Something odd about Llano and Bulldozer.

[RobertPters77]

Llano is being released to compete with sandy bridge in the mobile space right? But the cpu portion of Llano is based on the current "Stars/K10" architecture right? Bulldozer is Amd's next generation architecture? then why isn't the cpu portion of Llano Bulldozer based? Could it be either that Bulldozer is a minor upgrade from the current K10 architecture,Or that Bulldozer will be a power hungry beast unsuitable for the mobile market? I know the second gen of Llano will be bulldozer based but if Bulldozer is supposed to 'bulldoze' intel then why aren't all of amd's next gen products based on one architecture? Excluding bobcat ofcourse.

 

[hans007]

Llano is being released to compete with sandy bridge in the mobile space right? But the cpu portion of Llano is based on the current "Stars/K10" architecture right? Bulldozer is Amd's next generation architecture? then why isn't the cpu portion of Llano Bulldozer based? Could it be either that Bulldozer is a minor upgrade from the current K10 architecture,Or that Bulldozer will be a power hungry beast unsuitable for the mobile market? I know the second gen of Llano will be bulldozer based but if Bulldozer is supposed to 'bulldoze' intel then why aren't all of amd's next gen products based on one architecture? Excluding bobcat ofcourse.

the next fusion mid range will be bulldozer based.

supposedly it would have taken too long to get it all done . the k10 architecture isn't power hungry its just not running at 32nm like intels stuff. plus they probabl have improved clock gating etc.

 

[Arkadrel]

Could it be either that Bulldozer is a minor upgrade from the current K10 architecture,Or that Bulldozer will be a power hungry beast unsuitable for the mobile market?

From what I understand, bulldozer design is much more energy effecient!
Thats why they can go from 6 "core" phenoms, to 16 "core" bulldozers within sameish thermals/TPD (part of it is from smaller nm die sizes, but much of it is because of the design).

Im guessing we ll see dual core bulldozer APUs that use less power than the ones we have today at 8-9watt like the C-50.

At 40nm theyre able to make a C-50 for tablets, that uses 4-5watts (they cut out a few things tablets dont need, but its just as fast as the pc version of a C-50).

Once the smaller die sizes come out, and bulldozer design is used, Im sure they could make a APU thats faster than the C-50, and only uses like 2-3watts doing it (again for tablets, so with things cut out to reach 2-3watts)


why isnt it being used? it takes time to make these designs? I dont know, next gen APUs will have it.

 

[itsmydamnation]

i think you will find llano was supposed to be out at the start of the year but a combination of yeild issues + design issues mean its 6 months late. if Llano was planned to come out late Q2 then im sure it would have been bulldozer based.

 

[veri745]

The more new IP you put into a new product, the more things can go wrong, and the less likely you are to release the product on time and at performance/power/cost targets.

Llano has a "new" gpu (at least for SOI) on a new process, Bulldozer is a new core on a new process. A product with a new core, a new GPU, AND on a new process would be a nightmare, and would almost certainly fail one more more of those time/performance/power/cost metrics.

Can you imagine trying to take a piece of silicon with fab defects, core design flaws, and GPU design flaws, and trying to figure out what exactly is wrong with the damn thing?

 

[Cerb]

Llano is being released to compete with sandy bridge in the mobile space right? But the cpu portion of Llano is based on the current "Stars/K10" architecture right? Bulldozer is Amd's next generation architecture? then why isn't the cpu portion of Llano Bulldozer based? Could it be either that Bulldozer is a minor upgrade from the current K10 architecture,Or that Bulldozer will be a power hungry beast unsuitable for the mobile market? I know the second gen of Llano will be bulldozer based but if Bulldozer is supposed to 'bulldoze' intel then why aren't all of amd's next gen products based on one architecture? Excluding bobcat ofcourse.

More likely, IMO, is that the cost of getting an updated stars CPU w/ a GPU added on was cheaper, and less risky, compared to taking BD, the final details of which were still being tinkered with, and bolting on a GPU.

Imagine this scenario: a late bug was found that affected all BDs, and the fix would set back the release of any and all BD CPUs. Now, consider that AMD is already late by years with BD. It would not be unreasonable that they could have another minor delay, which could have caused this Llano replacement to get moved back even farther than it has been.

 

[JFAMD]

BD was not meant to have GPU in it.

 

[RobertPters77]

BD was not meant to have GPU in it.

Why not? If sandy bridge has a mediocre gpu that makes a 50$ card obsolete shouldn't bulldozer?

 

[JFAMD]

Because it wasn't designed that way.

 

[Blitzvogel]

Fusion work began long before Bulldozer. IIRC Zacate and Llano like parts were supposed to have been out over a year ago.

As for competition vs Sandy Bridge. The whole point of Fusion was to pair decent CPU performance with much better than typical integrated graphics performance (pre Sandy Bridge) and be specifically compatible for use in tandem with the CPU to drive GPGPU tasks by being DirectCompute and OpenCL compliant.

 

[RobertPters77]

Because it wasn't designed that way.

Ok then. I'm guessing you probably can't release any details about BD. But can you answer me this.

Should I wait for Bulldozer?

 

[Blitzvogel]

Ok then. I'm guessing you probably can't release any details about BD. But can you answer me this.

Should I wait for Bulldozer?

Do you want what just might end up as best of the best? We may get another semi-dud (like the original Phenom), but we finally might get AMDs real answer to take on i7 level architecture. Should be interesting as AMD would have proper coverage of most sectors by not matching Intel necessarily on performance, but via price per performance and features mostly.

Compared to standard Sandy Bridge even with the newer Intel HD 3000, I'd rather have Llano by far if it's graphics performance is up to snubb by not overtaxing the memory bandwidth and making the graphics performance irrelevant. It would make a better HTPC and media system via better pricing, better graphics performance for video playback and even decent enough for light gaming (assuming again that memory bandwidth is enough).

 

[Concillian]

Llano competes with SB in the mobile space, but the target demographic is generally one that wouldn't mind some CPU performance loss traded for additional GPU performance. Llano is not targeted at people considering "real" discrete graphics, and most people reading this forum, won't have much interest in Llano except as something to recommend to other people they know who want something that might play games okay, but don't really want to spend for it and otherwise just do Facebook and web browsing, email, iTunes and maybe do minor manipulation of photos from their digital camera.


Would it be better if it didn't trade CPU for GPU and just got GPU, sure it would, but the world doesn't always work that way.

 

[Blitzvogel]

A builder who would want Bulldozer probably won't give a flip about having an IGP and would want discrete graphics anyways.

I want Llano for building an HTPC like system personally and to experiment with as I've been enticed to go with a Zacate board of some kind, but it's too weak for me to care.

 

[RobertPters77]

Eh, I used my friend's zacate thinkpad. Wasn't impressed. Can barely play black ops and SC2. 400$ down the drain. I suggested he buy a toshiba for the same price with better specs.

 

[busydude]

Eh, I used my friend's zacate thinkpad. Wasn't impressed. Can barely play black ops and SC2. 400$ down the drain. I suggested he buy a toshiba for the same price with better specs.

So.. he bought a netbook to play modern games?

 

[zebrax2]

Eh, I used my friend's zacate thinkpad. Wasn't impressed. Can barely play black ops and SC2. 400$ down the drain. I suggested he buy a toshiba for the same price with better specs.

As busydude said you can't expect a $400 netbook to game like a champ.

 

[Arkadrel]

Eh, I used my friend's zacate thinkpad. Wasn't impressed. Can barely play black ops and SC2. 400$ down the drain. I suggested he buy a toshiba for the same price with better specs.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fBfDl...eature=related

Here is a youtube video of a Acer AO522 (C-50 APU), running a starcraft 2 demo.
Its running at 1280x720 resolution, minimum settings (at around 18-36 fps (fraps in corner))

Im assumeing your friend bought something faster than a C-50 APU (the 8-9watt one). As long as hes playing with minimum settings and in low res it should play well enough (be bareable).

 

[Cerb]

Eh, I used my friend's zacate thinkpad. Wasn't impressed. Can barely play black ops and SC2. 400$ down the drain. I suggested he buy a toshiba for the same price with better specs.

So, you weren't impressed that a chip didn't perform well at something that it was not expected to perform well at?

 

[RobertPters77]

A. I wasn't comparing Netbook VS Notebook.

β. I was comparing them price wise. 400$ Lenovo Zacate E-240 VS 410$ Toshiba w Athlon x2 @ 2ghz + hd4250 gpu. (Toshiba was on sale from 500$)

Ψ. Yeah I know it's apples to apples but for a few dollars more you get alot more horsepower.

Ω. I hope Llano makes the 500-800 laptop market interesting.

So, you weren't impressed that a chip didn't perform well at something that it was not expected to perform well at?

Well if you put it that way? No.

Then what is the purpose of Zacate?

Tablets? Wasted resources. Unless the tablet can run Win 7 64.

Notebooks? Isn't that what Llano's for?

Netbooks? At 400$ That's entry level notebook territory.

 

[frostedflakes]

Eh, I used my friend's zacate thinkpad. Wasn't impressed. Can barely play black ops and SC2. 400$ down the drain. I suggested he buy a toshiba for the same price with better specs.

What model was the Toshiba? For that price I wouldn't think you'd be able to get anything better than Intel integrated graphics, which I'm not even sure is faster than the 6130 in Zacate. If it is I doubt the difference is huge. If he found a laptop with discrete video for that much, your friend got a pretty good deal.

Anyway, it just depends on what his priorities are. You can get a 15" laptop with decent specs for about the same price or not much more than a Zacate netbook. But the 15" laptop isn't going to be nearly as portable and battery life is likely going to be worse. So if you just want performance and don't care about that other stuff, a Zacate netbook probably isn't a good buy. If you want a good mix of portability, performance, and battery life, though, they're great IMO.

edit: Pretty sure the HD4250 is quite a bit slower than the 6130 built into Zacate. They're both clocked at 500MHz, but the 6130 has 80 stream processors vs only 40 in the 4250. Also the 4250 is only DX10 capable and doesn't support DX11 like the 6130, although it probably doesn't matter much since both GPUs are too weak to handle newer games and really take advantage of the newer features DX11 offers. The CPU on the Toshiba should have better performance, though.

CPU might have been the bottleneck on your friend's X120e, the E-240 has the same GPU as the E-350 but I could see the CPU holding things back, it's only single core, clocked slower, and has less L2 cache than the E-350. I think some reviews even found the much more capable E-350 to be CPU limited in some games.

 

[RobertPters77]

http://www.toshibadirect.com/td/b2c/pdet.to?poid=505768

Similar to this one.

 

[Cerb]

Netbooks? At 400$ That's entry level notebook territory.

ION netbooks regularly went for $4-700, and some smaller CULV could fetch nearly $1000. Modern Atom netbooks worth anything are still around $300, and most are not available with Win7 Home Premium, much less Pro (at least not without tacking on a significant fee, often bringing it somewhat above $300). Full-sized notebooks simply do not get the battery life, and are physically pretty large.

Zacate is like what a follow-on of ION might have been, but with better battery life, a much faster CPU, and crappier Linux support (at least for now).

While I would want one in a full-sized package, I'm picky, and still barely managing on a P3 1.13. In general, however, it's aimed at users for whom a 15" display (big), 5+lb (heavy), and 2-3hrs battery life (3.4? Not with a display that you can use in a well-lit room!) is all much worse than losing some performance, and also users who have experience with Atom, and find it not quite good enough, which are many, especially given how little it has improved in the past three years.

In general, someone in the market for a laptop like you linked should not be in the market for anything like any currently-available Zacate-equipped computers.

 

[beginner99]

Eh, I used my friend's zacate thinkpad. Wasn't impressed. Can barely play black ops and SC2. 400$ down the drain. I suggested he buy a toshiba for the same price with better specs.

That's what I've been saying all along. Netbooks don't need to be able to play games. They would better invest the money in some fixed function hardware like video de- and encode (aka QuickSync) and make flash heavy web pages usable.

Llano is in the same boat. Maybe I'm missing something but I don't see the anything relevant behind the name APU compared to Arrandale or SB. It's just a CPU with a GPU. Intel was like 1.5 years quicker without making a fuss about it. I will be impressed if the gpu actually does some work outside of graphics/video without needing special software.

 

[itsmydamnation]

That's what I've been saying all along. Netbooks don't need to be able to play games. They would better invest the money in some fixed function hardware like video de- and encode (aka QuickSync) and make flash heavy web pages usable.

fixed function hardware is great until you hit something that it cant do.

i guess the thing about bobcat APU's is that is 75mm sq on 40nm , the smallest GPU AMD makes is 60mm sq (AMD 5450) on the exact same process and has the exact same specs. Thats where the win is. the low end Llano will be in the same boat ( do we never know how many Llano masks there are 1, 2 ?).

Llano is in the same boat. Maybe I'm missing something but I don't see the anything relevant behind the name APU compared to Arrandale or SB. It's just a CPU with a GPU. Intel was like 1.5 years quicker without making a fuss about it. I will be impressed if the gpu actually does some work outside of graphics/video without needing special software.

what does special software mean? is something written in opencl specific for GPU "special software"? if it is how is that any different to something written in C/++/# for X86? if you want performance you have to consider the architexture when writing software for it.