Apparently Fusion has Redwood level graphics

May 22, 2007
11,135
0
86
#2
and I predict that the sun could very well rise in the east this day, unless it rises from a different direction of course. or there is a long-term solar eclipse that blots out the sun. or sunspots, those things are a bitch. but still, it should probably be there.
 
May 24, 2003
16,000
0
0
#4
the article in question said:
The surprising part of the Fusion all-integrated chip is that it actually comes with Redwood equivalent graphics. Redwood is a group codename for Radeon 5500 and 5600 graphics
............
We will still have to wait until 2011 before this technology is comercially available, but it already appears that it will be worth the wait.
wat? How is this worth the wait? If you want 5500 graphics, stop being a lazy idiot and go buy a video card.
 

jvroig

Platinum Member
Nov 4, 2009
2,399
0
76
#5
wat? How is this worth the wait? If you want 5500 graphics, stop being a lazy idiot and go buy a video card.
It's not about absolute performance. What is "worth the wait" for the author is the advancement of technology to have decent GPU performance without needing a discrete 5500/5600 series card, and instead just have it integrated with the CPU. And I agree. I'm not saying such performance is not available today, but that it's quite a good achievement to have something integrated with the CPU that beats all mobo-integrated GPUs today by a wide margin (assuming this 5500/5600 equivalent is true)

If this is true, though, what I want to know is how they were able to achieve such performance without having VRAM to spare.
 
Jun 30, 2010
1,140
0
0
#6
OEM applications. IE Dell etc. reduce parts count on the PC and you get a nice cheaper to produce computer with lower overall cost that performs better.

http://www.fudzilla.com/graphics/graphics/fusion-to-have-redwood-graphics

Of course he fails to mention what Fusion product will have that. I can't find the size of the Redwood chip at this moment but I bet it's larger than the rumored 75mm2 of Ontario so you have to think this would be on the llano core.
wat? How is this worth the wait? If you want 5500 graphics, stop being a lazy idiot and go buy a video card.
It's not about absolute performance. What is "worth the wait" for the author is the advancement of technology to have decent GPU performance without needing a discrete 5500/5600 series card, and instead just have it integrated with the CPU. And I agree. I'm not saying such performance is not available today, but that it's quite a good achievement to have something integrated with the CPU that beats all mobo-integrated GPUs today by a wide margin (assuming this 5500/5600 equivalent is true)

If this is true, though, what I want to know is how they were able to achieve such performance without having VRAM to spare.
 

Dark4ng3l

Diamond Member
Sep 17, 2000
5,061
1
0
#7
Fitting a decent cpu + 5670(well probably more like the lower end redwood parts) into a reasonable power envelope for mid range system/laptops would be a REALLY good product for mainstream users.

Personally I don't go for ultra powerful laptops. Right now I have an HP DV2 with Huron platform chipset/cpu and that thing works well for me. Atom was too slow for me to consider using it for schoolwork or plugging it on my monitor when my main system goes down. These kind of chips are the future of low power systems IMO.
 

khon

Golden Member
Jun 8, 2010
1,296
3
91
#8
The 5670 has 627 million transistors and a TDP of 64W. Fitting equivalent performance onto the CPU would be impressive. More likely though its closer to the 5570 or even the 5550.
 
Jun 30, 2010
1,140
0
0
#9
Fitting a decent cpu + 5670(well probably more like the lower end redwood parts) into a reasonable power envelope for mid range system/laptops would be a REALLY good product for mainstream users.

Personally I don't go for ultra powerful laptops. Right now I have an HP DV2 with Huron platform chipset/cpu and that thing works well for me. Atom was too slow for me to consider using it for schoolwork or plugging it on my monitor when my main system goes down. These kind of chips are the future of low power systems IMO.

I have a cf-29 toughbook. 1.6ghz with intel graphics. It is no rockstar but for everyday use, email,spread sheet,accounting. It does all those things with reasonable speed and efficiency. the real benefit is lower parts count and improved performance. It makes the big companies, HP,Dell etc more competitive. You no long have to put in a video card to get reasonable graphics performance with modern content.

we should see alot of similar products in desktops/laptops/mobile.

if the performance is as claimed AMD might do very very well in the consumer upgrade/replace OEM suppleir and office market.
 

Dark4ng3l

Diamond Member
Sep 17, 2000
5,061
1
0
#10
Now that I am thinking about it this HAS to be Llano on 32nm because otherwise this kind of claimed performance would be impossible out of a reasonably sized chip with power consumption good enough for mobile use.
 
Jun 30, 2010
1,140
0
0
#11
Now that I am thinking about it this HAS to be Llano on 32nm because otherwise this kind of claimed performance would be impossible out of a reasonably sized chip with power consumption good enough for mobile use.

ok either ay. more performance lower parts count. cheaper to build desktop etc. viewing from oem vantage point. very good thing. not to mention the marketing for Fusion should be pretty easy with catchy slogans.
 
Mar 27, 2009
12,755
19
106
#12
For mobile users, I wonder how much power the Redwood core will draw at idle?
 
Jun 30, 2010
1,140
0
0
#13
For mobile users, I wonder how much power the Redwood core will draw at idle?

depends on the tatic they take to shut down or declock the cores. If they do it right it should be pretty damn low. if they do it wrong it could be alot.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY