• 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.

Rumour: Trinity 50% Faster than Llano

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
No way nVidia joins with Intel. nVidia is a strong player in the mobile market with Tegra, Kal-El, etc., and if that's where the market is heading then nVidia doesn't really need Intel.
 
I thought AMD knew better than to release these "50% faster" estimates. Why is it always a nice round number like "50%"?
 
Maybe in their internal testing the igp really is 50% faster than Llano in some benchmark. They do have working silicon of the next gen apu.
 
georgec84 said:
No way nVidia joins with Intel. nVidia is a strong player in the mobile market with Tegra, Kal-El, etc., and if that's where the market is heading then nVidia doesn't really need Intel.
Click to expand...

Current Nvidia market cap: $9.7B
Current Intel cash on hand: $11.9B
Current Intel maket cap: $113.5B

If Intel wanted Nvidia they could have them.
 
OCGuy said:
I thought AMD knew better than to release these "50% faster" estimates. Why is it always a nice round number like "50%"?
Click to expand...

People like nice round numbers. Even after rigorous testing you determined that it's 47.89% faster than something else, people are just going to say it's about 50%.

Also it's most likely a general approximation. If it's 82% faster at one task, 23% faster at another, 31% faster at a third, and 64% faster at a final task, it's easier to say it's about 50% faster.
 
formulav8 said:
You mean Intel putting 'Sponsored Ads' on TH? I do have to admit thats pretty wacky for Intel to try and make it look like an actual hardware article. All it is, is a PR avertisement of Intel telling people how great Intel is. :\
Click to expand...

Looks more like scare tactics with hints of retribution for providing AMD based motherboards in such abundance.
 
Phynaz said:
If Intel wanted Nvidia they could have them.
Click to expand...

Even Intel can't have "Everything" they want. Jen will NOT step down, he has shown that already. Nvidia is steep in ARM based R&D. Plus the FTC would probably have a cow. At least they should have one if that trys to happen.
 
Guys, when i said 50% means almost nothing. I meant the claim of 50% tells us nothing about the new apu. It could be bulldozer with the current gpu or a 1module bulldozer with a 4770 class gpu.
 
piesquared said:
Yeah, I suspect it won't be long until this campaign starts on Anandtech as well:

Intel declares open war on mobo makers
Click to expand...

😕

I don't follow.

I mean yeah, I see THG doing stupid stuff that crosses the lines, and I see an S/A article on it...but what does this have to do with ATF or the post you quoted?

(FWIW, totally off-topic here, but I do remember when AT did some dumbass Intel marketing thing akin to what THG is doing now...my eyes rolled and rolled and rolled over that one too, hopefully the power's that be have put that behind them now and we won't see a dejavu)
 
Skurge said:
Guys, when i said 50% means almost nothing. I meant the claim of 50% tells us nothing about the new apu. It could be bulldozer with the current gpu or a 1module bulldozer with a 4770 class gpu.
Click to expand...

this

a 50% more powerful GPU only wouldn't be as effective without the CPU power to drive it, and a 50% more powerful CPU only would be disappointing when the current GPU is only barely fast enough to be acceptable for modern games on low settings / resolution

it also could be something not immediately thought of such as if it supports DDR4 and DDR4 offering not only higher bandwidth per module but with its point-to-point advantage where each stick is its own channel (ie 4 slots = 4 channels) which would mean an APU on DDR4 is going to be held back by memory bandwidth far less than those currently now. Reviews today make it perfectly obvious how less powerful GPUs with much higher memory bandwidth can match or even trounce Llano's GPU.

in fact given all that, only 50% faster might be pretty disappointing
 
Last edited:
DDR4 won't be ready for mass market for trinity. Trinity+1 perhaps, or if AMD keeps up the tight schedule, trinity+2.
 
formulav8 said:
Even Intel can't have "Everything" they want. Jen will NOT step down, he has shown that already. Nvidia is steep in ARM based R&D. Plus the FTC would probably have a cow. At least they should have one if that trys to happen.
Click to expand...

Jen doesn't have to step down, he can be removed from his position by the BoD.

I'm really not to sure the FTC would block the acquisition. Intel has a very good argument that the AMD acquisition of ATI was allowed. They could also argue the Nvidia acquisition is needed for Intel to survive in the coming era of GPU computing.

The FTC has to make a case that the acquisition would be harmful to consumers. If the ATI acquisition wasn't, why would an Nvidia acquisition be?
 
Last edited:
Phynaz said:
Jen doesn't have to step down, he can be removed from his position by the BoD.

I'm really not to sure the FTC would block the acquisition. Intel has a very good argument that the AMD acquisition of ATI was allowed. Yhey could also argue the Nvidia acquisition is needed for Intel to survive in the coming era of GPU computing.

The FTC has to make a case that the acquisition would be harmful to consumers. If the ATI acquisition wasn't, why would an Nvidia acquisition be?
Click to expand...

I hope you do see a small difference in company size, in market share and market influence.

intel is at the border of being split.. and they should be allowed to buy their only competitor in relation with motherboard chips, a competitor for their integrated grahpics and a competitor with Atom?
 
Tuna-Fish said:
DDR4 won't be ready for mass market for trinity. Trinity+1 perhaps, or if AMD keeps up the tight schedule, trinity+2.
Click to expand...

Is the market going DDR4? It seems like video cards dabbled in it, but DDR5 was where the real improvements were. I could see a Llano type device (Llano or next gen APU) really benefiting from DDR5.
 
Phynaz said:
The FTC has to make a case that the acquisition would be harmful to consumers. If the ATI acquisition wasn't, why would an Nvidia acquisition be?
Click to expand...

Intel has already abused its cpu position hurting their competition and the customer. They should Not have another position with such a strong market share like nvidia has.

AMD/ATI was allowed because there was No threat to anyone. The company is still so small compared to Intel. Intel would truly be a beast if they were allowed to buy nvidia.
 
formulav8 said:
Intel has already abused its cpu position hurting their competition and the customer. They should Not have another position with such a strong market share like nvidia has.

AMD/ATI was allowed because there was No threat to anyone. The company is still so small compared to Intel. Intel would truly be a beast if they were allowed to buy nvidia.
Click to expand...

Your first point has never been proven in a court.

That said, you ignored my second point. The market is moving to GPGPU - an area where Intel has no presence. How could a government agency tell (in the US at least) tell Intel they are not allowed to make a technology acquisition that could possibly mean their their existence in the next decade?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top