ASRock A75 Extreme6 Review and Desktop Llano Overclocking
by Ian Cutress on June 30, 2011 12:05 AM EST3D Movement Algorithm Test
The first benchmark ran is actually one I have written. My full time job involves computational chemistry, so this first benchmark uses various algorithms for three-dimensional simulation and movement of independent particles. The algorithms both employ uniform random number generation or normal distribution random number generation, and vary in various amounts of trigonometric operations, conditional statements, generation and rejection, fused operations, etc. The benchmark runs through six algorithms for a specified number of particles and steps, and calculates the speed of each algorithm, then sums them all for a final score. This is an example of a real world situation that a computational scientist may find themselves in, rather than a pure synthetic benchmark. The benchmark is also parallel between particles simulated, and we test the single thread performance as well as the multi-threaded performance.
WinRAR x64 3.93
With 64-bit WinRAR, we compress the set of files used in the USB speed tests. WinRAR x64 3.93 attempts to use multithreading when possible.
FastStone Image Viewer 4.2
FastStone Image Viewer is a free piece of software I have been using for quite a few years now. It allows quick viewing of flat images, as well as resizing, changing color depth, adding simple text or simple filters. It also has a bulk image conversion tool, which we use here. The software currently operates only in single-thread mode, which should change in later versions of the software. For this test, we convert a series of 170 files, of various resolutions, dimensions and types (of a total size of 163MB), all to the .gif format of 640x480 dimensions.
Sorenson Squeeze 6.0
Sorenson Squeeze is a professional video encoder, complete with a vast array of options. For this test, we convert 32 HD videos, each a minute long and approximately 42 MB in size, to WMV 512KBps format. Squeeze can encode multiple videos at once, one for each thread.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
44 Comments
View All Comments
Exodite - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link
I'd agree that no common task /requires/ an i3 2100, or a Llano equivalent, but between the two of them the former is the better option for such.Most significantly Llano /doesn't/ have a much better graphics solution. Sure, it's better but still not good enough to do native resolution gaming and low/mid settings - which is the bare minimum for gaming at this day and age.
For anything else, speaking about the GPU-side of things, anything will suffice. Certainly both Llano and Intel's HD2000/HD3000 solutions.
Perhaps I were overly enthusiastic about Llano's GPU prowess, I didn't expect it to be quite as memory-starved as it was, but I always envisoned it being a lot closer to what a discrete solution with the same clocks and core count would offer.
As it is I'd recommend an Intel solution to anyone at this point, with or without a discrete card as required.
You may chose to scream bloody murder about it if you want to, it's no skin of my back, but the numbers do speak for themselves.
mino - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link
"I'd agree that no common task /requires/ an i3 2100, or a Llano equivalent, but between the two of them the former is the better option for such."Yeah, between the two i3 is a better option for uncommon single-threaded tasks.
Now, what have those to do with the low-end desktop market?
L. - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link
Bloody Murder !No shit ... "doesn' t have a much better graphics solution" ...
Seriously read a few other reviews and you'll understand there is a world of difference between 11 fps and 30, dx11 and no dx11, etc.
There are MANY games which lie on the fringe of "playable" with a Llano which are clearly unplayable on an i3.
The fact that this review is not showing is that with all those, the difference is between play and no play, and everytime the Llano is far ahead.
I linked a review in the comments of the OC article here on AT and it shows things ... like 11 fps crysis gamer settings @ 1920x1080.
While 11fps is not playable, 11fps in crysis w/ those settings and that resolution implies almost everything is playable with some stuff tuned down.
THIS IS NOT THE CASE with an i3.
The difference might be hidden w/ these benchmarks but it's there and so big it cannot justify the pricing of the i3 2105.
Llano is good enough to do native resolution gaming @ low / mid settings, even if you consider native to be full HD, there are many many many games that are playable on it this way.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/amd-a...
Yet another one ... high quality, full HD, far cry 2 , playable on Llano, 11 fps on HD3000.
Finally - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link
A German magazine has proven that a Llano will run fine with DDR3-1600 (and upwards). It's called computerbase, have a look: http://tinyurl.com/6zsv6kkFinally - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link
DDR3-1600 RAM isn't that much more expensive than the run-of-the-mill type... both are ridiculously cheap right now.With only 65€ for 8GB of (good gamer) RAM, I'd say that this has already become the new standard minimum amount.
havoti97 - Sunday, July 3, 2011 - link
You are not entitled to anything. You get what's given to you. If you don't like it, go look elsewhere or do yar own benchmark.L. - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link
This is almost correct.a) s1155 prices have dropped, you can expect A75 to do the same
b) Llano is AMD and WILL be cheaper
c) The core i3 2100 is way overkill for flash, full hd and basic stuff
d) For that you have a 18W e-350 that's so much more money and power efficient
e) Office desktops do NOT need the power of an i3-2100
Besides, you seem to think the GPU is useless outside of games, might be partly true today but it's not meant to last.
ganteng3005 - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link
IMHO it's not that GPU is useless outside of games (even Windows Aero requires a "real" GPU to run), but what I'm saying is that Intel HD Graphics is sufficient for daily usage except gaming and graphical computing. I might be incorrect, though, but for me, personally, an i3 2100 is sufficient (even overkill, I agree) for office tasks.E-350 and Pentium G620 (SB) might be better in price/performance, but what I've noticed from the E-350 (and of course, Intel Atom) is the lack of real-time responsiveness on laptops. It might be just me, though.
kevith - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link
Does that mean to say, that I´ll not be able to run Windows Aero with any buil-in GPU? AMD or Intel...StormyParis - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link
"Besides, you seem to think the GPU is useless outside of games, might be partly true today but it's not meant to last.".We'll see when we get there. The industry has a terrible, terrible record of adapting software to new hardware, especially to new CPU instruction sets / capabilities. Look at all the x86 extensions that are still barely used (anything after SSE2 ?).
My take it... that exact same quote will still apply 3 yrs from now, and by then, we'll be due for an upgrade ^^