AMD Reports Quarterly Earnings for Q2 2011

[bustapr]

[citation][nom]amk-aka-phantom[/nom]Llano can game well? Lol. What you should do instead is prey on suckers who dump their old desktops and ask them for old hardware, then assemble yourself something decent. Also, you know that for $500 you can build a desktop that'll kill any Llano in gaming, right? You don't go for a laptop on low budget...If your friend's i3 can't play HD movies well, fix his codecs. Even Celeron can play HD well (sometimes slow while seeking, smooth otherwise).And of course it's not gonna game well, i3 is an entry level CPU and I doubt that laptop has a GPU... you think Llano will be better? =)By the way, you misspelled my username. Phenom? Roflmao =) How ironic, I always despised Phenoms, though the recent ones kind of changed my opinion...[/citation]
dude you have to at least try to look at it from the intended audiences point of view. The grand majority of pc users dont care about codecs or about how much big or small the margin is between SB and Llano. They only care about if it can use the internet, can it play HD, and occasionally can it game. The Llano does quite fine accomplishing those needs and can game comfortably, but the more expensive i3 has slight trouble with HD and cannot game. And from AMDs point of view, theyre undoubtably going to gain some of intels marketshare with Llano because its such a balanced and affordable CPU.

Also, for $500 you can build a crossfire Llano rig that owns any game

 

[soundping]

I'm not giving up on AMD.

 

[amk-aka-Phantom]

dude you have to at least try to look at it from the intended audiences point of view. The grand majority of pc users dont care about codecs or about how much big or small the margin is between SB and Llano. They only care about if it can use the internet, can it play HD, and occasionally can it game. The Llano does quite fine accomplishing those needs and can game comfortably, but the more expensive i3 has slight trouble with HD and cannot game. And from AMDs point of view, theyre undoubtably going to gain some of intels marketshare with Llano because its such a balanced and affordable CPU.

Also, for $500 you can build a crossfire Llano rig that owns any game

You okay? Llano is an APU, and by adding CF you're wasting money, since you won't use the IGP on your precious Llano. Besides, it won't own any game, lol, not even close. Nobody said Llano can game "comfortably". Since you mentioned HD videos, I assume you're talking at least 720p... so I doubt Llano can pull this off. CF will be horribly bottlenecked by it.

Don't care about codecs? Then you're a fool. Get the wrong codecs and any PC will have trouble. i3 does NOT have trouble with HD, because it is way more than what's required to play HD. If his laptop has trouble, something is wrong with the software, that's all.

Is this thread full of AMD fanboys or what? Can anybody here give me one valid reason why Llano is so great, when it's just another low-power solution? Gamers don't need it, professionals don't need it and "simple users" don't need it because they don't even understand what's an APU is and/or are already using another "simple" PC. What's so great about Llano?

Personally, I think AMD should instead concentrate on REAL graphics, where they're kicking ass right now. And of course, the Bulldozer, if it's ever gonna show up... as much as I like SB, I'd love to see AMD to come up with worthy competition.

 

[iamtheking123]

Can anybody here give me one valid reason why Llano is so great, when it's just another low-power solution? Gamers don't need it, professionals don't need it and "simple users" don't need it because they don't even understand what's an APU is and/or are already using another "simple" PC. What's so great about Llano?

Personally, I think AMD should instead concentrate on REAL graphics, where they're kicking ass right now. And of course, the Bulldozer, if it's ever gonna show up... as much as I like SB, I'd love to see AMD to come up with worthy competition.

I can give you a reason. AMD marketing can now put FUSION in a giant sticker on laptops and fool people into thinking it's an improvement over cpu + separate integrated graphics (from ati (even though it's amd) or nvidia). AMD has good marketing but bad engineering. Over the last year they've been pushing their old stuff that's 5 years old under the VISION sticker for some reason. Still haven't bothered to find out what VISION really is.

Someone mentioned HD video. My 2007 laptop plays 720p just fine with it's 7150m graphics on 256 mb shared ram.

 

[jj463rd]

[citation][nom]leper84[/nom]From a consumer perspective, fusion is the way to go. We were looking for a netbook that 1)Had decent battery 2) could fit into a backpack to use at work/class and 3) had enough useability to warrant the cost.Tablets were cool but didnt make any more sense than a new phone. Atom netbooks that we played with on display were freezing and stuttering like a 800mhz running a corrupted version of windows 98. Zacate worked perfectly for what we're going to use it for. Ordered a hp dm1z w/ e350, 4gb of ram shipped with tax for $460. Even with all hp's bloatward still intact it never gives us any issues. Runs firefox, office, netflix, pandora and even some light killing time gaming without a hitch. Dont waste money on cable, so we hook it up to hdmi and guess what? It streams as smoothly as a 2600k pushing 4.5 ghz. Can it play crysis? Who knows, we didnt buy the thing to play crysis.My story may seem simpleton to some but guess what? Thats what 99% of consumers are looking for. Thats where zacate and llano are going to sweep the market. They do what most people want, without fuss and smoothly. They do it either better or cheaper than intel can right now. If amd has as much success on the server side with bulldozer Q4 is gonna look pretty damn good for amd, if I had the cash right now I would be ready and waiting to buy up some amd stock once I saw how bd turns out for servers.[/citation]
A good site on netbooks and ultraportable notebooks that I've found was
netbooklive [dot] com amongst some others.Interesting because I have a need of one now.It's really a trade off between good or great battery life ,overall cost and power.There are apparently high end performance 11.6 inch gaming or high performing application CPU notebooks using Intel CPU's.
Unfortunately though their battery life is quite poor (really out of the question,negates the purpose of mobility especially in the field or outside).

It seems as if the Zacate CPU's like the E-350 offer the best battery life and good performance (Balance).I am torn between choosing 3 ones right now at newegg.The costlier MSI 370-001US which really has a bigger 13.4 inch screen but has a claimed 10 hour battery life (beefy 8 cell battery),a Lenovo Thinkpad X-Series X120e 11.6 inch screen (It looks like it has a built in battery which I don't like) and a HP Pavilion dm1-3210US 11.6 inch screen which apparently is the newer replacement to the dm1z (I don't see any difference between them).The dm1-3210US is the least costly of the three and has bluetooth then again so does the Lenovo notebook.The MSI notebook has a beefier hard drive,some neat software no bluetooth though.
I am leaning more towards the dm1-3210US though.It also has the best sound quality of the 3.I can always easily put in 8 gb RAM (about $50-$70) to beef it up and use a bluetooth mouse.I read the owners manuals online before buying to get acquainted with it.



There is apparently a decent Intel alternative to the E-350 that of the Intel Atom D525 Dual core with nVIDIA Ion graphics (Intel GMA 3150 + Nvidia GT218) but again it seems as though the E-350 comes out on top with battery life with most ultra portables that are available.

Can the E-350 play crysis well I've heard yes in lowered resolutions,detail.It's quite adequate for older games and apparently plays Half Life 2 well in medium settings from what I've read on various websites.Gaming of course will probably murder the battery life of even a long battery life notebook or netbook though.The Passmark score for the E-350 is just slightly under a Sempron 140.

 

[henydiah]

faithfully waiting for Bulldozer

 

[davewolfgang]

probably me and mostly every struggling college student would like the idea behind fusion. remember, the a and e series are for people on a budget. Frankly I dont give a crap when the next ferrari comes out, I only give a damn about when my own corolla will break down and buying a cheap car after that to last me a while. not everyone here is an enthusiast.

Sorry to burst your bubble - but if you come to Tom's (and other tech websites), and then actually post on a story - You are an Enthusiast!!

Just "because" you want and are looking at the low end of the CPU world - doesn't mean you aren't an enthusiast - it just means you don't want to spend the money on anything better.

 

[moonsite]

Fusion is not just combining the CPU and GPU together. It is combining the CPU and GPU together into an APU that uses less power than the total power consumption of the original CPU and GPU cobmined. At least I hope that is what it should be. Otherwise what is the point of integrating those two other than space-saving?

 

[moonsite]

When you ask what good is fusion, this is what is good about it: a better than integrated graphic but very low power consumptions and cheap price.

I just bought an acer notebooks (11.6") for $200 + tax each that have AMD C-50 (1 Ghz dual core with 62xx graphic) cpu in them. I had several choices: Alienware 11.6" with dedicated graphic and intel core i-3 or i-5 (which would have costed me $700+), lenovo x120 or HP DM1Z with AMD E-350 (would have cost 370 or more), lenovo x220 with intel SB (would cost me $700+).

For someone like me, these are the reasons I bought this:
1. I travel a lot, so lighter is better. The longer battery life is also much needed.
2. The most intensive game I played is civilization 4 & 5 (which this notebook can handle). I usually play it on another Acer with Intel SU3500 and GMA 4500 graphic, and my old core 2 duo dell XPS M1210.
3. I watch a lot of video. I tested out the Acer. With CCCP installed, Windows Media Player played the 1080P encoded video very well. VLC had a bit of lag until I turned on hardware acceleration, then it played that smoothly as well.
4. I like to replace my notebook within 2 to 3 years max, since it get abused a lot while I travel, so the cheaper the better. Knowing that I only spent $200 to $300 on the notebook makes it a lot easier to replace it in a couple of year, or even a year.
5. This notebook meet about 99% of what I do: video, audio, web, and MS Office.

I am an "enthusiast", but not a game "enthusiast", just a hardware and software "enthusiast". I look for efficiency rather than performance. What is the point of buying a Ferrari if I have to pay $300 a month for gas when I can get a civic and pay less than $100 a month. If I have money and want to show off, sure a Ferrari is nice, but it is not practical.
The bad thing about most general consumer is that they don't know what they want. So they looking for the best and the greatest, and will listen to the saleperson who usually don't know any better. So you have a grandma with a Core i-7 desktop doing nothing else but checking her email everyday.

 

[jdwii]

people on these sites are not the smartest and their always going to be intel bullys on this site and any other site even AMDZONE

people thank their intel is so great

Graphics matter more then processing power to the avg user which is 95% of the world
AMD GARPHICS LOOKS WAY BETTER THEN INTELS

Amd has better details on videos and pictures you can tell side by side

use can change so many settings on the amd graphics versus just brightness on intels


I own intel labtops the great I3 is always at 50+ % trying to do gaming why my llano setting at 25% and using less power


What do you thank a Average pc user going to do first Play age of empires,WOW,sims 3 or on the wonderful intel machine convert videos

the people on this site(fourms) will never understand that a Athlon x2 or a dual Pentium processor is way enough
the reason these computers are slow is because of this horrible graphics intel onboard video or nvidia on board video and the dumb ass above said Amd reinventing the wheel they had the Ati graphics on their labtops for over 4 years now with nvidia and intel!!
i want the bulldozer because i love powerful hardware
but its a waste of money because my athlon x4 is so fast that i dont need nouthing better and either does any normal person running a a dual core. if i took out my video card my whole pc gets slower

Windows 7 loves powerful graphics it runs fine on a Pentium 4 running a Ati 5670 in fact its quite fast.

Intel makes the faster processors but what normal person needs them
to the person saying everyone saying this or that will save amd uh i thank Amd might have pulled it off when buying ATI this saved them, and it took amd 2 years but now they beat nvidia for 2 generations on performance. Amd has great engineers, but bad business practices and the worst marking ever. this is what they need to fix. if bulldozer fails is most likey from a business perspective and not a engineering perspective

 

[jdwii]

oh yeah and good job Amd for making money of this so called failure products

 

[jdwii]

"So AMD is again playing second fiddle with second rate engineers and second rate designs. Why do you think Intel's earnings RAPED amd's?"


because of their business practices intel more of a mafia anyways. they cheat and lie to get their way.
They cheat by bribing
you guys act live its not that big of a deal well it is, the 1.5billion $ is nothing compared to the time they lost

I also dont like how Dirk just wanted to beat intel in court, he made that company stand still then when it was over amd was 3 years behind

 

[amk-aka-Phantom]

Intel doesn't earn so much because of bribes. Rather, because of its many customers =P

 

[jdwii]

Yes im sure any person would love to have bad graphics but a good processor

 

[amk-aka-Phantom]

Yes im sure any person would love to have bad graphics but a good processor

No. That's why we get a graphics card. Most of the Sandy Bridge processors aren't meant for use with onboard graphics, although they have it. Seriously, if you aren't a gamer, pretty much any onboard graphics will do for you.