and i do have a preference for AMD over Intel. as i feel its both a better buy much of the time with budget products and they dont have the criminal record intel has.
Also@ ben do you feel that makes me a fanboy? :or rather, in your opinion am i part of that 'hive mind?'

Yes if you do it by default, as in recommending it to everyone instead of in a case by case basis, yes, to me that does represent some kind of fanboyism. An A6 is extrememly inferior to Intel equivalents in almost everything except graphics, so I don't see how recommending an A6 can be the default option other than from the hive mind recommendation. So that's what I think yes. Sorry if you don't like my opinion on that.

Dent1So pointing out that you misread, misunderstood or misconstrued the fact that "visual performance" doesn't mean gaming necessarily makes us a fanboy?

Wow you really are arrogant aren't you? It's the second time that you talk as if everything was about you. Wow.

And now you have misconstrued as visual does not mean gaming when in 99% it probably does, because this is a low end consumer product. I didn't even replied to your post about 3dsmax, Maya and whatnot because I thought it was futile. Those programs on a low end CPU like the ones found on APUs? Really are you crazy?? You think they would try to market them as such? Come on...

BenetanegiaI wouldn't say the HD4000 is in a disadvantage there.

dya see a lot off people folding on a HD4000????:laugh::roll:

and ive pointed out many times they are all on the gpgpu bandwaggon and the softwares started arriveing ,amd's is just further along and better performing in the Igpu area

and when HSA does roll into town a discrete wont be the way as the shorter APU interconnects , higher bandwidth and lack of interface chips will null its large gpu advantage and you wont have to wait till HSA before some software benefits

currently on aria 3870k APU = 105 pounds nearest intel i5 2500k hd3000gfx not 4000 and its 143 pound the intel may process better but my average joe mate would be richer and happier with the AMD cpu

i do like that you used intels topline consumer chip chart verses an APU though the price difference between them chips would buy you the whole godam AMD setup ha haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa:roll::roll::laugh::laugh: i7 3770K compareing that to an APU

and that slides trustworthy cos its your intel brothers ha haaa, the more i think bout it the funnier it gets

@ben, when 95% of those I'm selling to are buying a computer for Facebook and are buying a bloatware infested OEM computer, and it's a slow quad+ faster GPU and an hour longer rated battery life, vs a Pentium dual core, yes that 95% of the time I'm suggesting the A6. Perhaps I should have explained more.

And visuals - all images, video, graphics effects, screen animations, games, GUI, etc. Even if not all of it is hardware accelerated now, where do you think we'll be with the current push for it, say 3-4 years from now when 75% of my customers will still be using either a pre-SB Pentium(which is most of what I have to sell at 300-400, with intel 2000 graphics. Blame corperate. ) or an A6. Then i have at 500-600 an A8 with 6GB RAM, a 640 GB 7200rpm HDD, blueray player,and external speaker grill vs an i3 with 4GB RAM, a 500gb 5400rpm HDD, and all the same bloatware.

Yeah for the most part AMD is an easier sell and probably better in the long run for most of my customers

and ive pointed out many times they are all on the gpgpu bandwaggon and the softwares started arriveing ,amd's is just further along and better performing in the Igpu area

and when HSA does roll into town a discrete wont be the way as the shorter APU interconnects , higher bandwidth and lack of interface chips will null its large gpu advantage and you wont have to wait till HSA before some software benefits

You've missed the part were Tahiti is far more advanced in the HSA edpartment than Trinity which is going to be VLIW4. Discrete GPUs are at least one step ahead of iGPUs and will remain like that for many generations. Until after 2014 like I said.

currently on aria 3870k APU = 105 pounds nearest intel i5 2500k hd3000gfx not 4000 and its 143 pound the intel may process better but my average joe mate would be richer and happier with the AMD cpu

Erm it's not an i5 that you should be comparing with. An i5 murders any APU and eats it for breakfast along with some chips and salad. lol see you are a fanboy, talk about price disregarding performance and even claim everyone would be happier with a CPU that is 50% slower. Sure.

@everyone, may we cease all this Intel vs AMD fanboyism and simply wait for more news, and just for now say that if AMD actually comes out with improvements on this scale, it will be a huge improvement, and may alow for no AA 1080p gaming(hopefully?) and that at least will give AMD something which competes with/beats SB parts and will allow them to at least compete on the low end, and in the end we don't know right now one way or another.

no comment on your use of a 3770K as refference then

and your last point is opinion based ,the buying sheep public wont care for your opinion , they will see four cores ,about the same speed , a better gpu and most importantly the right price and i brought up the aria thing as your saying intels gpu are as good as lano's on a chart but not compareing similar chips you pulled an i73770k into the debate a chip thats not out and hence benches are not wizz's and hence void

but again their slides right isnt it haha

theoneandonlymrkno comment on your use of a 3770K as refference then

and your last point is opinion based ,the buying sheep public wont care for your opinion , they will see four cores ,about the same speed , a better gpu and most importantly the right price and i brought up the aria thing as your saying intels gpu are as good as lano's on a chart but not compareing similar chips you pulled an i73770k into the debate a chip thats not out and hence benches are not wizz's and hence void

but again their slides right isnt it haha

A little knowledge would help you a lot mate. The iGPU is the same in a 2500k and a 2105 and more or less the same will happen with Ivy. So compute performance will be the same. Now on the CPU front it's the i3 that you have to compare with not an 2500k which is twice as fast. In most cases that the average guy will encounter even the Pentiums are on par with the APU and they cost half as much. Only in rendering and encoding tasks they fall behind and that os not something a guy buying $500 laptops would care about. The 2100 keeps up with the quad core APU even in those test tho, so there you have it.

www.anandtech.com/show/4524/the-sandy-bridge-pentium-review-pentium-g850-g840-g620-g620t-tested/3

hd3000 is not the same as hd4000 and you know it ,anyway im done with you ,your borein me your either paid by intel ,75 years old or a bit strange, as soon as i fugur out the mute button ,your gone

yet again your on about a full gamers usage profile in budget terms not ya typical surfer/ cod player and the extra discretes going to cost money too shh and shh

But the thing is average consumer Joe or Jane isn't going to care if their son's new computer compiles faster then the competition. They will go to an electronics big box store and shop for a laptop or desktop that can play the newest COD game for the lowest price. When Trinity is released the staff will either push for SB/IB i3 with a low end OEM only gpu or a Trinity apu that will probably come in at a lower price point. I just think the parents would not notice a difference unless someone starts running some benchmarks.

theoneandonlymrkhd3000 is not the same as hd4000 and you know it ,anyway im done with you ,your borein me your either paid by intel ,75 years old or a bit strange, as soon as i fugur out the mute button ,your gone

yet again your on about a full gamers usage profile in budget terms not ya typical surfer/ cod player and the extra discretes going to cost money too shh and shh

Lol but nearly all of Ivy Bridge CPUs will use HD4000, just like HD3000 is available in nearly all segments in SB. The reviews speak for themselves, on the CPU side SB/IB is far superior so the ONLY recomendation you can honestly make for someone seeking for a CPU is, well there's many choices from both Intel and AMD, APUs are not one of them. plain and simple.

Now if we look at certain very specific scenarios, yes the APU might be a better choice. Otherwise in 80% of the casess you are just cheating the poor guy to benefit one company that you love.

Keep the discussion civil, or I'll be handing out infractions. I won't ask again.

Thank you.

BenetanegiaNow if we look at certain very specific scenarios, yes the APU might be a better choice. Otherwise in 80% of the casess you are just cheating the poor guy to benefit one company that you love.

ive not recomended anyone buy anything brother , go back and check , you have
and in any case this is a thread about an APU,s projected performance not a debate about its relevance to intel thread as your slanting it

i have recomended anyone buying to wait till wizz reviews it then decide, and ive not recomended a lano to anyone who it didnt suit perfectly,(thats just the 1 mate then)

so in all wait till wizz reviews it four foot snake, then i might join you in slateing it

im a glass is half full man myself, bene is clearly a glass half empty man ,Amd may be chatting rubbish ,they may not well see

ps i take all slides from nvidia an intel with optimism and doubt too

No you are just saying that an APU is better than a 2500k, roflmao.

I'm not pessimist, I've just been around long enough to know that their slides are lies. Specially after recent ones which I already posted here.

BenetanegiaNo you are just saying that an APU is better than a 2500k, roflmao.

So what? Who cares? Do both of you really need to go back and forth here? You both sound ridiculous.

erockerSo what? Who cares? Do both of you really need to go back and forth here? You both sound ridiculous.

As an enthusiast and knowledgeable (to an enxtent) person I consider my responsability in a public forum to tell the truth about things. So that people who read are informed and can make the right decisions.

Saying that an APU is better than an 2500k is a complete irresponsability, someone may actually end up believing it and get a subpar (in comparison) CPU.

erockerSo what? Who cares? Do both of you really need to go back and forth here? You both sound ridiculous.

:oagreed ,sorry ,it was him :laugh:

dude jus stop man i never said the apu was better

$200 for a 2500

$100 for a APU

Memory costs the same.

$60 FM1 board

$ 50 1155 board

All else being equal if I were to build a basic box with light weight gaming needs the APU would win. An extra $90 to spend on a GPU would get you more bang for the buck than the CPU's 10-15% increased efficiency.

BenetanegiaYou've missed the part were Tahiti is far more advanced in the HSA edpartment than Trinity which is going to be VLIW4. Discrete GPUs are at least one step ahead of iGPUs and will remain like that for many generations. Until after 2014 like I said.



Erm it's not an i5 that you should be comparing with. An i5 murders any APU and eats it for breakfast along with some chips and salad. lol see you are a fanboy, talk about price disregarding performance and even claim everyone would be happier with a CPU that is 50% slower. Sure.

true about the i5 murdering apus mostly because sb has atleast 30%-40% better ipc than phenom II/stars cores
but if amd can finaly make piledriver like it was officialy intended to be(match phenom II ipc but clock higher)then you have a very interesting cpu in hand, in such case a quad core(dual module) piledriver clocked at 4.2ghz should atleast match a sb bridge at 3.0ghz (assuming 40% is the ipc difference)
and knowing that bulldozer was able to hit 4.2ghz i have no doubt that piledriver will hit even better frequencies. (4.5ghz is very much likely)
that plus 4 extra cores can make the desktop piledriver a very competitive cpu, sure it will still be slower in single thread than ivy bridge(which almost hits the 4ghz barrier) but will have an edge in multitasking unlike bulldozer that barely matched sb in multithread, but totaly lost in single thread.

So if all this comes into reality I expect piledriver to be 20% behind ivy bridge in single thread, and lik 10% better in multithread compared to quad core intels with ht CPUs.

SteevoAll else being equal if I were to build a basic box with light weight gaming needs the APU would win. An extra $90 to spend on a GPU would get you more bang for the buck than the CPU's 10-15% increased efficiency.

If you think the difference between a 2500 and even the best APU is only 10-15%, I hate to say it, but you're misinformed. The CPU side of Quad-Core SB's is upwards of 50% faster than Llano;

www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canucks-reviews/50952-amd-a8-3870k-unlocked-llano-apu-review.html

Even with a 20% overclock, Llano wasn't really even close to the i5-2400. In games where the CPU plays any role, the i5's crush the Llano offerings, with the same discrete GPU. That's also comparing the $140 A8-3870K, the i5-2400 is currently $190, and you could even get an i5-2300 for $180, both of which are better than that CPU in every way (sans iGPU). If you look at the charts and see the ~$100 APU's, they are far worse.

Saying a Llano-based solution is as good as a Quad-Core SB solution, for anything short of day to day use, is dishonest at best.