<?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>AMD pits Llano against Sandy Bridge</title>
		<description>Discuss AMD pits Llano against Sandy Bridge</description>
		<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21989-amd-pits-llano-against-sandy-bridge</link>
		<lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 May 2013 09:44:21 +0100</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>JComments</generator>
		<atom:link href="http://www.fudzilla.com/component/jcomments/feed/com_k2/21989/10" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<item>
			<title>Bl0bb3r says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21989-amd-pits-llano-against-sandy-bridge#comment-17759</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Naterm, the TDP can exceed the limits depending on the cooling solution, but that's only until power management kicks in and lowers the core clock and drops the voltages. That's when things begin to stall. What intel gives as a guideline is what they've tested with their own cooling solutions they supply. As for the thin servers, that's a different story because there the heat sinks are all the same form, so mostly manage a specific range of TDP but also provide only a certain level of processing power compared to 2U parts or bigger, which also have bigger heat sinks thus support faster, hotter processors.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Bl0bb3r</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 06 Mar 2011 18:17:43 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21989-amd-pits-llano-against-sandy-bridge#comment-17759</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>TechHog says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21989-amd-pits-llano-against-sandy-bridge#comment-17705</link>
			<description><![CDATA[No, Brazos is for netbooks and nettops. Llano is a mainstream platform. Fusion will be in all market segments next year.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>TechHog</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 05 Mar 2011 12:24:24 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21989-amd-pits-llano-against-sandy-bridge#comment-17705</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Jurassic1024 says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21989-amd-pits-llano-against-sandy-bridge#comment-17703</link>
			<description><![CDATA[these tests do not reflect typical usage scenarios.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Jurassic1024</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 05 Mar 2011 11:32:43 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21989-amd-pits-llano-against-sandy-bridge#comment-17703</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Jurassic1024 says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21989-amd-pits-llano-against-sandy-bridge#comment-17702</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Fusion was designed with netbooks to net tops in mind. The SB processor tested is not Intel's top graphics core. The top end core replaces a $60 card... http://www.newegg.ca/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&DEPA=0&Order=BESTMATCH&Description=hd+5550&x=0&y=0 Kudos to AMD for the performance of Llano, however Intel is far from producing the same ol' graphics cores of yesteryear like some here claim.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Jurassic1024</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 05 Mar 2011 11:29:58 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21989-amd-pits-llano-against-sandy-bridge#comment-17702</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>TechHog says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21989-amd-pits-llano-against-sandy-bridge#comment-17679</link>
			<description><![CDATA[If you mean SB with Turbo Boost 2.0, it's up to 25 seconds.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>TechHog</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 04 Mar 2011 21:16:00 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21989-amd-pits-llano-against-sandy-bridge#comment-17679</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Naterm says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21989-amd-pits-llano-against-sandy-bridge#comment-17670</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Can be exceeded for how long? A few microseconds? You're not going to see a 130W processor running at 150W for any significant amount of time. Cooling systems are designed with specific thermal loads in mind. How come you never see intel's big, nasty 130W server processors in most blades and 1U servers? Because the cooling system can't handle it. Now if 95W processors started scaling up to 105W or 110W for significant amounts of time, you'd have yourself a serious problem. A processor is not going to exceed it's TDP for any humanly significant amount of time. It would be an engineering nightmare.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Naterm</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 04 Mar 2011 20:49:08 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21989-amd-pits-llano-against-sandy-bridge#comment-17670</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Pablo says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21989-amd-pits-llano-against-sandy-bridge#comment-17650</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Kudos to AMD for going to market with a different approach to benchmarks - what they've demo'd seems reasonable - this is going to help them market Llano. Of interest, the power consumption of both SB and Llano on mobile is quite high tbh. At those kinds of wattage, you're taxing the fan quite a bit (= eventual failure), the notebook will feel hot to the touch, and the battery life is going to be short. Zacate otoh consumes a lot less power and has a much smaller die size so if its successor Wichita is as good as expected (quad, improved graphics, 28nm), it will defeat both Llano and SB (and likely IB) where it counts: in the mainstream market.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Pablo</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 04 Mar 2011 18:12:54 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21989-amd-pits-llano-against-sandy-bridge#comment-17650</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>noypogs16 says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21989-amd-pits-llano-against-sandy-bridge#comment-17575</link>
			<description><![CDATA[where is fudo he should be the one writing this article, seen the demo Llano is great in multitasking heavy application, no bias on demo, dont ever used intel graphics it really sucks, and they really never learn the art of designing real GPU cores just stick to amd and nvidia]]></description>
			<dc:creator>noypogs16</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 04 Mar 2011 09:37:51 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21989-amd-pits-llano-against-sandy-bridge#comment-17575</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Bl0bb3r says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21989-amd-pits-llano-against-sandy-bridge#comment-17563</link>
			<description><![CDATA[The real issue here is that in this scenario, the intel CPU struggles and to be fair, how many of you have seen reviews actually been done this way? In most if not all reviews each test is done separately to measure raw performance. Even the pissx test in Vantage measured GPU performance separately, but in a real world scenario the GPU processed both actual workload and pissx at the same time making it not so desirable. The same way this demo proved that intel's graphics are unusable if anyone wants to use them for multitasking when possible, while Llano was built just for this, to have it's GPU used for accelerating along side the CPU. From this perspective, it does its job better than the faster Sandy cores.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Bl0bb3r</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 04 Mar 2011 03:15:03 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21989-amd-pits-llano-against-sandy-bridge#comment-17563</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Bl0bb3r says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21989-amd-pits-llano-against-sandy-bridge#comment-17562</link>
			<description><![CDATA[What the demo shows is that when heavily tasked, especially with video-related loads, the Sandy Bridge system become unusable while Llano keep its cool. Why? Who knows at this point without actual debugging... like Countess I also think it has something to do with the shared cache, knowing from the Quick Sync docs that the L3 is used by the graphics core as well. Those are just 6 MB of memory in this case which instead of helping makes instruction and data scheduling worse by having to constantly swap data back and forth to the system memory, which will also increase power usage. Llano has no L3... it sets the video memory to UMA or has a side port buffer + UMA and it can keep it's L2's for CPU workloads only.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Bl0bb3r</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 04 Mar 2011 03:09:06 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/21989-amd-pits-llano-against-sandy-bridge#comment-17562</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
