Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 28

Thread: AMD A8-3500M Llano Linux Benchmarks

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ssam View Post
    A8-3500M [1]
    2011, quadcore, 35W TDP

    atom 330 [2]
    2008, dualcore, 8W TDP

    maybe an i3 or i5 would be a more fair comparison. performance per watt is pretty important. (unless intel and AMD have vastly different ways of measuring TDP).

    [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD_Fusion
    [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...icroprocessors
    A8-3500M + Radeon HD 6620G = 35W
    Atom 330 + GeForce 9400M = 20W

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Elsewhere
    Posts
    91

    Default

    Geez! Imagine this beast running bin's compiled with EKOpath!

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    104

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ssam View Post
    A8-3500M [1]
    2011, quadcore, 35W TDP

    atom 330 [2]
    2008, dualcore, 8W TDP

    maybe an i3 or i5 would be a more fair comparison. performance per watt is pretty important. (unless intel and AMD have vastly different ways of measuring TDP).

    [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD_Fusion
    [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...icroprocessors
    This is how they measure TDP
    "Maximum allowed power consumption"
    edit: I know Llano isn't Bulldozer, but TDP is assigned the same way for all their processors at AMD
    Last edited by renkin; 06-14-2011 at 08:17 PM.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    437

    Default

    What about power consumption? both idle and load?

    Laptop benchmark without power consumption test is useless unless you want to be plugged in all the time.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    104

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FunkyRider View Post
    What about power consumption? both idle and load?

    Laptop benchmark without power consumption test is useless unless you want to be plugged in all the time.
    Michael had access to this system remotely, so he was not able to measure power consumption through PTS unless he gets someone to unplug the power cable locally.. he explained that on the first page of this thread as power consumption was one of the first things mentioned.

    also, for those interested in intel vs amd TDP, there's a nice differentiation here
    Last edited by renkin; 06-14-2011 at 09:02 PM.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    MA, USA
    Posts
    1,485

    Default

    Just so everyone knows, i'm almost positive that this CPU and I think the others in the A series are going to be K10 based, but all others will be new architectures. With Bulldozer, they're first releasing that as AM3+ as a brand new architecture, but, AM3+ is just a temporary transitional socket. They plan to replace that pretty quickly. Although K10 is pretty old, they did optimize it enough for Llano to the point where I think it makes a pretty decent laptop APU.

    It seems to me all of these first generation of new CPU models AMD is releasing are just transitional processors. They aren't their final plans but they aren't just simple recycles of their old stuff either. With the exception of current socket AM3 users with motherboards capable of using AM3+ CPUs, it seems to me that this first generation of processors is AMD's way of catching up and might not be worth getting just yet - their next stuff should be the real deal.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    104

    Default

    I thought it was already disclosed by AMD that it's based on the stars core? So no more guessing =p

  8. #18

    Default

    Yeah, they are K10.5 based, the desktop variants look very interesting as well for the HTPC market, I've been reading that the A8-3850 can OC to 3.7Ghz and it's HD6550D scales very nicely with ram bandwidth.

  9. #19

    Default

    From: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...pu,2959-4.html
    The Fusion APU also boasts a unique ability that dedicated graphics cards can not possess: direct access to unified memory shared between the CPU and GPU, something that makes Zero Copy and Pin-in-Place possible. To understand the advantage, consider how a discrete graphics card works today; texture maps are created in system memory and then transferred to virtual memory in Windows. When the system needs to bind the texture, it first makes sure itís in virtual memory, then the OS copies it to DRAM, and the DMA of the PCIe bus transfers it to the graphics memory for access. Simply put, thereís a lot of copying going on that can cause significant latency.

    But an APU doesnít need to copy memory contents because the GPU and APU blocks share access to the same memory. Zero Copy can access virtual memory directly. Just update the page tables and point to it; no copying is necessary. Application memory can be pinned in place without copying it through the operating system staging buffers. When very large data sets are involved, the APU can even outrun a dedicated GPU (Ed.: I covered this optimization, which AMD was calling Fast Copy previously, in ASRock's E350M1: AMD's Brazos Platform Hits The Desktop First. Brazos is also able to share that memory space, which was previously separate, and enjoy a latency reduction).
    Is this supported in the linux drivers (kernel, ddx, mesa)?

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    5,411

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by oibaf View Post
    From: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...pu,2959-4.html


    Is this supported in the linux drivers (kernel, ddx, mesa)?
    sure why not?

Posting Permissions

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