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

  • starfalcon - Tuesday, June 14, 2011 - link

    Well there's a few ways to look at it.
    I've played tons of games at 1024x600 resolution, they can still look pretty good.
    Console games run around that resolution sometimes too, so apparently millions of people are fine with it. It's still way above a DVD resolution.
    It's not much of a change to 1366x768 either.
    IGPs are pretty limited on bandwidth so go get discrete to play at 1920x1200 obviously.
    Just my 2 cents.
    Reply
  • Griswold - Tuesday, June 14, 2011 - link

    I dont see why you toss consoles or DVD in the mix here. We're not talking huge but low dpi TV screens where resolutions like this are quite normal but screens that are used for computers. A screen with that resolution would be tiny, compared the standard these days - and nobody would accept that unless its a crapbook. Reply
  • Anand Lal Shimpi - Tuesday, June 14, 2011 - link

    Keep in mind that these are entry level GPUs here, anything above 1280 x 1024 isn't really going to do too well. Llano at least lets us have a conversation at 1280 x 1024 but for the most part integrated solutions are going to keep you to these types of resolutions. I tried to provide both a reference point to older IGP results (1024 x 768) as well as some perspective for discrete cards (page 3 at 1280 x 1024). As you can see by some of the numbers on page 3, at 1280 x 1024 in many benchmarks we're pretty close to 30 fps already.

    That being said, this is just a preview. If you'd like I'll provide some resolution scaling data in the full review :)

    Take care,
    Anand
    Reply
  • Jamahl - Tuesday, June 14, 2011 - link

    I disagree. There are plenty of cases where the AMD chip is in the 100's. Nobody expects them to run Metro 2033 on high so don't bother using that as an excuse.

    1680 minimum, and medium settings - we'll see who holds on to the fps and who collapses. And for god sake put some decent RAM in the AMD system.
    Reply
  • Griswold - Tuesday, June 14, 2011 - link

    QFT Reply
  • whoaaaaaaaa - Tuesday, June 14, 2011 - link

    I have to concur with everyone else, Anand.

    There were a couple of tests where this setup had 80-100 fps.

    I think particular attention ought to be paid to the most popular games in your list, and that's probably Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2 + Black Ops and WoW.

    Given that the Llano is a budget desktop chip, who is going to buy one? The semi casual gamer who is probably interested in the Call of Duty franchise or World of Warcraft.

    And in both of those games this APU gets 100+ fps.

    Most screens these days are widescreen, 1366 x 768, 1280 x 720, 1680 x 1050, and 1920 x 1080. I think these are the resolutions to focus on.

    But I really appreciate the review having just discovered this web site last week it's really nice. Keep up the great work!
    Reply
  • Anand Lal Shimpi - Tuesday, June 14, 2011 - link

    My apologies - I was referencing the data on page 3 which purposefully looks at higher resolution/quality settings. There you're not looking at 100 fps in most situations but more down to earth frame rates.

    I've already begun work on high resolution testing and varying memory bandwidth, our story at the end of the month will focus much more attention on these questions as a result of your feedback :)

    Take care,
    Anand
    Reply
  • veri745 - Tuesday, June 14, 2011 - link

    This would be a perfect scenario for the list older games that you guys were putting together a few months ago.

    Show us some 2005-2008 action at decent resolutions (1366x/1680x)
    Reply
  • Anand Lal Shimpi - Tuesday, June 14, 2011 - link

    Have any specific requests you'd like to see?

    Take care,
    Anand
    Reply
  • veri745 - Tuesday, June 14, 2011 - link

    A couple suggestions

    Oblivion
    Bioshock
    Empire: TW
    Titan Quest
    Stalker SOC
    Torchlight
    GRID

    In no particular order
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now