AMD Demos Llano Fusion APU, Radeon 6800 Series

MojoKid writes "At a press event for the impending launch of AMD's new Radeon HD 6870 and HD 6850 series graphics cards, the company took the opportunity to provide an early look at the first, fully functional samples of their upcoming 'Llano' processor, or APU (Applications Processer Unit). For those unfamiliar with Llano, it's 32nm 'Fusion' product that integrates CPU, GPU, and Northbridge functions on a single die. The chip is a low-power derivative of the company's current Phenom II architecture fused with a GPU that will target a wide range of operating environments at speeds of 3GHz or higher. Test systems showed the integrated GPU had no trouble running Alien vs. Predator at a moderate resolution with DirectX 11 features enabled. In terms of the Radeon 6800 series, board shots have been unveiled today, as well as scenes from AMD's upcoming tech demo, Mecha Warrior, showcasing the new graphics technology and advanced effects from the open source Bullet Physics library."

Comments

Deceiving naming...

[TheKidWho]

The 6870 actually has less performance than the 5870... Same goes for the 6850/5850... I don't really understand why they named them the way they did... Either way, a 6970 is supposed to be released in the near future to surpass the GTX480/5870.

Re:Deceiving naming...

[Rockoon]

There is also the problem that the poster is measuring performance based on some single metric (presumably FPS in some game) which doesnt necessarily mean much.

Many years ago I upgraded from a Voodoo 3 to GeForce 4 Ti 4600, and for more than a few games that GF4 was slower in FPS than the Voodoo at first (but still more than fast enough for gaming.)

This was at a time when games were almost strictly simple textured polygon throwers, which was the Voodoo 3's only strength. As the use of multi-texturing became more prevalent (heavily used in terrain splatting..), the advantages of the GF4 over the voodoo became apparent as more scene detail became essentially free, whereas that voodoo required many rendering passes to accomplish the same thing.

Now I'm not saying I know that this generation of AMD gpu's will experience the same sort of future-benefits as that GeForce 4 did, especially since DX10/DX11 really isnt having a rapid uptake, but there could easily be design choices here that favor DX11 features that just arent being heavily used yet.

The question is not 'is the 6870 slower than that 5870?' in some specific benchmark. The question is, which is these cards will provide a solid gaming platform for the most games. As with my experience, that voodoo performed better than the GF4 for while.. but for the newest games the GF4 kept providing a good experience whereas that voodoo became completely unacceptable.

Re:Typo in summary,

[mabinogi]

No, AMD makes Radeon and has done for years.

They've _branded_ them ATI since the buyout, but even that has changed now and future parts (which is what these are) will be AMD branded.

Re:"Alien vs. Predator" Movie or Video Game?

[Ephemeriis]

I've got no idea how fast an "Alien vs. Predator" video game needs the graphics system to be, since I stopped caring once any modern hardware could play Nethack or Solitaire.

AvP is a relatively modern game. Came out in the last year or so. It isn't mind-shatteringly amazing, but it looks pretty decent.

Traditionally, integrated graphics have done a lousy job with serious gaming on PCs. Basically any FPS has required a discrete 3D card.

If Joe Sixpack can go out and buy an off-the-shelf machine at Best Buy and play a game on it without having to upgrade the hardware, it'll be a huge step in the right direction.

But this chip doesn't look like it'll be replacing 3D cards for serious gamers anytime soon.

Can the hardware play 1080p video without needing a noisy fan? How low power is "low-power"?

It's a desktop chip, so I can't imagine it'll do anything without a fan. Although the integrated graphics means that you wouldn't need a separate graphics card with its own fan. So it should be at least a little quieter.

The article got it wrong

[Suiggy]

APU doesn't standard for Applications Processing Unit, it's an acronym for Accelerated Processing Unit.

http://sites.amd.com/us/fusion/apu/Pages/apu.aspx

"The GPU, with its massively parallel computing architecture, is increasingly being leveraged by applications to assist in these tasks. AMD software partners today are taking advantage of the GPU to deliver better experiences to across an ever-wider set of content, paving the way to breakthrough experiences with the upcoming AMD Fusion Family of Accelerated Processing Units (APU)."

Re:Will apple use this new cpu with gpu build in?

[tyrione]

I doubt it. Switching to AMD (especially for only part of their line) seems like it would have a lot of ancillary costs such as the R&D help I know Intel has given Apple. Apple stuck by Intel for years through their abysmal "GPUs" (I've got one, along with an nVidia, in my MacBook Pro). Intel's latest round of integrated GPUs is actually supposed to be pretty good, to the point that on lower end computers (like MacBooks) it may not be necessary to include even a low-end GPU.

Also, don't forget the right now AMD has the Phenom, which is a good chip, and Intel has their current Core line, which is an amazing line of chips. To go to AMD means sacrificing performance/watt on the CPU side.

Two years ago maybe it would have mattered. Today? Too little too late.

Being a former NeXT and Apple Engineer I can tell you unequivocally your thought is Bull Shit. Intel gave NeXT practically zero information for the NeXTStep Port to Intel. Apple designs around Intel Specs and Intel helps as another OEM. No special treatment.

Re:"Alien vs. Predator" Movie or Video Game?

[Chris Burke]

The idea AMD is going for here, and I think there's some merit to it, is a low range desktop type of system. People who want something cheap, but still want to play games. Intel's integrated chips don't work that well for that (though they've improved) so this is to try and fill the market.

Think more mid-to-high-end laptops.

As mentioned in the summary, this is a low-power version of the Phenom II. Not an ultra-low power for consumer electronics or netbooks like Atom or AMD's Bobcat, but still solidly aimed at the mobile market. It provides all the power and cost advantages of a UMA solution plus gets rid of one of the system buses for more savings, while providing good-for-a-laptop graphics without having to significantly re-engineer the motherboard or cooling solution. This is still in theory; demonstrations of engineering samples are nice, but it'll be interesting once the reviewers get their hands on some.

Of course you're also right, since cost and power usage are relevant for desktop. Just not as much, since you're not dealing with battery life, or the form factor that make it difficult to work with discreet graphics. A single line of UMA-based motherboards with optional pci-e graphics card can serve multiple markets with one design and acceptable margins.