qcmadness

BD玩cinebench係特別慢

qcmadness

Group 1: Llano > Trinity ~ SB i3



Group 2: Trinity > Llano > SB i3




Group 3: SB i3 > Trinity > Llano





It all depends on workload

qcmadness

引用:

原帖由 dom 於 2012-8-23 01:11 發表
問題係 Notebook 無 3.0GHz+ .........

Llano best mobile CPU:
A8-3550MX: 2.0GHz / 2.7GHz, 45W, 5 SIMD shader group

Trinity best mobile CPU:
A10-4600M: 2.3GHz / 3.2GHz, 35W, 6 SIMD shader group

Note the difference?

qcmadness

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/a10-5800k-a8-5600k-a6-5400k,3224-21.html

引用:

Let’s start with the Piledriver architecture, which everyone is hoping will show up in a desktop-class CPU sooner than later. Our per-clock cycle testing suggests that the revised design, as it’s implemented on Trinity, is as much as 15% faster than Bulldozer. A quad-core Trinity-based chip will still trail a quad-core Llano APU if you hit it with a floating-point-heavy workload—but that’s to be expected, given that each of two Piledriver modules shares a floating-point unit. Fortunately for AMD, most of what we use to test taxes the architecture’s four integer cores.

A majority of our benchmarks favor Trinity over Llano thanks to IPC improvements and significantly higher clock rates. Piledriver still gives up significant instruction per cycle throughput compared to the older Stars design, but is better able to compensate than Bulldozer. The result, then, is modest x86 performance. It’s better than Bulldozer, but only a slight step up from what you get Llano. And that’s if we ignore the competition entirely. I didn’t have a appropriately-priced Intel chip to test, but just received a Core i3-2100 from Newegg that comes close to matching an A8-3870K’s price tag. Tests commence on that tonight.