News AMD Llano

Much of the talk about AMD products has centered around Bulldozer of late, but Llano is on track for launch this year as well. AMD has released a new video pitting Llano against Intel's Sandy Bridge, with results that (un)surprisingly favor AMD's own solution.

According to Godfrey Cheng, AMD's director of Client Technology, Llano was designed on the following hypothesis:  "People are using more modern workloads like 3D graphics, HD video and Internet surfing in a much more prevalent manner...we all dabble with spreadsheets and word processing...but any modern x86 CPU-based PC can handle these workloads with ease.  But with these modern applications, the capacity to multitask, improve image quality and enhance power efficiency are much more important than raw x86 performance in determining how good a consumer’s experience is with a particular PC."

He writes further: "AMD’s “Llano” and Intel’s “Sandy Bridge” are roughly equal in size and transistor count...But...An analysis of the two components’ die area shows that AMD has invested much more heavily in graphics, parallel compute and video whereas Intel has invested much more of its silicon area in improving classic x86 performance."

We can't speak to whether or not the two systems were comparably configured and the representativeness of AMD's chosen workload is, as always, open to debate. One thing we did note, however, is an interesting difference in the execution speed of the Microsoft Excel benchmark. (This may be the first time the words "interesting" and "Excel benchmark" have ever been used in the same sentence without the inclusion of a "not" --Ed). We calculated our results by taking multiple screenshots per second and comparing both the displayed graphs and the distribution of color in the data columns linked to those graphs. This last is essential—some of the early graphs are very similar.

When the Excel benchmark 'starts' at 1:07, the Intel 2630QM is running roughly two seconds behind AMD's 3510MX. By the time the additional video workload is introduced at 1:18, that gap has shrunk to just a fraction of a second. This implies that we'd see Intel overtake AMD were the test left to run a few seconds longer and that Intel's investment in traditional x86 areas does pay off in those types of computation tests.

The really interesting bit, however, is that once the CyberLink video starts at 1:19, the Intel Excel window redisplays the same graph it displayed at 1:09 and does nothing thereafter. From 1:19 - 1:25, the Intel Excel window doesn't update, while the AMD system goes on drawing a set of graphs we've never seen before. When we see the Excel graphs again at 1:41, the Intel graph is the same as the AMD graph from 1:12. When AMD adds a 3D rendering component, the Intel side of the Excel graph freezes even longer (10-11 second
It's entirely possible that these discrepancies were caused by Sandy Bridge-related driver issues, a specific application performance issue, or a bit of visual skullduggery from AMD (the video sequences could have been timed to show the worst side of Sandy Bridge.)  If none of these issues exist, it suggests that Sandy Bridge runs into trouble fairly quickly when handling CPU and GPU workloads simultaneously.

The question of which CPU is faster may come down to home much multithreading 'typical' users really need. We saw good reason to suspect that Sandy Bridge would've caught Llano in Excel when juggling the 3D demo—we'd be very curious to see this test repeated with 720P-1080P flash content standing in for CyberLink PowerDVD. Much of the  video users watch these days, including YouTube, Hulu, and most news sites, is played back using Flash inside a browser environment, not via disc-based media.
source: http://hothardware.com

AMD's New Llano Processor is a Big Deal

AMD's move to ultra thin 32-nanometer microprocessors may not sound too sexy, but it is if you like powerful laptops with long battery life. Before I dive into telling why you should care, first some background.
On Monday AMD announced its first shipments of 32nm A-series quad-core chips, codenamed Llano, for laptops and desktops. After playing second fiddle to Intel for decades, AMD has now caught up to Intel on the 32nm manufacturing process front, giving it a more competitive foothold. The new chips may also help AMD bounce back in one particularly important segment: notebook processors.

Laptops Love Llano

The 32nm chip production technology is the next evolution in chip manufacturing, an upgrade over the 45nm process AMD has been using most recently. By reducing the size of the features on the chip, companies can ramp up performance and energy efficiency, while creating smaller chips.

Fusion chips, already found in $200 laptops and desktops, are considered by analysts to have better graphics performance than Intel's chips. This is a major breakthrough for laptop users, as most of us have had to put up with middling graphics performance from earlier integrated graphics processors in exchange for greater mobility. The new processors also are more energy efficient, helping to preserve much-needed battery life on notebooks.

Several new laptops have been announced that use the lower-end (45nm) series of the AMD Fusion processor, including entertaining and gaming laptops from MSI, the CR650 and GX680, and, after interest from Dell early last year, Dell's first AMD Fusion notebook, the Inspiron M102z. Llano-powered laptops using the 32nm process are expected this quarter.

 
AMD vs. Intel

Although AMD is over a year late to the party (Intel started using the 32nm process in 2009 and sold its first 32nm processors in January 2010), it's better late than never. Intel has always had clear market dominance-and currently has over 80% of the chip market-but Llano could help AMD compete against Intel's Sandy Bridge processors, especially if AMD is able to gain more notebook manufacturer support.

AMD was steadily gaining on Intel in the notebook processor market, from a 12% market share in 2005 to a peak of 17% in 2007, according to research site Trefis. This was in no small part due to Dell at that time ending its Intel exclusivity and using more AMD chips. But AMD has so far been competing from a "low price" standpoint, lagging behind Intel when it comes to both chip process technology and original equipment manufacturer (OEM) adoption.

AMD's latest Fusion technology, which includes the A-Series Llano chips, coupled with the early Intel Sandy Bridge recall, have given AMD a great boost in this epic battle.

In short, finally getting to the 32nm technology was an essential step for AMD, especially when the emphasis these days is not just on value, but also on the utmost in mobility and performance.
 source: www.pcworld.com

AMD's Zacate Low Power Fusion APU Unveiled

"Fusion." We've heard that word from the good folks at AMD for what seems like an eternity, to be perfectly honest.  Fusion is AMD's marketing moniker for the company's next generation of integrated processors with on-board graphics -- a "fusion" of the CPU along with the GPU into what AMD now affectionately calls an "APU" or Accelerated Processing Unit.  Fusion has been a long time coming for AMD but it looks as if they may well have chosen the perfect entry point to release their first generation APU from the starting block.  The market is currently in what seems like a complete frenzy for anything to do with ultra-portable computing, from ultra thin and light notebooks, to netbooks and tablet PCs.  Consumers can't seem to get enough of the thin and sexy stuff and with AMD's first Fusion release, they've certainly chosen the right product segment to attack with a new low power processor.

Back in the September time frame, we gave you a quick look at AMD's upcoming processor codenamed Zacate.  Targeted at light mobile platforms, Zacate is a dual core processor with an on board DX11 capable graphics core and from the early look we got back then, it was shaping up to make a splash.  More recently, AMD invited us down to their Austin Texas facility to spend some quality hands-on time with Zacate.  Though we can't quite share performance details with you yet (still under NDA lock and key), we can give you a bit more detail and a first hand look at Zacate, its even lower-power sibling "Ontario" and the hyper-mobile platform that accommodates these new AMD processors that goes by the codename "Brazos."

Far Left: AMD's Zacate E-350 APU
Middle and Right: AMD's Previous Generation V105 Geneva Discrete Solution

 

 

 

 

At first glance of AMD's new silicon, you can see that Zacate is a single, monolithic die that is actually quite small when you consider the size of AMD's previous generation discrete processor architecture.  What you see here is an AMD E-350 dual core Zacate processor with a die size of 75mm².  The chip is built on TSMC's 40nm process technology and it's actually smaller than a dual core Intel Atom processor, which measure at 83mm². 

 These were part of the slide deck that AMD presented to us the day we paid a visit to their Austin Lone Star location.  As you can see, the Brazos platform will be home to both AMD E-Series and C-Series APUs.  Zacate, or the E-Series that we tested that day, is an 18 Watt TDP (thermal design power) chip and Ontario, or the C-Series, operates in a 9 Watt power envelope, if you can believe that.  As you'll also note here, Zacate is targeted to compete with Intel's low power CULV processors for thin and light notebooks, while Ontario is targeted at competing versus Celeron and Atom designs.  The kicker here is that AMD is claiming a "more balanced" architecture with a more robust graphics engine versus current Intel solutions on the market.

Additionally, we also see where AMD's product segmentation will fall in both the notebook and desktop space.  Sabine will be the next platform to incorporate AMD's Fusion-based Llano integrated APU and it is targeted to compete with Intel's Core i3,5, and 7 lineup of Arrandale processors with integrated graphics. Again the suggestion here is that with AMD's more robust DX11 graphics core under the hood, a stronger multimedia experience can be delivered.   Obviously, until we have product in hand, that remains to be seen.  Finally, we see Llano-based APUs for the desktop and, of course, Bulldozer showing up in the Scorpus platform, which will be AMD's next big iron processor for the high end. 

source: hothardware.com

Intel Unveils 10-Core Xeons Mission-Critical Servers

Intel announced its new E-series of Xeon processors today, claiming that the new processors will deliver nearly unparalleled advances in CPU performance and power efficiency. It's been just over a year since Santa Clara released its Nehalem-based octal-core Beckton processors. Whereas Beckton was focused entirely on performance and architectural efficiency, these new Xeons are more balanced. The new chips boost the core count to ten (up to 20 threads with HT enabled) and will be offered at a wide range of TDPs. 

"Intel has been changing the economics for mission-critical computing server deployments for more than a decade, and today we are raising the bar yet again," said Kirk Skaugen, vice president and general manager of Intel's Data Center Group. "The new Intel Xeon processor E7 family delivers record breaking performance with powerful new security, reliability and energy efficiency enhancements. The industry momentum we're seeing for this new server processor architecture is unparalleled in Intel's history. The days of IT organizations being forced to deploy expensive, closed RISC architectures for mission-critical applications are nearing an end."

Intel's presentation made it clear that it's gunning for what's left of the RISC market. Kirk Skaugen, vice president and general manager of Intel's Data Center Group, made a point of telling the conference that there's "No workload in the world today that Xeon can't handle." History certainly favors his words. Intel's quoted figures indicate that while the high end of the server market grew just five percent from 2002-2010, Intel's share of it nearly doubled.

The company went out of its way to note that Itanium's share of the market grew enormously over the past eight years, but it's Xeon, not Poulson, Intel is betting on. The new E7 series incorporates the benefits of Sandy Bridge, its support for new instructions, and its improved power management technology. Intel has also baked in support for low-voltage DIMMs, which allows vendors to opt for 1.35v products. The power savings, at 1W per DIMM, might not sound like much, but the E7 series supports up to 2TB of RAM in a 4S system. According to Intel, low-voltage DDR3 can cut a server's power consumption by up to 128W. 

OEM support for the new E7 processors seems downright enthusiastic; 19 vendors have announced a total of 35 systems with shipping to begin immediately. This may be partly due to the way the E7 helps to simplify Intel's product mix. Up to now, Intel's heavy-hitting Beckton was a 45nm chip that lacked the 32nm enhancements of the Xeon 5600 parts.
source: hothardware.com

Questions of Compatibility: AMD, AM3, and Bulldozer

It's been several weeks since Asus announced that certain socket AM3 motherboards would support AMD's upcoming Bulldozer processors. Since then, we've turned up additional rumors on the nature of such support. MSI has also announced its own plans to retrofit some existing AM3 boards with Bulldozer compatibility. What follows is the general shape of the situation as we currently understand it.

Will AMD Officially Support Bulldozer On The AM3 Platform?

No. The recent announcements from Asus and MSI make it clear that some AM3 boards will function with a Bulldozer-class processor installed. With that said, AMD originally justified moving from AM3 to AM3+ because not doing so would prevent certain Bulldozer features from functioning. AMD has not specified which features are affected yet; it's our belief, based on conversations with people in the know, that Bulldozer's advanced power management and clock gating capabilities require an AM3+ socket.

What's The Difference Between Unofficial and Official Support?
Quite a bit. For one thing, "unsupported" is almost always code for "voids your warranty." Official support doesn't automatically translate into practical compatibility. AMD has officially supported two separate product introductions in recent history. First, all AM2 boards that supported Phenom officially supported Phenom II. Second, all AM2+ boards officially supported AM3 processors. In both cases, actual compatibility implementation was left in the hands of the motherboard manufacturers.

There are occasionally cases where neither official support nor proper BIOS implementation is sufficient. AMD's 780G chipset, which launched to considerable acclaim, was capable of supporting AMD's entire range of processors. It soon became apparent, however, that a number of mATX 780G  boards were incapable of handling AMD's 125W Phenom processors. Well-built boards using high-quality components had no problems. The rest were quickly restricted to 95W TDPs or less.

What Have Asus / AMD Said?

AMD has officially said that it will support Bulldozer with the Socket AM3+ infrastructure. Questions regarding Bulldozer and AM3 support should therefore be directed to the motherboard manufacturers in question*. We attempted to talk to Asus, but were told that the company will no longer be talking publicly about AM3/Bulldozer support, at the request of AMD. Thus, Asus was unable to talk to us about the specifics of its own product based on an announcement it had already made.

What's The Bottom Line?
Some AM3 boards will support Bulldozer processors. The characteristics of that support and the degree to which performance, power consumption, and thermals will be affected is unknown. We generally expect that more expensive, enthusiast-class boards will offer a greater degree of support than bargain-basement models. Similarly, companies are more likely to update newer, better, boards than older ones.

The rumor mill indicates that multiple AMD chipsets will be capable of supporting Bulldozer. There's scant info on just how much various companies will implement support on older boards. Expect actual compatibility to vary considerably. The nature of this situation makes it very likely that some boards that should support Bulldozer, won't. Others may not be able to deliver power adequately given the CPU's different requirements.

The best thing to do is wait and see. We'll have to wait for launch to see what disparities exist between AM3 and AM3+ features and performance. We expect other motherboard manufacturers will make their own announcements about AM3 compatibility in the weeks ahead, but in lieu of the unofficial nature of support, we recommend waiting as opposed to buying a board now with a plan to drop an AM3+ processor in it.
source:hothardware.com