No announcement yet.

AMD A8-3850 With Radeon HD 6550D

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • AMD A8-3850 With Radeon HD 6550D

    Phoronix: AMD A8-3850 With Radeon HD 6550D

    Last month AMD officially launched the A-Series "Llano" Fusion APUs to much fan-fare with significantly better computational and graphics performance over the E-Series Fusion APUs and all around the new hardware being a compelling solution. On launch-day we delivered AMD A8-3500M benchmarks as we managed to procure remote access to one of the AMD Llano systems from a third-party, and we also delivered benchmarks of the Radeon HD 6620G that are found on that APU. We have now finally been sent over a Llano APU and motherboard from AMD so we are able to conduct our own set of in-depth Llano Linux tests. In this review we are examining the Radeon HD 6550D graphics capabilities on the AMD A8-3850 APU.

    Phoronix, Linux Hardware Reviews, Linux hardware benchmarks, Linux server benchmarks, Linux benchmarking, Desktop Linux, Linux performance, Open Source graphics, Linux How To, Ubuntu benchmarks, Ubuntu hardware, Phoronix Test Suite

  • #2
    Given how memory bound Llano is it would be nice if you'd put the speed of the RAM you used in the test.

    Also it might be interesting to have a test for memory scaling under Linux with Llano under both drivers once radeon gets operational.
    Last edited by Luke_Wolf; 27 July 2011, 01:41 AM.


    • #3
      Echoing this too, please mention what speed the RAM was, and if not 1866, could you test that too?

      Also, a power consumption comparison to the nearest discrete cards would be interesting (HD4650 and GT240).


      • #4
        ATOM benchmarks

        I think Llano is going to compete versus ATOM not versus desktop CPUs+GPUs.

        Prices must be in the benchmarks Price/performance is a good benchmark.

        Llano can be the fast verion of Chrome OS netbooks in a near future, and depending of the price a real pain in the ass to ATOM netbooks, even with MS WOS.

        Remember that the Asus Eee and similars works fine with Linux and OSX - pirate, but works - and MS WOS 7 has a very limited special OS done specially for avoiding the spread of Linux systems preinstalled on this devices.

        Now with the preinstalled Chrome OS netbooks with linux will have other oportunity and if Llano arrives on time and in price ATOM would have to improve A LOT its GPU.


        • #5
          Originally posted by mitcoes View Post
          I think Llano is going to compete versus ATOM not versus desktop CPUs+GPUs.
          Do you even know what processors Llano includes?
          How exactly is a quad core 2.9ghz processor close to atom performance?

          The fastest atom I see is dual core 1.8ghz. And the graphics (nvidia ion) that comes with them would be garbage compared to the Llano A8-3530MX vid card.

          Llano is meant for low/mid range computers. It's not AMD top end stuff, that is coming out later.

          I think you meant that AMD Bobcat competes with Atom (and dual core 1.6ghz e-350 bobcat still better than atom+ion).

          Did you read this phoronix review linkted to in this article:
          AMD A8-3500M Llano Linux Benchmarks.
          It shows amd quad core vs amd dual core vs atom. Atom is slowest and the quad core blows both dual cores away. a6-3400m is the slowest laptop quad core. This article talks about the fastest desktop quad core (a8-3850).
          Last edited by AnonymousCoward; 27 July 2011, 08:59 AM.


          • #6
            Originally posted by mitcoes View Post
            I think Llano is going to compete versus ATOM not versus desktop CPUs+GPUs.
            Youre totally confusing Llano (eg. A8-3850, Quadcore, 2.9 GHz, 2x DDR3-1866, GPU: 400 SPs, 100W) with Zacate (eg. E-350, Dualcore, 1.6 GHz, 1x DDR3-1066, GPU: 80 SPs, 18W).


            • #7
              Regarding memory scaling, I have tested Llano A8-3850, 8GB: 2x DDR3-1866 G.Skil RipJaws-X, Asus F1A75M-Pro, seeting the memory to 1333 and 1866 speed respectively, Results for Unigine and results for free games. All at 1280x1024 (my 2nd TFT). I also did encoding tests to show thet ram speed doesn't matter there. And compared to my old Phenom 9350e (Phenom 1st generation, 4x 2.0 GHz). Also reduced Llano to 2.0 Hz for comparison.

              I can barely see visited links in this forum so I set them to bold.

              I used (K)Ubuntu 11.10 Alpha which runs fine with the catalyst driver, I even got decent screen output with the Radeon driver delivered by Ubuntu, yet had big problems with setting the screen res there. The driver sees a VGA and a DVI screen while only DVI was connected.

              Power usage for me is idle: 30W idle with Catalyst, 35W with Radeon. Only CPU fan plus Notebook HDD attached, P/S: Enermax Pro82+ 385W. Full load under Unigine Tropics: upto 115W. Prime95: 110W. When I set CPU voltage to 1.25 (prime stable) I get max load closely under 100W. Btw: accordingt to their Llano had CPU Voltage-ID at 1.275V, the board set close to 1.4V though. I think there's somethin wrong with a BIOS lib, MSI told them this would be fixed with the next BIOS.

              My board sets 1.41V by default ...


              • #8
                It depends on the price and time of shipment

                Originally posted by edgar_wibeau View Post
                Youre totally confusing Llano (eg. A8-3850, Quadcore, 2.9 GHz, 2x DDR3-1866, GPU: 400 SPs, 100W) with Zacate (eg. E-350, Dualcore, 1.6 GHz, 1x DDR3-1066, GPU: 80 SPs, 18W).
                i asked for price/performance, but i think this kind of CPU+GPU processors are more for portable devices as netbooks - not as cheap as ATOM, but a litle more expensive and far better performance - for a near future - this computer world is fast and ATOM is aged. But i missed the 100W MY MISTAKE.

                Of course for desktop as ATOMs compact models. But i do not see them at big cases - perhaps it is my mistake - at least not as a best selled.

                And of course as a nextgen processor is really much faster than an ATOM, but Price / performance versus ATOM and desktop computers - being in the middle of both markets I hope - would be good, in my opinion too.

                I would like a score as futuremark for phoronix test suite with a 100 or 1000 base on a known model as a mac mini or similar to really compare at one sight performance between computers.
                Last edited by mitcoes; 27 July 2011, 09:51 AM.


                • #9
                  mitcoes: Llano for desktops is a very good OEM product (sources claim they rip it from AMD's hands) as it's cheap to build a box with enough CPU power for almost all users plus a middle class GPU with typical OEM characteristics.

                  You just need a case, psu, board, a/cpu, ram, drive, optical and cooling. No need for a seperate gfx card and comes with 4x USB 3.0, 6x SATA 6G and enough PCIe-lanes for PEG and all peripherals at still-up-to-date 2.0 speeds.

                  Cheap package, less parts needed, easy cooling, full features for mainstream. Simple as that.

                  But to me, it's also a very good DIY part because I have very low idle power (you'll have at least +10W with a discrete card, whichever middle class CPU you choose) and enough horse power for my needs CPU and GPU wise. And all the state of the art peripheral links.
                  Last edited by edgar_wibeau; 27 July 2011, 10:09 AM.


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Qaridarium
                    there are tests out there proofed the 2500mhz ddr3 speed up.

                    sure you need to overclock it to 5ghz to get the effect.
                    Have you followed my links? I forgot to write down my conclusions for the games, see below, but you could have found them yourself from the benches. For the games, I too have a speedup. Not for the encoders though, just about one percent which is within measurement errors. When you need to overclock to insane clock speeds, there pratically is no benefit for normal users and even on-air overclockers.

                    Unigine benches normalized against the 1333 run: 6%, 10% and 13% speedup.
                    Free games normalized against the 1333 run: 6% .. 31% speedup
                    Encoding normalized against the 1333 (A8) run: 0% .. 2% speedup.

                    31% speedup from 40% memory speedup, all other staying flat, is a very decent achievement. To me at least. But clearly not in all application types.