Trinity in the Flesh...or Silicon

When talking about Intel you are like Will Ferrell in Old School at the therapist talking about random girl's panties.

"We were out at the Olive Garden for dinner, which was lovely. And uh, I happen to look over at a certain point during the meal and see a waitress taking an order, and I found myself wondering what color her underpants might be. Her panties. Uh, odds are they are probably basic white, cotton, underpants. But I sort of think well maybe they're silk panties, maybe it's a thong. Maybe it's something really cool that I don't even know about."

Yes, maybe Intel has super secret special underpants they're making just for you that will boost their graphics performance 5-fold.

Ok i get you,you don't need to be so violent. :mad: :D
Can't someone say his opinion or thoughts?
 
trolls usually make people mad, just saying.

Intel hd 4000 graphics STILL SUCK. Llano has better gpu in it seriously. Trinity futher improves on llano in graphics, and also reportedly cpu performance as well.

Intel will most certainly maintain on top Cpu power wise. However they will get Further behind Amd's gpu performance.

Like others have said what will be important is power consumption. If trinity can come in a low power envelope then it will compare to intel Ivy bridge+ gpu and provide considerably better battery life, and be a lot cheaper, and be able to game just pretty darn well for the resolutions you see on a laptops.

In laptops like i said before, your rarely doing something cpu intensive and wouldn't actually notice having a faster processor. One thing you will notice though is the ability not to be able to play games, or play multiple streams of Hd video at the same time.
 
Wouldn't something like multi-tasking dozens of pdfs/docs be more of a CPU thing though? I don't know about everyone else, but when I am using a laptop for work I've usually got about 30 tabs open, and swapping between them a lot.

Not trying to troll or anything, just concerned that Trinity won't be a good laptop choice despite it's much better graphics (well, unless all you do on your laptop is game, in which case go for it).

Hopefully we'll start seeing some more mobile benchmarks soon, especially ones compared to current SB and future IB (when those come out later).
 
Wouldn't something like multi-tasking dozens of pdfs/docs be more of a CPU thing though? I don't know about everyone else, but when I am using a laptop for work I've usually got about 30 tabs open, and swapping between them a lot.

Not trying to troll or anything, just concerned that Trinity won't be a good laptop choice despite it's much better graphics (well, unless all you do on your laptop is game, in which case go for it).

Hopefully we'll start seeing some more mobile benchmarks soon, especially ones compared to current SB and future IB (when those come out later).

Thing is, even with a CPU like Llano, with many work situations, your bottleneck is more likely to be your RAM being used up than an actual CPU bottleneck. CPUs today are so powerful that even a modern $50 CPU is more than enough for 99% of work applications.
 
How does the 65W Llano A8-3800 compare to the E6600 CPU in terms of performance?
I want to upgrade my HTPC to be able to do some gaming, and there is no room for a video card.

I'll wait for Trinity, but benchmarks comparing the two would be useful.
 
I'm sure Trinity will be fairly cheap, AMD knows they can't get away charging a nice premium like Intel can. AMD will very likely take market share from Intel in the next couple of years, as they really do have a great product here. Intel is so much larger of a company though, and let's face it, their on die GPU's are coming along pretty well, they are behind, but in the general vicinity already.
 
Ok, so it's a May 15 release date?

A8-4500M (Trinity) vs A8-3500M (Llano): "The integer speed (basically the CPU math performance) is where Trinity shines though: its score of 5,214.95 / 5 662.48 is about 38.67% better than the Llano's 3,921.99." Link.

just got my llano lappie in Oct and was so happy. now i cry.
 
If the latest speculation is correct, yum. Nehalem i7 performance plus a nice IGP bolted to the side. AMD might have managed one hell of a Hail Mary. Really eager to see their ultrabook clones.

Vishera might be pretty good if it's priced right, too.
 
Ok, so it's a May 15 release date?

A8-4500M (Trinity) vs A8-3500M (Llano): "The integer speed (basically the CPU math performance) is where Trinity shines though: its score of 5,214.95 / 5 662.48 is about 38.67% better than the Llano's 3,921.99." Link.

just got my llano lappie in Oct and was so happy. now i cry.

overclock your llano, and you'll probably get the same integer score.

the 4500m is clocked way higher to make up for performance deficits
 
The 4500M might be clocked higher, but it's still within the same thermal envelop as the lower clocked 3500M. Overclock the 4500M and it'll be more powerful than the 3500M overclocked.

People making overclocked to stock comparisons = facepalm.

It's like saying my GTX 570 overclocked beats your 580!! Yeah, well, I can overclock my 580 as well, your point being?
 
The 4500M might be clocked higher, but it's still within the same thermal envelop as the lower clocked 3500M. Overclock the 4500M and it'll be more powerful than the 3500M overclocked.

People making overclocked to stock comparisons = facepalm.

It's like saying my GTX 570 overclocked beats your 580!! Yeah, well, I can overclock my 580 as well, your point being?

my point is that he shouldn't have buyer's remorse.

llano mobile can be undervolted and overclocked by a good amount. so thermals won't be far off, all while attaining trinity performance or better.

Sure, you can OC trinity. But if bulldozer is any indication, I bet the mobile trinity won't have much OC headroom without throwing a lot of heat.

if this chart is to be believed......
79a.jpg

you can see how fp/clock and int/clock of trinity trails the k10.

llano mobile quads can run 2ghz all day at default voltages or lower without breaking a sweat. At 2ghz, today's llano runs cool and already beats A8-4500m.
yeah, keep saying it's stupid to compare OC'd to stock. But again, I'm presuming trinity mobile is near its tdp limit, just like that one bulldozer cpu with 4.2 stock, 4.3 turbo or some shit
 
Last edited:
Except Trinity is not using Bulldozer, it's using Piledriver...
 
Assuming these Trinity APUs are priced reasonably, I suspect I won't be building any desktops with discrete GPUs that cost less than ~$100 anymore. $100 buys a 6770, and I expect (hope?) the IGP on the new APUs will perform like the 6670.
 
I'm very, very intrigued now. We know that Trinity will be better than Llano at this point, what I'm concerned about is how much better (especially at the APU point), what the cost will be, and when it's coming out. Any news yet on these?
 
I am really excited for these new chips, but ill be really upset if you cant overclock the mobile line. I love that i can undervolt/overclock my A6-3400m Im running 2.4ghz at stock voltage 24x7
 
I am really excited for these new chips, but ill be really upset if you cant overclock the mobile line

Llano is only overclock-able with adjustments to p-states. The program used to overclock the llanos, was made for phenom II, and any k10 cpu. Sadly I don't think the new trinity chips will be overclock-able. Since they will be using piledriver cores the traditional way of overclocking/undervolting of these chips will not be available.

I suppose you could use phenoms tweaker, as it also works with bulldozer, but who knows it that will work with Piledriver.

Anywho, Trinity has begun shipping to OEMS. We should start to see them being released shortly.
 
Why are the 4500M's so much lower in int performance than the FX-4100? Surely the L3 cache isn't making that much a difference

Because the 4500M is a mobile part running at 2.2 ghz (estimated), while the FX-4100 is a desktop part running at 3.8 ghz. It's the FP/Ghz and Int/Ghz you should be comparing.
 
So is the rumored release date of May 15th just the mobile versions or also the desktop? I was watching an interview where someone from AMD was saying the desktop would come shortly after the notebooks...
 
OMG now its getting real... (translated link below).

In Cinebench 11.5, we see a CPU score of 1.13 points. The processor will further a PassMark rating of 2870 CPU points. Its predecessor, the A6-3400m with the Llano architecture, scoring 2,405 points. The GPU score increased from 415 to 618 points. We can conclude that the new processor in terms graphgics about 50% faster.

HP Pavilion G6-2020AU laptop with an AMD A6-4400m- processor
 
I'm very, very intrigued now. We know that Trinity will be better than Llano at this point, what I'm concerned about is how much better (especially at the APU point), what the cost will be, and when it's coming out. Any news yet on these?

This is what I want to know as well, I need to build a small work computer and if Trinity isnt out in the next 2-3 weeks it looks like Llano for me.
 
So is the rumored release date of May 15th just the mobile versions or also the desktop? I was watching an interview where someone from AMD was saying the desktop would come shortly after the notebooks...

May 15th is the mobile launch but I'm not sure whether it's just a paper launch or the date that they'll become available. The desktop chips are coming after the notebook parts.

I'd imagine they're more expensive than the Llanos but still cheaper than Intel chips. AMD's approach was to underprice Intel Ivy ultrabooks and laptops with their chips so they should still be well priced. Trinity should be slightly bigger in die size and AMD also licensed the mesh tech IP so that would likely bump the price up a bit as well. This time around there's been no claims of poor yields so availability should be better than when Llano was initially released.

Vr-zone collected a good bit of info that's worth reading.

http://vr-zone.com/articles/amd-trinity-apu-preview-evolution-or-devolution-/15716.html

Apparently reduced L2 cache latency as well as better prefetching, branch prediction and a bigger L1 DTLB should all provide some healthy IPC bumps. Along with that there's decreased leakage (a major issue in Bulldozer) with frequency ramping. If they caught up to Llano IPC then the clock speed boosts will be very welcome.

Llano comes in at 228mm^2 so Trinity appears to be slightly bigger due to the VLIW4 shaders despite the saved die space with the modules. Should be interesting to see just how high these can clock :)
 
Last edited:
Those Trinity benchies look pretty impressive if theyre legit. This has got to mean good things for Piledriver right? I know theyre 2 different animals like a big horsepower engine in a pickup vs a small fuel efficient compact car but cant we tell a little how Trinity's performance will translate over to Vishera?
 
Those Trinity benchies look pretty impressive if theyre legit. This has got to mean good things for Piledriver right? I know theyre 2 different animals like a big horsepower engine in a pickup vs a small fuel efficient compact car but cant we tell a little how Trinity's performance will translate over to Vishera?

Trinity is two modules so anything that only uses a thread or two (most games) will perform similiarly clock for clock to a 4+ module Vishera.

However, I think Vishera has an L3 cache that Trinity does not which may help performance. Its also possible AMD has made further tweaks to Vishera, not much detail on that chip yet.
 
However, I think Vishera has an L3 cache that Trinity does not which may help performance. Its also possible AMD has made further tweaks to Vishera, not much detail on that chip yet.

only difference between Trinity and Piledriver is the l3. Otherwise they use the exact same core structure.

Apparently reduced L2 cache latency as well as better prefetching, branch prediction and a bigger L1 DTLB should all provide some healthy IPC bumps. Along with that there's decreased leakage (a major issue in Bulldozer) with frequency ramping. If they caught up to Llano IPC then the clock speed boosts will be very welcome.

Llano comes in at 228mm^2 so Trinity appears to be slightly bigger due to the VLIW4 shaders despite the saved die space with the modules. Should be interesting to see just how high these can clock

They are probably a smudge above phenom II, and well llano. Trinity i don't think will be a good overclocker, due to its on die GPU, which well takes up alot of space. Current Llanos are limited to around 3.8ghz. While the non gpu llanos (641 fm1) usually hit 4ghz+

I've been looking for trinity benchmarks, some are starting to pop up now. Launch date is supposedly the 15th of may for the mobile parts. Amd's website reflected that trinity had been shipping to oems, and to expect trinity based platforms available soon.
 
I'm not sure the IPC will be above the Llano yet. I think it will be close but thus far there's been nothing to state that it's anything but close so I'd be wary of overstating and expecting too much there. The biggest gains, I think, should come from perf-per-watt rather than perf-per-clock.

The non-GPU llanos would behave just as the GPU Llanos if the GPU is bypassed and toggled off. I'm not sure where you're getting 4ghz+ for the Athlon 641 but almost all the benchmarks I've seen put the 32nm Stars cores at 3.6ghz as the architectural ceiling regardless of Athlon or Llano on FM1. Remember that the Athlon 641 is the same as the Llano except it's non-working GPU, meaning it still carries that extra, essentially dead, space. This dead space can be mimicked in any Llano by simply bypassing the on-die GPU and using a discrete card. It still consumes watts but what it does consume is so low that it can be discarded (in the area of 50-100 times lower). It's the same reason the 2550K overclocks the same as the 2500K despite being "GPU-less." It really makes no difference.

I'm aching for some benchmarks as well. The one that's been posted above is pretty worthless due to being inconsistent but it points to the IPC being close to Llano -- again, not over nor under or equal but in the ballpark.
 
only difference between Trinity and Piledriver is the l3. Otherwise they use the exact same core structure.

From things I've seen before, while Trinity and Vishera will both use Piledriver cores, the PD cores in Vishera (PDv2) will be 'slightly' improved over the ones in Trinity (PDv1), at least in the way of either new or improved instruction sets.

One thing I do hope happens to Vishera is that AMD either: Increases the CPU-NB clock to 3+GHz (if the L3 clock is still tied to the NB clock), or, tie the L3 clock to the 'core' clock to increase bandwidth.
 
From things I've seen before, while Trinity and Vishera will both use Piledriver cores, the PD cores in Vishera (PDv2) will be 'slightly' improved over the ones in Trinity (PDv1), at least in the way of either new or improved instruction sets.

One thing I do hope happens to Vishera is that AMD either: Increases the CPU-NB clock to 3+GHz (if the L3 clock is still tied to the NB clock), or, tie the L3 clock to the 'core' clock to increase bandwidth.

That almost certainly will not happen. I think it would require a drastic restructuring in order to achieve something like that. The asynchronous speeds are one of the reasons why they're reaching such high clocks in the first place. I think the cache speeds in Piledriver will remain consistent regardless of Vishera tweaking.

But yea, I remember reading somewhere that Vishera will get a little bit of extra attention to improve its performance on the desktop. Who knows what that will be, though ;P
 
who here reads korean ?

what's this saying ? especially that green man figure showing cpu and gpu of equal size ??

trinity_a10.jpg
 
The blue one is probably Intel, how the GPU power of Intel's (or traditional) chips don't match up to the CPU's power, while AMD's power levels are more equal, allowing the user to take full advantage of both. Just my guess anyways. I bet it's just marketing speak.
 
I broke down and bought an A8 3870, depending on how trinity performs I will sell this in a couple months and upgrade.
 
Back
Top