a6-6310 vs i3-4005u - ordering today

[jacktesterson]

on my phone so I'll keep it brief

My daughter wants a dell Inspiron laptop and I told her I'd get one on Christmas Day for online sales. (Her grandfather gave her a gift card to get one)

As I already spent way to much on Christmas budget is very limited

This will be used primarily for web browsing and to plug into a 1080p TV for playing very low demanding games as well as playing 1080p YouTube and MKV rips in 1080p

She also wants a touch screen so we are getting a Dell Inspiron 15 As that's the option where gift card is for

I can get for same price:

1) 15.6 Touchscreen, 4GB ram, Intel i3-4005u, HD 4400, 500GB drive

Or

2) 15.6 Touchscreen, 8GB ram, AMD A6-6310, R4 bema graphics, 1TB drive


I have a 256GB SSD I'll be putting in it for her so drive size doesn't matter


I was leaning towards the 6310 model due to being quad core and having 8GB ram. But the i3 has better IPC but is a dual core with HT and the HD4400 is comparable in speed so I'm debating if getting the extra 4GB of ram with the AMD Is the better buy?

Thoughts? Want to order today as sale on these ends today

 

[positivedoppler]

The i3 is marginally better in cpu mark but is probably incredibly gimped for any type of gaming.

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare.php?cmp[]=2193&cmp[]=2290
http://www.cpu-world.com/Compare/33...A6-6310_vs_Intel_Core_i3_Mobile_i3-4005U.html

and this one gives a 3dmark score
http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core-i3-4005U-vs-AMD-A6-6310

 

[R0H1T]

The A6 6310 + 8GB RAM :thumbsup:

Anything less than 8GB RAM is highly inadequate for multitasking these days especially content (graphics) heavy programs, including browsers like chrome.

 

[monstercameron]

they are neck-and-neck!
here are some stand ins:

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Acer-TravelMate-P256-M-39NG-Notebook-Review.131495.0.html
VS.
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Lenovo-B50-45-Notebook-Review-Update.126712.0.html

go for better screen, memory and disk space.

 

[Shadowjump]

I say the A6 too.

I am sure at some point she ll want to play Sims or something similar, and the i3 will not be up to par to do that.

 

[ShintaiDK]

The i3 by a long shot. The A6-6310 is a netbook CPU while the i3 is a laptop CPU.

Remember the 6310 is singlechannel and only 128SPs.

 

[jacktesterson]

The i3 by a long shot. The A6-6310 is a netbook CPU while the i3 is a laptop CPU.

Remember the 6310 is singlechannel and only 128SPs.

From what I've read graphics seem comparable and the CPU favors the i3 single threaded but the 6310 wins multithreaded. Is this not right?

Seems to me like both will offer similar experience


By gaming I mostly mean Super NES emulators

 

[Gikaseixas]

Another vote for the A6, that 8GB of ram its a bonus

i3 by a long shot

Please explain why when the 2 are very closely matched but i'm not surprised coming from you.

 

[Arachnotronic]

on my phone so I'll keep it brief

My daughter wants a dell Inspiron laptop and I told her I'd get one on Christmas Day for online sales. (Her grandfather gave her a gift card to get one)

As I already spent way to much on Christmas budget is very limited

This will be used primarily for web browsing and to plug into a 1080p TV for playing very low demanding games as well as playing 1080p YouTube and MKV rips in 1080p

She also wants a touch screen so we are getting a Dell Inspiron 15 As that's the option where gift card is for

I can get for same price:

1) 15.6 Touchscreen, 4GB ram, Intel i3-4005u, HD 4400, 500GB drive

Or

2) 15.6 Touchscreen, 8GB ram, AMD A6-6310, R4 bema graphics, 1TB drive


I have a 256GB SSD I'll be putting in it for her so drive size doesn't matter


I was leaning towards the 6310 model due to being quad core and having 8GB ram. But the i3 has better IPC but is a dual core with HT and the HD4400 is comparable in speed so I'm debating if getting the extra 4GB of ram with the AMD Is the better buy?

Thoughts? Want to order today as sale on these ends today

I'd go with the AMD laptop in this case; 8GB of RAM is much better long-term than 4GB.

 

[frozentundra123456]

From what I've read graphics seem comparable and the CPU favors the i3 single threaded but the 6310 wins multithreaded. Is this not right?

Seems to me like both will offer similar experience


By gaming I mostly mean Super NES emulators

According to notebook check, the graphics performance is similar, as is multithreaded performance, while I assume single threaded would be better for the i3, as you said.

I think, again, as you said, overall performance would be similar. Personally I would consider both marginal in performance for a full size notebook, but of the two, I would pick the i3.

It should be emphasized though, that contrary to what one would expect(and some posters have implied), at least according to notebook check, graphics performance will not be significantly better on the A6. No game performance in listed for the A6, but at low settings, the i3 can almost play skyrim at low settings, so I should think it would play something like the sims, but any demanding type game will be unplayable.

I am not that familiar with emulators, but I believe they depend mostly on single threaded cpu performance, which would favor the i3.

Edit: As regards to the ram, obviously 8 gb is better than 4, but with such weak cpus, I really doubt it would make a difference in performance. My desktop has 8gb ram, and rarely goes over 30% utilization, except in next gen port games like Dragon Age: Inquisition.

 

[positivedoppler]

According to notebook check, the graphics performance is similar, as is multithreaded performance, while I assume single threaded would be better for the i3, as you said.

I think, again, as you said, overall performance would be similar. Personally I would consider both marginal in performance for a full size notebook, but of the two, I would pick the i3.

It should be emphasized though, that contrary to what one would expect(and some posters have implied), at least according to notebook check, graphics performance will not be significantly better on the A6. No game performance in listed for the A6, but at low settings, the i3 can almost play skyrim at low settings, so I should think it would play something like the sims, but any demanding type game will be unplayable.

I am not that familiar with emulators, but I believe they depend mostly on single threaded cpu performance, which would favor the i3.

The 3D mark score is significantly higher on the 6310. All other run of the mill useless matrix that might be important if you want to open an excel file in .00000003 seconds has them neck and neck with i3 having a small lead.

 

[Shivansps]

The 3D mark score is significantly higher on the 6310. All other run of the mill useless matrix that might be important if you want to open an excel file in .00000003 seconds has them neck and neck with i3 having a small lead.

No way, that I3 has to have superior ST performance and the worse case scenario for the IGP is that them gona be very close, the HD4400 has to have superior performance, we already how that even the Haswell Intel HD can beat the Kabini IGP (with both at full clock), the HD4400 should be able to still do it even in its thermal constrain, no question that is a lot better than the Haswell Intel HD.

Check the links monstercameron posted, Tomb Raider and GRID are the only 2 games tested on both, both of them run better on the I3.


BUT, BUT, (and its a BIG BUT), the Intel IGP needs to have DC memory, SC memory just dont do it, and the Monstercameron link of the I3 is running on SC, and its still beating it...
If the i3 of the OP posted has 2 slots the I3 is just gona be A LOT better than the Beema for games (and it already is with ST, just slightly).

So my suggestion is, verify if the I3 have 2 memory slots, if it has 2 just go for it, is a no brainer.

 

[jacktesterson]

O

No way, that I3 has to have superior ST performance and the worse case scenario for the IGP is that them gona be very close, the HD4400 has to have superior performance.

Check the links monstercameron posted, Tomb Raider and GRID are the only 2 games tested on both, both of them run better on the I3.

Gaming is of little concern. Browsing and HD media playback is the main focus.

It's not like getting 12FPS is way better than 9FPS in Tomb raider. I'm talking emulators and age of empires 2 HD.

I think getting the 8GB ram now make the A6 the better deal unless I'm crazy but that's why I'm asking here as I don't want to go with AMD if the Intel is clearly better.

I do know the thermals of the Intel don't seem to impact the HD4400 on this chip. Priority is actually given to the GPU over the CPU on the i3-4005u

I'll check the links now

 

[monstercameron]

No way, that I3 has to have superior ST performance and the worse case scenario for the IGP is that them gona be very close, the HD4400 has to have superior performance, we already how that even the Haswell Intel HD can beat the Kabini IGP (with both at full clock), the HD4400 should be able to still do it even in its thermal constrain.

Check the links monstercameron posted, Tomb Raider and GRID are the only 2 games tested on both, both of them run better on the I3.

marginally faster but with less ram and storage. look at the cinebench scores, ~0.75/1.85 haswell and ~0.55/1.82 puma+, not that much difference. also note that puma+ is more efficient although they arent quite comparable.

 

[Shivansps]

marginally faster but with less ram and storage. look at the cinebench scores, ~0.75/1.85 haswell and ~0.55/1.82 puma+, not that much difference. also note that puma+ is more efficient although they arent quite comparable.

Sorry ive edited after that, it is marginally faster, but is running on SC, if the I3 of the OP can run DC there is just no challenge here for games. As for CPU they are close, yes, but ill still stick with the superior ST depending on price.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Please explain why when the 2 are very closely matched but i'm not surprised coming from you.

Faster CPU, specially in 1-2 threads where its MUCH faster. Faster IGP when using dualchannel.

You can upgrade memory and storage, the CPU, not so much.

 

[monstercameron]

Sorry ive edited after that, it is marginally faster, but is running on SC, if the I3 of the OP can run DC there is just no challenge here for games. As for CPU they are close, yes, but ill still stick with the superior ST depending on price.

ok shiv. look, even with slightly higher clocks and dc memory, beema trails so closely and uses less power.

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Lenovo-Yoga-2-13-Convertible-Review.121363.0.html - Intel Core i3-4010U
vs.
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Acer-Aspire-E17-E5-721-69FX-Notebook-Review.129527.0.html - AMD A6-6310

Intel Core i3-4010U | AMD A6-6310
0.73/1.83 | 0,6/2.15 [cinebench r11.5]
44220 | 40855 [3dmark icestorm graphics]
35W | 25W [load power draw]

note the yoga did throttle abit, so I don't know if it affected 3dmark results.

 

[jacktesterson]

O

Gaming is of little concern. Browsing and HD media playback is the main focus.

It's not like getting 12FPS is way better than 9FPS in Tomb raider. I'm talking emulators and age of empires 2 HD.

I think getting the 8GB ram now make the A6 the better deal unless I'm crazy but that's why I'm asking here as I don't want to go with AMD if the Intel is clearly better.

I do know the thermals of the Intel don't seem to impact the HD4400 on this chip. Priority is actually given to the GPU over the CPU on the i3-4005u

I'll check the links now

Faster CPU, specially in 1-2 threads where its MUCH faster. Faster IGP when using dualchannel.

You can upgrade memory and storage, the CPU, not so much.

It's not "much" faster though. It's marginally faster.

Price and notebooks are identical except the AMD has 8GB of ram. Drive size isn't a concern with either.

 

[frozentundra123456]

marginally faster but with less ram and storage. look at the cinebench scores, ~0.75/1.85 haswell and ~0.55/1.82 puma+, not that much difference. also note that puma+ is more efficient although they arent quite comparable.

Using your own benchmarks, single threaded performance is 36 percent faster, while multithreaded is equal. That seems a significant difference to me, and I believe single threaded performance is the limiting factor for emulators.

Edit: But as I and others have already said, I think the performance of these two notebooks would be similar, with i3 having a slight lead due to better single thread performance and equal miltithreaded cpu and graphics performance. I really dont see 8gb of ram as a significant factor in such moderately powered laptops. The real question to me is if the OP needs to move up to a more powerful system than either of these. I know budget is limited, but it is also false economy to get a system that is under-powered from the start. If battery life is not critical, a full power mobile pentium or i3 would be faster than either of these. I recently got a HP i3, 2.4 ghz from Best Buy on sale for 360.00.

 

[Shivansps]

The igp seems to be about equal or faster with SC too, the thing is it just a small diference.

Seems to be in line with that G3220 vs 5350 discussion a few months ago.


What is funny is how the tables have changed in this low end department, AMD and Intel are very close on CPU but on IGP Intel is better if using DC.

 

[monstercameron]

Using your own benchmarks, single threaded performance is 36 percent faster, while multithreaded is equal. That seems a significant difference to me, and I believe single threaded performance is the limiting factor for emulators.

yeah but that wont really affect emulator performance on anything but ps2/gamecube gen. for the day to day tasks, that ssd will go a long way vs a bump in st ipc.

 

[jacktesterson]

Yeah

The Intel is faster. I was just looking at cost savings of getting 8GB of ram up front.

Haha I've gone back and forth so much over something relatively inexpensive

I'm leaning i3 again now. It was my original gut feeling then I started leaning towards AMD due to the ram.

The question is will there be a noticeable difference in daily use?

I will be installing a Silicon Power S70 240GB SSD in it. (Said 256 by mistake)

 

[Shivansps]

did you checked if the I3 has 2 slots? thats kinda a key factor here, whiout that there is just not a lot lot of diff here.

ok shiv. look, even with slightly higher clocks and dc memory, beema trails so closely and uses less power.

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Lenovo-Yoga-2-13-Convertible-Review.121363.0.html - Intel Core i3-4010U
vs.
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Acer-Aspire-E17-E5-721-69FX-Notebook-Review.129527.0.html - AMD A6-6310

Intel Core i3-4010U | AMD A6-6310
0.73/1.83 | 0,6/2.15 [cinebench r11.5]
44220 | 40855 [3dmark icestorm graphics]
35W | 25W [load power draw]

note the yoga did throttle abit, so I don't know if it affected 3dmark results.

The Thief fps are even slower than the SC one, there is definatelly some themal problem there, coming from Lenovo im no so suprised.

The SC vs DC diference is very well documented, even affecting BT SC/DC models by important margin. (Z3740 can run ME2 just fine, Z3735D can not).

 

[monstercameron]

Yeah

The Intel is faster. I was just looking at cost savings of getting 8GB of ram up front.

Haha I've gone back and forth so much over something relatively inexpensive

I'm leaning i3 again now. It was my original gut feeling then I started leaning towards AMD due to the ram.

The question is will there be a noticeable difference in daily use?

I will be installing a Silicon Power S70 240GB SSD in it. (Said 256 by mistake)

seeing as how ssds can bring ancient p4 rigs back to life, I'd say it goes a long way into making your day to day activities faster. also more ram and hdd space is good.

 

[R0H1T]

Yeah

The Intel is faster. I was just looking at cost savings of getting 8GB of ram up front.

Haha I've gone back and forth so much over something relatively inexpensive

I'm leaning i3 again now. It was my original gut feeling then I started leaning towards AMD due to the ram.

The question is will there be a noticeable difference in daily use?

I will be installing a Silicon Power S70 240GB SSD in it. (Said 256 by mistake)

The 8GB RAM is definitely going to be a big plus, try using 4GB on win7 or newer OS' & see how much constant paging can affect performance even on an SSD system. Also are you sure you have the right drive(s) ?
www.amazon.com/review/RSSXNTE0QBSTV...9GG06GC&nodeID=541966&store=pc#wasThisHelpful