New ASUS K43BR and K53BR laptops on the AMD Brazos platform

The range of ASUS laptops has been replenished with a couple of new products K43BR And K53BR. Both solutions are based on the AMD Brazos platform, represented by the AMD A50M chipset and one of the dual-core AMD E-450, C-60 or C-50 APUs.

At the heart of the RAM system of mobile computers and K53BR There are two 204-pin slots that support four-gigabit modules of the DDR3-1333 MHz or DDR3-1066 MHz standard. The disk system of the new products consists of one 2.5-inch HDD drive with a capacity of 320 GB, 500 GB or 750 GB.

Multimedia capabilities of models and K53BR based on an AMD Radeon HD 7470 mobile video card, a 14-inch (ASUS K43BR) or 15.6-inch (ASUS K53BR) HD display with LED backlighting, a pair of built-in speakers from Altec Lansing, a 0.3 MP webcam and microphone.

Among the additional advantages of the new products, we note support for a number of useful technologies:

SmartLogon – provides biometric authentication of the user based on his facial features, using the built-in webcam.

Comparative technical specifications of new laptops and K53BR presented in the following table:

ASUS Eee PC 1215B netbook updated

ASUS has decided to update the hardware of its mobile computer Eee PC 1215B. Let us remember that this solution was first demonstrated at CES 2011, and a few months later it went on sale.

The updated version of the model adds the ability to use the new dual-core AMD E-450 APU, which supports Turbo Core technology and has an AMD Radeon HD 6320 graphics core, and also increases the maximum possible storage capacity to 500 GB.

The rest of the netbook's equipment remains unchanged and includes:

12.1” screen with LED backlight;

up to 4 GB of RAM standard DDR3 SO-DIMM;

integrated speakers and microphone;

Webcam;

6-cell battery;

standard set of external and network interfaces.

The updated version of the new product will go on sale immediately after the official announcement of the new AMD E-450 APU. The summary table of the mobile computer technical specification is as follows:

ASUS K53BY laptop is a great solution for work and entertainment

An interesting solution has appeared in the range of 15.6” laptops from ASUS called K53BY. It is built on the AMD Brazos platform and its uniqueness lies in the list of supported processors, which includes two new products (AMD E-450 and C-60) that have not yet been officially presented by AMD.

As for the remaining hardware components of the laptop, there were no surprises here. Therefore, we will briefly note only the key ones:

2.5” SATA HDD drive with capacity from 320 GB to 750 GB;

up to 8 GB of RAM standard DDR3-1066 MHz;

AMD Radeon HD 6470M mobile video card with support for 512 MB or 1 GB of video memory;

integrated speakers from Altec Lansing;

optical drive DVD Super Multi or Blu-ray Combo;

6-cell battery;

webcam and microphone.

As an additional advantage, the model has support for several proprietary technologies that increase the level of comfort when working with this new product:

IceCool – allows you to reduce the heating temperature of the outer surface of the case, which is intended for resting your hands;

Power4Gear – automatically adjusts the rotation of the fan blades in accordance with the workload and temperature inside the case;

Palm Proof – distinguishes between targeted finger movement on the touchpad surface and an accidental touch with the palm and blocks the touchpad in the latter case;

SmartLogon – provides biometric authentication of the user based on his facial features, using the built-in webcam.

Detailed table of technical specifications of the new laptop:

Review and testing of the Acer Aspire One 522 netbook on the AMD Brazos platform

Announcement of the new MSI WindPad 110W tablet based on the AMD Brazos platform

According to information from authoritative Internet resources, MSI plans to introduce a new 10.1” tablet computer during the Hannover CeBIT 2011 exhibition. WindPad 110W. The new product will be based on the AMD Brazos platform, namely the dual-core AMD Ontario C-50 APU with a frequency of 1 GHz. Let us remember that it has an integrated AMD Radeon HD 6250 graphics core, which operates at a clock frequency of 280 MHz and supports DirectX 11 instructions.

To store information, the tablet will have a 32 GB SSD drive, an accelerometer and a screen backlight that automatically turns on thanks to an ambient light sensor. This model comes with a pre-installed Windows 7 Home Premium operating system.

Photo of the MSI WindPad 100W tablet, which is being prepared at CeBIT 2011.

The summary technical specifications of the new tablet are presented in the table below:

The Zona51 online store is a unique place on the Ukrainian Internet, where professional gamers, enthusiasts, game lovers and other people who are partial to branded devices, as well as high-quality paraphernalia for PCs, laptops, tablets and smartphones regularly visit.

A good gaming store is still a rarity in the electronic space of our country. Therefore, esports players have already appreciated the convenient portal with an impressive catalog of gaming devices and accessories for professionals in FPS, RPG, MOBA, RVEM and other genres.

Features of the range of goods for video games and e-sports in “Zone 51”

Armchairs

The best esports store in Ukraine offers real gaming chairs from the world's leading manufacturers. A gamer sitting on an ordinary stool or chair is the same as a Formula 1 racer who risked rolling a broken-down Zaporozhets onto the track. Firstly, it is unsafe and terribly inconvenient. Secondly, the chances of winning are zero. No eSports player has ever won a competition on a stool. Take pity on your health - give yourself a gift, after which you will say thank you to yourself every day.

Keyboard

Want to level up your game? Visit an online esports store to purchase a gaming keyboard. Only in it you will find the necessary additional keys and functions that are so lacking in cheap peripherals not suitable for gaming. Feel comfortable during long gaming battles. Customize the controls to your liking and forget about minor mechanical damage. Additional iron fasteners and elements increase the resistance of the professional device to wear.

Headphones

One of the main tasks of an eSports player is to hear everything that happens in the gaming space. For this purpose, the gamer store sells headphones for professional players of different genres. For a high price, you will get impeccable sound quality, a device that will serve you well for many years and will not have a damaging effect on your hearing, even if you turn up the music at full volume.

Mice

The mouse is the main weapon of a gamer. Therefore, every self-respecting eSports online store sells these babies, which are a bit steep in price and impressive in their technical capabilities. Not a single ordinary mouse has ever saved a single virtual life. And if you want to be ahead of your opponent by a split second, perform unique tricks and combinations, you cannot do without a professional manipulator.

Rugs

A good gaming surface is just as important as a professional mouse. In our eSports store you will find specialized mats designed for a specific type of game and manipulator. Easy sliding or a rough surface for precise cursor guidance - the choice is yours. The world's leading manufacturers took care of everything else.

Our representative offices are in Kyiv, Kharkov, Odessa and Lvov. But you will only need them if you have time to break away from your favorite game and personally honor us with your presence. Well, if you pass by, of course, it would be a shame not to stop by to see the magnificent technological masterpieces that thousands of the best gamers in the Solar System arm themselves with every day.

For all other cases, we have prompt delivery to any location in Ukraine. The hardest thing is to make a choice. But we are confident that with the help of free consultations from our experienced sellers, you will find a solution to this difficult task.

What's interesting about the new platform?

The idea of ​​a single chip that combines the functions of both a central processor and a graphics accelerator has been hovering over the computer systems market for a very long time. However, until recently, single-chip solutions did not exist for desktop or mobile computers. Moreover, PC architecture has traditionally included a large number of different chips: processor, video, chipset (two independent chips), and very often various peripheral controllers.

Meanwhile, integrating as many system components as possible into a single chip promises significant advantages. If all the necessary computing units and controllers are on one chip, it is both cheaper and more efficient. The speed of interaction between components increases. The board design is simplified; there is no need to connect several different chips with high-speed buses. In most cases, energy consumption and cost are reduced, and the cooling system becomes simpler and more efficient.

AMD has been working towards component integration for quite some time. One of the striking examples is the transfer of the RAM controller from the northbridge to the processor. However, the company took its most decisive step in 2006, carrying out a major merger deal with the Canadian manufacturer of graphics chips and system logic, ATI. The strategic goal of the merger was to develop a single integrated platform that would combine the functions of both the central processor and the graphics core (and a full-fledged one, so that, for example, an additional chip would not be required to organize image output). The company called it APU (Accelerated Processing Unit). The bet placed on creating an integrated platform was so great that AMD even changed its own logo, adding the slogan “The Future is Fusion” to it. The first market product was supposed to appear in 2010.

Another thing is that AMD very rarely manages to meet deadlines or declared functionality. I encountered this when AMD released the Puma platform. On paper the characteristics looked very impressive, but in practice nothing interesting came of it. Not to mention the very interesting concept of XGP, which, it seems to me, AMD ruined with its own hands, failing to properly build interaction between product manufacturers and consumers.

Unfortunately, the development of APUs only confirmed the general trend. After acquiring ATI, AMD attached a new slogan to its name and, with its sails down, moved to create a single processor, and this was back in 2006. However, the development took so long that the main competitor Intel, having managed to swim in many other seas during this time, came to the finish line first. How did this happen? Moreover, the Arrandale platform (first generation Core i3-i5) with a very strange internal organization, where inside a single processor case there were two completely different cores, a CPU and a graphics controller, even made according to different technologies (32 and 45 nm, respectively) is already completing its life cycle, and a new generation of Sandy Bridge is entering the market with all its might, in which the central processor and graphics controller units are already organically integrated and united by a single bus.

And only here does the AMD Brazos platform appear on the market with two processor options (codenamed Zacate and Ontario during development).

Does this mean AMD is late? It may not receive the status of a technological leader, but let's not exaggerate. After all, the new AMD platform that has entered the market is aimed at the low-performance device market segment: tablets, netbooks, ultraportable laptops. Intel is launching powerful multi-core battleships with huge bursts of performance on the market. AMD offers a less productive, but at the same time very economical solution in every sense for mobile and ultra-mobile solutions - which, it must be said, are now experiencing a real boom. If the company manages to seize this growth and gain a foothold in the market (which, however, there are some doubts), this will be an undoubted success.

After all, Intel in this segment can only respond with the Atom platform, which is characterized by both low performance and very weak functionality (and in many cases the functionality is narrowed, as they say, “for political reasons”). For example, it still doesn't have an external digital video output, and it's unlikely to get one in the near future. Therefore, in order to get an HDMI output and more or less decent graphics performance, you have to fence the garden with NVIDIA ION2, which in the current situation can only be called a perversion (the external chip is “hung” on the PCIe 1x bus, in addition to the regular platform). You can read more about this in our material on the history of netbooks.

However, it should be noted that at least the netbook segment is very price sensitive. Therefore, you can sell a lot of devices, but will you be able to make a big profit from it?

Technological aspects of APU

However, we’ll leave conceptual discussions at the end of the article and move on to the analysis of the new AMD platform. Which, by the way, has already been discussed several times in our materials.

There are two APU variants in the Brazos line, codenamed Ontario (9 W consumption) and Zacate (18 W). They differ from each other in clock frequency, 1 and 1.6 GHz, respectively. You can read more in our presentation of the architecture of new AMD processors. It also describes the Bobcat core, on the basis of which the processors participating in today's testing are built.

After entering the market, the code names are discarded, Ontario is now the C series, Zacate is the E series. A total of four processors should hit the market, two in each line. They differ from each other in the number of cores - one or two. They are called S-30 and S-50 for a 9-watt system and E-240 and E-350 for an 18-watt system, respectively. In mid-December, a review of the preliminary performance of AMD Zacate line of processors by Alexey Berillo was released, which describes the platform and conducts some preliminary tests.

In addition to the APU chip itself, the platform includes another hub, which is similar in functionality to a traditional south bridge. In the current platform, this is a powerful and functional Hudson M1 chip, which, however, may turn out to be a little more power-hungry than we would like for an ultra-mobile platform. You can read more about its functionality in the corresponding review.

Finally, quite recently a material was released in which the performance of the E-350 processor and its main competitor, Intel Atom, is compared in real applications. The comparison is made using desktop systems as an example. On the one hand, this makes it possible to more clearly compare the performance of different solutions, on the other hand, a lot of interesting things remain outside the scope of the material, for example, issues of energy consumption.

Well, we move on to the study of mobile processors. Today we have a summary material in which we will evaluate the performance of two chips at once - S-50 and E-350. And for comparison, we will take a wide variety of systems on Intel processors from different lines.

Participants Configuration

First, let's define the testing participants and their technical characteristics. In general, there was some overlap with the selection of configurations, because, as it turned out, we had not yet tested a single Intel Atom-powered netbook using the new method, and the netbook that we had interfered with the process in every possible way (we couldn’t run a set of tests managed). In addition, as it turned out, the test set of applications runs on a netbook for about a week (and this despite the fact that almost all 3D packages did not start or crashed immediately). Therefore, the comparison with Intel Atom was carried out only in synthetic tests, alas.

At the same time, among the test results we found a very interesting system based on a dual-core processor from the CULV line, SU4100. Despite the fact that the processor is considered obsolete, at one time it was created as an inexpensive, energy-efficient solution, i.e., positioned close to the older version of AMD Brazos. Therefore, it was decided to include him in the list. But we did not include systems based on Core i5 and older Core i3 in this comparison; these are a completely different class of processors. They are more productive, but also consume more energy. For comparison, we took the weakest Core i3-350M tested to see how much faster it is. Some individual tests mention other systems.

*There is some confusion in the power consumption data because AMD typically lists the maximum power consumption and Intel typically lists a lower power consumption. Therefore, the comparative data in this column should be viewed with some caution.

There are two closely related processors in the Intel line, N450 and N455. They are no different, except for DDR3 support in the second case, N455 was released a quarter later and for some reason it has a 1 W higher thermal package, despite the fact that all other characteristics and even the price are the same. You can compare processors; when comparing, it is clear that although Intel seemingly provides comprehensive information, there are still many “gray areas” in the characteristics.

Atom is manufactured using 45 nm technology, while AMD processors are manufactured using 40 nm technology. But Atom has a lower supply voltage, i.e. theoretically it should be more economical... How will the platform and graphics behave?

Comparison in synthetic tests

First, let's make an approximate comparison in synthetic tests. To do this, we use a traditional set of packages, the first of which are two tests Cinebench 10 And 11.5 . Of the synthetic tests, I trust this one the most, because it is still built on a real engine.

*The test fails because... The video core does not support the necessary functions.

What conclusion can be drawn from the test of version 10? Aimed at netbooks and tablets, the weaker S-50 outperforms the Atom N450, with which it is approximately equal in power consumption and is slightly behind the Atom D525, but this model is much more power-hungry, even Intel specifies a 13 W thermal package for it. So even its CPU performance is quite good for its niche. The E-350 is faster than the Atom line of processors, but is well behind the SU4100.

We should also pay attention to performance in OpenGL. Intel's integrated video is very weak and cannot compete with AMD products. The result of NVIDIA ION2 (result in brackets for Atom D525, this platform was used in the ASUS EEE PC 1215N netbook) can already provide some competition to the younger AMD Brazos model (although it lags behind the older one). But the economic feasibility of building such a platform is a big question, because this is a complete Intel Atom platform (processor plus chipset), on which another graphics chip hangs through the external interface. An expensive, difficult-to-manufacture design created out of desperation. Yes, and ION2 was inserted there, apparently, to get support for the HDMI interface.

In Cinebench 11.5, the balance of power in OpenGL has changed slightly - now the NVIDIA adapter occupies a middle position between AMD solutions. However, all three have low results. By the way, interestingly, the situation in processor tests is approximately the same.

In general, the 525th model from Intel in terms of performance is between the two AMD platforms (and in terms of consumption it should be much inferior to them, since its thermal package is almost twice as different from the Atmo N450).

Let's look at the test PCMark Vantage.

I leave it to the readers to understand the jungle of PCMark results. Although the final score, in general, roughly repeats the Cinebench results. It is difficult to comment on the results of subtests, so we will not do this, but move on to testing in real applications.

Testing in real applications

Testing in real applications is carried out in accordance with the 2010 test methodology. Let me remind you that the results of specific applications can be compared for all mobile and desktop systems (except for games, in this group the settings were seriously changed, and the parameters of the test task for Photoshop, where the size of the test file was reduced). But this applies only to the test results themselves; rating numbers cannot be compared, since they are calculated based on different sets of applications.

If there are blank columns in the table, this means that either the test did not work correctly or it is impossible to calculate the rating correctly.

Let's start with professional applications.

3D visualization

This group contains applications that require both processor and graphics performance. Therefore, the results of their work are of purely academic interest.

Only two systems, E-350 and SU4100, passed the test completely. The weak S-50 predictably did not work; the i3-350M did not pass the Lightwave test, so its results are excluded from consideration. AMD's first victory in this group. And in both applications.

3D rendering

Let's see how things stand in rendering the final scene, where the main load falls on the central processor. There are still only two participants.

But here the AMD processor is slower. True, it must be said that both processors took a very long time to complete the test; it is definitely not worth using them in this kind of applications in real life.

Computations

This group measures the mathematical performance of the processor. Let's see…

AMD processors no longer look so advantageous. The E-350 turns out to be weaker than the SU4100. But this is already a fairly old processor, and also focused on energy efficiency, not performance.

Compilation

Test for the speed of program compilation using the Microsoft Visual Studio 2008 compiler.

First, for this test there are results for the E-350 processor in a desktop system, and we see that the results are almost the same - both in a laptop and in a desktop board.

Let's look at the balance of power. The S-50 is in the deep end of any comparison. Such low results make us wonder: the processor may be too weak even for some home tasks, for example, flash video.

The E350 lost even to CULV in both variants and is very far behind the Core i3.

Java Application Performance

This benchmark represents the execution speed of a set of Java applications. The test is critical to processor performance and responds very positively to additional cores.

Interestingly, the balance of power in this test remains almost the same. There is a noticeable difference between the desktop and mobile versions of the E-350 installation; the desktop version has gone ahead. Because of which? Faster memory?

Both AMD processors lag behind Intel's solutions, but they will almost certainly be noticeably faster than Atom.

Let's move on to productive home tasks: working with video, sound and photos.

2D graphics

Let me remind you that there are only two tests left in this group, quite diverse. ACDSee converts a set of photos from RAW to JPEG. And Photoshop carries out a series of operations to process the image - applying filters, etc. The results of the Photoshop test cannot be directly compared, because the test file has been reduced (this was done so that the test works better on systems with a small amount of RAM).

In the ACDSee test, a noticeable difference again appears between the E-350 processor in a laptop and a desktop.

Whatever one may say, the noted balance of power remains the same here. We can make a preliminary conclusion that in situations where only processor performance is needed, the AMD E-350 outperforms even the relatively old Intel SU4100.

Encoding audio to various formats

Encoding audio into various audio formats is a fairly simple task for modern processors. The dBPowerAmp wrapper is used for encoding. It can use multi-cores (additional coding threads are launched). The test result is its own scores, they are the inverse of the time spent on coding, i.e. the more, the better the result.

The test is quite simple, but at the same time visual. In general, it confirms the noted trend.

Video encoding

Three out of four tests involve encoding a video into a specific video format. The Premiere test stands out; in this application, the script involves creating a video, including applying effects.

The catastrophic lag of the S-50 is immediately striking. The rest of the processors follow the already noted trend: the E-350 lags behind the SU4100, the i350M is far ahead.

And finally, several types of homework tasks.

Archiving

Archiving is a fairly simple mathematical problem in which all processor components are actively working and the resulting performance depends on all components.

One of the most obvious and simple tests. The results are quite clear; they can be used to clearly assess the level of processor performance.

Performance in browser tests

Quite simple tests too. Both measure performance in Javascript, which is perhaps the most performance-intensive part of the browser engine. The trick is that the V8 test results in points, while the Sunspider test results in milliseconds. Accordingly, in the first case, the higher the number, the better, in the second - vice versa.

The results of this test roughly follow the noted trend, with the exception of a strange dip in the results of the i350M, most likely caused by technical reasons.

Comparison in HD Play

This test has been removed from the desktop test, although it is still relevant on mobile. Even if the system copes with decoding, in a laptop it is very important how many resources it requires for this. This includes heating and battery life...

Let's take a closer look at this test, because almost every user can encounter it.

In principle, both AMD processors can even handle software decoding of the 1080p format. Although, I would say that this is “on the verge”: almost always, with such a high processor load, the system already begins to drop frames and playback loses smoothness. In software mode, the load on all processors is approximately the same, for some reason the lowest is on the weakest S-50.

When hardware acceleration was enabled, the places were immediately distributed in the usual way, although I thought that AMD systems would be ahead here due to good optimization algorithms in ATI video chips. However, this did not happen.

Well, time to move on to conclusions.

Overall system rating

Let's look at the average score of the systems participating in the test.

In the first line, the ratings are calculated for two systems (based on the ratings of all applications launched on them), i.e. AMD E-350 and Intel SU4100, in the second - for three, only applications that launched and ran on all three are taken into account systems.

Let's briefly summarize our impressions of the performance tests. It immediately catches your eye that Atom was not tested in real applications, but the SU4100, which is already leaving the scene, was tested. At the same time, in testing desktop systems, where the E-350 and Atom were compared, both processors could not come close to the outdated and cheap processors of the Celeron line. I'm afraid that the same complaints will be made about this article - like, where did I find a laptop with SU4100? Indeed, Intel is now almost not promoting this line (and in vain); I think it will soon disappear from everywhere, if it has not already disappeared. And why are there no results for Atom.

In the near future, we will definitely try to measure the performance of a netbook based on Intel Atom and publish comparative results. However, based on the results of synthetic tests, I would assume that the processors from the mobile line will be weaker than the S-50. Moreover (although it is not a fact that tests will show this), due to a more powerful graphics subsystem, AMD processors should be more comfortable in everyday work. The E-350 in netbooks should become the leader in speed.

Although the catch is that the E-350 is positioned in more productive segments than netbooks. And an interesting picture emerges: Intel had a processor for the same niche, also energy efficient and not very slow. It was also installed in large 15-inch laptops, citing the fact that productivity is not so important in office systems. The processor, by the way, turned out to be not very popular and is now disappearing from the scene. And AMD, it seems, will try to play in this segment again. On the other hand, now in Intel products there should be a gap between the too slow Atoms and the more productive, but also power-hungry modern Cores. AMD E-350 falls into this gap and looks good for a certain product category, if it weren't for the SU4100 seeming more interesting.

Power consumption and battery life

Let's see how much energy a laptop with a particular processor consumes under different operating scenarios. Unfortunately, we don't have data for the SU4100 and Core i3-350M (these laptops were tested before we measured power consumption). But we can measure the power consumption of a system on Intel Atom, its results should certainly be more interesting than those of CULV.

*18 W at minimum backlight brightness.

**27 Watts when there is no load on the hard drive.

The results were a little unexpected for me. It turns out that the new system on the S-50 consumes a little more energy than the system on the Atom N450 (to measure the system with the Atom 450, we used the MSI Wind 160 model with standard power consumption drivers from Microsoft). Of course, we are talking about the power consumption of the system as a whole (including the screen, etc.), but the systems are very close, two netbooks with almost the same characteristics. Since the power consumption is close, the autonomy of devices with AMD C-50 APU should also be approximately the same as that of Atom devices, but for tablets this, for example, is not a very good option.

However, for the same power consumption, the C-50 is faster than the N450, and the D525 definitely consumes more power and, more importantly, dissipates much more heat. By the way, a netbook with S-50 is significantly cooler than its Atom competitor.

The E-350 is also not a leader in energy consumption; in economical modes it is close to portable Intel models. Although, if we draw analogies again, its energy consumption should be close to CULV systems, and at one time they performed very well in terms of autonomy: laptops with them easily lasted for 7-8-10 hours.

We will provide more detailed data on energy saving and other information in reviews dedicated to specific laptops on the AMD C-50 and E-350 platforms.

conclusions

Once again you pick up new AMD products with the thought that they will change the world, and hand them back with the thought “just another processor, in some places a little better, in others a little worse.” This, by the way, is not very good for the product, since high expectations lead to disappointment during real research, and disappointment forms the wrong impression of the product, preventing you from correctly assessing its advantages. However, the new AMD processors are a step forward. Let's try to evaluate which one?

Firstly, the AMD Brazos platform even surpasses Intel Atom in terms of processor core performance. Atom mobile series can only compete with the younger version, which operates at a much lower clock speed, and with frequency parity, the AMD platform is far ahead. Moreover, what is important, this difference in performance manifests itself in a segment where it is very important (because, let's be honest, the overall level of performance of all products is very low).

However, there is a subtle point regarding positioning. Although Brazos is faster than Intel Atom, they are generally in the same segment. On the one hand, this is good, because products based on them can easily integrate into existing product positioning systems of manufacturers. On the other hand, as part of this positioning, they can receive the label “a cheaper alternative to Intel Atom,” with which they will remain, content with low profits and those users who do not want to pay for the Intel platform at all.

The second important advantage of the AMD Brazos platform: much more powerful graphics, both in terms of performance and functionality. Now that graphics are being used to speed up rendering even in Internet browsers, a powerful graphics chip will definitely not be out of place. Moreover, the main processor does not shine with high speed, so help will be very useful. In terms of performance, AMD Brazos works much more successfully with HD content, which is important for a platform in this class. As for functionality, it uses a modern graphics core with support for DirectX 11, and also immediately and fully supports HDMI digital video output. This is a significant advantage for final products - motherboards, mobile devices, netbooks and tablets. But these advantages still need to be conveyed to the user, to convince him that they are important, and this is already the task of building the right marketing policy on the part of AMD and manufacturers. Let's hope for the best, although previous experience in this area gives rise to some concerns.

From a design point of view, the most important advantage of the APU is that it is a single chip, so the platform is much cheaper, more compact, and cooler than competitor multi-chip solutions. However, this advantage is greater for developers and manufacturers. What difference does it really make to the user how many chips are in his device? He needs it to be productive, cool and have good battery life. And by what means this was achieved is the second question. Moreover, it is not a fact that if the manufacturer saves on production, then the final products will become cheaper.

But the lack of heating is an important advantage for the user. In my opinion, the heating level of both platform options is extremely low. The Acer 522 netbook with the C-50 processor still managed to warm up just a little, but the heating even in the hottest place reached 31–32 degrees Celsius, and the blown air was not very warm either. And the Aspire One Happy model on the Atom 450 from the same manufacturer was simply hot; it was unpleasant to hold the netbook on your lap. But the processor there is the “coldest” of the Intel line. The E-350 is not able to heat the laptop case at all. The eMachines 644 that we tested always remained cold; only the hard drive warmed up (and warmed up the case a little). At the same time, the cooling system in both laptops worked almost silently.

To sum up, we can say that the products themselves turned out to be very good. In terms of speed, functionality and other parameters, they are well suited for the tablet and netbook market, which is now actively developing and evolving, and can serve as the basis for very interesting devices. It’s a shame that they came out too late; if they had appeared on the market in 2010, during the netbook boom, a productive, versatile, low-heating platform with HDMI support could have made a splash.

However, even now the time has not yet been lost. But we can’t let things take their course. In order for AMD Brazos to be successful in the market, they need to be actively promoted to both consumers and manufacturers. And here there are some concerns. Because, firstly, AMD has acquired the image of the manufacturer of an “inexpensive alternative to Intel products,” which forces buyers and manufacturers to discard interesting functionality and focus only on price, which is fundamentally wrong. Very often, the fact that a product is built on the AMD platform means that it is poorer in functionality, does not have additional features, a good package, etc.

For example, Brazos can be an excellent base for an HTPC, but one platform is not enough for this. On its basis, you need to build an interesting final product with the necessary functionality and (this is important!) a good delivery package. Who will produce them and how will they be brought to market?

The same applies to the segment of laptops and netbooks. Potentially, the platform can be very successful if it is presented correctly (emphasizing the existing significant advantages) and if the initiative is supported by manufacturers, releasing truly interesting solutions, and not yet another super-cheap model from the “just in case” series (which can ruin the most interesting technological solutions). And it’s not worth it, especially at the present stage, to get involved in dubious adventures such as organizing new incomprehensible market niches (what they are planning to do with the E-350), and certainly not to try to position the processor against competitors to which it is inferior in terms of performance. By the way, a good example of unsuccessful marketing here is the same CULV platform from Intel. For some reason, a weak but economical processor began to be shoved into 15-inch desktop laptops, which killed the whole idea. Let's hope AMD doesn't repeat this mistake.

To summarize, I would like to say that AMD Brazos is a necessary and interesting product for its segment. But its success will largely depend not on the technological and technical advantages of the platform, but on properly structured marketing and competent promotion of the platform to the market. Only in this case will the platform be successful. Otherwise, it will remain another little-used niche solution, of which we have already seen many examples on the market.

AMD produces processors with extensive upgrade capabilities. In fact, CPUs from this manufacturer operate at only 50-70% of their actual capacity. This is done to ensure that the processor lasts as long as possible and does not overheat while working on devices with a poor cooling system.

There are two main ways to increase the CPU clock speed and speed up the computer's data processing:

• Using special software. Recommended for less experienced users. Development and support is handled by AMD itself. In this case, you can see all the changes immediately in the software interface and in system performance. The main disadvantage of this method: there is a certain probability that the changes will not be applied.
• Using BIOS. Better suited for more advanced users, because... all changes that are made in this environment greatly affect the performance of the PC. The standard BIOS interface on many motherboards is entirely or mostly in English, and all control is done using the keyboard. Also, the very ease of use of such an interface leaves much to be desired.

Regardless of which method is chosen, it is necessary to find out whether the processor is suitable for this procedure and, if so, what its limit is.

Find out the characteristics

There are a large number of programs to view the characteristics of the CPU and its cores. In this case, let’s look at how to find out “suitability” for overclocking using AIDA64:

1. Launch the program, click on the icon "Computer". It can be found either on the left side of the window or in the center. Then go to "Sensors". Their location is similar to "Computer".
2. The window that opens contains all the data regarding the temperature of each core. For laptops, a normal temperature is considered to be 60 degrees or less, for desktop computers 65-70.



3. To find out the recommended frequency for overclocking, return to paragraph "Computer" and go to "Acceleration". There you can see the maximum percentage by which you can increase the frequency.



Method 1: AMD OverDrive

Method 2: SetFSB

SetFSB is a universal program that is equally suitable for overclocking processors from AMD and Intel. It is distributed free of charge in some regions (for residents of the Russian Federation, after the demo period you will have to pay $6) and has simple management. However, the interface does not have Russian language. Download and install this program and start overclocking:




Method 3: Overclocking via BIOS

If for some reason it is not possible to improve the characteristics of the processor through the official or third-party program, then you can use the classic method - overclocking using the built-in BIOS functions.

This method is only suitable for more or less experienced PC users, because... the interface and controls in the BIOS can be too confusing, and some errors made in the process can disrupt the operation of the computer. If you are confident in yourself, then do the following:




Overclocking any AMD processor is quite possible through a special program and does not require any in-depth knowledge. If all precautions are followed, and the processor is accelerated within reasonable limits, then nothing will threaten your computer.

If overclocking, and even the processor, then it will start again: CPU-Z, Prime-95 and Linpak... And these are programs that actually do not participate in “overclocking” in any way. But, in fact, with AMD it turned out to be somewhat simpler. Much easier.

The Canadian company AMD, that is, the company itself, produces one such program. It is absolutely free. From it, you can overclock an AMD processor (starting from the AM-2 socket), on any “motherboard”, regardless of the manufacturer... Change all values, test the correctness of overclocking, look at real frequency values, test performance. That is, one program (with one window of several tabs) will replace a typical “set” of utilities. But no one forbids anyone who wants to test the “stability” with Prime, as well as evaluate performance after overclocking with Linpack. Let us repeat once again - the program works freely on all motherboards (with socket AM2 and higher, and AMD chipset from 7xx). It’s called, too, simply: AMD OverDrive.

Warning

Any change in clock frequency values ​​that goes beyond those specified in the documentation (as well as overestimation of supply voltages) violates the license agreement and voids the final warranty. After overclocking, any device automatically loses its warranty. You will carry out all actions at your own risk.

Now - about something less sad

The program allows you to “change” almost everything that can be changed: Hypertarnsport frequency, PCI-e and PCI buses, even (attention!) memory timings. Well, and voltage (and all this with constant temperature monitoring). A multi-core amd processor can be overclocked separately for each core... In a word, having “AMD OverDrive” installed, there is no need to go into the BIOS.

Official requirements

Chipsets supported: AMD Hudson-D3, 990X, 990FX, 970, 890GX, 890FX, 890G, 790FX, 790GX, 790X, 785G, 780G, 770.

Is your motherboard chipset not listed? Most likely, it really is not supported (including 760G, 740G, 780V).

Download the program here:

http://download.amd.com/Desktop/aod_setup_4.2.3.exe. At the time of writing the review, the version was 4.2.3 (which is discussed below).

Preparatory actions

Where should a person go before going to first grade? That's right, in preparatory. Same here:

1. Cool-n-Quiet driver, if installed, leave it: this is AMD Processor Driver for Windows, let it remain.
2. Go to BIOS and force shutdown:

• Cool ‘n’ Quiet (in Disable);
• C1E (to Disable);
• Spread Spectrum (in Disable);
• Smart CPU Fan Control (in Disable).

When exiting the BIOS, be sure to save your changes. Download the OS.

Note: Another name for C1E is Enhanced Halt State. It is impossible to provide detailed guidance here, because... Everyone’s motherboard is different (if we don’t know what’s where, read the booklet instructions for setting up this BIOS).

Actually, the system is now ready to install and launch Over Drive. But first, a couple more words.

Is it possible to overclock the processor in this system?

Look at the energy consumption graph. It concerns just overclocking (that is, consumption - before and after this action):

This is the power consumed by the processor alone (in Watts). Immediately, a couple of questions arise: will your power supply “pull”? What about the processor cooler? As a rule, all AMD boxed coolers are designed to operate in “standard” modes (that is, without overclocking the cooler - almost to the limit). If you can answer yes to both questions, move on to the next step.

Note: 248 Watts here fall on the 12-Volt line (that is, the current along it is 20.7 Amps, and not many power supplies can “boast” a value higher than 20).

Working with the Over Drive program

To begin with, a short educational program.

• Processor frequency is the CPU core frequency at which the processor executes instructions.
• HyperTransport frequency: frequency of the interface between the processor and the northbridge. Usually – equal to the northbridge frequency (but – should not exceed it).
• Northbridge (NB) frequency: For processors, increasing the Northbridge frequency results in higher memory controller (and L3 cache) speed. This frequency should not be lower than the HyperTransport frequency, although it can be made much higher.
• Memory frequency: The operating frequency (in megahertz) at which the memory operates. It must be remembered that the physical frequency is 2 times less than the “effective” one.
• Finally, the base frequency: as you can see, all frequencies are calculated from the base (by multiplying or dividing it).
• CPU clock speed = CPU multiplier * base;
• Northbridge frequency (aka L3 frequency in AMD) = northbridge multiplier * base;
• HyperTransport frequency = HyperTransport multiplier * base;
• Memory frequency = memory multiplier * base.

Launch the Over Drive program. In the first window, immediately click “OK”:

Thus, the user agreed with the responsibility (associated with the undesirable consequences of “overclocking”). The main program window will appear next:

As you can see, all the frequencies currently installed in the computer are shown (HyperTransport frequency is in the right column, and HT ref. is sort of the “base”).

Why are there so many “multipliers”? Isn't it easier to overclock your computer right away at the base frequency?

The fact is that two more are connected with the “base” one - these are the frequencies of the computer buses, PCI and PCI-Express. As the PCI frequency increases, many devices built into the board may become unstable (and this is already observed with an addition of less than 10% to the “standard” values).

This program for overclocking an amd processor allows you to monitor temperatures (of everything possible). Go to the “Status Monitor” tab (second in line):

Here we see the temperatures of only the processor cores (in the last line). By selecting “Board Status” and “GPU status”, we get a similar “screen” for the motherboard and video. The fact is that the latest version supports overclocking the video accelerator built into the processor (and in the previous versions - only in the chipset, and also Side Port). That is, the video temperature also needs to be controlled... But we are overclocking the processor.

Go to the “Performance Control” tab (third from the top).

This is the main window for overclocking. But now the tab is in “for beginners” mode. Let's go to the last one (“Preference”):

Here (“Settings” tab) – instead of “Novice Mode”, select, as in the figure (“Advanced Mode”). If you return to the previous tab, it will look like this:

Well, finally! You can freely change all frequencies (that is, all multipliers), including even the “base” frequency (indicated as “HT ref.”):

Note: as you can see, the North Bridge (NB) multiplier is missing. The NB frequency, in fact, increases “automatically”, with a change in the HyperTransport frequency (it cannot be less, can it?).

As you can see, the overclocking margin of HyperTransport (hence the NB, and most importantly the L3 cache) is very small. It is also impossible to “raise” the base frequency to very high values ​​(even at 220 MHz, something may freeze, including: audio, network...). So, first of all, they usually “play around” with the processor’s Core Multiplier.

You can activate the changes using the “Apply” button:

After which, it is better to check whether overclocking has led to instability (the “Stability Test” tab). Well, real performance can be assessed in “Benchmark”).

CPU overclocking technology

1. We increase the processor multiplier (let it be +1 or 2). It was 15 - now it’s 17. Click on “Apply”.
2. Turn on “Stability Test”. If it passes, go to the “Status Monitor” tab (record the temperature).

If everything suits you (if the processor has warmed up no higher than 70-75 degrees), the frequency can be increased further. That is, steps 1. and 2. are repeated, but only until “undesirable” temperature values ​​appear (or “failure” of the “Stability Test”).

Thus, we overclocked the processor with only one multiplier.

Here, also – “Stability Test” after each change. The limit is when the operation of one of the devices (integrated into the motherboard) begins to malfunction. The point is to achieve the highest possible CPU frequency with a reduced multiplier (gradually increasing the “base”).

In general, overclocking at the “base frequency” requires certain qualifications.

Well, and lastly (the third stage, so to speak), you can “increase” the “HT Multiplier” multiplier. Which will entail overclocking the L3 cache (and even more heating of the CPU). Once you've finished overclocking, run the Stability Test. Always (when changing something, including something other than the CPU multiplier) – look at the temperatures (not only of the processor, but also of the motherboard) listed on the “Status Monitor” tab.

After “overclocking”, the program itself can be closed. All settings will remain (to “reduce” them, run the program again). There is no need to restart your computer (and even after a reboot, the changes will remain in effect).

Additionally

We only overclocked the processor. Memory will remain the weak link in the system. You can also overclock it, use the “Memory” tab for this:

But this is more difficult than overclocking the CPU, since “stable” overclocking of RAM is associated with the selection of timings (switching delays). Of course, you can immediately increase them by a couple of values, but then, anyway, it’s better to choose them carefully.

The name lights up “red” - the value takes effect only after a reboot. “Memory frequency” is translated into English as “Memory Clock”.

Note: for DDR-3 (and 2) class memory, the physical frequency (displayed by the program) is related to the “effective” one as one to two.

It may be strange, but the memory voltage is regulated in the same place as everyone else (in the “Clock/Voltage” tab). Their values ​​are increased, if it doesn’t work out any other way. And in general, overclocking by changing voltages is recommended “last”.

After overclocking the system, do not be lazy to run the “Stability Test”. At very large multiplier values ​​(more than +20% to the “standard” values), it is better to look at the temperature immediately after pressing the “Apply” button (continuously, 8-10 minutes). If there is overheating, immediately change the value to the “previous” one.

We need competent, that is, “stable” overclocking, and we do not want “overheating shutdown.” Is not it?

Well, how much can you “overclock” a certain processor? Firstly, all “non-Black Edition” processors will not allow you to change the Core Multiplier. This means that you can only overclock the Core (core) a little, that is, at the “base” frequency. And nothing more, in theory. But it is this “overclocking” that increases the performance of the system “as a whole” by a proportional number of times.

If the user still decides to configure memory through the program, he must first go to the BIOS. To set memory timings (manually only):

By default, they are always “Auto”, so this step (at the preparatory stage) is mandatory.

Explanation: the computer takes memory timings from the SPD of the memory itself (each time the PC is booted again, if the value in the BIOS is “auto”). In turn, SPD contains values ​​“recommended” by the manufacturer. Instead of the “auto” mode, you need to set each timing value in an “explicit” form (and how to set it - well, at least the same as it was in SPD).

That is, we take it, enter it, change it (instead of “Auto”, it becomes “5”, then “5”, and so on, according to the displayed data from the SPD). SPD is translated as: “sequential prediction detector”, in general, the name does not reflect the meaning (in Russian, it would be more like “memory ROM”).

There are quite a lot of values, but changing them is possible (in the BIOS shown here there are only 9, then 5 more). Everything should work out...

Overclocking statistics

Let us now take and consider randomly selected results from “Overclockers.ru” (from statistics on overclocking of the “lightest” family in this sense – Propus, aka Athlone-II X4).

First result: 3667 MHz (282 “base” * 13.0). Cooler – BOX. The voltage increase was still used (the actual Vcore value was about 1.5 Volts). Conclusion: as you can see, the base frequency lends itself well to overclocking. Cooler – no need to change. We used a very “not weak” motherboard (ASUS M4A78LT-M), with a “not weak” power supply system. Standard CPU frequency: 200*13.0.

Second result: 3510 MHz (234 * 15.0). Voltage Vcore = 1.416 (that is, not too high). And this is stable overclocking (it seems that it was not possible to increase the “base” one further), but the board was also “not simple” - ASrock 870 Extreme3 ​​(cooler - BOX). Standard mode: 200*15.5.

Third result: 3510 MHz (260 * 13.5). Sometimes the “basic” one can still be overclocked (on the ASUS M4A77T board). The voltage is almost “standard” (1.5 Volts), but the cooler needed is completely “non-BOX” (Cooler Master Hyper 212 Plus). Standard mode: 200*15.0. The temperature of all Cores was “maximum”, and – in full processor load mode – did not exceed 50!

In the first example, the temperature is 62 Gy. C, in the second – 50.

Advanced Clock Calibration (ACC)

We looked at how to overclock an AMD processor in some detail. But there is one more function that you need to know about. The function of “ultra-precise” frequency selection, which is performed automatically (called ACC).

ACC is only present on boards with a southbridge “from 750” or higher. ACC itself can be enabled both in the program and inside the BIOS (in both cases, a reboot is required).

Why are we talking about this here? For the 45 nm Phenom II processor, it is best to disable ACC (after all, AMD claims that a similar function is included in the processor chip). Which is true for any CPU since then. process "not older". And for “older” processors (Phenom and Athlon 65 nm), ACC should be set to Auto. From +2% to +4% increase in frequencies is guaranteed.

So, go to our “favorite” tab (Performance Control), check the value.

What can influence the “success” of overclocking?

At the very beginning, it was already said that when overclocking, the processor requires more energy. At AMD, most desktop processors fit into a 95-watt package. But this does not mean that the power (both consumed and released) must be at this limit.

By the way, recently the situation has not improved. AMD FX processors, despite using the 32 nm process technology, remained at approximately the same level (TDP value did not decrease below 95).

For overclocking, “three” devices are important: the CPU power system (on the motherboard), the power supply (as mentioned above), and the processor cooler.

This “set” must be “balanced”, that is, all components must fully comply with the requirements of the others. The user probably realizes that there is no point in installing a “cool” motherboard if the power supply “can’t handle” even half of the total power. In general, 20 Amps is the “minimum” of the power supply, for its line is 12 Volts (240 Watts, but there are also greater requirements). Gluttony, that is, processor power, increases non-linearly with increasing frequencies. At the beginning of the review, we showed (how much the 965 “eats”). The load also increases with increasing supply voltage Vcore.

All this power must also be “dissipated” (all this is released in the form of heat on the CPU itself). For the Athlon II, a “BOX” cooler is often enough, but for more “powerful” processors, that’s not to say... We’re talking about overclocking here, of course.

All these requirements are very important. However, overclocking is a lottery; the final result will depend on the processor instance. The whole “tiring” will only help to reveal the potential. You shouldn’t put too much faith in statistical data (as well as reviews), where 45-nm “stones” exceed the limit of 4.0 Gigahertz. There are different instances (Core is driven, but the cache is not driven), the options are different, and what to overclock (and whether it is necessary) is decided by the user himself.

About overclocking results

We will not write about performance, about its growth along with “overclocking”. The actual operating speed indeed changes, and changes for the better (but nonlinearly with the frequency itself).

Let's look at a couple of cases here. That is, consequences (not too desirable ones).

The user did not overclock the new processor. After the warranty expired, it was "fixed" almost immediately. Everything was done correctly (maximum frequency found, etc.).

The PC itself worked in this mode for 2 months. Well, then he stopped (as if he broke down). Isn't there a reason to panic?

The problem was the same - only in the connector on the board (it was heavily oxidized, as a result of which 12V was not supplied to the processor). It became clear that the rest was in order after replacing the connector. However, in “normal” mode, the computer would continue to work, nothing would have to be changed (just the connector, as luck would have it, was 4-pin).

A common defect can be considered the desoldering of the board transistor in the CPU power circuit (power transistors on the “motherboard”). If before overclocking, everything seems to be working, then the user himself conscientiously “turns on” all the tests that cause maximum “power” (and the computer takes it and “turns off” during these tests)... By simple “installation” after such a defect, the system board will not be restored. Monitoring the temperature value turns out to be impossible (well, there are no such sensors on the motherboard). S&M is considered a powerful test for overheating, while Prime95 is the fastest to find errors.

That is, in “overclocking” errors are possible. Coming from the “overclocker”. The probability of which is lower, the higher the quality of the remaining hardware (as discussed: motherboard, power supply, and so on). And quality also costs more. Maybe for the same amount you can get a faster processor...

Whether it makes sense to overclock is up to the user to decide. What to overclock and what to check - you make the choice yourself.

The information provided here should be enough for “basic” overclocking. Fine-tuning the hardware requires qualifications.