Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 49

Thread: AMD Fusion E-350 Linux Performance

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,335

    Default AMD Fusion E-350 Linux Performance

    Phoronix: AMD Fusion E-350 Linux Performance

    By now you have likely seen the AMD Fusion E-350 APU showcased on a number of Windows web-sites, but how is this AMD Accelerated Processor working in the Linux world? At Phoronix today are the first in-depth Ubuntu Linux benchmarks being published from this promising, low-power solution designed to compete with Intel's Atom.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=15801

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    7

    Default

    would be nice to see how the e350 compares to a core i7 2657M (17 W TDP)

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Madison, WI, USA
    Posts
    862

    Default

    Looks pretty nice. I've been considering a Zacate Mini-ITX board as a MythTV front-end after I move this summer (and rebuild the HTPC / Home server setup).

    When you do the graphics comparison, could you add in a dedicated graphics card as an additional data point?

    Something like:
    1) Fusion w/ Catalyst
    2) Fusion w/ r600g
    3) Fusion w/ a dedicated Radeon card running Catalyst
    4) Fusion w/ dedicated Radeon w/ r600g

    Adding in the dedicated card would help us to figure out how much the CPU is bottle-necking the graphics performance.

    Also, checking the smoothness of full-screen HD video playback would be a cool thing to do, as it seems like a lot of people (not just me) are considering the Fusion chips for HTPC duties.

  4. #4

    Default

    d1saster: Why? The i7 costs about three times what an E-350 *with board* costs. Do you actually suggest comparing an Atom to that i7?

    Does anyone already have some SoftRAID benchmarks for the E-350? I ordered mine but it isn't quite here yet.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    91

    Default

    Did I miss the OpenCL tests, or are they just not there? It seems like the biggest advantage that this Fusion architecture has could be seen with the right OpenCL benchmark.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    6

    Default audio hdmi

    Maybe a little bit off-topic, but could you test HDMI audio with and or without catalyst drivers with this chipset?

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    7

    Default

    Even though video acceleration doesn't work it might be able to play an HD video just using the CPU. However, I couldn't find any information on that. That's why I would like to pose the following two questions:
    Is it fast enough to play a 720p HD h.264 file?
    Is it fast enough to play a 720p HD flash/youtube video?

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    519

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mastereye View Post
    Even though video acceleration doesn't work it might be able to play an HD video just using the CPU. However, I couldn't find any information on that. That's why I would like to pose the following two questions:
    Is it fast enough to play a 720p HD h.264 file?
    Is it fast enough to play a 720p HD flash/youtube video?
    From this post:
    Without hardware acceleration it's possible to play 720p but just barely

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Madison, WI, USA
    Posts
    862

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sandain View Post
    Did I miss the OpenCL tests, or are they just not there? It seems like the biggest advantage that this Fusion architecture has could be seen with the right OpenCL benchmark.
    Oh yes, I forgot to ask for that one. I am very curious to see how the OpenCL performance on the Fusion chips works out. I can see lots of potential for reduced startup latency and reducing communication bottlenecks.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    São Paulo, Brazil
    Posts
    73

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Schlensinger View Post
    d1saster: Why? The i7 costs about three times what an E-350 *with board* costs. Do you actually suggest comparing an Atom to that i7?
    Because it's a 17W TDP i7, which indicates Atom architecture inside. The article is currently comparing an 18W TDP Fusion chip with an 8W TDP (old) Atom part with way less RAM, which is actually showing a great performance from the Atom chip to me.


    And I read somewhere there are new Atoms with GPU and MemCtlr in chip now. Does anyone confirm that? Atom is a SoC now?

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •