• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Review: Processors with Integrated Graphics: AMD Fusion vs. Intel Core i3 and Intel Pentium

surprised if the reviewer doesn't somehow manage to skew the results in Intel favour, but yeah obviously Llano would win that hands down, might give it a read...:D
 
Sysmark again eh :p That doesn't explain the other figures though. Winrar archiving being 40% slower on the A8-3850 vs the Core i3 2130 for example. On the other hand Llano looks very competitive in Cinebench and x264 encoding...

Not really enough software used to give a good picture of overall performance, the review isn't up to scratch compared to others I've read at Xbitlabs.
 
Doesn't say much which hasn't already been said TBH. If the GPU is more important to you then get AMD, if the CPU is more important to you then get Intel. Simples :p

Hopefully that'll change when Trinity is out...
 
stupid, pointless thing about that article is the 'synthetic benchmarks', they have no relevance, the Intel processors could have a thousand times the processing power, but with no graphics power its pointless. Llano always wins in those situations, so will Trinity due to it have a notably more powerful graphics processor on-die.

same thing goes with most other reviews, makes it out that one CPU is terrible and not worth getting, however in the real-world, install your game and shock and horror, its running the exact same speed as the 'much faster' one due to the bottleneck being graphics, as it is 99% of the time in gaming. lets be honest how many people use their computers for calculating Pi? for the majority of tasks, gaming, web browsing and so forth there isn't a difference! :p
 
same thing goes with most other reviews, makes it out that one CPU is terrible and not worth getting, however in the real-world, install your game and shock and horror, its running the exact same speed as the 'much faster' one due to the bottleneck being graphics, as it is 99% of the time in gaming. lets be honest how many people use their computers for calculating Pi? for the majority of tasks, gaming, web browsing and so forth there isn't a difference! :p

I do a lot of archiving in particular, and media conversion hence buying a used PII X4. So the multimedia performance is just as relevant to me as gaming performance. Llano has process issues, little in the way of IPC improvement and is in few OEM laptops compared to even Brazos. I'm lead to believe the change in high-level AMD employees was because of disagreement on how to proceed in the mobile sector.
 
I agree that it is silly that gaming is used as the predominant reason for a good CPU... But other applications, from my own usage Photoshop, can benefit massively! Really wish I'd known how different it was when choosing Phenom II vs i5 750 back in the day :P
 
Something i've always wondered is that, considering how gigantic intel are, and how good their CPUs are, why can't they design decent graphics chips? Just seems weird that with their resources and money they still can't beat much smaller companies like AMD and Nvidia, and have even resorted to using Imagination Technologies smartphone GPUs :eek:.
 
Something i've always wondered is that, considering how gigantic intel are, and how good their CPUs are, why can't they design decent graphics chips? Just seems weird that with their resources and money they still can't beat much smaller companies like AMD and Nvidia, and have even resorted to using Imagination Technologies smartphone GPUs :eek:.

Most of the market are casual gamers, not hardcore nerds like us :p Intel has no need to make a discrete GPU when its integrated solutions dominate in sales volume.
 
Back
Top Bottom