AMD Trinity to launch on October 2nd

[Mallibu]

CPU performance is irrelevant as long as its fast enough for end users in their day to day usage scenarios. The gGPU is where the real performance comes from. The old school CPU's are the past heterogeneous computing is the future. The fanboy trolls are having a hard time coming to terms with it, but the industry is headed in that direction regardless of their FUD. That's where AMD walks all over inetl.

Please elaborate. It would be interesting trying to back up this pile of nonsense.

 

[Gikaseixas]

It still amazes me that some people insist that an i5/i7 will speed up everyday operation... A humble dual core with an SSD will absolutely murder a X79 CPU running on a HDD for everyday use... and before you claim that anyone with a good CPU has SSD, just look at the rigs of some of the most ardent fanboys... yes, for all their claims of "AMD is crap" they have their "uber" machines running still on HDD... or with crappy video cards

Back into topic, if the motherboards are decently priced, these will make very nice all around machines. And by being affordable, some money can be used on the all-needed SSD.

This

For someone on a tight budget this APU will do just fine. It does have worse ST performance but it's not a deal breaker at all since it runs everything a comparable priced Intel cpu runs. Overall is a decent effort. What's also amazing, is the Intel fanboys coming here trying to prove at all costs how bad an unreleased product is. WOW

 

[ShintaiDK]

CPU performance is irrelevant as long as its fast enough for end users in their day to day usage scenarios. The gGPU is where the real performance comes from. The old school CPU's are the past heterogeneous computing is the future. The fanboy trolls are having a hard time coming to terms with it, but the industry is headed in that direction regardless of their FUD. That's where AMD walks all over inetl.

Reminds me of slower but smoother claim.

You are always there for a tragicomic laugh.

 

[Gikaseixas]

Utter nonsenses again. Its funny than an Atom is too slow, an SB/IB is too fast. But faildozer design with higher power consumption is just about right

Taking consumption out of this equation, how do you rate faildozer performance?
Atom is too slow in your opinion
SB is too fast in your opinion
Faildozer, how would you describe it speedwise?

 

[ShintaiDK]

Taking consumption out of this equation, how do you rate faildozer performance?
Atom is too slow in your opinion
SB is too fast in your opinion
Faildozer, how would you describe it speedwise?

Lacking? CPU speed cant be great enough since there is always something that needs more and faster.

And no, its not my opinion. But it seems to be the current way people defend AMDs lack of performance.

 

[Gikaseixas]

Lacking? CPU speed cant be great enough since there is always something that needs more and faster.

And no, its not my opinion. But it seems to be the current way people defend AMDs lack of performance.

you did not answer as i expected.
I asked you something straightforward. Anyone knows that Atom is slow, SB is fast and BD is adequate for most enthusiasts here and that's my point. My i7 trades blows with the FX 8150 and consumes a lot more than a 3570k but i don't see anyone here saying crap about older i7. It still gives me awesome performance. Wouldn't you and most FX slayers here agree that FX is actually decent if not compared to the best Intel makes?

 

[ViRGE]

You guys seem really wound up this week (has someone spiked the water cooler?). I've issued several infractions and I'm hopeful that will be the end of it. But should I have to issue further infractions, there's a good chance it will come with a vacation. So consider yourselves warned.

No trolling, no baiting, no personal attacks, no profanity, and no thread crapping. This shouldn't be too hard for everyone to follow.

-Thanks
ViRGE

 

[sequoia464]

You guys seem really wound up this week (has someone spiked the water cooler?). I've issued several infractions and I'm hopeful that will be the end of it. But should I have to issue further infractions, there's a good chance it will come with a vacation. So consider yourselves warned.

No trolling, no baiting, no personal attacks, no profanity, and no thread crapping. This shouldn't be too hard for everyone to follow.

-Thanks
ViRGE

Thanks - hate that dang water cooler sometimes...

 

[Mallibu]

you did not answer as i expected.
I asked you something straightforward. Anyone knows that Atom is slow, SB is fast and BD is adequate for most enthusiasts here and that's my point. My i7 trades blows with the FX 8150 and consumes a lot more than a 3570k but i don't see anyone here saying crap about older i7. It still gives me awesome performance. Wouldn't you and most FX slayers here agree that FX is actually decent if not compared to the best Intel makes?

This conversation is doing circles all the time.
"Bulldozer sucks"
"Why, it is fast enough in some things!!"
Well, fast enough doesn't get you anywhere, you need the whole package. And no, bulldozer is not "fast enough" when it fails to keep steady >60fps in Guild wars 2, Borderlands 2, Starcraft II to name a few games.
Your comparison also doesn't make any sense. Your i7 came out in 2009? Now if the successor to your i7, had worst performance in many cases and drained watts like a dog everyone would also say it sucks, which is what happens to Bulldozer compared to Phenom / SB,IB.
Also, it's a bad overall choice. Noone 7zips all day long, and the best choice is almost always the all-around better one.Bulldozer is very good in some special and rare cases,and mediocre to modern realistic workloads.
The fact that Bulldozer is "fast enough" holds no value when i5 is even faster, consumes half the power, overclocks better, and is better all-around performer. 0 out of 4 reasons to prefer BD.

 

[NTMBK]

This conversation is doing circles all the time.
"Bulldozer sucks"
"Why, it is fast enough in some things!!"
Well, fast enough doesn't get you anywhere, you need the whole package. And no, bulldozer is not "fast enough" when it fails to keep steady >60fps in Guild wars 2, Borderlands 2, Starcraft II to name a few games.
Your comparison also doesn't make any sense. Your i7 came out in 2009? Now if the successor to your i7, had worst performance in many cases and drained watts like a dog everyone would also say it sucks, which is what happens to Bulldozer compared to Phenom / SB,IB.
Also, it's a bad overall choice. Noone 7zips all day long, and the best choice is almost always the all-around better one.Bulldozer is very good in some special and rare cases,and mediocre to modern realistic workloads.
The fact that Bulldozer is "fast enough" holds no value when i5 is even faster, consumes half the power, overclocks better, and is better all-around performer. 0 out of 4 reasons to prefer BD.

This post is not about Bulldozer, it is about Piledriver, specifically Piledriver in Trinity. Which has a good reason to prefer it over a similarly priced Intel + discrete GPU system- it's better.

 

[AtenRa]

Oh please. Anybody on this site for more than a day already knows AMD is inferior to Intel in CPU performance. Why should I post benchmarks that have been posted in practically every other thread in the CPU forum?

We are talking about Trinity here, at the same price point the Intel Core i3 has better single thread performance but worst Graphics performance. Since Trinity can be OverClocked both in CPU and iGPU thus raising its overall performance it is only logical to say that Trinity is the better product, again in the same price point.

So why dont you and others acknowledge that ??

 

[SPBHM]

We are talking about Trinity here, at the same price point the Intel Core i3 has better single thread performance but worst Graphics performance. Since Trinity can be OverClocked both in CPU and iGPU thus raising its overall performance it is only logical to say that Trinity is the better product, again in the same price point.

So why dont you and others acknowledge that ??

that's your opinion, but integrated graphics performance may not be a factor for some, the same for overclocking, and power usage can be a factor....

also, on the only review available at the moment the top A10 model, doesn't really make anything amazing against the old i3 2100 (on the CPU tests), and in reality it will be facing the i3 3220, not the 1.5+ years old 2100.

 

[happysmiles]

oh look people are posting their opinions and others aren't agreeing.

Your opinion > someone elses clearly.

aren't we grown adults?

 

[Schmide]

With that out of the way, let's do some quick platform comparisons:

Intel Pentium G850: $69
ASRock H77M: $70
1x4GB DDR3-1333: $18
Sapphire Radeon HD 6670 DDR5: $85
Total: $242

AMD A10-5800K: $130-140 (rumored)
Hypothetical ASRock FM2 motherboard w/ USB 3.0: $70
2x2GB DDR3-1866: $25
Total: $225-235

So $7-17 more you get a decent amount higher graphics performance.

Let's see another option:

Intel Celeron G530: $45
ASRock H77M: $70
1x4GB DDR3-1333: $18
Sapphire Radeon HD 7750: $95
Total: $228

WTF is with the memory disparities? Both are dual channel, why gimp one for $7?

For that matter why not go $50 more to $275 and add a 6670 for crossfired performance that would prob eat all the above rigs.

PS with the 6670 I linked to you can take 30 bucks off the first rig and make it equal to the Trinity in price

 

[NTMBK]

WTF is with the memory disparities? Both are dual channel, why gimp one for $7?

Because the theoretical Intel rig already cost more than the Trinity one, and he didn't want to make the price disparity too apparent.

 

[Yuriman]

Because the theoretical Intel rig already cost more than the Trinity one, and he didn't want to make the price disparity too apparent.

I believe it's because you can get away with single channel on an Intel CPU without really hurting performance much, but the APU relies heavily on memory bandwidth or you're cutting heavily into performance.

 

[Mallibu]

Because the theoretical Intel rig already cost more than the Trinity one, and he didn't want to make the price disparity too apparent.

Or maybe Trinity needs 1866 RAM to give 100% of it's performance, while in Pentium you can get away with cheap 1333?

 

[pcsavvy]

Originally Posted by LOL_Wut_Axel

With that out of the way, let's do some quick platform comparisons:

Intel Pentium G850: $69
ASRock H77M: $70
1x4GB DDR3-1333: $18
Sapphire Radeon HD 6670 DDR5: $85
Total: $242

AMD A10-5800K: $130-140 (rumored)
Hypothetical ASRock FM2 motherboard w/ USB 3.0: $70
2x2GB DDR3-1866: $25
Total: $225-235

So $7-17 more you get a decent amount higher graphics performance.

Let's see another option:
Intel Celeron G530: $45
ASRock H77M: $70
1x4GB DDR3-1333: $18
Sapphire Radeon HD 7750: $95
Total: $228

Yes, these systems are very close in price but for someone who wants to overclock a quad core on a tight budget, I don't really see a problem. I just don't see why the bashers have to be so bashing about Trinity. :'( I mean if you are a high end gamer with money to burn, you know which way to go.
If you need a quad core with decent IGP on a tight budget, you know which way to go.
Bashers are making Trinity sound like it is the second coming of the old, old Intel Celeron D's.

 

[Schmide]

Or maybe Trinity needs 1866 RAM to give 100% of it's performance, while in Pentium you can get away with cheap 1333?

Until I see numbers on this, I consider it fudging the figures and bad data. FFS it's $7 bucks and hardly makes the price point variance. I mean the G850 was around $95 when it originally came out, now $70. Processors will always be more expensive at launch time. Trinity will drop as well based on performance and demand.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

WTF is with the memory disparities? Both are dual channel, why gimp one for $7?

For that matter why not go $50 more to $275 and add a 6670 for crossfired performance that would prob eat all the above rigs.

PS with the 6670 I linked to you can take 30 bucks off the first rig and make it equal to the Trinity in price

1. Because it doesn't need dual-channel. You lose 1-2% of performance, if that. Sandy Bridge has a ridiculously fast memory controller.

2. Only one stick=one free memory slot on motherboard. Makes for much better upgrading down the line since you can get up to 8GB.

3. Llano needs dual-channel and high-speed memory. 1600MHz will suffice for most, but 1866MHz is ideal.

 

[Schmide]

(snip annoying font)Yes, these systems are very close in price but for someone who wants to overclock a quad core on a tight budget, I don't really see a problem. I just don't see why the bashers have to be so bashing about Trinity. :'( I mean if you are a high end gamer with money to burn, you know which way to go.
If you need a quad core with decent IGP on a tight budget, you know which way to go.
Bashers are making Trinity sound like it is the second coming of the old, old Intel Celeron D's.

Bashers??? I was saying the price parity did not justify this reasoning. I even linked to a cheaper card -$30 so they were exactly in parity regardless of the $7.

 

[Schmide]

1. Because it doesn't need dual-channel. You lose 1-2% of performance, if that. Sandy Bridge has a ridiculously fast memory controller.

Can you link us up?

 

[Yuriman]

Until I see numbers on this, I consider it fudging the figures and bad data. FFS it's $7 bucks and hardly makes the price point variance. I mean the G850 was around $95 when it originally came out, now $70. Processors will always be more expensive at launch time. Trinity will drop as well based on performance and demand.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-a8-3850-llano,2975-6.html

^ That's dual channel.

EDIT:

^ That's with a 2600K. The RAM is dual channel, but the CPU is more than twice a Pentium. I couldn't quickly find any scaling numbers on Sandy/Ivy with single channel RAM.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

Can you link us up?

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4503/sandy-bridge-memory-scaling-choosing-the-best-ddr3

This tests everywhere from 1333 to 2133, on dual-channel mode. The CPU being tested on is an i7-2600K, which is obviously about 2x-2.5x as fast as a Pentium and also means the memory bandwidth requirements would be much lower for the Pentium.

The avg. difference between 1333 and 2133 is 1-2%. On gaming specifically, under 1%.

 

[Schmide]

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4503/sandy-bridge-memory-scaling-choosing-the-best-ddr3

This tests everywhere from 1333 to 2133, on dual-channel mode. The CPU being tested on is an i7-2600K, which is obviously about 2x-2.5x as fast as a Pentium and also means the memory bandwidth requirements would be much lower for the Pentium.

The avg. difference between 1333 and 2133 is 1-2%. On gaming specifically, under 1%.

Actually it looks to be closer to 5%. It still seems silly to risk it over future upgrades when 8gb kits can often be found for $30.

(click to link behardware)

Edit: I would also think the lesser L3 cache on the g850 would hurt even more.

Edit2: I don't know why the image won't link.