AMD Launches the Second-Generation A-Series APUs

[Guru3D News]

AMD today announced the widely anticipated launch of its 2nd-Generation AMD A-Series Accelerated Processing Units APUs for mainstream and ultrathin notebooks All-in-One and traditional desktops home...

More...

[Mikedogg]

And yet it still won't compete with Intel. Amd hasn't released a decent processor since the "K6."

[k3vst3r]

no review here yet?

[Hilbert Hagedoorn]

Originally Posted by k3vst3r

no review here yet?

Samples are a big mess atm .. nothing has been send to press with an exception or 2-3 worldwide. Looks like AMD doesn't really want them reviewed.

[Mikedogg]

Originally Posted by Hilbert Hagedoorn

Looks like AMD doesn't really want them reviewed.

I wonder why hmm.

[thatguy91]

The AMD APU's are actually quite good - for a mainstream computer, I think its a better option than the i3 (remember the i3 is dual core, NOT quad core). For a budget gaming computer, add some fast RAM and a HD7670 discrete card on the new APU's and it can crossfire with the APU. The new motherboards come with 8 SATA3 ports too, and even the old chipset had 6. You can complain about the AMD's performance (I must admit, its fair to complain about the FX processors), but to put it into perspective think of Intel's cheapout with 2 SATA3 on Z77 and the use of cheap TIM (not even a reasonable quality one) on the Ivy Bridge. Just for Intel the positives (fast) outweigh the negatives (crappy TIM, poor SATA3 implementation (should be no SATA2 ports), and for AMD the negatives (underperforming FX processors) outweigh the positives (APU, number of SATA3 ports).

[k3vst3r]

Originally Posted by Hilbert Hagedoorn

Samples are a big mess atm .. nothing has been send to press with an exception or 2-3 worldwide. Looks like AMD doesn't really want them reviewed.

interesting

[Noisiv]

Predictably enough, Piledriver gets smashed by both Sandy and Ivy,
however Trinity is overall cca 15% faster then Llano,
and gaming wise vs Intel HD4000:

http://images.anandtech.com/doci/583...gaming-new.png

Nasty comment, but not totally untrue:

 Click to show spoiler

It's like buying a laptop from 2004, with a DX11 upgrade.

Way to capture the hearts of the 1% of the 1% of people looking for great gaming from their $500 laptop.

[k3vst3r]

Noisiv so how much slower is the cpu side of things % wise?

[Noisiv]

sent u the linkie

[---TK---]

Link please

[Noisiv]

dunno if it's appropriate

 Click to show spoiler

http://www.anandtech.com/show/5831/a...00m-a-new-hope

[Maximus7724]

Originally Posted by Noisiv

dunno if it's appropriate

 Click to show spoiler

http://www.anandtech.com/show/5831/a...00m-a-new-hope

Thanks that was a really good read.

Nice to see how Trinity performs against the IB i7 laptops, very much value for money.

[Chillin]

I for one am less then impressed:

A mere 15% performance lead in gaming titles with it's new GPU, it even loses to Ivy several times:


Transcoding, one of the big pushes behind the APU movement, is still faster on Sandy and Ivy:


And the rest:














The one thing I will hand to AMD is that they finally are starting to get their power draw under control.

[BlackZero]

Originally Posted by Chillin

I for one am less then impressed:

A mere 15% performance lead in gaming titles with it's new GPU, it even loses to Ivy several times

If you consider 2 out of 15 to be several.

Originally Posted by Chillin

Transcoding, one of the big pushes behind the APU movement

hmm?

[Chillin]

Originally Posted by BlackZero

If you consider 2 out of 15 to be several.

Batman, Skyrim and Futuremark among those tested.

hmm?

Very easily explained.

Look at where the CPU's only are located, then look at the GPU assisted and then finally look at where Intel is:

[IPlayNaked]

Originally Posted by Chillin

Batman, Skyrim and Futuremark among those tested.



Very easily explained.

Look at where the CPU's only are located, then look at the GPU assisted and then finally look at where Intel is:

snip

You're trying entirely too hard, and acting a little insane. In no one's mind is 3 out of 15 benchmarks even approaching relevant.

I mean, the graph from Anand clearly shows a close to double performance lead that Trinity's GPU has over the SB parts, and 25% over Ivy Bridge.

And let's not forget that this isn't exactly some top of the line expensive hardware. These won't be priced like an HD4000 i5.

[Chillin]

Originally Posted by IPlayNaked

You're trying entirely too hard, and acting a little insane. In no one's mind is 3 out of 15 benchmarks even approaching relevant.

I mean, the graph from Anand clearly shows a close to double performance lead that Trinity's GPU has over the SB parts, and 25% over Ivy Bridge.

Except when on average it has a 20% performance lead on it's strongest leg but loses significantly in other areas then there is a problem. The graphics performance gap between Trinity and IVB is much smaller (20%) than it was with Llano and SB (50%-75%).

And the reason this is so damning (in my opinion) is because when most people look at these integrated graphics, they look at them as a bonus or an additional plus, not as a basic requirement. Which means that now more than ever, Intel's integrated graphics is "enough" while it still maintains a healthy lead in Transcoding (612% faster) and general tasks (200% faster).

If someone is looking for pure graphics performance in a laptop then they would most likely go with Intel+Nvidia Optimus anyways.

And let's not forget that this isn't exactly some top of the line expensive hardware. These won't be priced like an HD4000 i5.

As evidenced by which crystal ball?

Because from what I can see, the current SB i5 and Llano A8 laptops are neck-to-neck in pricing.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...el%20Core%20i5
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...e=394%3A156452

[BlackZero]

Originally Posted by Chillin

Batman, Skyrim and Futuremark among those tested.

Futuremark wasn't in the list you pointed out and to be honest even in 3dmark the a10 leads heavily in 3dmark11/720p and again leads with a comparable vantage run at 1280x1024 while only losing at vantage 1024x768 which is 1 out of 3 futuremark tests, and if you want to include them then it's 3 out of 18 so hardly tantamount to losing in 'several tests'.

Originally Posted by Chillin

Very easily explained.

Look at where the CPU's only are located, then look at the GPU assisted and then finally look at where Intel is:

I was objecting to the notion that transcoding is considered an important aspect for apu designers or apu users, if anything most people would transcode media to use on a mobile device like a laptop (where an apu is best suited), not the other way around.

[Chillin]

Originally Posted by BlackZero

Futuremark wasn't in the list you pointed out and to be honest even in 3dmark the a10 leads heavily in 3dmark11/720p and again leads with a comparable vantage run at 1280x1024 while only losing at vantage 1024x768 which is 1 out of 3 futuremark tests, and if you want to include them then it's 3 out of 18 so hardly tantamount to losing in 'several tests'.

Oy vey, let's then call it "twice" and call it a day.

thanks for the explaining how a graph is read but I was objecting to the notion that transcoding is considered an important aspect for apu designers or apu users, if anything most people would transcode media to use on a mobile device like a laptop (where an apu is best suited), not the other way around.

I disagree.

Most people are moving away from large powerful desktops into plenty powerful and light laptops that they can carry around the house or outside. A laptop with an i5 IVB, 8GB and an SSD can perform 99.9% of the tasks an average consumer will ever ask of it super fast. But many people with such laptops also have a tablet or smartphone that they would like to Transcode videos for.

And the other (rather unfortunate) reality is that such consumers are also likely (in my opinion) to have a game console where they will do most of their "hardcore" gaming, with only some light gaming such as Farmville, WoW or even an RTS being done on the laptop; for which such a small percentage factor difference isn't likely to make them jump on the APU bandwagon, especially not when Intel can play those same games, albeit at a slightly reduced setting, as well.

[BlackZero]

Originally Posted by Chillin

Oy vey, let's then call it "twice" and call it a day.



I disagree.

Most people are moving away from large powerful desktops into plenty powerful and light laptops that they can carry around the house or outside. A laptop with an i5 IVB, 8GB and an SSD can perform 99.9% of the tasks an average consumer will ever ask of it super fast. But many people with such laptops also have a tablet or smartphone that they would like to Transcode videos for.

And the other (rather unfortunate) reality is that such consumers are also likely (in my opinion) to have a game console where they will do most of their "hardcore" gaming, with only some light gaming such as Farmville, WoW or even an RTS being done on the laptop; for which such a small percentage factor difference isn't likely to make them jump on the APU bandwagon, especially not when Intel can play those same games, albeit at a slightly reduced setting, as well.

Looking past the fact that laptops, tablets and smartphones are all mobile devices and transcoding between them would in my opinion be redundant for all practical purposes, also again playing on the mobile aspect; I would point out that laptop users would never expect it to do what a gaming console does and desktop users who buy an apu would do so for the graphics performance otherwise they could just buy a regular cpu, but all that side What I deduce from what you are saying is that it's better to have a laptop, a tablet and a gaming console to achieve pretty much the same as what you can with an apu? I would have to disagree and state that the entire purpose of an apu is to do away with precisely that, and if you can gain the same basic functionality at a reasonably lower cost then I honestly can't see what the fuss is.

The above is also a possible explanation of what the idea behind naming it trinity might have been

[deltatux]

For laptops, I think the performance seen with Trinity is pretty good in terms of battery life, price and being well rounded. Sometimes here at Guru3D we often lose the focus of the mainstream market which is what these companies often rather target as they make up the bulk of the market.

deltatux

[Chillin]

Originally Posted by BlackZero

Looking past the fact that laptops, tablets and smartphones are all mobile devices and transcoding between them would in my opinion be redundant for all practical purposes, also again playing on the mobile aspect; I would point out that laptop users would never expect it to do what a gaming console does and desktop users who buy an apu would do so for the graphics performance otherwise they could just buy a regular cpu, but all that side What I deduce from what you are saying is that it's better to have a laptop, a tablet and a gaming console to achieve pretty much the same as what you can with an apu? I would have to disagree and state that the entire purpose of an apu is to do away with precisely that, and if you can gain the same basic functionality at a reasonably lower cost then I honestly can't see what the fuss is.

The above is also a possible explanation of what the idea behind naming it trinity might have been

Not really.

What I'm saying is that the average household that is buying $600+ laptops is also going to have a smartphone or tablet; on this you would agree with me. And that someone is probably going to want to Transcode some TV episodes or the like for viewing.

On the same note, someone buying a laptop without a medium class discrete GPU is not exactly looking for top-tier gaming performance, especially considering the fact that whether on Trinity or IVB you are going to have to dial down the graphic options; again, I hope you agree with me on this.

And if someone is not looking at gaming performance then it goes to figure that he is either not interested in gaming on the particular laptop and/or has other means of satisfying his gaming needs.

Which again brings me back to my original point, the lack of a large market for said APU's.

In my opinion, AMD missed the sweet pre-tablet days spot for launching such an initiative (of course they couldn't, just saying). These days the market is extremely limited for those looking at what the A10 is offering.

[BlackZero]

Originally Posted by Chillin

Not really.

What I'm saying is that the average household that is buying $600+ laptops is also going to have a smartphone or tablet; on this you would agree with me. And that someone is probably going to want to Transcode some TV episodes or the like for viewing.

A household that has $600+ laptops as well as tablets and smartphones is likely to also own a desktop PC, which would be much better suited to transcoding than a laptop.

Originally Posted by Chillin

On the same note, someone buying a laptop without a medium class discrete GPU is not exactly looking for top-tier gaming performance, especially considering the fact that whether on Trinity or IVB you are going to have to dial down the graphic options; again, I hope you agree with me on this.

Completely, that is the selling point for APU based products, no pun intended

Originally Posted by Chillin

And if someone is not looking at gaming performance then it goes to figure that he is either not interested in gaming on the particular laptop and/or has other means of satisfying his gaming needs.

I agree that someone buying an APU is not looking for high end gaming performance, that was never what an APU is designed for. Instead it's designed for the casual gamer who might also enjoy a little wow while travelling on the tube/rail on the way to work or while sitting near the river on the weekend.

In fact, I would even go as far as to say that the market for discrete mobile GPUs is a much smaller niche and the vast majority of laptop users would be much more interested in APU based products as people particularly interested in gaming would would rather spend the cash on a high end desktop based discrete GPU.

Originally Posted by Chillin

In my opinion, AMD missed the sweet pre-tablet days spot for launching such an initiative (of course they couldn't, just saying). These days the market is extremely limited for those looking at what the A10 is offering.

Actually, APU based AMD products have proved to be quite successful, this is possibly why Intel has started to pay such close attention to graphics since the last generation of products.

[Chillin]

[QUOTE=BlackZero;4318445]A household that has $600+ laptops as well as tablets and smartphones is likely to also own a desktop PC, which would be much better suited to transcoding than a laptop.

Completely, that is the selling point for APU based products, no pun intended

I agree that someone buying an APU is not looking for high end gaming performance, that was never what an APU is designed for. Instead it's designed for the casual gamer who might also enjoy a little wow while travelling on the tube/rail on the way to work or while sitting near the river on the weekend.

In fact, I would even go as far as to say that the market for discrete mobile GPUs is a much smaller niche and the vast majority of laptop users would be much more interested in APU based products as people particularly interested in gaming would would rather spend the cash on a high end desktop based discrete GPU. [quote]

I'll roll this into my reply below.

Actually, APU based AMD products have proved to be quite successful, this is possibly why Intel has started to pay such close attention to graphics since the last generation of products.

The GPGPU is what they started to invest in, not for gaming per-se. This is evidenced by Quicksync and Lucid Virtu MVP for example.

A 20% performance difference by low graphics and resolutions on games is not going to change any consumers mind as opposed to a 600%+ lead in Transcoding and 200% lead in nearly everything else. As a consumer looking at such stats I would have to really be desperate to want a few extra FPS in an already playable, albeit on low settings (in both cases), game as opposed to the huge performance increases in everything else that IVB offers.

This is before we even touch on power usage, but I'll have to wait on Anand to get two comparatively equipped systems from the same OEM for that.

Which is why I will say again, I am underwhelmed by this latest match-up.