<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<title>Llano CPU power inferior to Sandy Bridge</title>
		<description>Discuss Llano CPU power inferior to Sandy Bridge</description>
		<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19582-llano-cpu-power-inferior-to-sandy-bridge</link>
		<lastBuildDate>Wed, 19 Jun 2013 20:00:59 +0100</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>JComments</generator>
		<atom:link href="http://www.fudzilla.com/component/jcomments/feed/com_k2/19582/10" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<item>
			<title>blandead says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19582-llano-cpu-power-inferior-to-sandy-bridge#comment-1483</link>
			<description><![CDATA[whos saying dream cream graphics. its already said itll be redwood, 5500 series or so. still in a dif league than intel.. idiot. one quarter the die size... for which fusion.. oh right the one with bobcat... thats supposed to compete with atom. i know plenty of people with ATI and newest drivers no complaints i think you're just an idiot]]></description>
			<dc:creator>blandead</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 25 Jul 2010 13:41:44 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19582-llano-cpu-power-inferior-to-sandy-bridge#comment-1483</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>SiliconDoc says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19582-llano-cpu-power-inferior-to-sandy-bridge#comment-1455</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Llano is ONE QUARTER the die size of the Intel counterpart. You'll have to bank on dream cream graphics as a red rooster fanboy, or scream "wait for Bulldozer!"]]></description>
			<dc:creator>SiliconDoc</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 24 Jul 2010 20:29:27 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19582-llano-cpu-power-inferior-to-sandy-bridge#comment-1455</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>SiliconDoc says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19582-llano-cpu-power-inferior-to-sandy-bridge#comment-1450</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Since Catalyst 10.5 and 10.6 are UTTERLY BROKEN and are destroying ati fanboy installs by the millions, how will AMD work the vidcard driver team for this ? Can they hire anyone competent enough, in big enough numbers that the end user base doesn't suffer miserably for months on end ?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>SiliconDoc</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 24 Jul 2010 20:07:08 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19582-llano-cpu-power-inferior-to-sandy-bridge#comment-1450</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>blandead says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19582-llano-cpu-power-inferior-to-sandy-bridge#comment-1449</link>
			<description><![CDATA[BTW any radeon 4000+ or any nvidia 8000+ series or higher can do GPGPU so ppl with better dedicated GPUS will run those GPGPU apps even faster. Fusion is just a good all in one also if GPGPU takes off no more being screwed over by having to pick a more expensive/worse product for proprietary CUDA. ANY CUDA/STREAM can be redone in GPGPU code as well and it can be done just as fast or better if one knows what he is doing. people are just used to CUDA/STREAM and they have some shortcuts. but GPGPU benefits greatly using video card added with SOME CPU power that GPU's can't provide (L1 cache for example). that makes it about 2x as fast.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>blandead</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 24 Jul 2010 19:33:10 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19582-llano-cpu-power-inferior-to-sandy-bridge#comment-1449</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>nele says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19582-llano-cpu-power-inferior-to-sandy-bridge#comment-1372</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Exactly, that was my point - they can, but they haven't... I think there's a very good reason for that. Intel still holds a vast chunk of the GPU market with their horrid IGPs, so most PCs wouldn't benefit from such applications... It will take some time, as developers aren't to keen to spend resources on stuff that will work on one in ten PCs. Also, millions of users still use older ATI/NV cards or IGPs, so they can't run GPGPU stuff either...]]></description>
			<dc:creator>nele</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 23 Jul 2010 10:24:53 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19582-llano-cpu-power-inferior-to-sandy-bridge#comment-1372</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>blandead says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19582-llano-cpu-power-inferior-to-sandy-bridge#comment-1361</link>
			<description><![CDATA[professional users my butt. they can make an antivirus and some more video encoders with more options thats gpgpu. firefox as a whole will become gpu rendered... and if the cpu is phenom II performance with decent graphics u got way better gpgpu performance than sandy bridge. their integrated graphics is just a way to save them money, for end user absolutely useless. fusion will be very popular once people try it. 32nm phenom II isnt so bad especially in an htpc at 4ghz with dx11. besides werent ALL OF YOU complaining how the cpu would only be as good as athlon II and now it can be as good as high end phenom II. probly will charge a lot less too... more cores and less $ + faster gpu. doesnt matter if they are a quarter late either. most ppl already have some crap core i3/w intel gpu]]></description>
			<dc:creator>blandead</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 23 Jul 2010 09:43:18 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19582-llano-cpu-power-inferior-to-sandy-bridge#comment-1361</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Bl0bb3r says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19582-llano-cpu-power-inferior-to-sandy-bridge#comment-1347</link>
			<description><![CDATA[+1]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Bl0bb3r</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 22 Jul 2010 21:25:30 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19582-llano-cpu-power-inferior-to-sandy-bridge#comment-1347</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Bl0bb3r says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19582-llano-cpu-power-inferior-to-sandy-bridge#comment-1346</link>
			<description><![CDATA[No, I'm pretty sure you got confused yourself. When referring to Llano and Sandy I don't just view them as APU's and that's it, I was also considering the micro-architectures (there, since small words apparently confuse people). Llano is just a middle product with Stars cores until the next Fusion APU will get Bulldozer cores and that will be the real competition for the Sandy micro-architecture. Tech for tech.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Bl0bb3r</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 22 Jul 2010 21:13:41 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19582-llano-cpu-power-inferior-to-sandy-bridge#comment-1346</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>nele says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19582-llano-cpu-power-inferior-to-sandy-bridge#comment-1344</link>
			<description><![CDATA[...well informed consumers might go for Llano powered PC simply for its better graphics. Yeah, this sure sounds pro-Intel to me... ;-) On a more serious note, people who know what they are doing will buy an AMD, not just when it comes to Llano, but in this market segment in general. AMD has been delivering vastly superior integrated graphics since the 690G and with Nvidia out of the picture, there's really nothing Intel can do. Also, the vast majority of AMD processors in the sub-$100 market offer much better value for money than anything Intel has to offer, not to mention low voltage e- and u- series processors (although the latter is a bit pricey)... I think we can all expect Llano to be somewhat cheaper than Sandy and a bit slower... Basically users will get the great graphics core for free. As for GPGPU... Well it depends. Most software that actually benefits from GPU power is somewhat specialized and reserved for professional users, so it's not stuff that people will run on Fusion or Sandy platforms. Hopefully this will change soon.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>nele</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 22 Jul 2010 20:45:12 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19582-llano-cpu-power-inferior-to-sandy-bridge#comment-1344</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>redisnidma says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19582-llano-cpu-power-inferior-to-sandy-bridge#comment-1340</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Once again Fuad chewing sour grapes. How come he doesn't mention the fact that in GPGPU apps Fusion will have the edge over Sandy bridge? It's not about CPU power anymore, it's the whole package that counts in the end. AMD is sponsoring the Fusion fund and the idea behind this program is to advance the introduction of more apps that can take advantage of GPGPU, and Fusion does have the edge. In the end, it's all about the software. Anyhow, sometimes you wonder how much intel pays Fuad for these type of degrading articles. /:]]></description>
			<dc:creator>redisnidma</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 22 Jul 2010 19:32:36 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/19582-llano-cpu-power-inferior-to-sandy-bridge#comment-1340</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
