AMD A10-7800 Kaveri APU Review: 4 CPU + 8 GPU
- Thread starter Steve
- Start date
G
Guest
I have Asus R7 250 1GB DDR5 and want buy A8 7600 and use dual GPU and will be interesting test for me.
Dont find here.
Dont find here.
tipstir
Posts: 2,873 +206
Interesting testing, Test/benchmark or floating-point software can only test give you what the programmer programmed into it and how accurate are they by margin of 100%. Real test would be you stop-watch and launch these programs your using to test out. Slight differences in results by seconds lower or higher. Intel is stronger in other areas than AMD.
AMD more for gaming. Intel number cruncher. Like 50/50 split or catch 22. Which one do you favor everyone will say which one they like the best. In all I say test other software too, run test with stop watch too. Make sure PC HDD is clean from chunk file/reg data, and de-fragmented HDD, Reg and RAM.
Now the PC is ready for your testing..
How does these test do Windows 7 32/64-bit systems as you done with Windows 8.1 Pro but only 64-bit. I have this OS on AMD Black Edition PH4 II 2.5GHz with South-bridge 8GB DDR2. Might be old for 2009/2010 system, still performs well today. AMD A8, A10 etc.. Intel i3, i5, i7 all are very good but tech will change and these new AMD Black Edition seem to be be aim to integrate more CPU processing and GPU into SoE.
But these test your doing on paid software (except for 7-zip) and games only limited. Why not add freeware ones like Kingsoft Office 2013 for a Office Suite and Paint.net V4 for graphical test loading up 1920x1080p HD image. Gaming online do STO (Star Trek Online).
My I3 8GB DDR3 Windows 7 / 64-bit and A8 16/32GB DDR3 XP 1600/2300 MHz Windows 7 / 64-bit are neck and neck performance, still not taken into consideration all the additional system tweaks I've made to push them to max performance.
These 3 are more real test. STO requires a lot from CPU/GPU in full High GPU graphic at 16x texture base if you want to play with high res. Run the 8742 Rep for Undine Space Battle-zone and Dyson Sphere Ground Battles-zone for Voth. Let's run test again.
Also I would like to add how well does they new CPU render under Google Earth, Google Moon and Google Mars. Launching Media Center from Microsoft. Opening up a large cloud base files from Evernote or even running Chrome 64-bit DEV Edition loading up TechSpot site.
More real conditions for testing with everyday programs.
AMD more for gaming. Intel number cruncher. Like 50/50 split or catch 22. Which one do you favor everyone will say which one they like the best. In all I say test other software too, run test with stop watch too. Make sure PC HDD is clean from chunk file/reg data, and de-fragmented HDD, Reg and RAM.
Now the PC is ready for your testing..
How does these test do Windows 7 32/64-bit systems as you done with Windows 8.1 Pro but only 64-bit. I have this OS on AMD Black Edition PH4 II 2.5GHz with South-bridge 8GB DDR2. Might be old for 2009/2010 system, still performs well today. AMD A8, A10 etc.. Intel i3, i5, i7 all are very good but tech will change and these new AMD Black Edition seem to be be aim to integrate more CPU processing and GPU into SoE.
But these test your doing on paid software (except for 7-zip) and games only limited. Why not add freeware ones like Kingsoft Office 2013 for a Office Suite and Paint.net V4 for graphical test loading up 1920x1080p HD image. Gaming online do STO (Star Trek Online).
My I3 8GB DDR3 Windows 7 / 64-bit and A8 16/32GB DDR3 XP 1600/2300 MHz Windows 7 / 64-bit are neck and neck performance, still not taken into consideration all the additional system tweaks I've made to push them to max performance.
These 3 are more real test. STO requires a lot from CPU/GPU in full High GPU graphic at 16x texture base if you want to play with high res. Run the 8742 Rep for Undine Space Battle-zone and Dyson Sphere Ground Battles-zone for Voth. Let's run test again.
Also I would like to add how well does they new CPU render under Google Earth, Google Moon and Google Mars. Launching Media Center from Microsoft. Opening up a large cloud base files from Evernote or even running Chrome 64-bit DEV Edition loading up TechSpot site.
More real conditions for testing with everyday programs.
G
Guest
Why amd isn't releasing a cheap kaveri cpu?, intel has cheaper offers with the more cpu performance.
GeforcerFX
Posts: 1,091 +547
Now drop the clocks a bit and give it a 35-45 watt tdp and get those into some laptops, AMD is falling really far behind in the laptop department now that haswell is cheap and in retail they have no graphics advantage on trinity apu's, and there a-10 trinity parts can't hold up to a haswell i5. This chip in a 45 watt config in a laptop would be one awesome budget gamin system while still remaining portable (I have a 45 watt haswell i7 system and it amazes me how thin it is but remains cool)
Lets face it AMD athlon 64 what a great cpu I remember it as a CPU should be, low TDP with overclocking within easy reach of typical users, since then AMD can't complete, I know AMD fan boys will kick off but AMD can't compete fact. What is AMD's market apart from GPU's (290 good buy by the the way apart from sound, temps).AMD's cpu's are sh@t you cant polish a turd.I will always love AMD but really they don't compete there quad core CPU's are crap, with intergrated GPU no one cares about. Intel ripped them off, under cut them and produced them more cheaply, is the market better for AMD, yes but can they compete, sadly no.
G
Guest
wow, nice review there. amd surely needs an escalator or elevator to step up to the current level of intel.
as my favorite past time is internet surfing and out of the blue low-resolution gaming (left 4 dead 2, plants vs zombies 1) on my intel pentium g630 rig (built-in hd graphics), I am looking at these suggested budget gpu upgrades Radeon R7 250 or GeForce GTX 750.
Forgive me but I had a hard time following your post. It seems you were unhappy with the software used for benchmarking and even the method.
Firstly I am not going to use a stopwatch for measuring how long an application takes to load for three good reasons. First reason being that this is a highly inaccurate means of testing. Secondly we use an SSD boot drive for testing and most applications launch quicker than you could hit start/stop on a stop watch. Thirdly I don’t even feel this is a good method for measuring CPU performance, more like system performance.
As for the applications, we use applications that commonly used by professionals and even home users. Honestly do you really think using freeware will somehow change the results? On that note please read any of the other hundred AMD APU reviews online and see if they came to a different conclusion. I know all the top tier sites came to the exact same conclusion we did.
“AMD more for gaming. Intel number cruncher” – Where did you come up with that? It’s an interesting statement though it couldn’t be any further from the truth.
"These 3 are more real test. STO requires a lot from CPU/GPU in full High GPU graphic at 16x texture base if you want to play with high res. Run the 8742 Rep for Undine Space Battle-zone and Dyson Sphere Ground Battles-zone for Voth. Let's run test again. "
Again why do you think this will change anything? We tested with a number of CPU demanding games and the APU was crushed in all of them. Why even try and cherry pick one game to try and save face?
We have already covered AMD DualGraphics at length which was mentioned in the review, short story its pretty useless...
https://www.techspot.com/review/781-amd-a10-7850k-graphics-performance/
G
Guest
I gave AMD a chance when I picked up a FX-6300 and overclocked it to 4.0ghz. Then I got the opportunity to pick up a i5-4670k for cheap and run them side by side. I REALLY want to root for the underdog here, but AMD engineers need to pick up the pace. APU's are a niche product. The tech community wants a new CPU with raw power that will give Intel a run for its money. Please AMD, we are still hopeful.
G
Guest
Isn't the point of getting an FX-6300 that you get "decent" power for half the price? You wouldn't really compare the FX-6300 to 4670... Would you?
G
Guest
FX-6300 is 120 and core i5 near 220 ... it's almost twice as much of course it will do better. AMD is not doing well but their APU and multicores strategy is not bad. It might pay one day. People used to buy discrete sound card. Maybe one day we will say people used to buy discrete GPU. And if it happens intel will be in big trouble unless they merge with Nvidia or they improve their gpu A LOT.
cliffordcooley
Posts: 13,141 +6,441
And so is the i3, which is more efficient.
G
Guest
I wounder if/how AMD is still profitable, the should either make breakthrough in cou making or just sell its cpu devision
G
Guest
... It might pay one day...I beg to disagree...it seems amd is no longer trustworthy...the release of bulldozer/piledriver in the past nor its latest release did not make amd a force to be reckoned with by intel. even NVidia is doubting the success of amd mantle tech.
most people prefer to buy superior quality items at higher initial cost, and for processors, intel is the way to go.
maybe amd processors will be purchased in masse for school and library use and for budget gaming (no discrete gpu) use...
G
Guest
Yes nobody brave enough testing under 200$ A8 7600 w R7 250 combo dual GPU benchmark.
Nobody want to see AMD how humilate Intel Nvidia same price couple.
AMD better than Intel? Thats cannot possible.Who tell that is stupid. Everybody knows it.
Who brave enough make a real test? Nobody.
Nobody want to see AMD how humilate Intel Nvidia same price couple.
AMD better than Intel? Thats cannot possible.Who tell that is stupid. Everybody knows it.
Who brave enough make a real test? Nobody.
Railman
Posts: 708 +100
As they are supplying the CPU and GPU to both the XBox1 and PS4 I suspect they are doing alright at the moment. It does seem that they have thrown in the towel on their attempts to compete with Intel.
Evernessince
Posts: 5,469 +6,158
And this is why they should remove "guest" posters. AMD is far from losing it's credibility and of course Nvidia is going to doubt mantle. AMD keeps toe to toe with Nvidia each generation. They may be loosing ground on intel but you can't really expect more from a company as small as AMD.
G
Guest
Seems topend AMD is about equiv to a r3 240, and getting somewhat playable framerates. The low bar for discrete cards is slowly moving up the stack .. Next gen maybe equiv to a r5 260?
BTW its "en masse" ,
BTW its "en masse" ,
Nice review. I would be interested in seeing more of what this processor is able to do. HSA, Mantle as in BF4 and Thief testing to see if this technology brings AMD APU on their own footing. Mantle does represent well what DX12 will bring to the table so worth while testing while also many newer games will incorporate Mantle as an alternative API. OpenCL programs would also be interesting where more of the APU potential is exposed. 45w setting evaluation (how does one do that? Effects on overall power usage). Review is more Intel domain testing with optimize code for a well running Intel CPU but falls I think short in exposing full capability of this cpu. Still if what you do now and in the future Intel optimized coded programs Intel would be the way to go.
Already tested Mantle using an APU and it makes bugger all difference. Mantle only helps if there is a CPU bottleneck and with slow integrated graphics the GPU is the bottleneck not the CPU...
https://www.techspot.com/review/793-thief-battlefield-4-mantle-performance/page2.html
I really disagree with the "those are Intel optimized benchmarks" remark. Intel has superior core performance, that's a fact. We test with popular programs, Office applications, Adobe applications and so on. Photoshop is a OpenCL program btw.
Similar threads
