AMD Fusion E-350 Linux Performance

[smitty3268]

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.

No, the i7 indicates it is the i7 (Nehalem) architecture. Not an Atom chip. Also, even though the TDP rating is the same, it will consume quite a bit more power. In exchange, it is much faster.

[chithanh]

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.

I think it is fair to do this comparison. After all, Atom 330 + Ion boards are still on sale and have a similar price. The difference in RAM is not so important for compute benchmarks. And considering the difference in power consumption for the whole platform still makes the E-350 appear more efficient.

[Nille]

Please dont try to compare Intels TDP and AMDs TDP. Intels Maximum TDP is around 20% higher as they say.

[smitty3268]

Please dont try to compare Intels TDP and AMDs TDP. Intels Maximum TDP is around 20% higher as they say.

Plus the Fusion TDP includes the GPU, while the Intel one does not since it's on the motherboard.

[[Knuckles]]

From the article: "...but even still with the latest Catalyst drivers the XvBA/video implementation can be buggy depending upon several factors."

Can anyone with this or similar hardware expand on this? I mainly have desktops, and nearly all have nvidia (for obvious reasons), so if I were to buy this board, what would I find in terms of hardware video decoding?
I know flash won't work (don't really care either), but would XBMC work? And mplayer?

[Panix]

It doesn't even compare to i3 hardware. Laptops with this hardware is about $400 plus change. I think it's good for battery life if that's your priority.

[devius]

So in conclusion, a Phenom II X3 710 is faster than a Core i3-370M.

What? Oh I see, this is about E-350 is it? Well, it's actually a very nice APU and in line with AMD's expectations in terms of performance. Faster than Atom and about 90% the performance of a Phenom II/Athlon II. If you divide the results by number of cores and clock speed it's easy to see that it has about the same performance as the Phenom II line with much lower power consumption. For example, on the first test doing this division results in 4.28 for the X3-710 and 4.19 for the E-350.

PS: Passive board ~~~~

[Nille]

From the article: "...but even still with the latest Catalyst drivers the XvBA/video implementation can be buggy depending upon several factors."

And don't forget that Phoronix use not even released software.

[brent]

With software decoding, 720p H.264 should work fine, especially if a multithreaded decoder (like ffmpeg-mt) is used. Lower bitrate 1080p probably works fine too (basically everything but Bluray).

It's not like the E-350 is borderline for 720p, a CPU that is borderline for this kind of load is a single core Intel Atom (e.g. 230 or N270). The Atom 330 actually is capable of playing lower bitrate 1080p H.264 with a suitable decoder.

[Max Spain]

Hey Michael, just wondering how you were able to OC the CPU since in the article it says that the BIOS wouldn't allow it.