• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Did AMD screw up Llano?

Davidh373

Davidh373

Platinum Member
I see AMD's APU Llano has released, and I also noticed the price and performance numbers. I thought Llano (while being low TDP and somewhat light on performance) was supposed to be inexpensive and compete with Atom. They look like they are trying to compete more in the desktop market. I can get an APU and Motherboard for around $270, while I can get a Phenom II X4 with a motherboard including graphics chip for around $210 which performs better. What is the deal here? It doesn't compete with any desktop processor in any productive way. I'm assuming AMD will bring out laptops, but it seems like these APUs burn around 100W, so that is going to kill battery life. What do you guys think?
 
Uhhh what? You do realize that the mobile version of Llano APU is going to have a much lower TDP than 100W right? Posts like these make me wonder if people even read reviews on the Anandtech homepage anymore.
 
Yeah. LLano isn't the competitor to the Atom, Brazos/Zacate is.

And the laptop versions of LLano are 35W and 45W TDP, not 100W.

I kind of am disappointed in the desktop LLano, I hope that they release a 35W desktop LLano quad-core. I'm also awaiting the mini-ITX mobos that were shown previously, but curiously, haven't appeared on the market yet.
 
Beer4Me said:
Uhhh what? You do realize that the mobile version of Llano APU is going to have a much lower TDP than 100W right? Posts like these make me wonder if people even read reviews on the Anandtech homepage anymore.
Click to expand...

But what is the point of THIS version? Why release a desktop version. It's pointless. I read the full review. Anand said the processor was good for HTPCs, but the on die GPU had very little purpose. He's on youtube saying it's good the gpu acceleration works on youtube. I mean really? The best AMD can do is make a quad core that plays youtube smoothly? They could certainly do better.

To address your comment about the lower TDP on the laptop version, yes I do. Lowering TDP on a processor that performs this absurdly on a desktop will still mean lower clocks and decreased performance. Why not just make a laptop version? Why make this processor that doesn't really compete well with anything? Seems like a huge waste of time and money. It is fact that a Phenom II X4 is still better for cheaper, and is much older. Heck, it's just barely better than the Athlon II X4. Real thoughts please. Obviously on the version that is out currently.

Athlon II X4 630 vs. A8-3850
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/105?vs=399

Phenom II X4 955 vs. A8-3850
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/88?vs=399

So where is the advance here? Where is the leap from the intel 8xx series to Sandy Bridge? Where is the cheaper price tag? Where is the lower TDP? Where is the Performance gains? There is nothing encouraging me to upgrade to this instead of a Phenom II. Nothing encouraging me to buy this over a Phenom II or better for any new builds.

Disclaimer: I am not an Intel fanboy, and am only criticizing the Desktop version of Llano. I have recommended and purchased AMD Chipsets, and GPUs in the past.
 
It's a great OEM CPU. This is just the first generation and as far as APUs(including Intels whateva they call it) go, this is the best on the market.
 
Davidh373 said:
I can get an APU and Motherboard for around $270, while I can get a Phenom II X4 with a motherboard including graphics chip for around $210 which performs better.
Click to expand...

For the record, the Llano GPU is much better than anything that AMD's integrated into a chipset. IIRC, the Llano GPU is about on par with the ~$50 discrete cards, so you're not really losing anything (besides the extra TDP of a discrete card).

Is Llano the hardcore gaming world beater than some people were hyping it up to be? Hell no.
Is Llano a huge step up from HD 3000 and the 800 series IGP? Yes.
 
sandorski said:
It's a great OEM CPU. This is just the first generation and as far as APUs(including Intels whateva they call it) go, this is the best on the market.
Click to expand...

Best on the market at it's price maybe? Sandy Bridge performs twice as good for about $30 more with the i5 2300. The 2500k being $70 more for it's better HD3000 on die GPU. apparently the 6550 on die GPU is better than the HD3000 according to Anand, but it's trading that for a processor at 50% performance to save $30. It's certainly a risky trade off. Then again, most of what hold laptops and even some low end desktops back in games is the onboard GPU, so I'll be intrigued to find out if when it's clocked lower, the 6550 still performs better than the HD3000s in i7 laptops. One of the main downfalls in this APU marriage seems to be AMDs lack of competition with Intel's Quicksync video encoding.

mfenn said:
For the record, the Llano GPU is much better than anything that AMD's integrated into a chipset. IIRC, the Llano GPU is about on par with the ~$50 discrete cards, so you're not really losing anything (besides the extra TDP of a discrete card).

Is Llano the hardcore gaming world beater than some people were hyping it up to be? Hell no.
Is Llano a huge step up from HD 3000 and the 800 series IGP? Yes.
Click to expand...

Good point. but who would be in the market for a $50 GPU? One can argue it's better than integrated graphics, but what benefits will a user who will buy in this price range have for a built in $50 GPU? I know this is a little powerful for Grandma's computer, but the average user buying either a prebuilt or maybe building an HTPC won't see a huge difference between this and a normal processor. Performance in windows, web, ect. will be a majority of their concern. (<- IMO anyway)

EDIT: Ok, so GPU performance on laptops is great. Anyone have a price for one?

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4444/amd-llano-notebook-review-a-series-fusion-apu-a8-3500m/12
 
Last edited:
Davidh373 said:
but the average user buying either a prebuilt or maybe building an HTPC won't see a huge difference between this and a normal processor. Performance in windows, web, ect. will be a majority of their concern. (<- IMO anyway)
Click to expand...

Two questions:

Will the average user buying a prebuilt machine see a huge difference between an Athlon II X4 and a Core i5-2500K?

Will the average user who also plays games like WoW, L4D, or SCII see a huge difference between a Core i5-2500K with Intel HD 3000 graphics and an A8-3850?
 
I don't think it's a mistake, I think it's a preview of what's in store for the future. As dies shrink they'll be able to meld the CPU with faster GPU's eventually doing away with the need for Discrete Graphics Cards for most.
 
Davidh373 said:
I see AMD's APU Llano has released, and I also noticed the price and performance numbers. I thought Llano (while being low TDP and somewhat light on performance) was supposed to be inexpensive and compete with Atom. They look like they are trying to compete more in the desktop market. I can get an APU and Motherboard for around $270, while I can get a Phenom II X4 with a motherboard including graphics chip for around $210 which performs better. What is the deal here? It doesn't compete with any desktop processor in any productive way. I'm assuming AMD will bring out laptops, but it seems like these APUs burn around 100W, so that is going to kill battery life. What do you guys think?
Click to expand...

Its called an integrated GPU that blows away discrete GPU's.
 
The price does seem a bit high for what it is, but it's new tech, and the price has to come down eventually. Also not too happy about the rumors of a hard TDP limit in the architecture of the desktop chips, to arbitrarily prevent these chips from reaching speeds comparable to Bulldozer on the desktop. Seems a bit lame of AMD to me.

I'm still looking forward to getting one, if only for HTPC duties or the like. Preferably one with 35-45W TDP like their mobile versions.
 
Last edited:
The reason why Llano is yet to be the 'thing' yet is due to the fact that there aren't that many GPU accelerated programs just yet. Since all the buzz about Fusion is about GPGPU computing and OpenCL, the potential of Llano in GPGPU computing has not been seen yet.

As more and more software developers port their software to enable hardware GPGPU acceleration only would we see the whole Fusion thing and heterogeneous computing going on. But the current Llano nonetheless is not very competitive against SB options in terms of CPU performance which makes me wonder if AMD should have just gone completely with a fusion with Bulldozer cores instead like Trinity. I am 50/50 with Llano competing in the desktop space but in the mobile space it is going to be a big hit.

Extracted from the AMD Fusion Developers Summit.
t3AgB.jpg


AucRS.jpg
 
Last night I was listening to what the guys on pcper podcast had to say and it kind of made sense. Right now, it's like buying a console, only it plays PC games. For ~$450-$500 you can buy/build a desktop that can play above the quality of PS3/ 360, and get you DX11. They said the stars cores were it's downside, but the graphics are better and use a little less CPU than the HD3000 on-die. They also mentioned it being a 'preview' of sorts to show off what could potentially be done in the future.

EDIT: one of the weird things I heard from them is they don't play DX9 games?

mnewsham said:
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/HP+-+Pav...0a8&amp;cp=2&amp;lp=11
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/HP+-+Pav...20a8&amp;cp=2&amp;lp=1
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/HP+-+Pav...20a8&amp;cp=1&amp;lp=5
Click to expand...

Thank you. Do you know if all the chips have the 6550, or do some of the lower end ones have lesser graphics? I'd probably recommend that $650 model to anyone looking for a 'cheapish' laptop if they would like to game a bit.
 
Davidh373 said:
EDIT: one of the weird things I heard from them is they don't play DX9 games?
Click to expand...

It will definitely play DX9 games. What you might be referring to is that the Hybrid Crossfire feature doesn't work for DX9 (don't ask me why).

Gigantopithecus said:
Two questions:

Will the average user buying a prebuilt machine see a huge difference between an Athlon II X4 and a Core i5-2500K?

Will the average user who also plays games like WoW, L4D, or SCII see a huge difference between a Core i5-2500K with Intel HD 3000 graphics and an A8-3850?
Click to expand...

Very good way to put it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top