With power gating, the GPU's contribution to power usage when running purely CPU loads should be minimal. Even then, the power usage of a 2.9GHz Llano quad-core when running a purely CPU load is comparable, if not higher than a 2600K despite the 2600K having roughly 2x the throughput.
AMD better release these by September, my upgrade itch is getting unbearable.
I should certainly hope so considering the post of mine which you quoted has absolutely nothing to do with Sandy Bridge in the first place.That's not really an accurate assessment when it comes to comparing Llano CPU clock speed to Sandy Bridge CPU clock speed. AMD invested most of the die area and transistors into the GPU portion while Intel did the opposite. AMD was also able to get competitive power consumption. This is comparing apples to oranges.
http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphi...r-Review-Can-AMD-compete-Sandy-Bridge/CPU-and-Idle results for the A8-3850 compared to the Core i3-2100 are pretty good with the AMD APU using less energy at this point. The load conditions aren't as good with the APU pulling down an additional 49 watts in CB10. Considering the APU is supposed to be a 100 watt part and the Core i3-2100 is a 65 watt CPU, those are larger than expected gaps.
And if you take a look at the AMD A8-3850 compared to the Sandy Bridge based Core i7-2600K, it uses nearly as much power and it does not have a discrete GPU installed while the 2600K does. Despite the poor x86 performance of the A8-3850 APU it seems to be using a lot of power while falling behind.
http://techreport.com/articles.x/21208/14Once all four of the A8's cores are occupied, though, we're reminded of its 100W TDP rating. Power draw on our Core i3-2100 test rig is 38W lower under load. Also, even though it's based on a 32-nm CPU at a lower clock speed, our A8-3850 system draws nearly as much power under load as our Phenom II X4 840 system. That suggests GlobalFoundries' 32-nm process may not be paying the dividends one would expect, at least not at these relatively high clock speeds.
Hehe, you know how it gets, there's nothing I can't play right now but still something within me wants me to throw money at my computer.Core i5 @ 3.7ghz slowing you down? Outta boy! Keep the enthusiast bug alive! :thumbsup:
If that chart linked is correct, the performance difference between the 8100 and the the Q1 2012 8170 is going to be huge (2.8ghz --> 3.9ghz!!!). Could it be that lower 8xxx parts will be monster overclockers then? I have a feeling AMD is being overly conservative with the 2.8ghz clock speed. *Fingers crossed*. That might be the "sleeper" chip of the entire lineup.
Who gets to make the call when hardware details are released, the hardware designer of the part or a bunch of demanding anonymous forum posters.
Some new stuff on AMD 2012 LINEUP
Quote
AMD's 2012 CPU lineup detailed
http://mb.zol.com.cn/240/2405453.html
10-core Komodo next year
http://www.fudzilla.com/processors/item/23525-amds-2012-cpu-lineup-detailed
Seeing how this years chips will not be seen till almost Q4 or later next years will not be released for at least a year.
So, does this mean AM3+ is dead?! ALREADY?!
That can't be right...
I take it that no real world performance indicators can yet be gleaned from this latest "leak"? Two more months of waiting in limbo...
A new socket is almost always required for IGP, if any of these have IGP's then they would likely need a new socket. Same if there were large architectural changes.
So, does this mean AM3+ is dead?! ALREADY?!
That can't be right...
LOL 0:15 on the bottom left:Well AMD just released this Ruby / FX ninjas video pawning some dudes in blue suits. That has got to count for something.
Every day of additional delay makes this feel more and more like the barcelona release. Only difference is that back then everybody assumed that AMD would have an answer for core2, while nowadays expectations are so low that any kind of release at all will probably be greeted with trumpets/streamers/cats and dogs dancing together/etc.
F*cking intel loser F*ck off if u do not know anything. This video is an hint to the date of release of the new chips losers. F*ck your eyes open and see 0:15. Losers. AMD FOR LIFE.
JakeTeddywithR34 3 hours ago
I should certainly hope so considering the post of mine which you quoted has absolutely nothing to do with Sandy Bridge in the first place.
My point regarding Llano's power-consumption is that it is surprisingly high compared to the performance and the core clockspeeds involved, even when due consideration is given for the dGPU.
http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphi...r-Review-Can-AMD-compete-Sandy-Bridge/CPU-and-
http://techreport.com/articles.x/21208/14
I'm pretty sure that the shareholders are getting fairly antsy too.
Again, your point?
It's using a two-year-old architecture.