AMD A8-3850 Review: Llano Rocks Entry-Level Desktops

[Soma42]

"The difference from going from a llano to a 2500K would be MORE dramatic than from a Pentium 4 to a 920 because the 2500 K is faster than the 920 and the llano is probably not much faster than a Pentium 4"

You're kidding right?

"I am not a gamer but I have my own business and run a lot of software (like MS Office)."

MS Office is not something that takes a lot of computing power,so this is exactly my point of an i7-2500k being overkill. If all you use is MSOffice and some other business software I don't know why you're against a cheaper solution than Intel offers.

I'm not going to convince Llano is more than enough than for the average business user or home user so I'm not going to try anymore.

I would only buy Llano myself for a HTPC, but for pretty much any relative I have it would be a good solution for them.

 

[srgess]

[citation][nom]someguynamedmatt[/nom]Hah! Exactly.And why can't you people see that these are designed specifically to use as little power as possible? No shit, if you put a quad core and 5670 in there it will be faster. It will also use about six times more power than this.[/citation]

Maybe want to buy ipad if you want power consumption usage.... I think anyone that is smart enough would wait for put the 500$ more for a dedicated gpu, cpu more powerful that will last several year more then this poor desktop setup. Unless you are the one who think atom desktop as a place in this world. I have to admit i may buy the mobile apu version for a laptop but useless for desktop.

 

[clonazepam]

Ok, tell me if this logic is accurate.

If you are going to use open source and freeware software for all of your computing needs, Llano wins because of the physical cores. So you have the inexpensive processor+gpu coupled with free software for a huge savings and performance benefit. In addition, with web browsers using gpu muscle you see a big advantage there as well as many casual gamers turn to web browser based gaming. Does all that sound about right?

Can we see more comparisons done using web browser based gaming performance?

 

[lradunovic77]

Llano does not make sense at all. This chip should be for netbooks only nothing else.

 

[jdwii]

The X4 with a 6850 is a reasonably fast setup. Imagine if you had spent the extra $60 bucks to move up to a 2500K - whoosh you would be in a whole new world of performance. Wow that $60 is a lot of money.

when i got a athlon x4 it was 1 and half years ago i only had 200$ to spend. all things aside AMD was my best option

 

[clonazepam]

Again, tell me if this sounds proper.

In the next 1 to 3 months, I will be building a pc with very few specific purposes.
1) It will have 2-4 large harddrives for storage.
2) It will remain on 24/7 so that storage is accessible on my gaming rig.
3) Since its on 24/7, its available to the family for basic web browsing, and solitaire type gaming.
4) Office suite, general printing, light photo-editing (cropping mostly).
5) Children's learning software - typing, math, reading games.

It seems to me that this Llano product will hit the mark superbly. Now with its cpu/gpu unit, and motherboard, it should come under cost of any other platform. Is that accurate?

I would also like to explore which platform lends itself best to being completely passive cooling. I'd imagine a solid fan for the storage components. Could I get away with passive cooling on this Llano product?

 

[lradunovic77]

Can it play Crysis?

 

[jdwii]

and i also needed to buy a moutherboard

 

[Guest]

Seeing how the GUI of OSs are becoming more and more graphically demanding, Llano could prove to be even better for the overall experience.

Oh, and when you guys are comparing prices, please calculate the % in your head. From $135 to $200 is almost 50% increase, and that's going to hurt if you're buying more of these at a time ( different organizations; like schools, these are great for eduPCs ).

 

[Nintendork]

Seems Llano hit intel drones hard. They giving negative votes xDD. You make me laugh.

 

[clonazepam]

[citation][nom]Nintendork[/nom]Seems Llano hit intel drones hard. They giving negative votes xDD. You make me laugh.[/citation]

I wanted to say that but my comments are already gettin hit lol...

 

[fir_ser]

Llano is really an interesting processor (or APU), hope Bulldozer would just be a serious rival for Sandy Bridge processors.

 

[flong]

[citation][nom]jdwii[/nom]The X4 with a 6850 is a reasonably fast setup. Imagine if you had spent the extra $60 bucks to move up to a 2500K - whoosh you would be in a whole new world of performance. Wow that $60 is a lot of money.when i got a athlon x4 it was 1 and half years ago i only had 200$ to spend. all things aside AMD was my best option[/citation]

Fair enough - and I have heard that the X4 is a very good chip.

 

[flong]

[citation][nom]lradunovic77[/nom]Can it play Crysis?[/citation]

I would suggest that you post your projected needs, the use of your projected computer and your budget in the "New Build" section of Tom's Hardware. There are many regular posters there that will give you advice on the best bang-for-your buck components for your computer.

This generally helps prospective builders a lot as you get an A-list of the best components for your budget. Keep in mind that there will be some disagreement among posters but still, you will get a lot of valuable information.

 

[flong]

[citation][nom]clonazepam[/nom]Again, tell me if this sounds proper.In the next 1 to 3 months, I will be building a pc with very few specific purposes.1) It will have 2-4 large harddrives for storage.2) It will remain on 24/7 so that storage is accessible on my gaming rig.3) Since its on 24/7, its available to the family for basic web browsing, and solitaire type gaming.4) Office suite, general printing, light photo-editing (cropping mostly).5) Children's learning software - typing, math, reading games.It seems to me that this Llano product will hit the mark superbly. Now with its cpu/gpu unit, and motherboard, it should come under cost of any other platform. Is that accurate?I would also like to explore which platform lends itself best to being completely passive cooling. I'd imagine a solid fan for the storage components. Could I get away with passive cooling on this Llano product?[/citation]

Sorry read the post above for your question - I hit the wrong "quotes" button. Post your prospective build in the "New Build" section of Tom's Hardware.

 

[Guest]

It's pretty crappy - also no market for these... nice try, but not good enough.

 

[LORD_ORION]

Looks like it could be a good workstation for everyday business use, but too bad those guys never buy AMD just because they are AMD.

I would like to see how they do vs the i3s in Windows 8. That is probably the real target. Systems equipped with these will dominate the low end consumer segment probably by $100 bucks a shot.

I'd still buy an i3 though, simply knowing that a year down the road the i3 will keep price/performance pace, but graphics performance will be much higher for the same price. (because it always is)

 

[flong]

[citation][nom]Soma42[/nom]"The difference from going from a llano to a 2500K would be MORE dramatic than from a Pentium 4 to a 920 because the 2500 K is faster than the 920 and the llano is probably not much faster than a Pentium 4"You're kidding right?"I am not a gamer but I have my own business and run a lot of software (like MS Office)."MS Office is not something that takes a lot of computing power,so this is exactly my point of an i7-2500k being overkill. If all you use is MSOffice and some other business software I don't know why you're against a cheaper solution than Intel offers.I'm not going to convince Llano is more than enough than for the average business user or home user so I'm not going to try anymore. I would only buy Llano myself for a HTPC, but for pretty much any relative I have it would be a good solution for them.[/citation]

Nope, I am not kidding. It seems that you have not read the reviews of the 2500K. With a moderate overclock it blows the the doors off of the I-7 920 and so I am not sure why you would be so incredulous. In the Tom's Hardware review, the 2500K beat the I-7 990 in most benchmarks (with a stable overclock). Even without any overclock it beats the 920.

The 2500K is easily the cheapest rocket ship-fast CPU ever made and that is why I don't get spending $70 more for a vastly superior product.

I am very willing to look at other non-Intel solutions. That is why I read this article.

 

[applegetsmelaid]

Yeeeuuuhhh Boooooyyyyeeeee! Go AMD.

 

[cangelini]

[citation][nom]flong[/nom]Nope, I am not kidding. It seems that you have not read the reviews of the 2500K. With a moderate overclock it blows the the doors off of the I-7 920 and so I am not sure why you would be so incredulous. In the Tom's Hardware review, the 2500K beat the I-7 990 in most benchmarks (with a stable overclock). Even without any overclock it beats the 920.The 2500K is easily the cheapest rocket ship-fast CPU ever made and that is why I don't get spending $70 more for a vastly superior product.I am very willing to look at other non-Intel solutions. That is why I read this article.[/citation]

The i5-2500K remains the chip I recommend to anyone with the money to spend on it and a suitable discrete solution. I still think that's your best value bet for an enthusiast-oriented machine.

 

[rootheday]

[citation][nom]Nintendork[/nom]This review need IGP OC. The Llano GPU overclocks like hell.600Mhz to 840/900Mhz? No problem at all.[/citation]

Sandybridge GPU OC's like crazy too - I've see results OC'd from 1300MHz up to 1.9GHz and even 2.1GHz. YMMV, of course

 

[Guest]

Hey everyone! 3 beers! SMOKE YOOOOOOU!!

 

[LORD_ORION]

[citation][nom]flong[/nom]Nope, I am not kidding. It seems that you have not read the reviews of the 2500K. With a moderate overclock it blows the the doors off of the I-7 920 and so I am not sure why you would be so incredulous. In the Tom's Hardware review, the 2500K beat the I-7 990 in most benchmarks (with a stable overclock). Even without any overclock it beats the 920.The 2500K is easily the cheapest rocket ship-fast CPU ever made and that is why I don't get spending $70 more for a vastly superior product.I am very willing to look at other non-Intel solutions. That is why I read this article.[/citation]

No CPU will ever compete with the Celery 300 overclock.

 

[Guest]

@rootheday

cause anything times zero is still zero...... and thats the level of performance you'll get from an intel gfx solution, dont get me wrong i think the i series chips are decent enough, but i really have no idea who's idea was it to plonk the god awful gfx solution in the same package, it's like buying a sports car with bicycle training wheels on, who ever it is deserve to be shot, just use that wasted of silicone to boost the CPU performance or better still take away the silicone and give us the cost savings

 

[that_aznpride101]

[citation][nom]Nintendork[/nom]Seems Llano hit intel drones hard. They giving negative votes xDD. You make me laugh.[/citation]

Yeah, seriously. They're posting up dumb negative reviews too without explaining why.