ASRock A75 Extreme6 Review and Desktop Llano Overclocking
by Ian Cutress on June 30, 2011 12:05 AM ESTIf we're comparing Desktop Llano to Sandy Bridge, we essentially have to look at the best Llano package, the A8-3850, against a low end Sandy Bridge, the i3-2100. This makes sense, as Desktop Llano comes to the market as a beefed up mobile processor, whereas a Sandy Bridge second-generation Core series CPU is a scaled down performance product.
If we consider the current and expected prices of motherboard and processor combos, the high end ASRock A75 Extreme6 will cost $150 (so I'm told), and the A8-3850 is expected to retail at $150 also. With the i3-2100, we're looking at a H67 board (most of which are below $100) and the processor will cost $125 (all prices from newegg.com), totalling $225. The question now becomes, is Desktop Llano worth the extra $75?
The chipset features are the best place to start - on A75 there are six native SATA 6 Gbps ports, whereas the H67 will only have two (both motherboards may have more from controllers). Memory speed on the A75 will natively accept DDR3-1866 MHz, whereas the H67 will only allow DDR3-1333 MHz. Both motherboards will accept one GPU at 16x, or on Llano this can be split into two at 8x. You can pick and choose with your network, audio, and USB 3.0 controllers - the exact features and warranty will be determined by which model a consumer ends up buying.
In terms of performance, this board and the A8-3850 were tested in several key areas. Compared to Sandy Bridge, the Desktop Llano single thread performance is abysmal - but this is what was to be expected, given that Desktop Llano is based on a K10 core and performs like a Phenom II X4. In multi-threaded performance, it's a case of whether the full four cores of the A8-3850 can outshine the two cores with hyperthreading we find on the 2100.
The one area Desktop Llano stands out in is the integrated GPU. The A8-3850 has 400 streaming processors, wrapped in a HD 6550D. Technically, we're dealing with a DirectX 11 product. Compared to the Sandy Bridge solution, we're looking at nearly double frame rates for the Llano at the resolutions we've tested. That's a clear tick in the Desktop Llano department.
So, for pure iGPU performance and more SATA 6 Gbps ports, can I personally recommend Desktop Llano over a Sandy Bridge model, for an extra $75? In my non-HTPC oriented mind, only in the integrated GPU arena does it make sense. If you're a GPU developer and don't want to tie up a discrete GPU, then yes, it can make sense, as long as you can access that GPU. If you're a multi-GPU gamer, the odd Crossfire scaling leaves something to be desired, and P67 is just a minor step up over H67 prices. Desktop Llano certainly isn't a low power system - the A8-3850 is rated at 100W, so if you want something to word process, look at emails and play flash games, an AMD Fusion board for $150 will do all that quite easily for all under 60W. If you want to do almost anything else (except play 23.976 fps video), in my opinion, I'd recommend the Sandy Bridge route as it commands that extra CPU grunt.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
44 Comments
View All Comments
Exodite - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link
I'd agree that no common task /requires/ an i3 2100, or a Llano equivalent, but between the two of them the former is the better option for such.Most significantly Llano /doesn't/ have a much better graphics solution. Sure, it's better but still not good enough to do native resolution gaming and low/mid settings - which is the bare minimum for gaming at this day and age.
For anything else, speaking about the GPU-side of things, anything will suffice. Certainly both Llano and Intel's HD2000/HD3000 solutions.
Perhaps I were overly enthusiastic about Llano's GPU prowess, I didn't expect it to be quite as memory-starved as it was, but I always envisoned it being a lot closer to what a discrete solution with the same clocks and core count would offer.
As it is I'd recommend an Intel solution to anyone at this point, with or without a discrete card as required.
You may chose to scream bloody murder about it if you want to, it's no skin of my back, but the numbers do speak for themselves.
mino - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link
"I'd agree that no common task /requires/ an i3 2100, or a Llano equivalent, but between the two of them the former is the better option for such."Yeah, between the two i3 is a better option for uncommon single-threaded tasks.
Now, what have those to do with the low-end desktop market?
L. - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link
Bloody Murder !No shit ... "doesn' t have a much better graphics solution" ...
Seriously read a few other reviews and you'll understand there is a world of difference between 11 fps and 30, dx11 and no dx11, etc.
There are MANY games which lie on the fringe of "playable" with a Llano which are clearly unplayable on an i3.
The fact that this review is not showing is that with all those, the difference is between play and no play, and everytime the Llano is far ahead.
I linked a review in the comments of the OC article here on AT and it shows things ... like 11 fps crysis gamer settings @ 1920x1080.
While 11fps is not playable, 11fps in crysis w/ those settings and that resolution implies almost everything is playable with some stuff tuned down.
THIS IS NOT THE CASE with an i3.
The difference might be hidden w/ these benchmarks but it's there and so big it cannot justify the pricing of the i3 2105.
Llano is good enough to do native resolution gaming @ low / mid settings, even if you consider native to be full HD, there are many many many games that are playable on it this way.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/amd-a...
Yet another one ... high quality, full HD, far cry 2 , playable on Llano, 11 fps on HD3000.
Finally - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link
A German magazine has proven that a Llano will run fine with DDR3-1600 (and upwards). It's called computerbase, have a look: http://tinyurl.com/6zsv6kkFinally - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link
DDR3-1600 RAM isn't that much more expensive than the run-of-the-mill type... both are ridiculously cheap right now.With only 65€ for 8GB of (good gamer) RAM, I'd say that this has already become the new standard minimum amount.
havoti97 - Sunday, July 3, 2011 - link
You are not entitled to anything. You get what's given to you. If you don't like it, go look elsewhere or do yar own benchmark.L. - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link
This is almost correct.a) s1155 prices have dropped, you can expect A75 to do the same
b) Llano is AMD and WILL be cheaper
c) The core i3 2100 is way overkill for flash, full hd and basic stuff
d) For that you have a 18W e-350 that's so much more money and power efficient
e) Office desktops do NOT need the power of an i3-2100
Besides, you seem to think the GPU is useless outside of games, might be partly true today but it's not meant to last.
ganteng3005 - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link
IMHO it's not that GPU is useless outside of games (even Windows Aero requires a "real" GPU to run), but what I'm saying is that Intel HD Graphics is sufficient for daily usage except gaming and graphical computing. I might be incorrect, though, but for me, personally, an i3 2100 is sufficient (even overkill, I agree) for office tasks.E-350 and Pentium G620 (SB) might be better in price/performance, but what I've noticed from the E-350 (and of course, Intel Atom) is the lack of real-time responsiveness on laptops. It might be just me, though.
kevith - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link
Does that mean to say, that I´ll not be able to run Windows Aero with any buil-in GPU? AMD or Intel...StormyParis - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link
"Besides, you seem to think the GPU is useless outside of games, might be partly true today but it's not meant to last.".We'll see when we get there. The industry has a terrible, terrible record of adapting software to new hardware, especially to new CPU instruction sets / capabilities. Look at all the x86 extensions that are still barely used (anything after SSE2 ?).
My take it... that exact same quote will still apply 3 yrs from now, and by then, we'll be due for an upgrade ^^