Llano - when will we start seeing reviews?

[tweakboy]

I don't like the name Lano , wtf is that. No wonder its bunk Ill stick with ASUS and EVGA

 

[Phynaz]

ASUS and EVGA make CPU's? When did that happen?

 

[Idontcare]

to be honest i really expecting AMD would use sideport memory like thier current inboard GPU but use GDDR5 instead, so it won't be bottlenecked by dual channel ram config

I could see them do something like this, it is technically feasible, but this would not be an inexpensive product (which Llano is supposed to be).

 

[wahdangun]

I could see them do something like this, it is technically feasible, but this would not be an inexpensive product (which Llano is supposed to be).

they could just make a "premium" version and it will have identical or even faster than 5570 performance, and I think right now GDDR5 is cheap enough even HD 6450 use it, and I guess it just cost them $20 to add 512Mb GDDR5 ram on board.

 

[nonameo]

I could see them do something like this, it is technically feasible, but this would not be an inexpensive product (which Llano is supposed to be).

Also, wasn't the sideport only 32 bits wide?

 

[wahdangun]

Also, wasn't the sideport only 32 bits wide?

with current iGP its actually 64 bit, but its not stopping amd to make 128 bit version, after all the 5570 have it in the first place.
and IF get stuck to 64 bit its still good, and with Gddr5 it will have same performance as 5550, and its not all bad

 

[IntelUser2000]

Low-k = reduced power consumption, high-k = better performance, right?

Simply put,

Low-K: Interconnect
High-K: Transistors

 

[Voo]

I could see them do something like this, it is technically feasible, but this would not be an inexpensive product (which Llano is supposed to be).

And one problem that shouldn't be overlooked is how to cool that RAM. GDDR5 really isn't in the same league as DDR3 so apart from the more expensive memory you'd also need some cooling solution I'd assume.
So even if Llano wasn't a budget solution, what would be the advantage of this over an external GPU? I don't see much.

 

[busydude]

When do you guys think we'll start seeing reviews?

Early June for reviews/performance numbers and end of June/ early August for wide availability.

Is a 10% boost clock-for-clock too high of an expectation?

Keeping in mind we are losing L3 cache, I don't think there is going to be any performance increase clock-for-clock. I think it is going to be comparable to Athlon II in multithreaded operations.. and slightly better in lightly threaded programs due to turbo boost.

Does any one know what kind of turbo boost is being implemented in Llano? Is it going to be similar to the one we saw in Thuban or the one being implemented for BD, that was detailed in John's blog entry?

 

[grimpr]

Llano is power gated and comes with Turbo Core 2.0, albeit not aggresive as BDs version which hits 1ghz.

 

[Phynaz]

they could just make a "premium" version and it will have identical or even faster than 5570 performance, and I think right now GDDR5 is cheap enough even HD 6450 use it, and I guess it just cost them $20 to add 512Mb GDDR5 ram on board.

You forgot a couple of things - like engineering costs, additional manufacturing costs, more inventory, etc.

All the above would have to be divided amongst a small number of CPUs, making them very expensive.

 

[wahdangun]

And one problem that shouldn't be overlooked is how to cool that RAM. GDDR5 really isn't in the same league as DDR3 so apart from the more expensive memory you'd also need some cooling solution I'd assume.
So even if Llano wasn't a budget solution, what would be the advantage of this over an external GPU? I don't see much.

no, gddr5 is not that hot, even hd 6990 just use simple backplate to cool it,
the advantage is to make a very slim and light weight gaming laptop or lan party rig.

Btw if adding gddr 5 ram is so expensive then why amd can put it in $40 hd 6450 card?

 

[IntelUser2000]

Btw if adding gddr 5 ram is so expensive then why amd can put it in $40 hd 6450 card?

If adding high speed memory on a board to speed integrated graphics made so much sense, they'd have put a far better one in the 790-class boards. But in reality, they added memory that's slower than last generation single channel memory, all for a reason.

You try to put even a regular bandwidth extra memory in there, I wouldn't be surprised if the costs happen to be equal to buying a $40 video card seperately. Even if it only adds half the price at $20, you significantly reduce the attractiveness of having an integrated video in the first place.

 

[piesquared]

If adding high speed memory on a board to speed integrated graphics made so much sense, they'd have put a far better one in the 790-class boards. But in reality, they added memory that's slower than last generation single channel memory, all for a reason.

Product segmentation. Besides, I don't think you can compare last generation 790 boards to Llano.

You try to put even a regular bandwidth extra memory in there, I wouldn't be surprised if the costs happen to be equal to buying a $40 video card seperately. Even if it only adds half the price at $20, you significantly reduce the attractiveness of having an integrated video in the first place.

If only your numbers were anywhere close to reality, saving $20 isn't exactly insignificant when multiplied by 10,000,000.

 

[tweakboy]

A folding at home box you can do. Help this world find the cure for cancer hehe.

 

[darkswordsman17]

I could see them do something like this, it is technically feasible, but this would not be an inexpensive product (which Llano is supposed to be).

I doubt we'll see this done with Llano, and I think with Bulldozer based APU they'll probably be moving to DDR4, which should make needing GDDR5 unnecessary (they could just add a dedicated graphics DDR4 slot).

I guess it will depend on how aggressive AMD is. Might be a good idea for them to try to implement a new graphics memory slot.

 

[hans007]

no, gddr5 is not that hot, even hd 6990 just use simple backplate to cool it,
the advantage is to make a very slim and light weight gaming laptop or lan party rig.

Btw if adding gddr 5 ram is so expensive then why amd can put it in $40 hd 6450 card?

well they'd have to add a ddr5 controller to the llano chip (one ddr3 for regular ram, and a gddr5 controller JUST For this option). and then they'd have to add extra pins for that , etc.

and the boards with GDDR5 (say 512MB of it) would obviously have to cost more for the memory.

even boards without ram woudl cost more becuase the chips would have to be more complex. on top of that sideport did not really help the 78x series IGPs that much to begin with. its a 64-bit sideport, vs 128-bit system ram.

 

[Voo]

no, gddr5 is not that hot, even hd 6990 just use simple backplate to cool it

Yeah a backplate that's connected with some large cooler. Not exactly the same as having to be cooled passively in a stuffed case with dozens of cables hanging around.

the advantage is to make a very slim and light weight gaming laptop or lan party rig.

Just having faster memory with a slow IGP still won't be especially useful as a gaming laptop (and I'd think when designing the llano IGP the engineers tried to hit a good balance) and as soon as you have a external GPU that has enough power you get the memory anyways.

Btw if adding gddr 5 ram is so expensive then why amd can put it in $40 hd 6450 card?

Because they already have the design for those cards and buy GDDR in masses. They don't need two different memory controllers (and have to design one first).

Also the thing about MB manufacterers is that their profit margins are extremely slim and there's a whole lot competition out there. All in all that'd be a whole lot of designing, testing and whatnot for a premium product (goodbye economies of scale) that'll overlap with external GPUs quite heavily (and should have worse performance since you'd still have to factor in all the transfer times). For a budget product like Llano? How many 250+$ MBs do you think we'll see for that CPU?

 

[Arkadrel]

What I want to know is....

How much GPGPU power does the Llano have? since its part of the reason their doing integrated GPU (a claim).

I want to see it do something that uses GPGPU, and compaire it to a Sandy Bridge CPU
(without a discrete card along sides the sandy bridge) and see which is faster.
They need to do this benchmark, reviewers to make sense of AMDs reasoning for putting the GPU on die.

^I ll be disappointed if reviewers dont do above.
It needs to be done to see if AMD are on to something, with their hetrogenios computeing with GPGPU, or if their just blowing smoke.

I want to see it do something that uses GPGPU, and compaired a discrete GPU that can do GPGPU stuff.

 

[VirtualLarry]

What I want to know is....

How much GPGPU power does the Llano have? since its part of the reason their doing integrated GPU (a claim).

An interesting benchmark, would be running F@H on both the Llano CPU + GPU cores, compared to, say, a SB 2600K running F@H on just the CPU cores. (Granted, with the -bigadv WU bonuses, that comparison might be unfair.)

 

[Arkadrel]

And one problem that shouldn't be overlooked is how to cool that RAM. GDDR5 really isn't in the same league as DDR3 so apart from the more expensive memory you'd also need some cooling solution I'd assume.
So even if Llano wasn't a budget solution, what would be the advantage of this over an external GPU? I don't see much.

Advantages of On die GPUs:

1) price (cheaper to have 1 chip vs 1cpu+1discrete gpu with pcb/ram/heat sinks ect)
2) latency (things being closer (on chip) less latency)
3) power useage (again 1 chip vs 2 thingy)
4) avoid bottlenecks (apperntly they can remove bottlenecks this way)

So "llano" > "athlon II + radeon 5550" in quite a few things.


there are weaknesses to this way though:

1) memory bandwidth issues because system DDR3 isnt as fast as a discrete cards GDDR5.
2) everything in 1 place, means more heat issues to deal with.



You can work around the memory bandwidth issues alot of ways though, so the CPU+GPU on 1 chip is probably here to stay.

I suspect more and more of the lower end - mid end market will be useing APU like cpus in the future.
Simply because the advantages beat out the dis-advantages, by alot, and OEMs always like products that have advantages in price area, so they can earn more selling them, or make their product more attrative than a competitors by offering it cheaper.

 

[Topweasel]

I don't like the name Lano , wtf is that. No wonder its bunk Ill stick with ASUS and EVGA

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Llano,_Texas

Its just a code name. You don't go to the store and buy a Sandybridge, you by an i3, i5, or i7.

When you buy a Llano PC, you would be buying a A-**** CPU or E**** CPU. Just like if you wanted to buy a BD it would be a FX-4k, 6k, or 8k CPU. Or if you wanted to purchase a Regor, you would be purchasing a Athlon II, or Deneb, a Phenom II X2, X3, or X4, or a Thuban would be a Phenom II X6.

 

[Voo]

Advantages of On die GPUs:

1) price (cheaper to have 1 chip vs 1cpu+1discrete gpu with pcb/ram/heat sinks ect)
2) latency (things being closer (on chip) less latency)
3) power useage (again 1 chip vs 2 thingy)
4) avoid bottlenecks (apperntly they can remove bottlenecks this way)

So "llano" > "athlon II + radeon 5550" in quite a few things.


there are weaknesses to this way though:

1) memory bandwidth issues because system DDR3 isnt as fast as a discrete cards GDDR5.
2) everything in 1 place, means more heat issues to deal with.

Wait we weren't discussing external GPU vs IGP, we were discussing external GPU vs. IGP + external GDDR side port memory. Which is quite different because it more or less gets rid of all your 4 advantages you listed. A IGP is fine for absolutely everyone who doesn't game and even for the latter group it can be "good enough" if they lower their expectations.

What you're getting at is integrating higher end GPUs on-die which seems quite likely in the future (although more in form of heterogeneous cores and no strong distinction between CPU and GPU any more)

 

[Topweasel]

Wait we weren't discussing external GPU vs IGP, we were discussing external GPU vs. IGP + external GDDR side port memory. Which is quite different because it more or less gets rid of all your 4 advantages you listed. A IGP is fine for absolutely everyone who doesn't game and even for the latter group it can be "good enough" if they lower their expectations.

What you're getting at is integrating higher end GPUs on-die which seems quite likely in the future (although more in form of heterogeneous cores and no strong distinction between CPU and GPU any more)

But is it really lowering expectations? I mean you are really talking about even with Llano a low cost CPU aimed a system integrators, enthusiasts looking for either a cost effective portable system in which gaming is possible, or enthusiasts to build/recommend to friends. On it is a CPU much much much better then the X360 or PS3 and an IGP on par or better then the 7900GT that is the basis for the PS3 graphics, where it also shares system memory with a much smaller pool. Will it play Crysis, or Metro 2033, probably not. But it can play HL2, Portal 2, Civ 5, SC2 (both), Wow and hundreds of more popular games perfectly fine (in theory).

What your implying is right, top end graphics as we know it are dying, and eventually the service they do will be included into a CPU and while neither one will hit where they could be separate it won't matter as we leverage both of them to do whatever job we are doing. But the advantage is the lack of titles and software where it isn't "enough". IGP like Llano have a two fold effect. Lower the cost of PC based "enough" graphics, increases the bottom line for developers. Which in the short term will raise the demand for more graphically intensive games, which in turn means more wiggle room for high end settings for more advanced discrete graphics, which then pushes the development of that, which pays off as those graphics get back into future "llanos", rinse and repeat as the two merge together.

No to say Llano is the answer. But I think its much more impactful (or potential to be) then just barely being "enough" as implied.

 

[Arkadrel]

Will it play Crysis, or Metro 2033, probably not. But it can play HL2, Portal 2, Civ 5, SC2 (both), Wow and hundreds of more popular games perfectly fine (in theory).

From Toms:

A 5550 can do ~30 fps @1680x1050 low details, 4xAF (with a i5-2500k).

The Llano will probably be able to do something like that, so... will it play metro2033? yes in 1680x resolution and low details

What you're getting at is integrating higher end GPUs on-die which seems quite likely in the future (although more in form of heterogeneous cores and no strong distinction between CPU and GPU any more)

Honestly I think the heat issues, and memory bandwidth issues... will mean that high end discrete GPUs wont be going anywhere.

However if they could make a APU with a ~Radeon 6870 level of performance / Geforce 470 performance, that would be more than enough for ALOT of people.



With 28nm it might be possible.
6870 is around 255mm^2 on 40nm tech, on 28nm it would probably be around ~160mm^2.
So the space it takes up shouldnt be a issue.

Memory bandwidth issue?
eDram on chip, should be able to do it, same as the xbox 360 has. AMD asks IMB for a little help and its not a issue.

Power use issues?
On 40nm a 6870 uses on avg loads gameing around 108watts... Im sure on 28nm this would be like ~70watts or less. So it doesnt seem like its a problem.

Heat issues?
yes you would need a big mofo of a CPU cooler foor this thing.



Will we ever see such a "desktop" APU? maybe.... give it a year or two.