A6700 Richland is a fine cpu

[William Gaatjes]

I see a lot of people writing that AMD is not that good.

But i am running a virtual machine with heavy development software, playing music in the background on the host by use of VLC, Running a java based fully featured IDE MPLABX on the host, a browser and multiple pdf readers on the host. And running Comport terminal programs and logic analyzers on the host. And it all runs fine. The music never stalls or my programs never slow down.
I am very pleased with it.
My host system is windows7-64.

 

[Roland00Address]

If that is your logic then I can lists hundreds of fine cpus made from Intel and AMD.

Same Logic with SSDs, Harddrives, Memory, Power Supplies, Monitors, etc.

 

[meloz]

I see a lot of people writing that AMD is not that good.

But i am running a virtual machine with heavy development software, playing music in the background on the host by use of VLC, Running a java based fully featured IDE MPLABX on the host, a browser and multiple pdf readers on the host. And running Comport terminal programs and logic analyzers on the host. And it all runs fine. The music never stalls or my programs never slow down.
I am very pleased with it.
My host system is windows7-64.

Good to see you are happy with your build. But you can do all that work on a Haswell Pentium, too. If virtualization is crippled in Pentiums (unsure) an entry level Core i3 should suffice. In modern desktop systems the bottlenecks tends to be disk I/O (if no SSD is used) or the network port (if workload is heavily networking dependant). Abundant RAM has also made life easier for everyone, the OS can cache so much more and thus make for a responsive system.

AMD's two weakness are absymal single-threaded performance and poor performance/watt. It is for this reason people usually recommend Intel over AMD, even though Intel system initially costs more.

 

[know of fence]

CPUs have been fast enough since the Core 2 Duo days, especially on the desktop, since then there were marginal improvements SATA and memory bandwidth doubled and we've got more memory with DDR3. On the desktop idle power consumption hasn't improved since the first core i Nehalem. Still there is no need to move past quad core.

AMD was in a bit of a stall since the Phenom, but intel is also just happy to dial back performance and the TDPs and push the somewhat performance limited 15 W ultrabooks and NUCs to unsuspecting customers aiming to replace the desktop altogether.

There is a lot of life and "future proof" left in todays quad core desktops, given that we all wait for mobile to catch up.

 

[Hans Gruber]

I think that Haswell unlocked dual core Pentium chip could give your AMD a run for it's money for $70. The ship at AMD has been driven by a drunk captain.

 

[frozentundra123456]

Only a few posters say AMD cpus are not "good". Whether they are the best choice in the vast majority of situations is another matter. Personally, I feel that in almost every case except where one wants to game on the igpu, Intel offers a better solution at a comparable price. That does not mean that AMD cpus cannot do the job, and if you are happy with your cpu, that is great.

 

[USER8000]

I think that Haswell unlocked dual core Pentium chip could give your AMD a run for it's money for $70. The ship at AMD has been driven by a drunk captain.

The G3258 has kibbled virtualisation options.

 

[MiddleOfTheRoad]

I think that Haswell unlocked dual core Pentium chip could give your AMD a run for it's money for $70. The ship at AMD has been driven by a drunk captain.

If he's using the integrated graphics (common at this price point) -- then the Pentium is not not even close. AMD still owns the segment if you don't want to buy a dedicated video card.

 

[BSim500]

If he's using the integrated graphics (common at this price point) -- then the Pentium is not not even close. AMD still owns the segment if you don't want to buy a dedicated video card.

The problem with the A6700's $149 price-tag is for the same money, you could buy a $70 G3258 + pick up a $70 7790 discrete card on Ebay and enjoy double to triple the fps in most games. The gap widens even more if you have to buy high-speed RAM for the iGPU to avoid 20% fps drops with DDR3-1600 vs 2400 RAM.

Sane advice still stands : If you're planning to game on a budget, save yourself a lot of pain and just buy a cheap 2nd hand GFX card. $149 is a false economy for this level of 'performance' when there are 7750/7770's going for as little as $30-50. At those prices, the "competition" isn't Intel's iGPU's, it's AMD's previous gen discrete GPU's which are a lot more cost efficient ($ per fps) even in the "$150 max for both CPU + GPU" budget range.

 

[MiddleOfTheRoad]

The problem with the A6700's $149 price-tag is for the same money, you could buy a $70 G3258 + pick up a $70 7790 discrete card on Ebay and enjoy double to triple the fps in most games. The gap widens even more if you have to buy high-speed RAM for the iGPU to avoid 20% fps drops with DDR3-1600 vs 2400 RAM.

Sane advice still stands : If you're planning to game on a budget, save yourself a lot of pain and just buy a cheap 2nd hand GFX card. $149 is a false economy for this level of 'performance' when there are 7750/7770's going for as little as $30-50. At those prices, the "competition" isn't Intel's iGPU's, it's AMD's previous gen discrete GPU's which are a lot more cost efficient ($ per fps) even in the "$150 max for both CPU + GPU" budget range.

Sane advice would be to read what he's actually doing. He's using it for running virtual machines and software development. The virtualization features on the G3258 are crippled. You do realize there are people who use a computer to do something besides play games.

For what he's doing -- the A6700 is a much better choice than a Pentium. You just seem to be perpetuating the "Intel is always better" silliness. Here is a great example of where it isn't. For inexpensive CPU's, AMD are extremely compelling for scientific computing, virtualization and integrated graphics.

 

[Enigmoid]

Sane advice would be to read what he's actually doing. He's using it for running virtual machines and software development. The virtualization features on the G3258 are crippled. You do realize there are people who use a computer to do something besides play games.

For what he's doing -- the A6700 is a much better choice than a Pentium. You just seem to be perpetuating the "Intel is always better" silliness. Here is a great example of where it isn't. For inexpensive CPU's, AMD are extremely compelling for scientific computing, virtualization and integrated graphics.

Scientific computing? Only in some cases. Lots of scientific applications are FP, cache, or BW heavy and perform horribly on AMD's systems (3d particle movement, Euler 3d, etc). Integer performance however, is very strong and can easily exceed the 4770k. Research beforehand is needed.

Plus if you run these things 24/7 you have to look at the power bill.

As for the G3258, VT-x is enabled though VT-d is not.

http://ark.intel.com/products/82723/Intel-Pentium-Processor-G3258-3M-Cache-3_20-GHz

 

[MiddleOfTheRoad]

Scientific computing? Only in some cases. Lots of scientific applications are FP, cache, or BW heavy and perform horribly on AMD's systems (3d particle movement, Euler 3d, etc). Integer performance however, is very strong and can easily exceed the 4770k. Research beforehand is needed.

Plus if you run these things 24/7 you have to look at the power bill.

As for the G3258, VT-x is enabled though VT-d is not.

Why would anyone buy a CPU being used for Virtual Machines that has some of its features for virtualization disabled? That would be a poor purchase -- and probably lead to lousy performance. As for the difference of running an AMD vs Intel 24/7 for power consumption -- everyone makes a big deal, but in the USA it's probably around 10 or 15 bucks a year tops (excluding the insane 220 Watt FX chips -- those are just power-guzzling CPU's IMO).

As for scientific applications -- It varies. My i7 3770K and FX-8320 benchmark within 100 points of each other for floating point performance under BIONC (both running under ubuntu 64 bit). Optimizations vary from project to project (some favor AMD while others favor Intel). Many projects score higher for Nvidia versus Radeons as well -- which is I why I run components from both manufacturers.

 

[beginner99]

Sane advice would be to read what he's actually doing. He's using it for running virtual machines and software development. The virtualization features on the G3258 are crippled. You do realize there are people who use a computer to do something besides play games.

For what he's doing -- the A6700 is a much better choice than a Pentium. You just seem to be perpetuating the "Intel is always better" silliness. Here is a great example of where it isn't. For inexpensive CPU's, AMD are extremely compelling for scientific computing, virtualization and integrated graphics.

The problem is a entry level core i3 is cheaper and better suited for these tasks. The gpu in richland will go unused (is over powered) but cost a huge premium. And if you need the GPU for gaming on a budget you are better of with a pentium and 7750(7770) at a similar price.

The tasks he lists can be easily achieved by a baytrail 4 core atom. In fact having an ssd will be more important than the CPU for the listed tasks.

 

[MiddleOfTheRoad]

The problem is a entry level core i3 is cheaper and better suited for these tasks. The gpu in richland will go unused (is over powered) but cost a huge premium. And if you need the GPU for gaming on a budget you are better of with a pentium and 7750(7770) at a similar price.

The tasks he lists can be easily achieved by a baytrail 4 core atom. In fact having an ssd will be more important than the CPU for the listed tasks.

Again, this is turning into fanboy-ish posts. This user felt the A10 6700 best suit his needs. Your assuming he's never going to use the GPU. What if he does? He is already clearly happy with the performance he's getting out of his purchase.

The price difference between a new A10 6700 and an "entry level" i3 is about $20. For the extra twenty bucks, I'd rather have the stronger GPU if I ever needed it. Why would anyone advocate a baytrail which has absolutely no upgrade path? An FM2+ motherboard has an upgrade path in the future -- since its the socket that AMD is focused on.

And back to the Pentium nonsense? Crippled virtualization features for a guy who is running virtual machines? A Pentium is a poor choice -- he is better off with what he already has. Where is the common sense? He is NOT playing games.

 

[sm625]

Try playing a game of contested territory tier 9 on Bloons Monkey City. Get to about round 50 and then you'll find out whether your cpu is good or not.

 

[SlowSpyder]

If that is your logic then I can lists hundreds of fine cpus made from Intel and AMD.

Same Logic with SSDs, Harddrives, Memory, Power Supplies, Monitors, etc.

If what is his logic? He needs a CPU to do XYZ well, it appears to do XYZ well for him.

 

[frozentundra123456]

Again, this is turning into fanboy-ish posts. This user felt the A10 6700 best suit his needs. Your assuming he's never going to use the GPU. What if he does? He is already clearly happy with the performance he's getting out of his purchase.

The price difference between a new A10 6700 and an "entry level" i3 is about $20. For the extra twenty bucks, I'd rather have the stronger GPU if I ever needed it. Why would anyone advocate a baytrail which has absolutely no upgrade path? An FM2+ motherboard has an upgrade path in the future -- since its the socket that AMD is focused on.

And back to the Pentium nonsense? Crippled virtualization features for a guy who is running virtual machines? A Pentium is a poor choice -- he is better off with what he already has. Where is the common sense? He is NOT playing games.

You do know that an i3 is Haswell and can be upgraded to an i5, right?

 

[Roland00Address]

If what is his logic? He needs a CPU to do XYZ well, it appears to do XYZ well for him.

Most cars can get a person from A to B in an acceptable matter.

That does not mean one car is better or worse than another. You can make quantifable statements saying this car is faster, better gas mileage, cheaper, etc.

Saying one cpu suits your needs is not useful information when your needs are so generous I can put hundreds of cpus that would meet his needs.

A cpu is a bad cpu, if in all tests one cpu it is inferior to another (including price). A q6600 can still be found out in the wild for $90 for a new cpu. In all tests it will be inferior to a g3258 which can be found for $70.

You may think I am making an obtuse comparison, but I am making an extreme comparison.

 

[MiddleOfTheRoad]

You do know that an i3 is Haswell and can be upgraded to an i5, right?

He was talking about Baytrail Atoms -- which is a system on chip that is hardwired to the motherboard. No CPU upgrade without swapping the motherboard.

 

[William Gaatjes]

If that is your logic then I can lists hundreds of fine cpus made from Intel and AMD.

Same Logic with SSDs, Harddrives, Memory, Power Supplies, Monitors, etc.

You make weird comments based on your own view. I just mentioned that my cpu and all hardware around it, is suited for the tasks i had in mind.
On the contrary, it performs magnificent, and i still have not upgraded towards an SSD (Still postponing the moment for re install reasons).

Of course i can still play the games i like with my new system at a higher resolution because some of those games are more cpu intensive and that was the bottleneck of my old system, meaning not gpu performance limited. GPU wise, the A6700 gpu is more powerful than my old gpu. I have been winning at all fronts when compared to my old system.
And that is my point of view and logic. I am not going to compare my A6700 to the fastest Intel I7 out there or AMD FX because there is no use for it.

 

[ChichoGarcy]

The A10-6700 at $100 or $110 would be a no brainer. With only 65w TDP (less heat, great for HTPC), quad core and a very interesting iGPU it would be an easy decision. At $150, a cheaper Intel + cheap dedicated GPU will always be a solid option. AMD has to put better prices out there, at least for Trinity and Richland APUs.

 

[monstercameron]

The A10-6700 at $100 or $110 would be a no brainer. With only 65w TDP (less heat, great for HTPC), quad core and a very interesting iGPU it would be an easy decision. At $150, a cheaper Intel + cheap dedicated GPU will always be a solid option. AMD has to put better prices out there, at least for Trinity and Richland APUs.

you pay for integration in every market.

 

[bononos]

The A10-6700 at $100 or $110 would be a no brainer. With only 65w TDP (less heat, great for HTPC), quad core and a very interesting iGPU it would be an easy decision. At $150, a cheaper Intel + cheap dedicated GPU will always be a solid option. AMD has to put better prices out there, at least for Trinity and Richland APUs.

I wonder if gamers really need to save that $50 for the privilege of playing games at low settings. AMD has done a good job pasting together a relatively good igp with its cpus but its fought the wrong battle by gambling on HSA.

 

[ChichoGarcy]

I wonder if gamers really need to save that $50 for the privilege of playing games at low settings. AMD has done a good job pasting together a relatively good igp with its cpus but its fought the wrong battle by gambling on HSA.

I'm not talking about a gaming rig. If you want that go for Intel + GPU. APUs are perfect for HTPC that can do some casual gaming.
On HSA, sadly I'm with you. Very good idea, but looks like a dead end.
Lots of people are getting tired of AMD unfulfilled promises, that's a shame.

 

[Abwx]

Scientific computing? Only in some cases. Lots of scientific applications are FP, cache, or BW heavy and perform horribly on AMD's systems (3d particle movement, Euler 3d, etc). Integer performance however, is very strong and can easily exceed the 4770k. Research beforehand is needed.

Plus if you run these things 24/7 you have to look at the power bill.

As for the G3258, VT-x is enabled though VT-d is not.

http://ark.intel.com/products/82723/Intel-Pentium-Processor-G3258-3M-Cache-3_20-GHz

3d Particle movement is not a FP bench, it relies mainly on memory bandwith and it seems not at all on FP capabilities, typicaly a riggged bench by the definition showing 30% better perf for BT compared to Kabini even if the latter has roughly 30% better FP IPC, indeed i d like to have Anand s reviewer opinion about this bench that suddenly came from nowhere.

As to Euler 3d, well, let see what is exactly this bench :

Euler3d Benchmark Data

The benchmark is intended to provide information about the relative speed of different processor, operating system, and compiler combinations for a multi-threaded, floating point, computationally intensive CFD code

Intel's Fortran Compiler generates different code paths for different processor capabilities. Non-Intel processors may not trigger the fast code path