Leaked AMD Trinity Slide Promises Big Gains Over Llano APUs



+ Add a Comment


as always, amd will beat intel in the budget market. sorry Intel fan boys, but heres the truth: intel hd sucks, and gamers on a budget finally have a an igpu worth gaming on. i built an a8 system last month, great proc. whips the i3 2105 is the ass



I've given up on AMD. Bulldozer is a joke, and I'm selling my slow Llano system (why did I bother?) and building a 3770K system for my office box and another for my gaming box. I've had enough of bottlenecks and counting coins, an i7 in the chamber eliminates that bottleneck period for a quite a while yet.

I don't know how people can justify the FX series. It barely matches SB depending on workload or falls right behind. IB will bend it over further and Haswell will piss on Piledriver's grave. By Skymont I won't be surprised if AMD is dead and buried.



I must say ...i am impressed with these fusion cpu chips.
I bought a Acer Aspire with a Quad-Core A6-3400M Processor in it.
I can play MW3....starcraft 2....left 4 dead...all at native resolution...be it i have the eyecandy AA...shadows...etc turned down.
When using "Game Booster"
I am averaging about 72 fps with MW3 at native resolution.....i am impressed with these Fusion API chips.
I expect the Trinity chips will even improve on that....way to go AMD!



forgot to mention it is a notebook.....



I hope they can have this compete decently, with IB right around the corner. If they go under or can't put up a decent fight, Intel will have no reason to keep prices low or innovate.



I'm impressed with AMD's Trinity. My notebook has a 5650 HD, and it's quite impressive but my laptop's not as slim as I'd like it to be. But how can it be when it's got a videocard?

If the Trinity is as good as its claimed,that means you can get relatively good gaming performance on an IGP. That'll not only save on costs, but dramatically increase the capabilities of ultrathins and notebooks with IGPs.

I have no doubts that Trinity can't compete with IB on the CPU front, but for me, I'll require the most horsepower for gaming. The two will both be adequate for Office software and 1080 video.


Veni Vidi Vici

All I want to know is whether these are going to be able to compete with Intel's IB? I know they probably won't win the fastest CPU out there but can they even be close to being a good "best performance for your money" CPU? The last crop AMD released weren't even close to being a good value CPU.



Could someone clarify for me; what does resting battery life mean?



I would imagine that it means Screen on without any major cpu processing going on. My first thought was standby time but seeing as the asus transformer can go a few days without draining, i doubt its that.



The problem for AMD is that APUs become irrelevant the day IB is released (well...a few months later when the low end IB chips come out). Intel's integrated graphics can handle HTPC/Angry Birds duty just fine.

If anything now that Intel has thoroughly gutted AMD in CPU performance they can now focus their efforts on destroying them in graphics performance and further developing Atom to compete with ARM in lower power usage.



Except Intel is far behind on integrated graphics. IB is fine and dandy, but they're not geared well towards a tech world leaning towards graphics acceleration for many applications on low-power mobile devices. AMD has a huge head start with its APUs. Their goal is to completely knock out Intel's chips for the mobile market and they can do so by focusing on graphics rather than pure power.

The average consumer will judge a system based on what they see, and not care about the inner workings of one platform or another. For the consumer, they will see that they can hook up their laptop to a tv and place HD video in 1080p, do some graphics/media editing, and play modern games well, even if it is at low-medium settings.

Unlike AMD, Intel isn't situated well for graphics development. Their experience is rather poor compared to AMD & Nvidia and its going to show more with the consumer now than ever.



And IB graphics can do all of that..arguably SB graphics could do most of it. IB crosses that "minimum threshold" where it doesn't matter whether you're 30% above that line or 5%. Because everyone that would care about 30% vs 5% is using discrete anyways.

And, as I mentioned, Intel now has the time and the capital to focus much more on the segments they've been letting AMD survive in. Intel's higher profitability and superior R&D capabilities pretty much mean they can dominate any segment they want once they focus on it.



The average Joe Schmoe doesn't know the difference between a CPU or a GPU. What the average Joe Schmoe does know is price and that's what AMD is going to stick Intel in the ribs with.

"And, as I mentioned, Intel now has the time and the capital to focus much more on the segments they've been letting AMD survive in. Intel's higher profitability and superior R&D capabilities pretty much mean they can dominate any segment they want once they focus on it."

Intel has never been in a position where they weren't profitable. However, they were in position #2 during the AMD Athlon and Opteron days as far as system speed in which Intel's "NetBurst" technology was more like "NetBust" Shortly after the world found out how much faster AMD were than Intel, Intel used its Muscle and FORCED companies like Dell by threatening them with supplying less CPUs and also, Intel would give companies like Dell FAT rebates if they stuck with Intel and use them exclusively. This seriously put a hurt on AMDs bottom line as they weren't able to sell any chips to OEMs and thats where the big money is.


So Intel settles with AMD but AMD is still hurting from the smarts that Intel laid on AMD. Had AMD made money when their CPUs were top dog, AMD might have been in a better position than it is today because they would have more cash for R&D.

And as far as Intel having the R&D capabilities, that is true up until a point. Remember Larrabee?


AMD's wise decision to purchase ATI is starting to pay off. The Llanos were in short supply due to AMD not being able to meet demand. While it shows that AMD has a ways to go as far as keeping up with demand, the point is that there IS a demand for these APUs and the type of consumer purchasing these APUs is Joe Schmoe.

Do you think the average Joe Schmoe is going to want to spend $200-$400 for just a GPU when he sees complete systems in the Best Buy weekly for $350?

Now with an "APU" from AMD, Joe Schmoe is going to be able to buy a complete system that'll play all the current games quite nicely but at a $350-$450 price point.

The Ivy Bridge's GPU is decent but it can't hold a candle to what's in the Llano and with Trinity offering a hefty performance increase over Llano, well I could imagine this isn't sitting well with Intel.

One last thing. You mentioned that Intel has the money and R&D capabilities to dominate any segment it chooses. This is clearly not the case with On-Die GPUs and it is also not the case with the Mobile space. Intel has been trying to crack the Mobile sector for a while now but ARMs stronghold on the industry has pretty much kept Intel as an outsider looking in. In fact, as far as cracking the mobile sector is concerned, AMD is in a far better position to enter that market.

Intel can suck it! Those crooks.



APU's are really slick, love the one in the HTPC

Log in to MaximumPC directly or log in using Facebook

Forgot your username or password?
Click here for help.

Login with Facebook
Log in using Facebook to share comments and articles easily with your Facebook feed.