Final Words

There are still a number of unanswered questions about Llano on the desktop. In the coming weeks we'll be looking at HTPC performance, power consumption, and hopefully we'll be able to figure out what the deal is with overclocking AMD's new mainstream APUs.

The question of processor graphics performance is open and closed. Llano offers what I'd expect to be the bare minimum from any processor offering a real performance oriented GPU. All of our bench suite is playable on Llano and its actually possible to drive up image quality settings without sacrificing playability. If you're looking to build an entry-level gaming PC, Llano is most likely going to be on your hit list this year.

It took AMD spending half the transistors of Llano on its GPU to deliver the sort of performance we've been asking for from integrated graphics for over a decade; the question I have is whether or not Intel is willing to make a similar sort of move in its architectures.

Ivy Bridge has already been decided upon; it'll be faster but not a significant upheaval in performance. However Intel does have a history of building upon ideas that AMD introduced before their time (e.g. IMC, x86-64, Fusion), and with Llano we may be given a peek at what's to come in the future.

Llano vs. Sandy Bridge: Finally, Acceptable Processor Graphics
POST A COMMENT

131 Comments

View All Comments

  • bnjiman - Thursday, June 23, 2011 - link

    @seapeople: which version of Excel/processor are you using? Using Excel 2008 on XP I can agree with your experience using a core 2 duo @ 3ghz - in fact I had IT write an executable to open Excel on one CPU only and diabled multi thread calc. However using a Core I5 laptop 2.7ghz quad core with Office 2010/Win 7, spreadsheets that would take ten minutes to update are done in thirty seconds. I appreciate there will be a single threaded performance delta but I don't feel this accounts for such a radical improvement; perhaps the multi threaded suport is getting better as well. Reply
  • psiboy - Wednesday, June 15, 2011 - link

    8 watts difference in a desktop? Ooooohh I'm gonna cry.... Reply
  • psiboy - Wednesday, June 15, 2011 - link

    14 years doesn't mean dick if you suck at it... on the other hand you might be good at it... Reply
  • quiksilvr - Tuesday, June 14, 2011 - link

    That's the big factor here as well. It would be nice to see a comparison please. Reply
  • quiksilvr - Tuesday, June 14, 2011 - link

    Apologies, I saw the explanation. Reply
  • 8steve8 - Tuesday, June 14, 2011 - link

    curious about power consumption.

    disappointing that amd seems so far behind in performance per core.

    Lots of software (still) have components that require single core performance.
    Reply
  • 8steve8 - Tuesday, June 14, 2011 - link

    the igp looks nice though, funny the people who care the most about that won't be using it. Still nice though. Reply
  • TrackSmart - Tuesday, June 14, 2011 - link

    Agreed. This isn't an exciting release for the desktop computer realm, where there's lots of spaces and small power saving differences don't matter much.

    HOWEVER, for HTPCs, All-In-Ones, and Small Form Factor systems, the new Llano APUs might be a hit. Of course, that's an admittedly small (but growing) market.
    Reply
  • mino - Wednesday, June 15, 2011 - link

    This is a godsend for any OEM customer. Anybody who can't see that must be blind. Reply
  • jjj - Tuesday, June 14, 2011 - link

    wish you had at least a few numbers for higher res gaming. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now