AMD to Release Two New Llano APUs: A8-3870K, A6-3670K

[DirectXtreme]

[citation][nom]RazorBurn[/nom]Any info about their GPU parts? Most people who buys LLano are more interested in their GPU capability..[/citation]
The GPUs on these chips will be the same as their non-K brotherin, the only potential difference being clock speed.

 

[hakesterman]

If you build an I5 or I7 System it will cost you more than double of that of an AMD system and your gameing expierance won't improve enough to justify the means. Now if you want to build an I5 or I7 so you can brag to your friends what you got than that maybe it's worth the extra 700 bucks for the I7 system.

 

[c_herring]

[citation][nom]de5_roy[/nom]and yet amd said that they are not focussing on rivalry anymore[/citation]In the desktop space. They never said anything about mobile and slimline PC markets. ;-D

 

[Guest]

hakesterman. I'm sorry but the i5 and i7 performance is LIGHT YEARS ahead of the Llano. I build applications and time is money. A system that can do a days full of tasks twice as fast as another means I'm potentially making the same money in half the time and if I keep up production, potentially making twice as much money. Paying $250 more for a PC to make more money is hardly a tradeoff. I use AMD for testing on those platforms but Intel for all the real work. Go to anandtech and look at the Llano vs. i5 & i7 benchmarks man. Intel was worlds higher in performance and while APUs were 35% higher in graphics performance, the CPU isn't called the "Central" processing unit for nothing.

 

[shafe88]

"You can't trademark numbers so AMD is safe."
If that was the case apple would of done it by now.

 

[jdwii]

I'm pretty sure these will beat the 8 core BD when they come out. These will overclock like crazy probably 3.8-4.2GHz and its already 5-10% faster then the K10 on IPC. And if you can overclock the graphics to this will be a very very good product. You could probably get 30% more performance in games just by overclocking it. They should price it at 149.99$.

 

[Belardo]

Wow... a K chip from AMD, how original.

 

[ChromeTusk]

If you build an I5 or I7 System it will cost you more than double of that of an AMD system and your gameing expierance won't improve enough to justify the means. Now if you want to build an I5 or I7 so you can brag to your friends what you got than that maybe it's worth the extra 700 bucks for the I7 system.

hakesterman. I'm sorry but the i5 and i7 performance is LIGHT YEARS ahead of the Llano. I build applications and time is money. A system that can do a days full of tasks twice as fast as another means I'm potentially making the same money in half the time and if I keep up production, potentially making twice as much money. Paying $250 more for a PC to make more money is hardly a tradeoff. I use AMD for testing on those platforms but Intel for all the real work. Go to anandtech and look at the Llano vs. i5 & i7 benchmarks man. Intel was worlds higher in performance and while APUs were 35% higher in graphics performance, the CPU isn't called the "Central" processing unit for nothing.

Why is the LLano (A8 = 4 core/4thread APU) compared to an i7 ( -2600k = 4 core/8 thread, unlocked CPU)? Each processor targets a different consumer base. Personally, I would compare the AMD LLano chips with Intel's i3 and i5 chips. As a system builder or IT Manager, you must factor in the target users' needs, the system requirements of their programs, total budget, and total cost of ownership.

 

[holdingholder]

[citation][nom]joytech22[/nom]Am I the only person posting who instantly thought "Lawsuit" when they read the model numbers?I mean.. Intel has similar numbering schemes with their newer CPU's.Anyway..I know this might seem biased towards AMD but it's just my thoughts so I expect thumbs down lolI'm honestly surprised OEM's don't strongly consider using these chips in their desktops.I mean sure there are desktops and laptops out there with them but wherever I go and look around the $500-$1000 PC's have SB Pentiums or i3's or even i5's but mostly with the horrendous Intel IGP's.I think it would be a MUCH better deal for the customer if they stuck these Llano CPU's into those systems, less things nowdays are limited by CPU power, and these Llano CPU's perform almost identically to their Phenom II brothers and think about it that kind of CPU power is already enough for most consumers.The GPU on those Llano CPU's also trounces anything Intel has and everybody knows it including OEM's.They are the perfect all-in-one CPU..I know if I was to start my own OEM brand I would use them and leave the more expensive space to Intel and a dedicated GPU, or a Llano matched with a dedicated GPU for Crossfire.My two cents. :\[/citation]
I think AMD/Cyrix/Intel already went down that road in the late 90's

 

[A Bad Day]

[citation][nom]RazorBurn[/nom]For $500 to $1000 i can have an i5 or i7 with descrete GPU that will run around Llano in any benchmarks.. Llano will only be sellable below $300 PC's.. More than $300? Its not practical to use Llano anymore..[/citation]

Now take out that discrete GPU. A lot of mainstream computers come without discrete GPUs or really weak ones.

Besides, why does a customer who only wants to watch some videos, type some word documents and do some light gaming need a Radeon 6970 paired with an equally overpowered processor?

 

[K2N hater]

100W parts? With some tweaking through k10stat I'm sure it drops under 70W without dropping clocks.

 

[madm8bh]

IMO, they are not cheap enough yet. Yes, the GPU on the the AMDs are much better than Intel's, but most users are not gamers. If they are, they play games on their PS3/XBOX/Iphone etc.

For mainstream users, if it streams youtube videos, netflix, DVD/Bluray etc, its good enough. Thats my opinion anyways.

 

[sseyler]

[citation][nom]madooo12[/nom]OC is short for overclocked[/citation]

He clearly knew OC would stand for "OverClocked", since when he said "double entendre", he was most likely implying that the second interpretation would refer to "unlOCked", ya dumbass.

 

[nottheking]

[citation][nom]Sensei11[/nom]hakesterman. I'm sorry but the i5 and i7 performance is LIGHT YEARS ahead of the Llano. I build applications and time is money.[/citation]
Lemme guess, you "mine bitcoins?"

Given that the most expensive Llano is still some $50US below the LOWEST SB i5, this is hardly a comparison that makes any sense. If we wanted sheer ego-waving, then we'd say that the i5s are utterly worthless because they'll NEVER match up to a Sandy-Bridge E CPU. Also, remember that the i5 2500K is the most EXPENSIVE i5; the cheap-end ones that could possibly get compared are weaker ones.

 

[livebriand]

Dang, is this still i3 performance? Well, at least the good gpu should help most people. Realistically, these seem like a decent, though overlooked, budget option.

 

[cybersans]

don't worry, i won't be on par with i7- 2500K, and comparing to i7-2600K, it got smoked away, no matter that they put "K" after the model name 😀

 

[Belardo]

How many people who KNOW what an Intel K chip is, will be fooled by an AMD-K chip? While the FX is somewhat better than the A-Series, how much better are they?

The whole thing is stupid.

 

[Guest]

Any1 knows what GPU they will be abel to crossfire with ? I dident go for a llano because I have a Cayman gpu and llano only goes crossfire with turks or less

 

[K2N hater]

[citation][nom]livebriand[/nom]Dang, is this still i3 performance? Well, at least the good gpu should help most people. Realistically, these seem like a decent, though overlooked, budget option.[/citation]
Drop a BMW engine onto a VW Bug and you have the definition of all 90%+ i3-based computers.

 

[nottheking]

[citation][nom]Hex6950[/nom]Any1 knows what GPU they will be abel to crossfire with ? I dident go for a llano because I have a Cayman gpu and llano only goes crossfire with turks or less[/citation]
Turks will be the highest that will be able to match up (roughly) to Llano's performance. The new APUs don't have any better GPUs packed into them; the 6550D remains the most potent. (600 MHz, 400 SPs) The name does intend to roughly line it up with the discrete lineup; the thing's closest to (but inferior to) the Radeon 6570; it's slower by 50MHz in the core, and has 1/6 fewer SPs.

As for the A6-3670K, it'll almost certainly be very similar to the currently-existing A6-3650, which actually uses the 6530D GPU, not the 6550D. This is significantly weaker; it's cut from 400 SPs to only 320, and the core's clocked at only 443 MHz.

 

[silverblue]

Some pretty good posts here, unfortunately somebody has seen fit to downvote probably every single one of them.

I understand the voting system can help hide spam but if it's being abused, it invalidates its purpose somewhat.