Thanks so much for posting about AMD's demonstration :-). I kept hoping they would bring some nice value to the low-end/low-power integrated graphics arena. It looks like they have!
A netbook with: this tech, a nice screen, and a backlit keyboard would be awesome IMHO.
2X the performance of i5 lmao. Shouldn't a futuristic cpu be compared to another futuristic cpu say SandyBridge. Clearly there is no bias! lmao. Anyways if it's twice the performance of i5 than its equal too or slightly exceeding sandbridge. Sandybridge can also be refered to as i5 2nd gen.
Nothing special, but considering the monopoly Intel has quite impressive they can tie them on one front. Poor Nvidia walking the same path as Voodoo; they are screwed. X86 emulation lmao.
Plus it's the competitor to the Intel Atom, not the Core i5/i7/Sandy Bridge.
And the Atom is still using a variation of the crappy GMA 950 a-la the 3150 which cannot even do TnL or Vertex Shading. In that regard, AMD poops all over Intels IGP offerings in that market, no contest.
Amd is always faster in integrated GPUs......not a news :). But what about CPU power ?????. Few customers are utilizing integrated GPU for games on laptop, the vast majority is on a laptop with a good discrete GPU. So in don't see a great market for Bobcat......it will be good for inexpensive notebooks good for kids :). People want CPU power on it's desk and bobcat will be very very crap on this side..........in fact Amd says nothing about this versus mobile i5/i3 :).
Maybe because they are not directly compititors in that region. They are for low power and small form factor. The only i3 that runs in a similar power envelop will be a 1,2Ghz device. Which, if the bobcat boinc scores are correct (which is hard to believe imo) would be similar in performance as a 1,6Ghz bobcat. (30% higher clocked) while the graphics for bobcat are way faster.
Sandy Bridge seems to have a GPU that can match this no problem, but also has VASTLY more powerful CPU's than these bobcats cores that probably aint much faster than atom. I'll be picking up a laptop with Sandy Bridge.
First this is Zecate not Llano. You are comparing apples to oranges Intel top of the line to AMD middle of the road solution. Zecate is built to take on the Intel CULV solution.
Llano is far superior to SB for the simple fact that nobody cares about CPU performance in a laptop anymore. You can get quad cores in laptops now, so how much more processor is necessary for opening up office suites, windows programs, and small databases on a laptop???
What I'm looking for is a better graphics solutions that fit the power requirements of a laptop so when I'm on the road I can do more than play a low quality video on a crappy Intel CULV solution or deal with a add-on GPU chip that kills my battery life. I want some multimedia so I'm not bored to death when I am stuck in a hotel room in the middle of nowhere. It would be nice to play an HD vid and have some programs running in the background so I can switch between the two without the laptop taking a crap all over itself.
But on the second you are completely mistaken. Windows is for power users which clearly you are not given your statements.
If you just want to run windows, office and similar every day applications you better off with a mac. Windows provides applications for everything beyond everyday, and I have found myself missing tons of cpu power.
If your looking for a new laptop purely as a gaming platform then ya, the amd cpu will get you get there.
your comment lmao. It is obvious that they can't compare with Sandy Bridge right now. You can search for the sandy bridge preview in this site and do the comparisons that Anand does.
And... it is special, you speak like you have a core i5 $500 notebook.
Psychedelic Browser is a pointless benchmark, it turns out. I just ran it on my C2D CULV SU2300 ultraportable with Intel's crappy last-gen IGP, and it scored 1775rpm.
I have no idea how AMD managed to get such a low score on i5... I suspect intentional crippling of the Intel rig. But most likely, the psycho browsing is just not a good benchmark tool for comparing GPUs/CPUs.
How exactly do you expect AMD to bench their newest unreleased part against Intel's newest unreleased part? Walk over to the show floor and ask for a trade?
Sure, they could go by released numbers, but that wouldn't actually mean anything.
it'll obliterate it while using much less power. The single core Atom is comparable with the pentium M, one Bobcat should be MUCH faster than Atom, this thing has two bobcats... Have you looked at the die shots? The GPU is HUGE! HUGE!. What AMD has done here is not integrating a GPU into the CPU, but rather they integrated a CPU into a GPU.... M.
I did significant benchmarking on an Atom 330 (1.6 Ghz) versus the Pentium M 1.4 Ghz in my laptop. The Atom 330 had the benefit of more + faster memory and single-core performance was considerably worse than the Pentium M.
I'd say single-core Atom @ 1.9 Ghz would be about equivalent to Pentium M @ 1.4 Ghz.
I have a Lenovo T410 with Core I5 and Intel HD Graphics - very similar to the system AMD was using. On Amazon bookshelf, I get 40-50FPS and for Psychedlic Wheel, I get 1779 RPM
You might be on to something here. I ran the same tests on my HTPC (E5200, GF9400 IGP, using Firefox 4b5) and got 27-41 FPS and 1335 RPM, respectively.
It might make sense if the bookshelf demo was run on a i5 CULV, which runs the GFX at much lower clocks (which wouldn't be unfair since the vanilla i5s are 35W parts, whereas the CULVs are 18 or so- right in line with these new AMD parts), but there's no accounting for that 10x difference in Psychedellic unless they switched down to an ATOM for the intel representative.
It was all explained in the last 2 articles about this. People reposting this whole AMD IS BSing stuff is getting old.
They let Anandtech play with both machines and run their own tests.
They even ran Batman Arkham Asylum on both machines and Zacate still got 50% better performance. Intel i5 andits chip both had their drivers completely updated. Thats why it even got as good performance as it did.
And isn't the 35w just the CPU alone? or including the integrated gfx chip?
zacate doing 50% better on half the power? Thats down right amazing.
And you sandybridge idiots, Sandybridge is supposed to be using the same architecture as the i7 I hear and be integrated with an upgraded graphics card. can you imagine? After all this time they finally got a gfx card that'll compete with the motherboard already in my laptop year old HP.
Yeah I call BS here too. My sister has an i5 notebook that can run DA:O at normal res (768p) lowest settings and it gets 25-30fps. This has to be either an i5 ULV or the absolute worst game that the Intel graphics runs (thinking driver issue here...)
And look what a tiny cooler and fan the setup is running!
comparing this to a i5 or even a Sandy bridge is unfair to AMD!
There is little on the board that uses power except the CPU/GPU package (look for other coolers).
So this looks very very cool indeed. One question is how well will it code or decode 1080p. If they have the right software that uses the GPU it might just be blazing fast, too. Cheers M.
Llano is at least 4 times faster then Zacate IGP. No matter if SB put the 2-core igp, Llano will be more than 2 times faster or 4 times the SB IGP in the preview.
Maybe you should? If you are just going to benchmark the same games over and over, it's not exactly difficult for intel to "optimize" for them. Maybe you should throw them a curveball every so often, in the name of good journalism.
This was a predone presentation where AMD controlled the environment in a conference room. Intel will be doing similar things this week, for this is IDF, and this is what you get.
As you can see the AMD "2x" faster performance is achieved by large reduction in quality. I'd rather have a game run 20fps but with good quality, than 30fps with reduced quality.
How about you read the article instead of confusing yourself while looking at pretty pictures? It clearly states both systems are running at the same low settings,
I would like to know what would be the code name for the llano under the Bulldozer architecture, I mean Llano will be base on Phenom II and I guessing that in the near future we will have a llano based on Bulldozer
HD graphics embedded intro the Intel Core i5 managed just 6~7 fps @ 1024 x 768, while the Fusion "Zacate" managed close to 5 times that, around 30 fps, which made the game playable.
The Fusion "Zacate" was able to deliver smooth animations, while that from the Core i5 looked choppy.
It'd be best for ATI to get an Atom N280 processor, (or dualcore), and equip it with this better graphics card. I hope the graphics card is able to disable many cores for better battery life during inactivity.
It would also be nice to see some sort of CUDA software for ATI graphics cards. With the CPU and GPU working in parallel, a netbook like this might even overpower current notebooks!
I don't know if this was a graph misinterpretation or AMD purposely misled you, but the results you posted for the i5 system is far from right. I refer you to this thread on XS: http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php...
Members run the benchmarks with far far better results than your article indicates. Did you actually try to do some verification work before posting your article?
HD4200 are better than current i5 IGP's. Now Ontario Zacate is near twice the performance of HD4200. As comparing HD3450 --> 4550/5450.
An obviously this a chip that probably won't run more than 2Ghz on the high end versions. A Phenom II X4 945 3Ghz with the same Ontario gpu should perform better because of the cpu.
Desktop versions almost don't matter because their chipsets are either discrete or integrated.
Mobile versions which is what zacate is targeting usually have discrete coupled with integrated.
My HP Pavilion AMD+ATi 2.2 ghz AMD TURION M500 + M880 M/B w/ ATi 4200 320 Megs+ up to 1920 discrete.
The most I've seen intel chips include is 128 megs of discrete.
Most activities today use GPU Power, not CPU. Truth is, most games are more on the GPU than CPU.
You can get away with a 2 ghz clocked Dual core for most games, and a nice GPU. RTS are different cause... you need like a fast dual core/quad core for nice settings regardless of the gfx card
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
66 Comments
Back to Article
punjabiplaya - Monday, September 13, 2010 - link
woah, netbooks than can play games? This is getting interesting.cmdrdredd - Monday, September 13, 2010 - link
Until I can run it on the highest settings with AA/AF and not have a 10lb notebook I don't care.Stas - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
And still last for 3-4 hours under that load.B3an - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
And has a remotely decent screen, with both colour quality, contrast AND resolution.Taft12 - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
and gives me a BJ when I press F10chrnochime - Wednesday, September 15, 2010 - link
Blah Blah blah whine whine whine.That sounds about right.
vol7ron - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
Could this be the HTPC chip of one's dream?coolhardware - Monday, September 13, 2010 - link
Thanks so much for posting about AMD's demonstration :-). I kept hoping they would bring some nice value to the low-end/low-power integrated graphics arena. It looks like they have!A netbook with: this tech, a nice screen, and a backlit keyboard would be awesome IMHO.
serkol - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
Called "Mac Book Mini"?chillmelt - Thursday, September 16, 2010 - link
that, you know, doesn't cost twice as much for similar performance.ericore - Monday, September 13, 2010 - link
2X the performance of i5 lmao. Shouldn't a futuristic cpu be compared to another futuristic cpu say SandyBridge. Clearly there is no bias! lmao. Anyways if it's twice the performance of i5 than its equal too or slightly exceeding sandbridge. Sandybridge can also be refered to as i5 2nd gen.Nothing special, but considering the monopoly Intel has quite impressive they can tie them on one front. Poor Nvidia walking the same path as Voodoo; they are screwed. X86 emulation lmao.
Quake - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
Read the title, The AMD's GPU is faster than the I5's GPU, not cpu but GPU.StevoLincolnite - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
Plus it's the competitor to the Intel Atom, not the Core i5/i7/Sandy Bridge.And the Atom is still using a variation of the crappy GMA 950 a-la the 3150 which cannot even do TnL or Vertex Shading.
In that regard, AMD poops all over Intels IGP offerings in that market, no contest.
vlado08 - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
"Plus it's the competitor to the Intel Atom, not the Core i5/i7/Sandy Bridge."(18W TDP) "Zacate is going to go after the ~$500 mainstream notebook market"
"9W Ontario part clearly goes after Atom"
Perisphetic - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
Hello I am Triumph.What do you have there Intel? Atom?
That's a nice chip. For me to poop on!
zingo - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
Amd is always faster in integrated GPUs......not a news :). But what about CPU power ?????. Few customers are utilizing integrated GPU for games on laptop, the vast majority is on a laptop with a good discrete GPU. So in don't see a great market for Bobcat......it will be good for inexpensive notebooks good for kids :). People want CPU power on it's desk and bobcat will be very very crap on this side..........in fact Amd says nothing about this versus mobile i5/i3 :).flyck - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
Maybe because they are not directly compititors in that region. They are for low power and small form factor. The only i3 that runs in a similar power envelop will be a 1,2Ghz device. Which, if the bobcat boinc scores are correct (which is hard to believe imo) would be similar in performance as a 1,6Ghz bobcat. (30% higher clocked) while the graphics for bobcat are way faster.B3an - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
Sandy Bridge seems to have a GPU that can match this no problem, but also has VASTLY more powerful CPU's than these bobcats cores that probably aint much faster than atom.I'll be picking up a laptop with Sandy Bridge.
Pirks - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
You'll reconsider after looking at the price tagSandmanWN - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
First this is Zecate not Llano. You are comparing apples to oranges Intel top of the line to AMD middle of the road solution. Zecate is built to take on the Intel CULV solution.Llano is far superior to SB for the simple fact that nobody cares about CPU performance in a laptop anymore. You can get quad cores in laptops now, so how much more processor is necessary for opening up office suites, windows programs, and small databases on a laptop???
What I'm looking for is a better graphics solutions that fit the power requirements of a laptop so when I'm on the road I can do more than play a low quality video on a crappy Intel CULV solution or deal with a add-on GPU chip that kills my battery life. I want some multimedia so I'm not bored to death when I am stuck in a hotel room in the middle of nowhere. It would be nice to play an HD vid and have some programs running in the background so I can switch between the two without the laptop taking a crap all over itself.
ericore - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
On your first point you are correct.But on the second you are completely mistaken. Windows is for power users which clearly you are not given your statements.
If you just want to run windows, office and similar every day applications you better off with a mac. Windows provides applications for everything beyond everyday, and I have found myself missing tons of cpu power.
If your looking for a new laptop purely as a gaming platform then ya, the amd cpu will get you get there.
SandmanWN - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
yeah, the old "power" user argument.cause we all run production server environments on our laptops right....
ridiculous
Pirks - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
Are the games "beyond everyday" or not?Seikent - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
your comment lmao. It is obvious that they can't compare with Sandy Bridge right now. You can search for the sandy bridge preview in this site and do the comparisons that Anand does.And... it is special, you speak like you have a core i5 $500 notebook.
Shadowmaster625 - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
Yeah but sandy bridge will cost 2 arms and one leg. This chip will cost 1/4 the price of the cheapest sandy bridge chip.ericore - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
wrong Intel doesn't want AMD to rise, they will lower there prices just when the uprising begings those evil bastards hahahhaha.hyvonen - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
Psychedelic Browser is a pointless benchmark, it turns out. I just ran it on my C2D CULV SU2300 ultraportable with Intel's crappy last-gen IGP, and it scored 1775rpm.I have no idea how AMD managed to get such a low score on i5... I suspect intentional crippling of the Intel rig. But most likely, the psycho browsing is just not a good benchmark tool for comparing GPUs/CPUs.
UPSLynx - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
How exactly do you expect AMD to bench their newest unreleased part against Intel's newest unreleased part? Walk over to the show floor and ask for a trade?Sure, they could go by released numbers, but that wouldn't actually mean anything.
DanNeely - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
Call me crazy but I somehow doubt Intel is going to give AMD any prerelease parts for demoing purposes.Jeff7181 - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
Honestly, I don't care if my netbook can play Crysis... what's the battery life like when browsing the web, watching video, etc.?iwodo - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
I would like to know how this small tiny chip compare to Pentium M or Pentium 4 with Radeon X1600 or Geforce 4 Gfx.A Mini ITX Computer based on this + SSD would be great for 95% + of my needs.
mschira - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
it'll obliterate it while using much less power. The single core Atom is comparable with the pentium M, one Bobcat should be MUCH faster than Atom, this thing has two bobcats...Have you looked at the die shots? The GPU is HUGE! HUGE!.
What AMD has done here is not integrating a GPU into the CPU, but rather they integrated a CPU into a GPU....
M.
mino - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
That CPU into a GPU is a VERY nice point :)As for performance, think Radeon 9800 XT paired with Intel Core Duo 1.6GHz (Yonah).
bji - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
I did significant benchmarking on an Atom 330 (1.6 Ghz) versus the Pentium M 1.4 Ghz in my laptop. The Atom 330 had the benefit of more + faster memory and single-core performance was considerably worse than the Pentium M.I'd say single-core Atom @ 1.9 Ghz would be about equivalent to Pentium M @ 1.4 Ghz.
adonn78 - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
How well does it handle 1080P streaming video? Also that means about 5-6 hours under real world use.rootheday - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
I have a Lenovo T410 with Core I5 and Intel HD Graphics - very similar to the system AMD was using. On Amazon bookshelf, I get 40-50FPS and for Psychedlic Wheel, I get 1779 RPMI call BS on AMD on this one.
hybrid2d4x4 - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
You might be on to something here. I ran the same tests on my HTPC (E5200, GF9400 IGP, using Firefox 4b5) and got 27-41 FPS and 1335 RPM, respectively.It might make sense if the bookshelf demo was run on a i5 CULV, which runs the GFX at much lower clocks (which wouldn't be unfair since the vanilla i5s are 35W parts, whereas the CULVs are 18 or so- right in line with these new AMD parts), but there's no accounting for that 10x difference in Psychedellic unless they switched down to an ATOM for the intel representative.
Mautaznesh - Monday, September 27, 2010 - link
It was all explained in the last 2 articles about this. People reposting this whole AMD IS BSing stuff is getting old.They let Anandtech play with both machines and run their own tests.
They even ran Batman Arkham Asylum on both machines and Zacate still got 50% better performance. Intel i5 andits chip both had their drivers completely updated. Thats why it even got as good performance as it did.
And isn't the 35w just the CPU alone? or including the integrated gfx chip?
zacate doing 50% better on half the power? Thats down right amazing.
And you sandybridge idiots, Sandybridge is supposed to be using the same architecture as the i7 I hear and be integrated with an upgraded graphics card. can you imagine? After all this time they finally got a gfx card that'll compete with the motherboard already in my laptop year old HP.
M880+ATi 4200 = Crysis playable.
Accord99 - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
Yeah, with a Thinkpad W500 with a C2D manually set to 1.6GHz and a X4500, I still get ~1650 RPM with the same screen size.anactoraaron - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
Yeah I call BS here too. My sister has an i5 notebook that can run DA:O at normal res (768p) lowest settings and it gets 25-30fps. This has to be either an i5 ULV or the absolute worst game that the Intel graphics runs (thinking driver issue here...)OBLAMA2009 - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
first the inferno in san bruno and now this, amd is really shaking idf up!!crawmm - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
"The relative lack of balls on the package..."I know it's correct terminology, but I laughed.
Taft12 - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
Anand should have looked under the package when seeking the balls.mschira - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
And look what a tiny cooler and fan the setup is running!comparing this to a i5 or even a Sandy bridge is unfair to AMD!
There is little on the board that uses power except the CPU/GPU package (look for other coolers).
So this looks very very cool indeed.
One question is how well will it code or decode 1080p. If they have the right software that uses the GPU it might just be blazing fast, too.
Cheers
M.
mino - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
Comparing this to i5 is the BEST POSSIBLE compliment AMD could get.And hell of a good PR at that
That is exactly why AMD was comparing it to i5 in the first place ...
Seem ATI influence has come to their marketing dept too. FINALLY!
hvakrg - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
Any word on wether or not it'll get HD-audio bitstreaming?Mautaznesh - Monday, September 27, 2010 - link
I believe they'llb e updated their Avivo HD technology, so thats a yes? Not sure about ontario, but probably with Zacate.Lolimaster - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
Llano is at least 4 times faster then Zacate IGP. No matter if SB put the 2-core igp, Llano will be more than 2 times faster or 4 times the SB IGP in the preview.And that 4 can be 5.
Ontario/Zacate IGP 80SP
Llano 320-480SP
Jamahl - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
Maybe you should? If you are just going to benchmark the same games over and over, it's not exactly difficult for intel to "optimize" for them. Maybe you should throw them a curveball every so often, in the name of good journalism.I guess we'll see.
Roland00 - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
This was a predone presentation where AMD controlled the environment in a conference room. Intel will be doing similar things this week, for this is IDF, and this is what you get.slickr - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
As you can see the AMD "2x" faster performance is achieved by large reduction in quality.I'd rather have a game run 20fps but with good quality, than 30fps with reduced quality.
Jamahl - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
How about you read the article instead of confusing yourself while looking at pretty pictures? It clearly states both systems are running at the same low settings,ethomaz - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
In Psychadelic (HTML5) test no. The Core i5 is using Hallucinogenic mode (slowest) and Zacate is using normal mode (fastest).Mautaznesh - Monday, September 27, 2010 - link
I believe they had it at the same quality, or it wouldn't matter. In one test, Zacate was at higher settings before the Intel got its drivers updated.Nehemoth - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
I would like to know what would be the code name for the llano under the Bulldozer architecture, I mean Llano will be base on Phenom II and I guessing that in the near future we will have a llano based on Bulldozermino - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
Lliano is the near future. For its successor, think Q2+ 2012.fshaharyar - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
HD graphics embedded intro the Intel Core i5 managed just 6~7 fps @ 1024 x 768, while the Fusion "Zacate" managed close to 5 times that, around 30 fps, which made the game playable.The Fusion "Zacate" was able to deliver smooth animations, while that from the Core i5 looked choppy.
You can go and watch it here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XH5A4D9qoDQ
ethomaz - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
Core i5 using Hallucinogenic mode (slowest) and Zacate using normal mode (fastest).ProDigit - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
It'd be best for ATI to get an Atom N280 processor, (or dualcore), and equip it with this better graphics card.I hope the graphics card is able to disable many cores for better battery life during inactivity.
It would also be nice to see some sort of CUDA software for ATI graphics cards.
With the CPU and GPU working in parallel, a netbook like this might even overpower current notebooks!
raddude9 - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
CUDA is a proprietary Nvidia-only technology, ATI (AMD) supports the much more free and open technology called OpenCLKillaInstinct - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
I don't know if this was a graph misinterpretation or AMD purposely misled you, but the results you posted for the i5 system is far from right. I refer you to this thread on XS: http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php...Members run the benchmarks with far far better results than your article indicates. Did you actually try to do some verification work before posting your article?
Also, are you aware that City of Heroes: Going Rogue is a heavily optimized game for AMD architecture/drivers? Check this out: http://blogs.amd.com/nigel-dessau/2010/07/28/evolv...
Have a god day.
Lolimaster - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
HD4200 are better than current i5 IGP's. Now Ontario Zacate is near twice the performance of HD4200. As comparing HD3450 --> 4550/5450.An obviously this a chip that probably won't run more than 2Ghz on the high end versions. A Phenom II X4 945 3Ghz with the same Ontario gpu should perform better because of the cpu.
starfalcon - Wednesday, September 22, 2010 - link
HD4200 and a Core i3 IGP showed pretty close benchmarks, compared to the i5 might be just about the same depending on what the benchmarks are.Mautaznesh - Monday, September 27, 2010 - link
Desktop versions almost don't matter because their chipsets are either discrete or integrated.Mobile versions which is what zacate is targeting usually have discrete coupled with integrated.
My HP Pavilion AMD+ATi
2.2 ghz AMD TURION M500 + M880 M/B w/ ATi 4200 320 Megs+ up to 1920 discrete.
The most I've seen intel chips include is 128 megs of discrete.
Most activities today use GPU Power, not CPU. Truth is, most games are more on the GPU than CPU.
You can get away with a 2 ghz clocked Dual core for most games, and a nice GPU. RTS are different cause... you need like a fast dual core/quad core for nice settings regardless of the gfx card
mschira - Tuesday, September 14, 2010 - link
If the complete chip has only 18W, what you reckon how fast one could push it with some decent overclocking....M.
semo - Wednesday, September 15, 2010 - link
will directed io be available in these mobile chips?