Llano so who is getting it for their Desktop?

[Topweasel]

Whats the tdp for the dual core and does it have the same gpu?

The Two core unit I believe has half the SP units as well. Same architecture just less of it.

 

[VirtualLarry]

I'm interested in a LLano desktop miniITX rig, to replace my current Q9300 desktops. But I want a low-power LLano, like 35-45W.

 

[guachi]

The problem with ITX systems is they only have one expansion slot. Want to play games? Guess you are using your one and only slot.

For me, Llano is perfect for a HTPC and light gaming. In the HTPC I currently have, I installed a TV tuner card. This necessitated getting a micro-ATX board so I could install a video card. If I had to build it over again, I'd likely get the fastest Llano and a mini-ITX board so I can have a smaller case.

I'd like to think manufacturers are exciting about being able to sell a much more capable system in a smaller size, but I have no idea what the retail desktop market is like or even how a system with this much graphical capability would be marketed.

 

[KingstonU]

Well Anand homepage just confirmed that Bulldozer is delayed until at least September . So all of the limelight this summer will have to go directly to Llano competing with Sandy Bridge in the middle sector (SB alone at the top).

Either Bulldozer is having problems, or that AMD expects that demand for Llano will be greater / more important and so the entirety of GloFo's initial 32nm capacity is going to it instead on BD. That is the latest word from AMD at least, though I'd still suspect that the rumors of BD not being ready is part of it. :hmm:

 

[exar333]

BD or bust; no other AMD product is exciting for what I am looking for right now on the CPU side.

 

[dac7nco]

BD or bust; no other AMD product is exciting for what I am looking for right now on the CPU side.

^This. If the high-end FX isn't comparable to a 2600K, I'm done taking AMD seriously, unless they start giving them away in cheese wrappers. If only Fiorina hadn't wrecked the DEC Alpha.
Daimon

 

[raviolissimo]

The Llano seems logical, if you want an extremely low power consumption + are willing to sacrifice some CPU power, compared to other options available today.

But dang it's fast - compared to many models of yesteryear.

But Sandy Bridge is GREAT, F. A. S. T. - plus you get low power consumption, more if you get the 2600S model.

How does a Llano system compare to 2600K or 2600S in terms of power consumption ? Maybe it's hard to get apples to apples, the Llano has integrated video, I guess you could use a 2600/ 2500 compatible chipset with integrated video, for the comparison.

It's a nice choice to have. It's like choosing between a beautiful high-maintenance girlfriend and a beautiful low-maintenance girlfriend.

 

[wahdangun]

Llano is great for my HTPC, because its low power so I can mod it inside my car, it really excited me, I can't wait to show it off to my friend that my onboard GPU can play modern games,

 

[BD231]

It's a nice choice to have. It's like choosing between a beautiful high-maintenance girlfriend and a beautiful low-maintenance girlfriend.

I think somebody put something in your cereal this morning .... maybe bleach or something cus ur talkin crazy .

In any case who wants a dated CPU with a bottlenecked GPU ?? I can understand wanting this in a laptop but if the desktop version isn't under $100 it's a waste. Chance's are you'll end up wanting faster DDR3 for the obvious performance improvements so there's no real savings in this picture.

Plus, I don't want a gpu sitting right on top of my CPU heating things up. Interested to see what kind of thermal consequences it will bring.

 

[Zap]

definitely interested in a quad itx setup here
I'd like to have one as a replacement for my matx c2d server

if I can do this well under 100watts full load will be the determining factor
I just want it small and low power draw

Top quad desktop Llano is 100W TDP for $150, according to latest rumors.

might build an ITX setup around it. Low price, low power consumption and adquate performance are a must.

See above for price/power. Performance would be 5% faster than an Athlon II of same speed/#cores. Not bad to add a 400 core GPU for 5W more TDP, but not as ground shaking as the notebook version.

Whats the tdp for the dual core and does it have the same gpu?

Don't know about the desktop. The notebook versions have same TDP for some reason, and 240 cores.

 

[formulav8]

It will be interesting to see just how bandwidth limited the gpu is. If going from 400 shaders down to 300 or whatever the next lower sku is, and it only shows smallish decreases in performance, then the gpu is majorly bandwidth limited.

Of course we know the gpu is bandwidth limited in the end. But doing that could tell us how bad it is. Also testing various memory speeds will be a good indicator.

 

[ShadowVVL]

guess its safe to say the dual core will most likely fall at 65w tdp.

To me $150 is a bit much.That would probably land the dual core around $79-$99

 

[Doltmoopsie]

I'm interested in a LLano desktop miniITX rig, to replace my current Q9300 desktops. But I want a low-power LLano, like 35-45W.

Unless you are paying over 50 cents per Kw/h you will never make up the purchase price of the A8 by saving on your electric bills. Just buy yourself an AMD HD 6850 if you are itching to upgrade your desktop.

VirtualLarry,
Your Q9300 @ 3 Ghz is going to be faster then the A8. Using Cinebench Single-threaded the A8 produces 2035 while the Q9300 (@3Ghz) produces a score of 3300. In the multi-threaded benchmark the A8 produces almost 7000 compared to the Q9300 at over 12000. Today's A8 processor just can't keep up with Intel's 2008 budget quad-core on the desktop.

A8 processors/APU will make a difference in laptops. It is a better GPU then what is in 90% of current laptops. I'm thinking of buying one...

 

[Topweasel]

Unless you are paying over 50 cents per Kw/h you will never make up the purchase price of the A8 by saving on your electric bills.

Your Q9300 @ 3 Ghz is going to be faster then the A8. Using Cinebench Single-threaded the A8 produces 2050 while the Q9300 (@3Ghz) produces a score of 3300. In the multi-threaded benchmark the A8 produces almost 7000 compared to the Q9300 at over 12000. Today's A8 processor just can't keep up with Intel's 2008 budget quad-core.

Just buy yourself an AMD HD 6850 if you are itching to upgrade.

A8 processors will make a difference in laptops. It is a better GPU then what is in 90% of current laptops.

Performance per watt as alternate values. Like for example. At 140w, and 250w video card, my room heats up and lowering the temp through an air-conditioner as a very measurable affect on electricity costs. Same thing in living rooms. Some people just like having small power saving devices that don't cause the room to turn into a sauna unless they have to.

 

[busydude]

Your Q9300 @ 3 Ghz is going to be faster then the A8. Using Cinebench Single-threaded the A8 produces 2050 while the Q9300 (@3Ghz) produces a score of 3300. In the multi-threaded benchmark the A8 produces almost 7000 compared to the Q9300 at over 12000. Today's A8 processor just can't keep up with Intel's 2008 budget quad-core on the desktop.

I think you are comparing Llano mobile to Intel desktop quads. Clock for clock they are about equal.