"The Future Is Fusion"... is AMD right?


Recommended Posts

I've recently built a Media Center/Gaming PC to go with my new HDTV, and decided to give AMD's "Trinity" platform a chance with its A10 5700. At first, I didn't think this PC could do much better than run old games at low resolutions, but Trinity has blown me away. Dark Souls? 30-40fps at 1080p - better than on PS3. Trine 2? 45fps at 1080p, high settings. Recent, GPU-bound titles running at full HD, no significant compromises in graphical quality, and enjoyable framerates.

That an integrated GPU can offer what only a discrete solution could since hardware accelerated graphics began, is a revolution.

First let's look at the current state of things. For the most powerful all-around and specifically gaming machine, things are still as they have been for the past 8 years or so: the latest Intel CPU paired with a power-hungry graphics card with a monstrous cooler, either AMD Radeon or NVIDIA Geforce. Llano didn't change this, Trinity doesn't change this, and Richland won't change this either.

What AMD's APUs bring to the table, however, is the possibility of dropping the discrete card entirely, and for a fraction of the price, power and thermal envelope, getting still pretty darn good performance in most games, even at high resolutions. It's a significant tradeoff, sure, but one that can make sense for real gaming, something unthinkable just a year ago. For HTPCs, laptops, and basically every form factor where price, power draw, noise and heat are critical concerns, APUs are bound to make discrete graphics cards irrelevant very quickly.

As for desktop PCs where these considerations matter less, the future of discrete cards is not as clear as it was either. Of course, in their current iterations (Trinity/Richland), APUs cannot compete with any recent 100$+ graphics card, a relatively small investment for vastly superior performance. Yet, the two next-generation consoles, PS4 and Xbox One, are confirmed/rumored respectively to be AMD APUs, sporting 8GB of unified memory and performance in the 2 TFlops range. As absurd at this may sound, the next generation of consoles runs on integrated graphics, based on technology very similar to the 130$ Trinity running the HTPC in my living room. This makes my brain want to explode.

There are many advantages to this solution. Unified memory means more flexibility in how it is shared in each application, less overhead in GPU-CPU communication, and a vastly simplified programming model for developers. If AMD can make this work at state-of-the-art performance level on next-generation consoles, can't we hope for this to happen on desktop PC in the forseeable future?

AMD's slogan has been "The Future is Fusion" for nearly 5 years now, and I'm starting to believe it. Intel is quickly catching up in this territory as well, with Haswell promising performance similar to the Geforce GT 650M. It's an interesting take on things to see Intel playing catch-up on AMD when AMD has been largely perceived as the underdog in the past few years. Holding the CPU performance crown may be nice, but it never gave anyone playable framerates, and I'd venture to say that AMD CPUs are still fast enough for most uses in most circumstances. At least, that's what Intel is apparently thinking, with Haswell focusing essentially on power consumption (vs ARM) and graphics performance (vs AMD).

Oh yeah, and John Carmack seems to agree:

The current generation Fusion parts are really a separate CPU and separate GPU connected on the die by better or worse interconnects, but their vision is integrating them much more tightly such that they share cache hierarchies, address space, and page tables. I think its almost a foregone conclusion that its going to be the dominant architecture in the marketplace because there are these strong forces about how we are getting more shrinks on the dies, [and] we can stick more things on there. It?s going to just pay to integrate that, and you aren't going to be able to put as many transistors towards that if its a dedicated chip. You'll pick up a lot from this tight integration with cost benefits.
Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/1153754-the-future-is-fusion-is-amd-right/
Share on other sites

Isn't that the new AMD APU they are going to put on the XBOX One?

Reports are that APUs in next-gen consoles are custom designs, based on Kaveri (perhaps?) which is Richland's successor. In any case it's much more advanced than what's currently on the market for PCs.

This being said (and true), I don't understand why Intel didn't pack Iris Pro in more of their upcoming CPUs. Just like it is with IB - the low end, where IGP is most likely to be used, got measly HD2500, but high end got HD4000, mostly *in vain*, because those people often opted for superpowered discrete GPU anyway.

Does Intel think that people will opt for more expensive knowing the difference? Some would. But they *don't* know the difference - they simply fully expect the new series to be better!

This being said (and true), I don't understand why Intel didn't pack Iris Pro in more of their upcoming CPUs. Just like it is with IB - the low end, where IGP is most likely to be used, got measly HD2500, but high end got HD4000, mostly *in vain*, because those people often opted for superpowered discrete GPU anyway.

Does Intel think that people will opt for more expensive knowing the difference? Some would. But they *don't* know the difference - they simply fully expect the new series to be better!

Well, the i3225 has the HD4000 on it.

Anyway, yes, I've always thought AMD was ahead of the game in this field, it's no surprise Sony and MS went with them for their new consoles.

I think the main drawback in this discussion for me would be "choice" and tied into a set solution. I like many others sway in the winds of change as the power heads of the technology world fight it out. Right now I have an Intel Machine with an Nvidia Graphics Card and could I live with a AMD CPU + Integrated future GPU? - sure! Do I want to have choice taken away from me? Answer: NO, does everyone think like me? Answer: NO

I think it is a good way to get a machine up and running with little cost but for some - this is just an extra cost and not a set future unless people love everything to be uniform.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • I have a Motorola, one of the lower end ones, it works fine. It is possible to get rid of the Gemini app and also to disable googles assistant , but A.i is still apps. I try to avoid all LLM A.I, is i can, I use no Ai duck duck go.
    • Free Software Foundation Europe pushes EU to force Google to allow AI uninstalls on Android by Paul Hill Credit: Pexels Users should be able to fully uninstall AI-based features from Android devices and be able to access interoperability functions, free from Google’s verification requirements, the European Commission has heard as part of an Android interoperability consultation under the Digital Markets Act. These measures were proposed by the Free Software Foundation Europe (FSFE) last week when it submitted its documentation. The FSFE noted that Google had started silently installing AI models without telling users. It noted that the EU’s DMA requires companies like Google to allow users to uninstall pre-loaded software from their devices, but in the case of the AI models Google is installing, they reinstall if you delete them, contravening the DMA. To get Google back under control, the FSFE has told the European Commission that there needs to be improvements within the Android Open Source Project (AOSP). First, it said that users should be able to fully remove pre-loaded AI components from their devices, with companies being prohibited from silently reinstalling or reactivating them. Second, access to Android interoperability features should not be contingent on registration, authorization, or contractual relationships with Google. This pertains to Google’s attempt to force developers to register with Google, even to publish apps to alternative app stores like F-Droid. Discussing its submission, Lucas Lasota, FSFE Legal Programme Manager, said: Google is planning to roll out its Android Developer Certification in September 2026. This will force every Android app developer to register with Google before their software can be installed on certified Android devices, but it should affect those who have removed Google Apps from their device. The program is controversial because it entails the signing of contracts and payment of account fees to Google, as well as the handing over of the identities of developers. It said: The FSFE said that if the Commission’s draft measures remain unchanged, then Google will be allowed to make developers verify their identity. The FSFE believes that asking developers to register is contrary to the text and spirit of the law. In summary, the FSFE has told the Commission that no developer should need a Google account, a Play Store presence, or any agreement with Google to access Android’s interoperability features.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      sumytbe earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • One Year In
      B4dM1k3 earned a badge
      One Year In
    • One Year In
      DarkWun earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Dedicated
      Almohandis earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Dedicated
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Dedicated
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      519
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      188
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      87
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      81
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      72
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!