It is not a completely different chip. Both APU's in the PS4 / Xbox are basically dual Athlon 5150's with a pumped up GPU. Both Microsoft and Sony don't even hide the AMD Jaguar micro architecture from its marketing literature.
Jaguar was engineered for Tablet usage -- but since Intel is wrapping $20 bills around every Atom they send to OEM's. The OEM's won't even consider it. The inferior Intel chip is probably good enough or most people.
There is a good article on why x86 will probably remain in every future game console (no more Power architecture probably).
http://www.forbes.com/sites/patrick...ns-microsoft-and-sony-chose-amd-for-consoles/
Last edited:
Phynaz
Lifer
- Mar 13, 2006
- 10,140
- 819
- 126
Edit:
You know what, forget it. I'm stepping out, there's nothing to be gained posting to you.
Last edited:
Again, Atom and Jaguar are indeed competing directly. Intel's contra revenue may have kept Jaguar out of Tablets -- but AM1 Jaguars (Sempron 2650 / 3850 / Athlon 5150 / 5350) are competing against Atom motherboards/desktops..... And Atom laptops are competing with Jaguar laptops.
So how exactly are they not competing? Contra revenue has indeed kicked the Jaguar micro architecture out of tablets -- but Jaguar is still going head to head with Atom in the Laptop and Desktop markets.
Last edited:
Seriously, are you are incapable of using a search engine? This is downright pathetic.
AMD's APU's for Tablets:
http://www.amd.com/en-us/products/processors/notebook-tablet/tablet-apu#
AMD's low power Jaguar for Tablets:
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2593...ar_lowpower_processor_design_for_tablets.html
Well, between the trolling, thread crapping and insulting people, I think you are done here for now.
Markfw900
Last edited by a moderator:
Or maybe its the fact that you've been wrong about almost everything you stated for the past 2 pages of this thread.
You know, AMD website isn't the defining source for product information. On this same site we can find that AMD also sells high end server processors (lol), but that doesn't mean the market consider they have high end server processors. It's the same with their tablets, they can say anything they want about Jaguar, but actually selling the thing on this market is another story.
Nice spin on being totally wrong.
Jaguar is a micro-architecture, not a chip. You clearly couldn't tell the difference.
Ignorance is bliss. BTW, that wasn't the high road -- the high road would be to admit
that you were actually wrong. On multiple things...... Like how you claimed Jaguar
was never designed for tablets to PS4/Xbox APU's being completely different from
their desktop AM1 brothers (when they are all built on the same Jaguar micro
architecture).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaguar_%28microarchitecture%29
Not only does AMD's Jaguar power game consoles, it powers desktops, powers laptops, it powers embedded systems and even some servers. Your claim that these are all entirely different chips is a complete failure to understand its design.
The A6 1450, A4 1350, A4 1250 and A4 1200 were all designed for Tablets -- but because of Intel contra revenue in the tablet market, the majority of these APU's ended up migrating to other uses like low-end laptops.
Jaguar tablets may be rare -- but they are indeed a reality:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EW2ve4kGcF0
Last edited:
The jaguar microarchitecture may be suited for tablets but the chip was never designed for tablets. If intel had a BOM problem, AMD has it far worse.
Kabini/Beema dies do not have an integrated signal processor for example which means another fairly substantial on board component, increasing cost and decreasing battery life.
Other problems include
AMD also doesn't do well on Android due to compatibility reasons. I haven't seen any AMD android tablets.
At least at launch idle power was unacceptable compared to the competition.
AMD's power numbers are Soc only while the S600 is total power - display.
Directly put jaguar as implemented in mullins/temash was never suitable for a tablet. Even without contra revenue it would be unappealing for these reasons.
Edit:
A6 1450, A4 1350, A4 1250 and A4 1200
Are all dirt slow terrible pieces of crap compared to ARM or BT.
I seriously doubt it.... If he already knew it -- he wouldn't have gotten so many technical details incorrect that are fairly common knowledge.
The jaguar microarchitecture may be suited for tablets but the chip was never designed for tablets. If intel had a BOM problem, AMD has it far worse.
Kabini/Beema dies do not have an integrated signal processor for example which means another fairly substantial on board component, increasing cost and decreasing battery life.
Other problems include
AMD also doesn't do well on Android due to compatibility reasons. I haven't seen any AMD android tablets.
At least at launch idle power was unacceptable compared to the competition.
AMD's power numbers are Soc only while the S600 is total power - display.
Directly put jaguar as implemented in mullins/temash was never suitable for a tablet. Even without contra revenue it would be unappealing for these reasons.
Edit:
A6 1450, A4 1350, A4 1250 and A4 1200
Are all dirt slow terrible pieces of crap compared to ARM or BT.
wow didnt want to get involved in the derailing but i must respond to these inaccurate claims.
so mullins wasn't good for tablets, yet we ave tablets with intel core chips? how does that compute, those chips will draw 20-40W under load.
also comparing temash to arm and bt, at best those will have better battery life. show me where an alwinner, rockchip, snapdragon, ti omap or a freescale i.mx soc will outperform amd temash, let alone mullins.
back up your claims, especially about the bom costs.
Jaguar was actually designed for tablets.
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/Cape-Temash-Jaguar-Kabini-Tablet,21893.html
They specifically designed tablet features into the architecture like turbo dock:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nat6uZC4fxE
AMD is absolutely horrible on Android, which has definitely held them back. However their micro APU's are well suited for Windows tablets for heavy 3D users -- SolidWorks, Computer Animators, Health Care.... But that's a tiny niche at best -- one that Intel's contra revenue has pretty much wiped out for OEM consideration. So Apple iPads have basically carved out this niche of the market (obviously using iOS instead of Windows -- but still doing some pretty decent 3D Apps nonetheless).
The bottom line is Jaguar is again held back by AMD's huge die disadvantage against Intel.... So it's not just the contra-revenue (but that hurts a lot as well). Competing with 28 nm product versus Intel's 22 nm and 14 nm nodes is a dead end for AMD's tablet aspirations (which they've publicly acknowledged).
Last edited:
There is no point to having a discussion with you guys when are simply are not receptive to anything you don't like.
Post #114 is actually moving somewhere. That's good. I agree with what you say. AMD may have designed jaguar for tablets but (I amd arguing) it is not competitive in tablets, not only for the contra-revenue but because they lacked the scope for proper implementation (ISP, turbo, Win sleep states, better BoM integration, etc.)
Post #113 is not getting it.
You realize that is exactly what is going on in the graph there? Higher idle consumption = lower idle battery life. Temash may have been competitive from a performance standpoint but sucked down a lot of power and lacked basic power features like a good turbo implementation. The cut down tablet level chips (1.0 ghz A4-1200) are ridiculously weak (GB3 -560 single core, 1000 MT, 5600 points 3dmark physics), even the top tablet level A6-1450 only gets 12,000 in 3dmark physics, around S600, which is good but as the power numbers show, consumes more power. Values taken from NBC.
TI exited the ARM market years before jaguar was launched FYI.
Edit: This is getting off topic so I'm done here unless we start talking about kaveri.
Post #114 is actually moving somewhere. That's good. I agree with what you say. AMD may have designed jaguar for tablets but (I amd arguing) it is not competitive in tablets, not only for the contra-revenue but because they lacked the scope for proper implementation (ISP, turbo, Win sleep states, better BoM integration, etc.)
Post #113 is not getting it.
You realize that is exactly what is going on in the graph there? Higher idle consumption = lower idle battery life. Temash may have been competitive from a performance standpoint but sucked down a lot of power and lacked basic power features like a good turbo implementation. The cut down tablet level chips (1.0 ghz A4-1200) are ridiculously weak (GB3 -560 single core, 1000 MT, 5600 points 3dmark physics), even the top tablet level A6-1450 only gets 12,000 in 3dmark physics, around S600, which is good but as the power numbers show, consumes more power. Values taken from NBC.
TI exited the ARM market years before jaguar was launched FYI.
Edit: This is getting off topic so I'm done here unless we start talking about kaveri.
Last edited:
The only Temash chip for tablets was the A4-1200 and that one is a complete crap, the others where for touch netbooks and 2-1 with active cooling. And the Mullin equivalent for the A4-1200 is the E1 Micro-6200T that is also, not good enoght.
Im not longer interested in AMD if they cant provide a tablet for $150 or less with a fast enoght processor, and im definately not interested in making out escuses for them.
Stop lying... a Intel BT chip cant draw 20-40W under load man... how on hell can it do that when the chargers for the tablets are 9v 2a and 5v 2a and thats is for the whole device + charging? its simple math.
Last edited:
AtenRa
Lifer
- Feb 2, 2009
- 14,003
- 3,362
- 136
Back on topic,
I was looking at Intel HD5000 again and this is quite shocking.
Intel will sell a Core i5 4350U (dual core with HT at 1.4GHz base) + HD5000 Laptop for 1400 Euros
When the faster (both in CPU MT and iGPU) AMD FX-7500 Laptops are considered second grade and are selling for 500 Euros or less.
Not only that, but people will pay for a Core i3 with a puny HD4400 and dont even consider or dont even have the choice of the AMD product.
This is getting seriously not in the best interest of the consumer. People will have to realize that AMD may not have the fastest desktop CPUs but in the Laptop space they have very competitive products with Kaveri and soon Carrizo.
They will have to be guided to make the correct purchasing decision and given a second choice with an AMD product.
I was looking at Intel HD5000 again and this is quite shocking.
Intel will sell a Core i5 4350U (dual core with HT at 1.4GHz base) + HD5000 Laptop for 1400 Euros
When the faster (both in CPU MT and iGPU) AMD FX-7500 Laptops are considered second grade and are selling for 500 Euros or less.
Not only that, but people will pay for a Core i3 with a puny HD4400 and dont even consider or dont even have the choice of the AMD product.
This is getting seriously not in the best interest of the consumer. People will have to realize that AMD may not have the fastest desktop CPUs but in the Laptop space they have very competitive products with Kaveri and soon Carrizo.
They will have to be guided to make the correct purchasing decision and given a second choice with an AMD product.
The problem I ran into with AMD laptops is not the cpu/gpu/guts, it was the case and peripherals were all 2nd and 3rd rate junk. I was perfectly content with an a8-6410 I had for a few weeks, but everything NOT the cpu/gpu/motherboard was crap. Ended up with some giant intel HP to get an all around decent unit. Locally anyway.
frozentundra123456
Lifer
- Aug 11, 2008
- 10,451
- 642
- 126
@ Aten
Dont know where you are getting your numbers, but according to Passmark, the 4350u has a 10% higher cpu score and 29% higher single threaded score, while the FX has a 25% higher TDP.
Dont know where you are getting your numbers, but according to Passmark, the 4350u has a 10% higher cpu score and 29% higher single threaded score, while the FX has a 25% higher TDP.
AtenRa
Lifer
- Feb 2, 2009
- 14,003
- 3,362
- 136
Stop the nonsense,
From notebookcheck
x264 HD 4.0 pass 1
FX-7500 = 68,5 fps
N3540 = 54,3 fps
FX = 26% faster
x264 HD 4.0 pass 2
FX-7500 = 13,9 fps
N3540 = 11,1 fps
FX = 25% faster
AtenRa
Lifer
- Feb 2, 2009
- 14,003
- 3,362
- 136
10-20sec synthetic benchmarks dont mean a crap. Try do something that will stress the CPU for more than a minute and see the results drop down due to CPU throttling at 1.4GHz base.
No disagreement with your post, but on the topic of what you touched upon in the above don't you think this has more to do with the OEMs who are creating the finalized products?
Meaning this isn't really an AMD vs Intel point of discussion, but more of a "why don't the OEMs find it to be worthwhile to field an AMD-based laptop outfitted with all the comparable bells and whistles that one can find on an Intel-based laptop?"
I'm wondering if this isn't more of an issue of what is referred to as "downstream" supply chain management?
In business you have to worry about "upstream" supply chain management as this determines your cost structure (prices your suppliers sell to you) as well as your risk structure (do you have dual or multi source options?).
But you also have to worry about "downstream" supply chain management as that determines your revenue opportunities, brand recognition with the end-user, and market exposure.
Downstream supply chain management is the reason Intel has a contra-revenue program. They recognized they must seed the market (the OEMs) with an incentive to even bother with x86-based anything for tablets if there was ever going to exist a software and app ecosystem from which end-users would see value in owning an x86-based tablet/phone versus a random android or iOS mobile device.
Historically speaking it would appear that AMD has failed in their downstream supply chain management. Be it with GPGPU, APU and HSA, or in their vision of CMT. But what you are mentioning, on the hardware side of business, it sounds to me like AMD is also not effectively managing the downstream supply chain management for their laptops and so on.
If they leave it entirely up to the OEMs to decide how to capture and showcase AMD-based processor products, then they are leaving it up to the OEMs to decide how best to milk the most profits out of the end-user. And that is going to come in the form of craptastic integrated components (screen, keyboard, battery, etc). It is up to AMD to do something about that, if they care to do anything about it.
The OEMs are not going to do anything about it, a lion does not voluntarily choose to become a vegan.
Last edited:
At least at launch idle power was unacceptable compared to the competition.
AMD's power numbers are Soc only while the S600 is total power - display.
It s not because this slide was published at AnandTech that it s accurate, this is not the power figure for Mullins.
As for bettery life it s 6-8h depending of usage with a 10"1 1080p and 32WH battery.
DrMrLordX
Lifer
- Apr 27, 2000
- 22,701
- 12,652
- 136
Yeah, AMD seriously has to start setting some standards for the OEM machines featuring their products. Especially on APUs.
On a side note, monstercameron, I'd be interested in seeing how your FX-7500 fares on older gpu benchmarks like 3DMark Vantage, Unigine Sanctuary, and Unigine Tropics with 14.12 vs 15.2. Not to thread-derail, but I ran into some weird results with a similar shader configuration and I would like to see if your machine shows the same trends.
On a side note, monstercameron, I'd be interested in seeing how your FX-7500 fares on older gpu benchmarks like 3DMark Vantage, Unigine Sanctuary, and Unigine Tropics with 14.12 vs 15.2. Not to thread-derail, but I ran into some weird results with a similar shader configuration and I would like to see if your machine shows the same trends.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter