Llano Demo

[ElFenix]

System integrators in general have a habit of inflating all other system specs when all you want is a better GPU. i3 + 6850, for example is really not a bad combo for games, but find a Dell, HP, Sony, etc... that even offer a 6850 and you can only get it paired with a $1500 Socket 1366 machine .

The mobile side is just as bad, possibly even worse, since the CPU / GPU disparity is even bigger with the "mobile" version of a 68xx being more like a desktop 5770 than a 58xx or 68xx. They make you move to an i7 and 17" screen just to even have the option of the equivalent of a 5770 GPU. It's really pretty ridiculous.

this is why i hate OEMs. customized for you is a load of crap because they bundle options together.

at least with the desktop side you can add your own stuff.

 

[VirtualLarry]

This was a demo, not a review. Demo's rarely (if ever?) include full system specs, or any system specs at all beyond the highest level (This is Llano vs Sandy Bridge i7-2630QM).

They did include the specs of each system.

 

[veri745]

They did include the specs of each system.

Then what more could you possibly ask for?

 

[Nemesis 1]

Any good links? I'd be interested in seeing this...

All ready posted link to O/C here at forums

 

[Nemesis 1]

They did include the specs of each system.

True enough . Was turbo mode enabled? I missed the AMD cpu running speed . SB was 2ghz. So I suspect turbo was off. Its also the lowest turbo for the HD3000.
I may have missed the AMD cpu speed. But if they did clock for clock the SB was handy capped as AMD can't run at intels IGP clockspeed.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Heres an example of AMDx test proceeders . Ya have to read the print at the end of the video to see what amd calls apple to apple comparison .

http://www.youtube.com/user/AMDUnprocessed#p/u/5/4WOdKaLyCn4

 

[Nemesis 1]

They did include the specs of each system.

Ya I went back watched again. I thought that intel notebooks were suppose to be 1600 memory. But there is no clock speed given for the intel IGP or the AMD system . The other part were all aware of is the low level cache runs at same speed as processor. If turbo was disabled this demo is pretty worthless.

 

[busydude]

Heres an example of AMDx test proceeders . Ya have to read the print at the end of the video to see what amd calls apple to apple comparison .

http://www.youtube.com/user/AMDUnprocessed#p/u/5/4WOdKaLyCn4

That video compares (E-350)Zacate with P6000. I am not sure what your point is.

 

[Nemesis 1]

That video compares (E-350)Zacate with P6000. I am not sure what your point is.

Point is SB was already out why test against HD graphics . Why not the HD3000 that will be on all intel notebooks . The hd 3000 is 2x faster than the one choosen for demo . Thats AMDs marketing .

Remember when intel showed C2D six months early . AMD fans said it was marketing , But intel went against AMDs best in that demo . Intel showed legit results Apple to apples . This was old vs new tech . Fusion against Intel fusion is apples to apples. Ha I know what market zacata is suppose to play in . But AMD marketing is the pits that can't be taken seriously.

It just a shame AMD wouldn't even go against the i5 560m. Which would likely lose anyway but not like that video showed zacata won't go against intel p6000. but SB and on tablets the intels oak trail . A better compare would have been against Atom which would have been easily beaten by zacata. That would have been a more honest compare. Amd would have even looked stronger.

 

[Skurge]

Point is SB was already out why test against HD graphics . Why not the HD3000 that will be on all intel notebooks . The hd 3000 is 2x faster than the one choosen for demo . Thats AMDs marketing .

Remember when intel showed C2D six months early . AMD fans said it was marketing , But intel went against AMDs best in that demo . Intel showed legit results Apple to apples . This was old vs new tech . Fusion against Intel fusion is apples to apples. Ha I know what market zacata is suppose to play in . But AMD marketing is the pits that can't be taken seriously.

No amount of CPU turbo or CPU advantage is going to make up for Intels crappy IGPs. Their CPUs are great, but AMD's graphics division is just in a different league to Intel's in both hardware and software. You really think HD3000 even with an overclock (which would increase power usage even more) can stand up to 400sp Radeon GPU?

 

[busydude]

Point is SB was already out why test against HD graphics . Why not the HD3000 that will be on all intel notebooks . The hd 3000 is 2x faster than the one choosen for demo . Thats AMDs marketing .

They cannot compare their new product to an unreleased product from a competitor. I will agree with what you have said after a month if we have SB based ultra portables in $400-$500 range from Intel.

Also, come on now, you know how marketing works..

 

[drizek]

If you overclock hte IGP in a laptop, you limit CPU performance further.

The only thing that will save Intel in the laptop space is the use of Optimus and the AMD equivalent. If running a dedicated GPU was as power expensive as it was two years ago, Intel wouldn't have a chance in anything but the budget low end and desktop replacements. The entire middle woudl go to AMD.

I think Apple should have not updated the 13" MBP to sandy bridge and just waited for Llano and announced the new Llano MBP along with the SB MB Airs.

 

[drizek]

They cannot compare their new product to an unreleased product from a competitor. I will agree with what you have said after a month if we have SB based ultra portables in $400-$500 range from Intel.

Also, come on now, you know how marketing works..

We aren't going to have $500 SB ultraportables. I'm going to say there may be some ones in the $800 range with those crappy Asus displays. Those might get discounted to near the $600 range by the end of the year, but SB will never compete with Zacate.

As for the ram they used in the Llano demo, who cares? Ram speed is more or less insignificant. What difference would it make, 2%?

Also, the reason why the power consumption is so bad is because they are running these in desktop motherboards.

 

[PlasmaBomb]

Ya I went back watched again. I thought that intel notebooks were suppose to be 1600 memory. But there is no clock speed given for the intel IGP or the AMD system . The other part were all aware of is the low level cache runs at same speed as processor. If turbo was disabled this demo is pretty worthless.

There are plenty of Sandy Bridge laptops shipping with either 1066 or 1333 ram...

 

[Nemesis 1]

They cannot compare their new product to an unreleased product from a competitor. I will agree with what you have said after a month if we have SB based ultra portables in $400-$500 range from Intel.

Also, come on now, you know how marketing works..

Ya . explain marketing to me and than show me a link of intel doing the same thing . If amd wanted to show off the power of llano They needed to include the processor speed and gpu speed of both units . I already know for fact that the SB didn't turbo up to 2.9 ghz as there was 4 programs running which puts the intel unit @2100ghz. Without llanos clocks of both graphics and cpu its a meaningless demo.

 

[Nemesis 1]

There are plenty of Sandy Bridge laptops shipping with either 1066 or 1333 ram...

I don't care about how a system was configured by OEM as far as Ram so long as its at spec. If intel mobile is speced at 1600 on memory thats what should be used. Amd made a choice as to how to spec here.

 

[Skurge]

I don't care about how a system was configured by OEM as far as Ram so long as its at spec. If intel mobile is speced at 1600 on memory thats what should be used. Amd made a choice as to how to spec here.

So it can use more power and have no increase in performance? Sure.

 

[Concillian]

Point is SB was already out why test against HD graphics . Why not the HD3000 that will be on all intel notebooks . The hd 3000 is 2x faster than the one choosen for demo . Thats AMDs marketing .

How confident are you that HD3000 will be on notebooks competing with the price of an E350?

I'm not very confident of that. Intel has a track record of neeutering their bottom end. Not just cutting out features, but completely gutting it. None of the announced SB CPUs are price competitive with an E350. Do you have a link to one that is?

Why would a company make a comparison to something that is in a higher price class? They'd have to be completely retarded. Put yourself in their marketing team's shoes. Would you honestly compare an E350 to a CPU projected to be in machines 20-50% higher priced than yours? Or would you compare to machines that are in a similar price range?

It seems like you're being purposefully obtuse just to derail the thread, because you can't really question these decisions, can you?

 

[Arkadrel]

How confident are you that HD3000 will be on notebooks competing with the price of an E350?

Why would Intel use a 230+ mm^2 sandy bridge vs a 75mm^2 E350?
Intel are makeing new Atom CPUs for that.

Point is SB was already out why test against HD graphics . Why not the HD3000 that will be on all intel notebooks .

here you go, watch this video: sandy bridge vs Llano
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mdPi4GPEI74

Configurations:
APU - AMD Accelerated Quad-Core Processor Engineering Sample
Chipset - AMD Fusion Controller Hub Engineering Sample
Video Driver - 8.830.0.0
Screen Size - 14 inch Diagonal
Screen Resolution - 1366 X 768
Memory - 4 Gb 1333 DDR3Ram
Hard Drive - C300 128Gb SSD
OS - Windows 7 Professional 64 bit

CPU - Intel® Core™ i7-2630QM 2.0Ghz (stock speed when you buy it)
Graphics - Intel® HD 3000 Graphics
Chipset - Intel® 6 Series/C200 series chipset family
Video Driver - 8.15.10.2276
Screen Size - 14 inch Diagonal
Screen Resolution - 1366 X 768
Memory - 4 Gb 1333 DDR3Ram
Hard Drive - C300 128Gb SSD
OS - Windows 7 Professional 64 bit

Youtube video of a AMD Llano vs a Intel Core i7-2630QM sandy bridge CPU, the video shows the Llano useing less power than the i7-2630QM, doing the same tasks, multi tasking better.

If amd wanted to show off the power of llano They needed to include the processor speed and gpu speed of both units .

Does it matter what speed the cpus are clocked at? if it uses less power? isnt it a fair compairison?
Also AMD didnt underclock the i7-2630QM... ITS STOCK SPEED IS 2.0GHZ... the same speed shown in the video.

Do you expect AMD to overclock a Intel laptop CPU? when compaireing it to their own cpu? When the Intel one already uses more power than the Llano does?

*** I think its safe to assume, that the laptop with the intel cpu/gpu is running stock speeds, and its being compaired to a Llano engineering sample laptop. If anything Id say Intel has a advantage, its a final product vs a engineering sample motherboard + cpu, and drivers ect that might not be completely finished yet.

 

[Nemesis 1]

No amount of CPU turbo or CPU advantage is going to make up for Intels crappy IGPs. Their CPUs are great, but AMD's graphics division is just in a different league to Intel's in both hardware and software. You really think HD3000 even with an overclock (which would increase power usage even more) can stand up to 400sp Radeon GPU?

Yes I do . Weres the bandwidth going to come from? I expect llano to have maybe 15-20 better performance . Intels IGPs use to be crapp. But their HD 3000 slaped around the AMD discrete card last generation pretty dam well. On the low end, did it not?

 

[Nemesis 1]

Why would Intel use a 230+ mm^2 sandy bridge vs a 75mm^2 E350?
Intel are makeing new Atom CPUs for that.




here you go, watch this video: sandy bridge vs Llano
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mdPi4GPEI74


Youtube video of a AMD Llano vs a Intel Core i7-2630QM sandy bridge CPU, the video shows the Llano useing less power than the i7-2630QM, doing the same tasks, multi tasking better.


Does it matter what speed the cpus are clocked at? if it uses less power? isnt it a fair compairison?
Also AMD didnt underclock the i7-2630QM... ITS STOCK SPEED IS 2.0GHZ... the same speed shown in the video.

Do you expect AMD to overclock a Intel laptop CPU? when compaireing it to their own cpu? When the Intel one already uses more power than the Llano does?

*** I think its safe to assume, that the laptop with the intel cpu/gpu is running stock speeds, and its being compaired to a Llano engineering sample laptop. If anything Id say Intel has a advantage, its a final product vs a engineering sample motherboard + cpu, and drivers ect that might not be completely finished yet.

We don't know that as both systems did use differant components. Until we see apple to apples none can say llanos power usage is better.

 

[Nemesis 1]

I recall Ats preview of zacata . AMD tried to pull wool over eyes but ananda called them on it . So was allowed to reconfigure and still the compare wasn't correct . Because many after said that zacata had = graphics to SB that AT previewed. We all kmow how that turned out now don't we?

 

[Arkadrel]

Intel drivers wherent working with their finished product in the AT preview of the zacate.
AT figoured it out and got drivers installed, and it still showed the zacate being faster than the atom.
they where then allowed to install their own benchmarks ect, and compaire freely.

So I guess we do know how that turned out.... it was as they said, the zacate was faster than the atom.

"because many after said..."

are you holding AMD responcible for something other people say that arnt with amd say?

 

[Nemesis 1]

They cannot compare their new product to an unreleased product from a competitor. I will agree with what you have said after a month if we have SB based ultra portables in $400-$500 range from Intel.

Also, come on now, you know how marketing works..

. If llano is priced @ 400-500 dollars thats great for a working notebook.But I not intersted inthe dollar comparison . If llano beats SB in graphics and AMD sells that cheap they deserve to go out of business. If your talking about zacata on cheap netbooks thats another story to go along with the tablets are going to be the big thing this year story . Which NV will be a player in with good graphics . Intel should close up shop , cash in their chips and call it aday. LOL

 

[Mopetar]

We don't know that as both systems did use differant components. Until we see apple to apples none can say llanos power usage is better.

Here's an image from Engadget's coverage of the story:

The components are essentially the same. The only thing you could possibly say is that the drivers used for the Intel system are out of date, but I have no idea about whether or not they are.

The clock speed of the AMD chip isn't likely to be much faster than the Intel chip considering that it'll be using a K10 core and the fastest quad-core notebook CPU AMD currently offers is 2.4 GHz. Adding in the fairly beefy graphics and you can't clock the CPU cores too high without driving up the TDP. Based on the actual power draws from the video and previous mobile AMD quad-core chips, the AMD CPU probably has a 45W TDP, the same as the Intel part.

This test really isn't surprising since the workload used in the video is going to murder Intel's graphics. In a straight up CPU shootout, we'd probably see just the opposite.