Intel dealt with this issue last week in the CC--25% of the CPUs Intel ships will be Ivy Bridge in *this* quarter. That is hard to believe, but that is what they said. The problem, I think is that mfrs want low voltage parts and they can't make enough to satisfy them. Remember, that 22nm's huge advantage is at low voltage. The lower the TDP, the bigger the advantage over competitors. For instance, Ivy is still behind Llano in desktop, but drop to laptops and it has about the same graphics performance as Llano. The speculation is that at 17W TDPs it will actually outperform Llano in graphics!
Graphics aren't as important as AMD would like the world to believe. Microsoft wanted to come up with a down and dirty quick little system for rating computers. They came up with the Windows System Assessment Tool. It rates a computer by various components and gives an overall score based on the lowest score of all the tests. I recently built a system based on a 2010 Conroe i3 processor. This was pre Sandy Bridge. The thing scored a 4.7. The graphics was by far the worst part of the system. Flight Simulator X needed a 3.0 as a baseline. So 4.7 doesn't look bad. It runs 1080P video flawlessly. Are there games out there that would bring this system to it's knees? Certainly. The problem is that my wife and other adults tend to not play them. So for her 4.7 is more than good enough. Any somewhat serious gamer would not be happy with the onbaord graphics from Ivy Bridge nor Llanno and insist on installing an expensive graphics card.
What Intel is offering with Ivy Bridge is more than good enough for the vast majority of consumers. The differences between it and Llano are nearly irrelevant. The only people who care is AMD. It's about the only selling point they have left for Llano.