Jump to content

AMD Fusion fps?


diablo440

Recommended Posts

Anyone tried the game with a fusion ITX and PCIe card? I'm interested in power saving options.

 

One problem is all Fusion chip sets seem to under-voltage PCIe bus to get that low power rating, it ends up being 4x instead of 16x. Also the APU is marketing for IGP on the CPU die, which Intel has been doing two generations already; it doesn't actually assist despite what it's name suggests, except in a typical IGP role. The power savings are good though, hopefully they do PCIe 16x soon. 20+ FPS avg. without heating issues would be good as that is what consoles do.

Edited by diablo440
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i have been wondering about this also. i hope its better than 9400 igp. i am waiting for them to have one with a "70" suffix first

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i have been wondering about this also. i hope its better than 9400 igp. i am waiting for them to have one with a "70" suffix first

If you do serious digging on their APU tech, currently it's just surplus k10 chips paired with 6x radeon IGPs. They opened up access to some computing APIs in their drivers also. The ones coming later this year to 2013 will just be more efficient CPUs.

 

They accomplish the low power by dropping bandwidth on PCIe and DDR3(Intel didn't have to do this with Atom(a nuance AMD doesn't use in their over-abstract comparisons).

 

The only things that will help GTA and other games is the SSE4a and the two hardware threads from the dual core. Might as well go get a k10 or Intel chip so your PCIe and memory bandwidth isn't choked out. I doubt you'd keep 15+ avg. even with a PCIe card. Atom 5xx with x16 PCIe 2.0 slot would actually still kill them. It's SSE4+HyperThreads, only with small L2 and in-order instruction handling(doesn't have a significant impact). It could easily get 30+ with the right card while saving power, just use one with a fan instead of passive cooling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AMD APU are quad cores and its rated at 100w TDP, how much do you think it will save especially when your going to add dedicated graphics? rolleyes.gif

These guys are for HTPC or for those who wants to build a nice simple computer for their parents but with better onboard graphics instead of using Intel's crappy solutions. AMD's "E" models are rated at 45 to 65w TDP.

Any one interested will have to wait for Bulldozer before putting anything into their next PC purchase.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i am glad for the discussion (was thinking about posting the same myself before). i don't disagree with either of the above posts at all. thanks for posting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

AMD APU are quad cores and its rated at 100w TDP, how much do you think it will save especially when your going to add dedicated graphics?  rolleyes.gif

These guys are for HTPC or for those who wants to build a nice simple computer for their parents but with better onboard graphics instead of using Intel's crappy solutions. AMD's "E" models are rated at 45 to 65w TDP.

Any one interested will have to wait for Bulldozer before putting anything into their next PC purchase.

"APU" is nothing more than marketing for AMD's version of a CPU+GPU die. The current FM1 versions are all k10 with weak mobile radeons. I guess the computing APIs on the radeon drivers makes it an assisted processing unit, but that doesn't help with GTA or other games. Their is no other processor there besides the radeon and cpu though.

 

Quad-core bobcat versions don't come out till later this year, the radeon has more than four cores just in the TMU part of the FPGA alone. The highest TDP on the 'APU' currently is 11W too.

 

 

I've still yet to see an FM1 board that didn't have 4x operation on it's x16 PCIe slot. This alone kills any chances for next-gen gaming. It probably wouldn't even handle GTA SA and high res with FSAA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

 

any opinions? I found this very very interesting, as constant refreshes was how nvidia killed 3dfx (iirc)

AMD will have APUs/IGPs with 800 SPs within the next year..You can already build AMD/ATI rigs for considerably less that get equal or better performance and efficiency.

 

By the way a lot of people are interested in current zacate fusion+16x pcie(x4) performance with GTA, but nobody has the money for testing..

 

All current hardware has good pricing, but it's all x2 e350/h1/x4 pcie based. I think you could keep 20+ fps avg and keep one cool at medium settings, if you had a 128bit or faster card in it that has at least 90sp, like a 2GB GF 430. Hopefully someone will test and publish.

Edited by diablo440
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

But who buys i5-2500k for gaming, without having a powerful GPU? No one.

74cXSsx.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, Fusion has some fairly decent GPU (at least as far as the IGPs go) and might be sufficient for less demanding players. i5 on the other hand is barely playable, especially given poor drivers.

Without dedicated GPU, i5 will end up more expensive and slower than Fusion, making it a totally pointless choice.

74cXSsx.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just for clarification: APU is AMD marketing for an on-die GPU. Intel chips have them too, it's the HD IGP.

 

The AMD APU has more cores, but it's on a 64bit bus too..if you like GTA at 14fps tops at 800x600 it's good.

 

The big killer is the x4 mode on the PCIe slot with the H1 ITX boards. It keeps these from being scalable even as a basic HDCP solution..The IGP/APU and even -256bit discrete cards choke out even with 3d tool and playback tasks..Hope they put x16 there in later solutions..

Edited by diablo440
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The AMD APU has more cores, but it's on a 64bit bus too..if you like GTA at 14fps tops at 800x600 it's good.

 

that's depressing. that's no better than my q6600+9300 IGP imo, with the exception of blue screens from the nb overheating

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The AMD APU has more cores, but it's on a 64bit bus too..if you like GTA at 14fps tops at 800x600 it's good.

 

that's depressing. that's no better than my q6600+9300 IGP imo, with the exception of blue screens from the nb overheating

If you put a discrete card in the x16(x4) slot that was at least 128bit with 90+ SP you could get ok frames and resolution. No testing exists though, nobody puts discrete cards in them. The IGP/APU is really no better than the HD3200 IGP in my old cheapo laptop because of the bus..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

see, i wanted to stick a thermaltake v1 that i got from best buy $26 on clearance

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx...N82E16835106102

on the cpu/gpu in a case with a pull-push airflow and just play GTA IV until the cows come home. using a discrete card defeats the whole purpose for me. i really hope amd pulls it out for bulldozer. we would still have 5ghz prescotts if it weren't for them

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • 1 User Currently Viewing
    0 members, 0 Anonymous, 1 Guest

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using GTAForums.com, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.