Information

Dear forum members,
We are delighted to inform you that our forums are back online. Every single topic and post are now on their places and everything works just as before, only better. Welcome back!



Discussion

Discussion on Article:
Processors with Integrated Graphics: AMD Fusion vs. Intel Core i3 and Intel Pentium

Started by: Pouria | Date 11/10/11 06:17:08 AM
Comments: 20 | Last Comment:  05/23/13 11:44:53 AM

Expand all threads | Collapse all threads

[1-7]

1. 
Nice review Ilya, Thanks!
But your judgment in your last words on Conclusion page some kinda Intel's bias-related to me...
4 0 [Posted by: Pouria  | Date: 11/10/11 06:19:00 AM]
Reply

2. 
Nice article and nice tests, XBitLabs. I am an AMD fan but I agree with your analysis. It looks like lower-TDP AMD APU is more suitable for HTPC, but Intel Sandy Bridge or Ivy Bridge will probably in my next build, unless AMD can turn things around quickly, which they are trying.
2 0 [Posted by: gamoniac  | Date: 11/10/11 06:32:00 PM]
Reply

3. 
AMD has it right with APUs that provide a balanced experience which is what mainstream PC buyers require. Trinity will up both the CPU IPC and the IGP performance so AMD will retain their APU advantage for both the laptop and desktop entry level segments. In fact AMD's APUs are now being used for server apps so AMD is likely to see great growth in APUs across the entire x86 market.

Intel is still trying to catch up on IGP so unless you need just CPU performance Intel's IGP based CPUs are simply unacceptable for any media graphics applications.
3 3 [Posted by: beenthere  | Date: 11/10/11 09:30:15 PM]
Reply

4. 
I dont know how you manage to do this.... Even when an Amd product is clearly superior to Intel you put one big BUT at the end. What is this, Intel told you guys donn't ever tell that Amd is better then us at something??? Jeez. How do you know that the change of plans in Amd roadmap doesn't include a better future for FM1???
2 0 [Posted by: george1976  | Date: 11/11/11 09:40:32 AM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
show the post
1 6 [Posted by: beenthere  | Date: 11/11/11 12:15:26 PM]
Reply
 
Thank you for the link. If only more people would read it, and understand something from it would be great.
1 1 [Posted by: george1976  | Date: 11/11/11 03:24:09 PM]
Reply
 
show the post
2 5 [Posted by: beenthere  | Date: 11/12/11 10:28:03 AM]
Reply
 
Yah see it too, and commonly disregard the news.

Could it be Because Intel has better Processor than AMD, Since First Release of Intel Core 2?
1 1 [Posted by: xentar  | Date: 11/14/11 06:52:34 AM]
Reply
 
Are you kidding me? I thought the conclusion was quite favourable to AMD. These APU's are only good if you want to play games, and if you're serious about that you'll get an Intel CPU and a discrete card anyway.
1 1 [Posted by: ET3D  | Date: 11/13/11 04:13:02 AM]
Reply
 
No this is not true. The whole point of a desktop APU is for entry level performance at a good price point, which you can't get with a discrete CPU/GPU combo.
1 3 [Posted by: beenthere  | Date: 11/13/11 11:51:20 AM]
Reply

5. 
Thanks a lot for this review. I've been looking for reviews of the low end Llano APU's and this is the first one I've seen. Looks to me like the A6-3500 is the most well rounded of the Llano APU's, a good combination of low power and performance.

Still I think that given the choice I would rather pair a low end Radeon with a Pentium. It's a pity that AMD is so much behind in raw CPU power. I'm still all AMD at home, but if the current trends continue, that won't last.
1 1 [Posted by: ET3D  | Date: 11/13/11 04:10:58 AM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
I'm not mocking you but what big hungry cpu apps you want to run on a low end system???
0 0 [Posted by: george1976  | Date: 11/13/11 11:29:05 AM]
Reply
 
For a HTPC, media ripping might be an area where you'd care. Intel has significantly lower energy consumption for x264 (50% worst case, > 100% best case). Don't have numbers for energy consumed using QuickSync, but the numbers are likely better. For the task of watching video, there's really no difference.

I'd like to see AMD competitive again, but Intel upped the ante in the post P4 timeframe and AMD appeared to standstill. Intel has the advantage of it's own fabs and manufacturing technology. Ivy Bridge is looking very good with respect to energy efficiency. AMD's Trinity is going to be based on Bulldozer, a part that has poor energy efficiency and poor cache performance, so it's hard to see how AMD catch up in this game.

The likely battle is now between ARM systems coming up from the low-end and Intel coming from the top. I've not seen anything from AMD at ISCA (or elsewhere) that convinces me they have anything to counter Intel or the ARM world. Five years and they are a smaller company making discrete GPU parts or become an ARM licensee like NVidia.
0 0 [Posted by: pico  | Date: 01/15/12 01:20:12 AM]
Reply
 
You folks have missed the whole point of this IGP review. This is a comparison of entry level desktop IGP solutions which have a much lower price point than a discrete CPU/GPU combo. AMD actually excels substantially in this area and will continue their dominance with Triniy which increases IPC by ~20% and IGP by ~30%. It's system performance and price that mainstream consumers care about.

AMD's APUs are a significant new market segment and product that will eventually power most mainstream desktops as it is more cost effective, more energy efficient and fully capable of performing all PC operations that mainstream consumers desire.

In short AMD is redefining the laptop and mainstream desktop markets and their APUs are even being used in servers now because they offer better overall performance for many applications. Enthusiasts level desktops will be the only X86 segment left that uses discrete CPU/GPU combinations for the next few years. After that I suspect APUs will replace discrete CPU/GPU combos as APUs are simply a better design choice.
2 4 [Posted by: beenthere  | Date: 11/13/11 12:00:06 PM]
Reply
 
AMD offers excellent performance per dollar, but they are not selling them at this price for the benefit of the consumer. AMD can't charge top-dollar because they don't have the performance to merit the premium. Energy efficiency has caught some consumers attention, but if you do the math, Intel is 30-100% more efficient at compute intensive tasks.

AMD have a better IGP, but Intel's IGP works fine in similar scenarios and for the niche that care about GPU performance both IGPs are poor. The AMD APU is not strong enough to merit a premium in the market.

I hope your views of Trinity hold true, but Trinity is based on Bulldozer and the TDPs for this part are a generation (or two) behind the equivalent Intel SandyBridge parts. The micro-benchmark performance of Bulldozer doesn't appear to be compete with Phenom (see http://www.xbitlabs.com/a.../amd-fx-8150_8.html#sect1.) Trinity is going up against Ivy Bridge. Most of the media believe Intel's 3D transistors and 22nm process are going to offer significant power savings and greater IPC compared to SB. Unless Intel has manufacturing issues, it's hard to see AMD capturing significant share.
1 0 [Posted by: pico  | Date: 01/15/12 01:38:16 AM]
Reply

6. 
Thats the main reason I bought AMD A8 for my business, I don't need much Graphics power for my customer using Facebook, Light MMORPG.

AMD Llano has the balance choice for Entry Level System Unit.

I do have Intel Processors with Discrete Video for may FPS Game like CODMW3 and BF3.

If you want Best IGP Processor Choose AMD Llano. If you need Raw Power Both Processor using Discrete Video. Buy the Intel iCore Series. ATI/AMD Graphics or Nvidia will do.
2 0 [Posted by: xentar  | Date: 11/16/11 06:22:28 PM]
Reply

7. 
The whole article is a horrific push-forward of Intel processors, not worth reading.Just for the sake of argument, what part of your computer limited usage, the processor or the graphic card? Not mentioning CrossFire support and superior transcoding quality (not necessary speed)from AMD is another "glitch" of this review.
1 1 [Posted by: mosu  | Date: 12/06/11 12:06:54 AM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
For a Llano system, Is the IGP able to make a significant contribution in a system with a significantly more powerful GPU (e.g. Radeon 6850)? Is there any data for this? Naively it seems the additional complexity in workload partitioning, the disparity in GPU compute power, and GPU data sharding might produce worse overall performance. Anand found mixed results on this: http://www.anandtech.com/show/4476/amd-a83850-review/6

Is there any evidence of the superior transcoding quality of the AMD parts? What tools use it?
0 0 [Posted by: pico  | Date: 01/15/12 12:36:38 AM]
Reply

[1-7]

Back to the Article

Add your Comment