News AMD demo Llano on YouTube

This video doesn't really show me anything that I care about, maybe if it was a video of two computers side-by-side with their full specs listed and one person at each computer trying to load up the same software, proform the same tasks and play the same games it would be a bit more convincing but all I see is two images next to each other and one stutters while the other doesn't. I don't want to put AMD down, I've used their CPU's in the past and they work quite well to this day but this just looks like a glorified commercial with a few commentary track. Looking forward to seeing some benchmarks on bit-tech when the time comes. This video wrote a check that it better be able to cash!

 

bad example as for some reason the Final Fantasy 14 benchmark runs like crap on Nvidia GPUs so I expect that the Intel side had an Nvidia card underneath it. I wouldn't put it past AMD to pull something like this either.

 

We do know AMD beats intel in the GPU arena but that we still very much doubt they beat them for CPU one too. Video work load and the gaming can be easily shifted to the GPU and with clever coding from programmers so can the 3D modelling. Was it even real time or another video which would be so much easier to demonstrate. Even the excel work load it was impossible to say who completed what and how was doing it quicker! Im still not convinced CPU wise they could touch sandybridge. Maybe their "HT" works alot better and was intels "HT" even turned on? The video did seem heavily GPU dependant which I don't think anyone doubts AMD leads intel in. Raw CPU wise......I'll wait for numbers rather than a video. AMD could genuinely have the advantage, but it really depends how well programmers balance load between CPU/GPU and how good both companies drivers are.

 

This is still K10, so I think AMD deserves a bit of a break of the CPU side of things. Besides, lets face it, the crappiest part of laptops have always been the video card. If AMD can put out a fusion product that gives the same gfx power as a low to mid end discreet card, I think they are going to have a winner now and even more so when they can pack bulldozer under the hood.

 

I am not suprised that the AMD would trounce the Intel processor if they were both using the integrated graphics cores.

Now if you used the same discrete GPU, and the CPUs on their own...frankly I don't think I'd take the AMD video with even a salt mine.

A kick ass integrated graphics core is certainly nice, but for the medium/high end, at least from all the rumors and from has been seen...matters not a fart in the wind. AMD though does look like it might be capturing the low and middle-low end of the market with their up coming chips. At least until Intel improves their integrated graphics, which with AMD's experience, I don't think Intel is ever going to catch up all the way.

 

I cannot see my self doing this on a train when is this scenario likey to happen in the office? Could this by why amd have been late the party recently all there tecs are watching movies while working (and there playing games im sure for driver update purposes)?
On the plus side this is AMD taking the game to intel at the high end 2630QM laptops are the £800+ end of the market.
So keep up the good work also i like the idear of a graphics card on the CPU for a laptop as the CPU can be changed while the GPU is almost always part of the motherboard meaning no upgrades are ever really worth it.

 

You're taking it FAR too literally. It's merely an example of diverse, multitasking workloads with real-world applications, not "look how fast we can superpi" or compute only tasks. OK, it's very graphics and video heavy - of course that's what AMD is going to push - but it's not invalid in any sense.

 

AMD - as much as Intel - wants to own the low to middle end. It's where volume is. The high end is nice (for us) but it's minute until you get to 1-2 socket server, where the real profits are. Bulldozer will fill in the high end anyway, Llano will take on SB at its core markets in general consumer and business PCs and laptops. If business' and OEM PC makers can save $30 by not using a PCI-E graphics card - not to mention the fact it opens up different, smaller volume PC styles (which again save money as well as providing a unique angle) then they will jump on it!

We already know the CPUs are K10.5 derivatives so won't exactly blow our socks off, however for a thin, low power PC for the parents, business or HTPC, it should be highly competitive. Not to mention actually overclockable (hopefully) as the system isnt locked down like SB.

 

True, but how about how much they'll save buying AMD procs vs. Intel? A mid-level HP business desktop runs in the neighborhood of $800, with a Core i3. A competing AMD box would cost in the neighborhood of $100 less...and when businesses aren't paying attention, HP can lighten the discount on the AMD and pocket the difference. Everybody wins! Wait...

 

Hmm just missing the "it will also be competitive price wise" to sandybridge IE the same or cheaper as you state....looks expensive...i suspect AMD if its proven better than sandybridge will have to sell them more expensive to claw back some much needed funds.

 

What I'd like to know is how are they running a FCPGA988 mobile i7 in an LGA1155 m-atx motherboard as the specs at the end say...?!

 

For anyone that isn't in to gaming at all, IE not even a casual gamer, I think the only thing AMD is going to have is price on its side, just like with the K10.5 series. In non-graphics related workloads utilizing the integrated graphics cores, the sandy bridge chips are almost deffinitely going to be clock for clock, and core for core much faster. Probably against Bulldozer as well.

For business use, speaking from personal experience, so long as the graphics are good enough for basic web use and office apps, architectual programs, CAD, spread sheets, etc...that is good enough. Sandy Bridge's graphics cover that just fine. Only place AMDs integrated graphics is going to be a plus is in the lower end mobile market for netbooks, maybe lower end laptops. For higher end laptops you are going to see a lot more discrete GPUs that are going to be more powerful than what it sounds like AMD is going to integrate.

With the chicanery that goes on with Laptops, it isn't a stretch to say that SB is going to be able to utilize its GPU for basic functions and once things get demanding switch to a high powered discrete GPU for the heavy lifting.

For desktops, casual gamers and maybe some non-gamers are going to be attracted by AMDs APU offerings with Llano, but just look at Intel's SB prices. The core i3s are in the low mid $100's, the i5 quad core parts are mid high $100's or low $200's. Sure AMD might be able to undercut them some...but probably not by much any more. As process sizes shrink, the price of the CPU does some as well. A 25% savings on a $300 part ain't bad. On a $200 or even $120 part, 25% savings isn't really all the much if performance isn't nearly as good. Especially if you are a person planning discrete graphics anyway. Just my 2 cents.

 

EDIT: Wow, epic fail on my part...