Trinity review

[hans030390]

Interesting "argument".

It was people here saying that Trinity would be very popular because of the IGP. We already know how that turned out with Llano vs Sandy Bridge, and Intel has narrowed their gap to AMD when it comes to the IGP with Ivy Bridge.

Intel already has a massive CPU advantage, and now AMD's IGP advantage is dwindling and will be completely gone next year. Given most consumers would go with Intel 9/10 times, especially since they're competitive in pricing and all other areas, what's AMD gonna do to attract people? People that want to game on their laptops on the cheap makes a tiny sector of the market; a small niche. If all AMD is gonna target is a niche segment then you won't see their market share increase by any significant number in comparison to Intel. Llano targeted that small niche, and we all know how that ended out.

I was under the impression that Llano laptops did quite well. Could be wrong.

Either way, I don't doubt that Intel will eventually catch up. And, yes, from a purely CPU perspective, Intel wins. However, in the $500-600 price range, you aren't going to see any Intel laptops that beat out a decent Trinity laptop when it comes to budget gaming.

Let's consider games like League of Legends (which has tens of millions of registered players). Trinity = win for stuff like that. I might even sell my R1 M11x for a nice Trinity laptop, as the ULV, 1.3GHz C2D in that isn't so great.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

I was under the impression that Llano laptops did quite well. Could be wrong.

Either way, I don't doubt that Intel will eventually catch up. And, yes, from a purely CPU perspective, Intel wins. However, in the $500-600 price range, you aren't going to see any Intel laptops that beat out a decent Trinity laptop when it comes to budget gaming.

Let's consider games like League of Legends (which has tens of millions of registered players). Trinity = win for stuff like that. I might even sell my R1 M11x for a nice Trinity laptop, as the ULV, 1.3GHz C2D in that isn't so great.

They did better than the previous K10/K8 architecture laptops, no doubt. A big part of that is that Llano brought AMD to parity with Intel when it came to battery life, power consumption, and heat and it was relatively cheap. The problem is, the earlier processors did horribly compared to Intel, so an improvement over that isn't much to write home about. They're selling better relative to what they had before, but relative to Intel they're way behind in the laptop market in sales.

 

[red12355]

If this statement were true Sandy Bridge wouldn't have left Llano in the dust when it came to sales.

Again, in the enthusiast community it's somewhat common, but the enthusiast community is a very, very small part of the computer market.

That's one of the most asinine things I've ever heard. I have no idea how you arrived at "nobody cares about gaming on laptops" from sandy bridge sales. You realize that you can pair a discrete GPU with a sandy bridge processor, right?

If you look at the last steam survey, laptop users make up about 18% of all users. That's certainly more than "nobody".

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

That's one of the most asinine things I've ever heard. I have no idea how you arrived at "nobody cares about gaming on laptops" from sandy bridge sales. You realize that you can pair a discrete GPU with a sandy bridge processor, right?

If you look at the last steam survey, laptop users make up about 18% of all users. That's certainly more than "nobody".

Yes, because manufacturers make those to target that small niche of the market. Even if it's a niche, there's still money to be made.

In terms of the overall market it's a very small part. It seems like you're assuming that most people have Steam installed on their machines. Given that the enthusiast market is very small in relation to the overall market, 18% of people using laptops on Steam is actually quite small. I'd be pretty surprised if even 5% of desktop and laptop computers sold throughout the world have Steam installed on it.

 

[red12355]

Yes, because manufacturers make those to target that small niche of the market. Even if it's a niche, there's still money to be made.

In terms of the overall market it's a very small part. It seems like you're assuming that most people have Steam installed on their machines. Given that the enthusiast market is very small in relation to the overall market, 18% of people using laptops on Steam is actually quite small. I'd be pretty surprised if even 5% of desktop and laptop computers sold throughout the world have Steam installed on it.

So you would agree to the statement "nobody cares about gaming on desktops" then?

Also, care to back up your "discrete GPUs on laptops is a niche" statement with a source?

 

[Riek]

You do know that 38 is 19% more than 32, right? That's nowhere near close to 50%.

I know that 38 fps vs 24fps = 58% more or 36% less.


or 13.8 and 7.3fps = 89% more or 47% less

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

So you would agree to the statement "nobody cares about gaming on desktops" then?

Also, care to back up your "discrete GPUs on laptops is a niche" statement with a source?

I didn't say "nobody"; I said a very small part of the market.

But you intentionally misquoting me just proves that I'm right, so no harm done.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

I know that 38 fps vs 24fps = 58% more or 36% less.


or 13.8 and 7.3fps = 89% more or 47% less

Either the CPU or IGP or both can't Turbo to the speeds they're supposed to because the XPS 13 does run very hot. From the review:

Under stress testing, we found the XPS 13's core temperatures would idle in the mid forties and then push into the low eighties. That trouble is compounded by the fan noise; the XPS 13 just seems to have a hard time in general dissipating heat. There's a ceiling that it hits, and then the fan will keep running well after the system has stopped being stressed as it slowly but surely tries to get the temperatures back down to the forties. As I mentioned before, once any obstruction is placed under that bottom vent, it's not at all difficult to get the core temperatures into the high nineties. Fan noise under heavy load is at least 43dBA, and as is customary with the small fans ultrabooks require, the character of the noise is extremely high pitched. Again, this is really going to be the price of admission for an ultrabook. I want to say that Dell probably could have tweaked their fan controls better, but really it's the fact that the whole cooling system just doesn't seem to be as efficient as competing designs.

Don't know how this is relevant. You did realize you're comparing an Ultrabook to a normal laptop (which is what we're discussing), right? A normal laptop has a much better cooling system and shouldn't have the problems the XPS 13 was experiencing.

 

[Riek]

Either the CPU or IGP or both can't Turbo to the speeds they're supposed to because the XPS 13 does run very hot. From the review:

Don't know how this is relevant. You did realize you're comparing an Ultrabook to a normal laptop (which is what we're discussing), right? A normal laptop has a much better cooling system and shouldn't have the problems the XPS 13 was experiencing.

actually is was you who brought up the 'intel has almost no degradation in their gpu. They keep the same gpu for all their models with only a slight difference in turbo speed'.

Hence I showed their is a difference! turbo speed of that model is 1200MHz.

And ofcourse it doesn't reach turbo, the lower the TDP gets, the lower the time spent at max turbo. Hence why turbo is a false number to identify performance by. And its not due to heat, its because the turbo cannot be applied because the cpu is either fully loaded or turboed also. While this is a 17W model, it clearly shows intel has a huge degradation in performance when TDP lowers despite keeping the same turboboost frequency.

So looking at turboboost to indicate performance is plain wrong..

 

[frozentundra123456]

Again, if you've got the data to back this up please do so. I've already showed that Llano is outselling Intel laptops and has been outselling them consistently since Llano was released last year. If this were true, which it isn't, it would be Intel gaining the market share and not the other way around.

Are you seriously saying Llano outsells the entire intel lineup in laptops? The latest figures I could find showed Intel with still 80% market share. AMD is making marginal gains in market share, but is far, far from "outselling" intel.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

actually is was you who brought up the 'intel has almost no degradation in their gpu. They keep the same gpu for all their models with only a slight difference in turbo speed'.

Hence I showed their is a difference! turbo speed of that model is 1200MHz.

And ofcourse it doesn't reach turbo, the lower the TDP gets, the lower the time spent at max turbo. Hence why turbo is a false number to identify performance by. And its not due to heat, its because the turbo cannot be applied because the cpu is either fully loaded or turboed also. While this is a 17W model, it clearly shows intel has a huge degradation in performance when TDP lowers despite keeping the same turboboost frequency.

So looking at turboboost to indicate performance is plain wrong..

If the IGP can't Turbo or it's very limited in terms of how much it can then that's gonna make a big difference, even if clock scaling isn't great. There's a much smaller difference between 1100-1150MHz and 1250MHz than 650-1000MHz and 1250MHz. There's two things: the TDP wall, which you mentioned, and the fact the XPS 13 runs very hot while gaming. If you still don't understand it: a normal laptop wouldn't have this problem because it uses a much better cooling system and has much more TDP headroom.

There's also the CPU, which is obviously clocked much lower than the standard voltage versions.

And with that, we get to the main point: it's a stupid argument because there's a big variance when you're comparing two wildly different types of chassis: Ultrabook and a normal laptop. Nice try at making a fallacious counter-argument.

 

[wrbt]

And, yes, from a purely CPU perspective, Intel wins. However, in the $500-600 price range, you aren't going to see any Intel laptops that beat out a decent Trinity laptop when it comes to budget gaming.

Let's consider games like League of Legends (which has tens of millions of registered players). Trinity = win for stuff like that. I might even sell my R1 M11x for a nice Trinity laptop, as the ULV, 1.3GHz C2D in that isn't so great.

Yup, you nailed it.

If I'm looking for a laptop that can do some gaming, and I don't mean 60fps 8xAA 1080p where I'm noticing how lovely the shadows are on distant mountains gaming we're talking just being able to occasionally jump into Team Fortress 2 or Left 4 Dead when I want to drink beer and play with my friends online, it is likely that a decent Trinity laptop will be a better choice for certain price points.

I'm not discounting IB, when I'm ready to buy if there is an Intel model that is more what I'm looking for in terms of screen size form factor etc. fine maybe I'll go with that since I know it is a solid offering as well.

However from the info I have so far a Trinity laptop might be the better choice for low to mid range gaming portarig.

 

[Soulkeeper]

desktop versions are still months away ?
or full piledriver for desktop

 

[IntelUser2000]

Desktop version of Trinity is coming in August. The iGPU-less Piledriver is probably within 1-2 months of that.

Is this a paper launch? I can't find any store selling Trinity based laptops. It says on HP Sleekbook launch that the 15.6-inch Fusion will be available in June 20.

From the few searches I have done, it does seem like its a paper launch.

 

[busydude]

Desktop version of Trinity is coming in August. The iGPU-less Piledriver is probably within 1-2 months of that.

Is this a paper launch? I can't find any store selling Trinity based laptops. It says on HP Sleekbook launch that the 15.6-inch Fusion will be available in June 20.

From the few searches I have done, it does seem like its a paper launch.

Yeah this is a paper launch similar to Llano. We have to wait at least a month or two to see products in retail.

 

[Obsoleet]

LOL at the people saying it would be a massive increase. You can't polish a turd.

An i3 or i5 and switchable AMD or NVIDIA GPU is still a better alternative. Yeah, it'll be a bit more expensive, but you get what you pay for. This is the same situation as the Core i5+GT 540M vs. A8 again.

That was the same blurb the AT review had at the end. I feel that's unfair to Trinity.

It's like saying the Corvette is slower than the Toyota, when the Toyota has a rocket attached to it. At what cost? Overall I'd rather have a Trinity in a laptop than an Intel + Nvidia switchable monstrosity (ie. you get what you pay for I suppose).

I'd rather have a nice single solution, and Trinity has no equal on the market for that. Frankly, once APUs get to a certain speed- I'm going to stop buying standalone GPUs. The laptop world should and likely will adopt this mentality even earlier.

 

[MrPickins]

View Post
tons of people game on their laptops. i dunno where wut axel is getting the notion that people don't. MMOs in particular.

If this statement were true Sandy Bridge wouldn't have left Llano in the dust when it came to sales.

Again, in the enthusiast community it's somewhat common, but the enthusiast community is a very, very small part of the computer market.

You can say this all you want, but that doesn't make it true.

The vast majority of people gaming on laptops are not enthusiasts. They're normal people with a laptop as their main/only PC that happen to play some light games (as ElFenix said, MMOs in particular).

When I played FFXI, I'd wager that more than half of my in game friends used their laptops, some with horrendous IGPs.

Remember that most gamers are "casual" gamers these days. These are also the same people who don't need gobs of CPU power to listen to MP3s and watch cat videos on youtube. AMD is in a good position to nail that market with Trinity. :thumbsup:

 

[ElFenix]

If this statement were true Sandy Bridge wouldn't have left Llano in the dust when it came to sales.

Again, in the enthusiast community it's somewhat common, but the enthusiast community is a very, very small part of the computer market.

no there aren't any other reasons at all why sandy could have left llano in the dust. surely can't have anything to do with sheer retail availability or the strength of intel's brand name. couldn't have anything at all to do with the lack of serious research people put into laptop (and just about every other aside from car) purchases.

 

[Shaydza]

Frankly I cannot wait till trinity laptops hit retail. Price will be the ultimate determining factor though. If they are reasonably priced I think there well be a lot of takers.

Please someone release a laptop with an a10 processor, decent 15 inch display ( I am happy with 1366x768 till as faster architecture arrives ) and a 100 watt hour battery. Gimme these and I will happily fork over my cash.

 

[lau808]

Frankly I cannot wait till trinity laptops hit retail. Price will be the ultimate determining factor though. If they are reasonably priced I think there well be a lot of takers.

Please someone release a laptop with an a10 processor, decent 15 inch display ( I am happy with 1366x768 till as faster architecture arrives ) and a 100 watt hour battery. Gimme these and I will happily fork over my cash.

yeah, i want an asus with an a10 and a 15" 768 screen for my next notebook. (possibly for fall semester) also would like the option of a ssd and hdd too. (unsure if notebooks have this capability) can anyone confirm if this is available on some notebooks whether asus or not?

 

[BrightCandle]

I did a test yesterday evening of a 2.4 Ghz laptop Core 2 Duo in Cinebench. I was interested to see how much quicker the top end Trinity was compared to that now very old machine as Trinity would have significantly more GPU grunt. Single threaded Cinebench comparison:
C2D 2.4Ghz - 0.74
Trinity - 0.77

On the positive side AMD has finally managed to make a chip that outperforms a Core 2 Duo, we all knew it would happen eventually. On the other hand its not really worth upgrading to, I'd be better off swapping to a second hand machine with a better graphics card. Sure its more efficient but that is nothing short of shockingly poor CPU performance.

 

[Shaydza]

I did a test yesterday evening of a 2.4 Ghz laptop Core 2 Duo in Cinebench. I was interested to see how much quicker the top end Trinity was compared to that now very old machine as Trinity would have significantly more GPU grunt. Single threaded Cinebench comparison:
C2D 2.4Ghz - 0.74
Trinity - 0.77

On the positive side AMD has finally managed to make a chip that outperforms a Core 2 Duo, we all knew it would happen eventually. On the other hand its not really worth upgrading to, I'd be better off swapping to a second hand machine with a better graphics card. Sure its more efficient but that is nothing short of shockingly poor CPU performance.

$100 says the battery life on the trinity gives that old core 2 a hiding.

And the is more to a processor than cinebench, you have to test a full spread of apps

 

[frostedflakes]

Core 2 Duo is still a pretty respectable CPU, had a 1.83GHz Core Duo laptop with an SSD that felt just as fast as a much more expensive and powerful desktop for web browsing and other everyday tasks. If you don't plan to do much CPU intensive work, Trinity should work as well as anything else in its price range.

Also, try comparing multi-threaded Cinebench to the 2.4GHz C2D. Even with the CMT penalty for Piledriver, it probably still runs circles around the C2D in heavily-threaded tasks, 4 cores vs 2 cores isn't even fair for the C2D. So for CPU intensive tasks (which would tend to be heavily threaded and be able to take advantage of all four threads available with Trinity), it should be quite a bit faster.

 

[mikk]

ivy AF is not better, is slight worser....you can see in the AF test there is more red....anyway the diference is impossible to see dodging bullets

IVB AF is better of course. Read the Computerbase test and download the AF tester videos. The flickering is much worse on a VLIW4 and VLIW5 GPU, you can't see this in a screenshot, you need videos. AMD fixed the flickering issue in their GCN architecture.

 

[KAZANI]

Yeah this is a paper launch similar to Llano. We have to wait at least a month or two to see products in retail.

I was looking forward to a Trinity desktop upgrade. Too bad AMD chose to serve me 4 months later than Intel; I went with an Ivy Bridge.