The Llano Desktop Preview: AMD A8-3850 CPU & GPU Performance
by Anand Lal Shimpi on June 14, 2011 12:00 AM ESTLlano vs. Sandy Bridge: Finally, Acceptable Processor Graphics
On average the A8-3850 is 58% faster than the Core i5 2500K. If we look at peak performance in games like Modern Warfare 2, Llano delivers over twice the frame rate of Sandy Bridge. This is what processor graphics should look like. While I believe Sandy Bridge was a good start for integrated GPU performance, Llano is my ideal for 2011. Update: We've added results from the latest 2372 driver for the 2500K. Most performance results remain unchanged however a few problematic areas for Sandy Bridge have been addressed as a result. Llano still maintains a significant performance in the majority of cases.
Games that are more CPU bound however do show Llano's weakness. Both Dragon Age and Starcraft II have Sandy Bridge either outperforming or coming very close to Llano in frame rates. Those are most definitely the exception rather than the rule however; for the most part AMD is able to deliver entry-level discrete GPU performance with Llano.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
131 Comments
View All Comments
nuker - Tuesday, June 14, 2011 - link
Any hints on the probable cost of this processor?KingKuei - Tuesday, June 14, 2011 - link
Admittedly, I have stopped following AMD chips since the move from AM2+ to AM3. So at this point, if the A8 is targeting Core i3, is there anything known about their future roadmap that would indicate any other line of chips such as a "Phenom"-class chip to target i5/i7???Veerappan - Tuesday, June 14, 2011 - link
Take a look at the Bulldozer/Zambezi line of chips that should be out in the next few months. Those are the 4/8 core competition for i7. The first iteration will not have an integrated GPU, but that is coming eventually.LtGoonRush - Tuesday, June 14, 2011 - link
Is the absence of Turbo Core something particular to this sample, or is it not present in desktop Llano processors?JarredWalton - Tuesday, June 14, 2011 - link
The highest desktop CPU (A8-3850) is apparently already running close to maximum performance. It seems like there should still be headroom available, but because of the way AMD is doing TC versus Intel's Turbo Boost, maybe they can't make use of the final few MHz. Or maybe current Llano chips just don't clock stable enough at 3.0+ GHz.MrSpadge - Tuesday, June 14, 2011 - link
Yeah, that's really strange. They pushed their 45 nm chips to 3.5+ GHz with lots of (unnecessary) voltage, and now the maximum they're allowing the 32 nm chips is 2.9 GHz? For the cost of looking stupid compared to Intel in single threaded performance? And with a 100 W TDP.. which gives them all the headroom they could realistically use for single thread? Sounds like AMD 32 nm isn't quite there yet, or they introduced some speed bumps into the design.MrS
StormyParis - Tuesday, June 14, 2011 - link
Last time I used a 1280x1024 screen was ... 10 years ago ? can you even *BUY* those anymore ? Let alone 1024x768 (isn't that what my *phone* has ?). And LCD screens *don't* degrade beautifully.I'm guessing those rez may be useful when trying to isolate CPU vs GPU performance... which will we be relevant as soon as Anand release their much-awaited tutorial: Llano: how to saw off the integrated graphics and hammer in a 6890....
FYI, my E-350 is driving a 1920x1200 main screen, and a 1680x1050 secondry one. Relevant tests, please, people ?
BLaber - Tuesday, June 14, 2011 - link
Absolutely agree , 1024 x 768 ,resolution gaming test are absolute joke & No wonder Sandy bridges shitty graphics are able to keep up , increase the resolution & Sandy Bridge will eat dust , Anand I hope for better that this.tisho75 - Tuesday, June 14, 2011 - link
+1I don't know any laptop running these resolutions these days. Seems like someone want to show 'how close' are Sandy Bridge graphics to Llano... Please show tests at least at 1366x768 and 168x1050
TrackSmart - Tuesday, June 14, 2011 - link
+21366x768 is the de facto standard on laptops and would yield more useful results Anandtech readers. Widescreen has been standard for a long time now. It doesn't make sense to test laptops as if they still had 4:3 aspect ratios...