Back to Article

  • chillmelt - Wednesday, September 07, 2011 - link

    Last week, I was forced to buy an Intel laptop for work, simply because there seems to be a scarcity in 3530mx-powered laptops. That was my first Intel purchase in a long, long time.

    The desktop market is slowly losing market share. Laptops, smartphones, and tablets are where the consumers are at right now. Get on it AMD!
  • Taft12 - Wednesday, September 07, 2011 - link

    What you're saying just doesn't align with reality. The laptop OEMs are really behind Fusion. There are far, far more AMD laptops than there used to be. In my latest Best Buy flyers, they seem to outnumber Intel!

    As for a laptop with a 3530MX, try the HP dv7-6188ca maybe?
  • GiantPandaMan - Wednesday, September 07, 2011 - link

    Makes total sense. He said desktop market share, as in total desktop market share compared to total computing market share, not AMD market share in laptops versus total laptop share. Reply
  • chillmelt - Wednesday, September 07, 2011 - link

    I found that exact model... But why is there only *one* model for the flagship Llano processor? Where is Toshiba/Samsung/etc. on the list? I've done my searching/shopping and I can't seem to find anything beyond HP's dv6.

    When you're out for a decently-powered laptop from AMD, other than AMD's quad core Llanos, you have no choice but to go to i5 and up, which is what I did.
  • BSMonitor - Wednesday, September 07, 2011 - link

    Half as many CPU cores. Half as many GPU cores. And still a 65W processor?

    Same old story from AMD. NOTHING that stands out. Follow the leader. YAWN!
  • silverblue - Wednesday, September 07, 2011 - link

    TDP is a worst case scenario. Think about the E-350 for a moment - it may be rated at 18W, but does it use it? TDP is the maximum amount of power that a cooling system must dissipate and thus not likely a true reflection of how much power a CPU uses. In the end, a TDP rating is meaningless in the face of actual power readings. I also undervolt my CPU but get the same performance, so again, TDP isn't a perfect indicator of power when I might be using only half of that.

    Yes, it's puzzling that the same TDP would exist for both the A8-3800 and A4-3300, but a quick glance at the technology on offer for both CPUs will be enough to convince you that a dual-core APU with not even half the number of shaders will not use anywhere near as much power as its quad-core relative, even if AMD have changed the setup of such a CPU to favour the CPU more during heavy load.
  • MrSpadge - Wednesday, September 07, 2011 - link

    You can be sure AMD is pumping at least 1.4 V into these to meet that 65 W TDP ;)

    Some German site recently overclocked their top of the line A8-3850 as far as the motherboard allowed (not much, about 3.3 GHz) and then lowered CPU voltage as far as they could. They achieved something ~1.1 V instead of the stock 1.4 V and got about HALF the power usage under CPU load than the stock config. That's so totally nuts..

  • titan13131 - Wednesday, September 07, 2011 - link

    I think it would be neat if a dual core variant came with the 6550D GPU, I mean it's not like the CPU is going to bottle neck it so why not. Reply
  • SunLord - Thursday, September 08, 2011 - link

    Based on the photos of an A4 next to an A8 on Engadget which looks to be almost half the size of the A8 I think AMD has both versions in the market mainly due to the piss poor yields on the new 32nm process. Reply
  • yankeeDDL - Thursday, September 08, 2011 - link

    SunLord, sorry I don't understand your message.
    If the size of the die is half, it's because AMD has a specific mask set for the A4 compared to the A8.
    Which means that they're getting good enough yield on the A8, to the point that they don't have enough patrs with only 2 good cores, to make A4s. So they manufacture A4s with their own mask set.
    Which means, the reality is the opposite of what you state .... unless I'm missing something here.
  • yankeeDDL - Thursday, September 08, 2011 - link

    Let's see how these CPUs perform in real benchmarks, but at $70, it seems to me these should kill completely the "Pentium", from the G850 down and including, of course, the G620. Reply
  • silverblue - Thursday, September 08, 2011 - link

    With the lower Pentiums, it's going to be a case of what matters most, CPU speed or GPU power. At 160 shaders, it's not going to be a strong Radeon IGP, and the Pentium will undoubtedly have an edge in performance, so it's possible that motherboard pricing might be the determining factor. As you go up in price, Llano's case does seem to get stronger as the competition is still mainly dual-core and you're getting not only a triple- or quad-core CPU for your money, but a much stronger GPU.

    Horses for courses.
  • silverblue - Thursday, September 08, 2011 - link

    Sorry, I meant the Pentium's CPU cores would have an edge in performance. Reply
  • yankeeDDL - Thursday, September 08, 2011 - link

    Very true, however, given the target of ultra-low budget PCs, I think the following applies:
    - if you need to run CPU-intensive applications you probably should not be looking at low budget PCs.
    - normally, a low budget PC is intended for email, web browsing, light use of Office-type of applications, minimal image and video editing. For most of the above, the superior GPU of the A4 will take over the "heavy duty" work making comfortably up for the CPU shortcomings. And you will have a cheap and dirty speed bump if, once the costs go down, you replace the A4 with an A8, for example.
    - having very high CPU requirements while being absolutely cash-strapped, I would think, is not the average-Joe scenario (well, the cash-strapped yes, but not the high CPU power requirements). This said, 2 cores, even if not too efficient, are quite fine for the vast majority of consumer application.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now