The Brazos Review: AMD's E-350 Supplants ION for mini-ITX
by Anand Lal Shimpi on January 27, 2011 6:08 PM ESTBlu-ray & Flash Video Acceleration
Compatibility is obviously a strongpoint of Brazos. So long as what you’re decoding can be hardware accelerated you’re pretty much in the clear. But what about CPU utilization while playing back these hardware accelerated formats? The CPU still needs to feed data to the GPU, how many cycles are used in the process?
I fired up a few H.264/x264 tests to kick off the investigation. First we have a 1080p H.264 Blu-ray rip of Quantum of Solace, averaging around 15Mbps:
| Quantum of Solace 1080p H.264 CPU Utilization (1:00 - 1:30) | |||||
| Platform | Min | Avg | Max | ||
| AMD E-350 | 22.7% | 27.8% | 35.3% | ||
| Intel Atom D510 | Fail | ||||
| Zotac ION | 14.6% | 17.2% | 20.1% | ||
A standard Atom platform can’t decode the video but ION manages a 17% average CPU utilization with an Atom 330. Remember that the Atom 330 is a dual-core CPU with SMT (4-threads total) so you’re actually getting 17.2% of four hardware threads used, but 34.4% of two cores. The E-350 by comparison leaves 27.8% of its two cores in use during this test. Both systems have more than enough horsepower left over to do other things.
Next up is an actual Blu-ray disc (Casino Royale) but stripped of its DRM using AnyDVD HD and played back from a folder on the SSD:
| Casino Royale BD (no DRM) CPU Utilization (49:00 - 49:30) | |||||
| Platform | Min | Avg | Max | ||
| AMD E-350 | 28.1% | 33.0% | 38.4% | ||
| Intel Atom D510 | Fail | ||||
| Zotac ION | 17.7% | 22.5% | 27.5% | ||
Average CPU utilization here for the E-350 was 33% of two cores.
Finally I ran a full blown Blu-ray disc (Star Trek) bitstreaming TrueHD on the E-350 to give you an idea of what worst case scenario CPU utilization would be like on Brazos:
| Star Trek BD CPU Utilization (2:30 - 3:30) | |||||
| Platform | Min | Avg | Max | ||
| AMD E-350 | 29.0% | 40.1% | 57.1% | ||
At 40% CPU utilization on average there’s enough headroom to do something else while watching a high bitrate 1080p movie on Brazos. The GPU based video decode acceleration does work, however the limits here are clear. Brazos isn’t going to fare well as a platform you use for heavy multitasking while decoding video, even if the video decode is hardware accelerated. As a value/entry-level platform I doubt this needs much more explanation.
Now let’s talk about Flash.
I ran through a number of Flash video tests at both YouTube and Hulu ranging in resolution from 480p all the way up to 1080p. I used Flash 10.1, 10.2 beta as well as an unreleased version of 10.2 beta provided by AMD.
For the most part GPU accelerated Flash video does work well. Performance under both YouTube and Hulu was flawless, provided that I wasn’t watching 1080p content. Watching 1080p content in YouTube wasn’t entirely smooth on Brazos, despite posting very reasonable CPU utilization numbers.
I took my concerns to AMD and was told that this was a known issue with Brazos and Flash 10.1 and that 10.2 should alleviate the issue. AMD then supplied me with an unreleased version of Flash 10.2 to allow me to verify its claims. While 1080p playback improved with AMD’s 10.2 beta, it wasn’t perfect (although it was very close). AMD wouldn’t tell me the cause of the problem but it’s currently working on it with Adobe. At the end of the day I don’t believe it’s a dealbreaker, but early Brazos adapters should expect some stuttering when playing back 1080p YouTube videos. Note that 720p and lower resolution videos were perfectly smooth on Brazos.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
176 Comments
View All Comments
DanaG - Friday, January 28, 2011 - link
One thing I'm wondering: how does Brazos compare to Atom and ARM (such as QNAP TS-219P+) on power usage and network performance? From reviews of ARM devices, it looks like they hit a speed limit that may be caused by the SoC devices themselves.I do know that Realtek Gigabit Ethernet sucks, so it'd be worthwhile to benchmark with an Intel NIC and a Broadcom NIC, as well.
Aone - Friday, January 28, 2011 - link
I reckon Anand Lal Shimpi should know that neither Atom D510 nor Atom 330 supports EIST or Idle Power State. If he does compare the power consumtion he, at least, must mention it.And i'm not sure that Atom platform supports DDR3-1333 as Brazos. Usually Atom sticks with DDR2-667.
Unfortunately, mem config is absent from description of test configs.
DanNeely - Friday, January 28, 2011 - link
DDR3-800 based atoms launched a few months back; the performance difference vs their DDR2 siblings was negligible.krish123 - Friday, January 28, 2011 - link
Hi Anand,You are comparing the gaming performance of Core I5 2500K / higher clocked graphics with E350, but u should also show the power consumption/price difference on those parts. .. I feel ., kind of biased review, when you are trying to compare only the positive side of intel parts and not the negative side
I will wait for your review on Llano and bulldozer
Regards,
Kicha
7Enigma - Friday, January 28, 2011 - link
Did you even read the text or just look at the pretty graphs?The i5 is in there as a bracketing agent so that those of us with desktop systems can get a feel for the performance difference to these Atom/APU products. There was never a direct comparison drawn unless you ignore all the text and just stare at the pictures.
OneArmedScissorB - Friday, January 28, 2011 - link
Did you even read the pretty graphs? They were very nearly neck and neck in those comparisons. Why omit the most significant differentiation between the two?Sandy Bridge and Bobcat as HTPC platforms are more comparable than anything else. They are both at least "good enough" for general use, have similar IGP and video acceleration capabilities, and are both readily available in mini-ITX.
And yet, there's a 3.1 GHz Athlon II X2 with an 890GX board in the power results, likely full size ATX, in place of every single last one of the numerous mini-ITX platforms they could have just copied and pasted into the chart from past articles. Wtfbbq?!?
That was not just an oversight, but a very significant mistake that detracts from the usefulness of the entire article.
bjacobson - Saturday, January 29, 2011 - link
hm, that seems a bit of an overstatement. I don't really see how the 2500's are at all in the same market as this.code65536 - Friday, January 28, 2011 - link
I wonder, does Bobcat support hardware-assisted virtualization?silverblue - Friday, January 28, 2011 - link
I read that it does.macs - Friday, January 28, 2011 - link
Can someone test the power consumption of an i3 2100 on itx mobo? I suppose it will be quite close to brazos, at idle at least