Trinity review

[frozentundra123456]

Yeah, that's nice. What does it have to do with anything though? I have a sneaking suspicion that you're trying to imply something.

I am saying that it makes no sense to say "buy AMD" because it is "good enough" when there are faster alternatives from Intel at the same price. Is that blunt enough for you?

 

[Schmide]

The HD 7660G isn't 40% faster than the HD 4000. Sorry.

That's exactly 20% averaged out.

Dude did I not show a very very popular game where it was 40% greater? If you take everything out of context, I guess you're right? If you have to be?

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

Dude did I not show a very very popular game where it was 40% greater? If you take everything out of context, I guess you're right? If you have to be?

No, it's you taking things out of context by nitpicking benchmarks that favor your point of view and then wording it as if that was the average improvement.

Speaking of which, here's the HD 4000 beating the HD 7660G by 16%.

Since this is a very very popular game, I guess this settles it: the HD 4000 is 15% faster than the HD 6620G.

 

[Schmide]

No, it's you taking things out of context by nitpicking benchmarks that favor your point of view and then wording it as if that was the average improvement.

BTW, here's the HD 4000 beating the HD 7660G by 16%.

Since this is a very very popular game, I guess this settles it: the HD 4000 is 15% faster than the HD 6620G.

Fine. I'll lay it out for your buched up panties.

You show a lot of benchmarks, marginalize a lot, then ask a question of why anyone would choose an A8 over an i3?

I answer with a game that a lot of people are very excited about showing a 40% improvement.

Some other guy asks me to clarify.

I do.

You say I'm wrong, by taking things out of the context I put them into.

I tell you you're taking what I was saying out of context.

You say I'm nitpicking benchmarks because you have to be right. Then prove this by a benchmark that was unrelated to my original statement.

Ok you're right as you think you are.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

Fine. I'll lay it out for your buched up panties.

You show a lot of benchmarks, marginalize a lot, then ask a question of why anyone would choose an A8 over an i3?

I answer with a game that a lot of people are very excited about showing a 40% improvement.

Some other guy asks me to clarify.

I do.

You say I'm wrong, by taking things out of the context I put them into.

I tell you you're taking what I was saying out of context.

You say I'm nitpicking benchmarks because you have to be right. Prove this by a benchmark that was unrelated to my original statement.

Ok you're right as you think you are.

And I just showed you a game a lot of people are still excited about and play a lot showing a 15% improvement. Funny how that works, ain't it?

And it was you taking things out of context from the get-go by wording your statements as if they meant the 7660G was 40% faster than the HD 4000, which it's clearly not. I contradict what you said by pointing out another very popular game where it's actually slower, and you go crying foul. Funny how that works, right?

And BTW, I am right. Both Llano and Trinity are big improvements compared to what they had before, but they're no better than what Intel has on the market. AMD's only thing to rest upon is their mantra of "good enough", but "good enough" doesn't mean much when your competitor is laying a beating on you in sales.

 

[Schmide]

And I just showed you a game a lot of people are still excited about and play a lot showing a 15% improvement. Funny how that works, ain't it?

and this has what to do with what I said???

And it was you taking things out of context from the get-go by wording your statements as if they meant the 7660G was 40% faster than the HD 4000, which it's clearly not. I contradict what you said by pointing out another very popular game where it's actually slower, and you go crying foul. Funny how that works, right?

I did nothing of the sort! Now that's a straight up straw man. Did I say it was flat out 40% faster? No I said in this one case it was. You're becoming delusional in your quest to prove this one issue.

And BTW, I am right. Both Llano and Trinity are big improvements compared to what they had before, but they're no better than what Intel has on the market. AMD's only thing to rest upon is their mantra of "good enough", but "good enough" doesn't mean much when your competitor is laying a beating on you in sales.

and? As many have said, what are you getting at? If someone says something contrary to your perception, belief, or whatever, you have to go off on the big picture as if its ubiquitous to the world and every buyer.

All this from a simple point I made that does show Trinity in a favorable light.

I find this entertaining BTW.

Ok you're right.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

and this has what to do with what I said???



I did nothing of the sort! Now that's a straight up straw man. Did I say it was flat out 40% faster? No I said in this one case it was. You're becoming delusional in your quest to prove this one issue.



and? As many have said, what are you getting at? If someone says something contrary to your perception, belief, or whatever, you have to go off on the big picture as if its ubiquitous to the world and every buyer.

All this from a simple point I made that does show Trinity in a favorable light.

I find this entertaining BTW.

Ok you're right.

Oh, of course you didn't. So you're backing out of your very own statements now?

It was you that said "it's 40% faster in this game", yet completely forgot about the fact there's games where it's either only slighly faster or even slower. Well, isn't that convenient? The fact that you just admitted to wanting to show AMD in a good light says a lot about your objectiveness here. I don't care about showing a company in a good light; I care about showing the straight up facts and that's why I don't play the benchmark nitpicking game like many here do.

If budget gaming is what you want, then the HD 4000 already does a good job at it. However, if you want overall performance, you go with Intel. AMD is targeting a small niche of the market and yet many people here keep parroting up and down that budget gaming on a laptop isn't a niche despite Llano sales already proving it was. Intel has almost completely closed the gap to AMD when it comes to IGP performance, yet there's a huge gap in CPU performance (especially single-threaded) between Intel and AMD. So what's the excuse gonna be next year when Haswell is already ahead of AMD in the gaming department and still amount a huge faster in the CPU department?

 

[Schmide]

Oh, of course you didn't. So you're backing out of your very own statements now?

What am I backing out of? A straw man you're setting up for me?

Now you're picking fights where there aren't any. I clearly showed the order of events.

It was you that said "it's 40% faster in this game", yet completely forgot about the fact there's games where it's either only slighly faster or even slower.

Uhh. You can make a point without having to show every other possible implication of that point. You should try it sometime.

Well, isn't that convenient? The fact that you just admitted to wanting to show AMD in a good light says a lot about your objectiveness here.

The statement speaks for itself. How much it bunches you panties is just a side effect.

I don't care about showing a company in a good light; I care about showing the straight up facts and that's why I don't play the benchmark nitpicking game like many here do.

Kind of ironic here. You don't really have to nitpick, trinity IGP wins most of them. Some by a wide margin. What you do is marginalize.

If budget gaming is what you want, then the HD 4000 already does a good job at it. However, if you want overall performance, you go with Intel. AMD is targeting a small niche of the market and yet many people here keep parroting up and down that budget gaming on a laptop isn't a niche despite Llano sales already proving it was. Intel has almost completely closed the gap to AMD when it comes to IGP performance, yet there's a huge gap in CPU performance (especially single-threaded) between Intel and AMD. So what's the excuse gonna be next year when Haswell is already ahead of AMD in the gaming department and still amount a huge faster in the CPU department?

Mitigating Mitigation?

None of this has anything to do with what I stated in a simple, not over the top and wordy statement.

I kind of wonder how far you will take this. Injecting every possible detail into a simple benchmark statement, that in context, stands on its own.

 

[pcsavvy]

Can we all agree to disagree on the merits of trinity vs HD4000.
Personally, I want to wait, not very patiently, until trinity is in actual working everyday kind of laptop and see how it works in real life dealing with daily real life computing. Not some artificial benchmarks which by the way like statistics can be manipulated to suite one's agenda.:\
How does Trinity look and feel on an actual laptop that you carry from place to place?
Does the display jerk around or show weird squiggly lines or when I have two or three windows open or running a couple of programs at the same time does it crash or start hanging? Do shadows look more like eqqplant than true black?
Can I watch Netflix or Hulu or latest music video enjoyably or do I wish I was at home with my desktop? Or do I want to stick needles in my eyes from the insane colors cascading across my display?


Inquiring minds want to know??

I am not so interested personally whether it can run the latest DX11 games with 100fps or whatever, just will it do what I want to do reliably, efficiently, and crashfree on a tight budget.

If I had unlimited funds then I would be more interested in getting a high end gaming demon machine but that is not where I am coming from.

 

[AtenRa]

What We've Been Waiting For: Testing OpenCL Accelerated Handbrake with AMD's Trinity

Edit: Just to add a slide, i believe it put things in to another perspective

 

[CKXP]

Oh, of course you didn't. So you're backing out of your very own statements now?

It was you that said "it's 40% faster in this game", yet completely forgot about the fact there's games where it's either only slighly faster or even slower. Well, isn't that convenient? The fact that you just admitted to wanting to show AMD in a good light says a lot about your objectiveness here. I don't care about showing a company in a good light; I care about showing the straight up facts and that's why I don't play the benchmark nitpicking game like many here do.

If budget gaming is what you want, then the HD 4000 already does a good job at it. However, if you want overall performance, you go with Intel. AMD is targeting a small niche of the market and yet many people here keep parroting up and down that budget gaming on a laptop isn't a niche despite Llano sales already proving it was. Intel has almost completely closed the gap to AMD when it comes to IGP performance, yet there's a huge gap in CPU performance (especially single-threaded) between Intel and AMD. So what's the excuse gonna be next year when Haswell is already ahead of AMD in the gaming department and still amount a huge faster in the CPU department?

I guess I missed the memo...Haswell's IGP is going to be faster than what exactly in gaming? How do you know this? Any links saying so? Just curious, that's all.

 

[Abwx]

Speaking of which, here's the HD 4000 beating the HD 7660G by 16%.

That s total BS ...

The IB on the test is a 45W part compared to a 35W Trinity.

GIve Trinity 10 watts more , dedicated to the CPU and CPU perfs
will increase by as much as 40%, fully leveraging the 7660 potential...

While you re at it , take a XM 55W IB part has did a reviewer......

http://techreport.com/articles.x/22932/10

Edit : The tests where the HD4000 do well in Anand s review
are using DX10 not DX11 , such that results are more CPU
bound that GPU bound.....

Using a higher TDP part was not enough it seems....

 

[Red Hawk]

Edit: Just to add a slide, i believe it put things in to another perspective

Uh, a bunch of the "apps" listed are just plain old 3D accelerated games, which of course the APU will be used to accelerate since they won't even work without a 3D graphics accelerator. What can an APU do for these video games that a simple CPU+GPU can't already?

 

[AtenRa]

Uh, a bunch of the "apps" listed are just plain old 3D accelerated games, which of course the APU will be used to accelerate since they won't even work without a 3D graphics accelerator. What can an APU do for these video games that a simple CPU+GPU can't already?

You are missing the point, every year more apps are added to that list. Intel's Quick Sync is supported only by one or two apps. Not only that but OpenCL will benefit both AMD and Intel users

I would really like to see how the Core i3 and i5 are performing.

 

[Red Hawk]

You are missing the point, every year more apps are added to that list. Intel's Quick Sync is supported only by one or two apps. Not only that but OpenCL will benefit both AMD and Intel users

I would really like to see how the Core i3 and i5 are performing.

You're missing my point. What are the criteria for being on the list in the first place?

 

[gorobei]

Uh, a bunch of the "apps" listed are just plain old 3D accelerated games, which of course the APU will be used to accelerate since they won't even work without a 3D graphics accelerator. What can an APU do for these video games that a simple CPU+GPU can't already?

10 out of 60 for the 2012 apps is 1/6 or 17%. not sure if that qualifies as a bunch.

the primary theoretical advantage is that if the data being processed can be kept on the apu die vs sent out to pcie bus or to memory, latency and power use can be reduced.

 

[Skurge]

Woah, someone in this thread doesn't like Trinity very much. It's pretty telling when you can see the merit of a chip that being compared to Intels 2x the price, more power hungry chips.

 

[Dresdenboy]

No, it's you taking things out of context by nitpicking benchmarks that favor your point of view and then wording it as if that was the average improvement.

Speaking of which, here's the HD 4000 beating the HD 7660G by 16%.

Since this is a very very popular game, I guess this settles it: the HD 4000 is 15% faster than the HD 6620G.

This game is one of the 2 red barred games in the other chart, which ranges from ~80 to ~200%.

According to rumors I've heard, game frame rates also depend on CPU performance ;-) And here IB could score, as often can be seen at lower details, DX9 and no-AA stuff.

 

[BrightCandle]

I am a firm believer of only bothering to evaluate for your own needs whether a product is right. Its hard to predict what average PC buyer will want and perceive in terms of performance.
I have 3 needs -
1) I have gaming and development on the desktop. Here I have no power constraints, water cooling and 3x monitors. Max performance, cost factors but not so much that decent kit is passed up, I just don't buy top of the curve unless it is worth it. Trinty is worthless here, CPU performance is too low
2) HTPC under the TV and storage. Here an i3 does the job and trinty would as well. Realistically 2 Intel cores is enough but it doesn't require much GPU performance and Intel is sufficient here. Trinty is likely good enough but not an upgrade to a year old SB machine.
3) Business laptop - All development, requires high numbers of threads working on integer performance mostly with max CPU grunt. Single threaded CPU performance is very important for this type of dev work. Trinity might save power but compared to a Core 2 Duo its similiar in performance and this laptop is almost always plugged into a wall socket.

I don't have a compelling use case for Trinity. If its CPU performance was better with the workable GPU it has then I would consider it for the laptop, it would allow me to low end game while away from home. In 2 of the 3 places I use computers I don't yet have anywhere near sufficient CPU performance and Trinity would be a step backwards or a side grade.

 

[ShintaiDK]

10 out of 60 for the 2012 apps is 1/6 or 17%. not sure if that qualifies as a bunch.

the primary theoretical advantage is that if the data being processed can be kept on the apu die vs sent out to pcie bus or to memory, latency and power use can be reduced.

Here is the catch. If you look at the schemantics and busses. There aint any difference. They still sit on the same bus as before. Its just in 1 package instead of 2.

They simply offer nothing in technical terms besides lower manufactoring costs.

Intel is the one with the most integrated IGP since SB. Since it got access to the L3. But again....both are lightyears away from what people think it is when they talk about it as a unified and fully integrated structure.

Here is a good example. While marketing can always call it something else. Just like AMDs Alink Express and Intels DMI thats just renamed PCIe. Its still the same thing we always had.

The green arrows are...well...illusional at best since it actually cross the crossbar (Thats also why the CPU cores are green). The Trinity GPU sits on a PCIe or HT link(Most likely PCIe). Just like before with IGP(HT link) or discrete cards(PCIe).

If you go into windows device manager for Intels HD graphics. It even says the location is on PCI 0. I am sure it says the same for Llano/Trinity.

People too quickly fall for marketing

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

I guess I missed the memo...Haswell's IGP is going to be faster than what exactly in gaming? How do you know this? Any links saying so? Just curious, that's all.

Ivy Bridge to Haswell will be a bigger IGP performance gain than Sandy Bridge to Ivy Bridge. IGP performance is supposed to go up at least 50%.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

Woah, someone in this thread doesn't like Trinity very much. It's pretty telling when you can see the merit of a chip that being compared to Intels 2x the price, more power hungry chips.

Get back to me when Ivy Bridge Core i3 laptops cost $1000-1200 on average.

 

[ninaholic37]

Intel has already proven they are willing to throw away tens of billions in profits by their idiotic refusal to release a low cost low power chip like an atom with sb level graphics and an integrated ssd controller. The ipad only happened because netbooks run like such trash. If every netbook from day one had a decent youtube/netflix/farmville capable gpu and an SSD, then their chips would be in every ipad today i guarantee it. Intel has already proven they can do it with their 10 watt 807UE. But no one uses it because it is so damned expensive.

Interesting perspective. Anyone know if AMD is making a new chip for the netbook segment? Their C-50/60 chips are nice (and seem smoother for most things than Atom N2600/N570/etc. to me, even with 1280x720)... but everywhere here (Best Buy, Future Shop, Staples, Walmart) seem to be selling netbooks exclusively with Atom chips right now for some reason.

 

[Skurge]

Get back to me when Ivy Bridge Core i3 laptops cost $1000-1200 on average.

They might be close price wise, but they will likely be slower.

 

[Olikan]

Interesting perspective. Anyone know if AMD is making a new chip for the netbook segment? Their C-50/60 chips are nice (and seem smoother for most things than Atom N2600/N570/etc. to me, even with 1280x720)... but everywhere here (Best Buy, Future Shop, Staples, Walmart) seem to be selling netbooks exclusively with Atom chips right now for some reason.

well, there is bobcat 2.0

it's just some clocks bumb (1.65Ghz > 1.7Ghz) , and a rework in south bridge to be more power-eficient