AMD A10-5800K preview - iGPU side only

[Gikaseixas]

That cant run it up to the settings you re insisting on ,
but that is only your opinion , so to write that it cant
run it , period , is just trolling...

Well said

 

[iCyborg]

If you want to buy "what suits you" and if that is a system that can barely if at all play current games at decent settings and resolutions, more power to you. And let me be clear. I am only directing this to those who insist on buying trinity and gaming on it without a discrete gpu. I fail to see how that is a "compelling option" when for 50 to 100 additional dollars you could effectively double the performance in games by adding a discrete card.

And if you add another $100 you can get a 7850 which will provide nearly 2x more than 7770 if you OC. And if you add another $100, you can get 3570K, double the cores of i3, and being unlocked you can easily push it past 4 GHz. And if you add another $100, you can get a 128GB SSD. And if you add...

We need to draw a line somewhere, and what Ferzerp and you guys don't understand is that this line is in different places for different people. Instead, you're defining what "suitable" is for everyone. I have i7 + 7950 and to me gt640, gt650 and 77xx are glorified HTPC cards, and I'm not even a heavy gamer. But I wouldn't say that anything below 7850 will "not get any points just for participation".

Also, I find it funny that in the Trinity mobile review, we had a similar argument: for gaming one should pay another $100-$200 and get an IB+gt640m/7670m, because the former is not suitable for gaming, you need discrete. And now even though 5800K is more powerful than those entry level mobile discretes, it's nonetheless unsuitable for gaming. It's as if the definition of suitability has more to do with integrated/discrete than the actual performance. I don't want to search for the thread, but I'd think it would involve a lot of the same people...

 

[Ferzerp]

this is about the fastest igpu we have available

No one is arguing with you in regards to that, but being the fastest available doesn't mean that it doesn't still suck. Some cannot see that.

Car analogy time!!!!

Let's pretend we're all bad life planners and have 100 mile (each way) commutes. Let's pretend ford has an EV that can go 45 miles on a charge!
Now, let's pretend chevy has one that can do 75 miles on a charge! (wowie!)

Well, either of these works fine for going to the grocery store and derping around town with. Unfortunately, both are pretty useless for our commutes.

Now, let's pretend that there are some days that our commutes are only 60 miles. Wow, there are the occasional days that your chevy might work for a commute. Too bad if I buy one, I can only get to work on those days and the rest of the time I am just out of luck.

 

[Ferzerp]

We need to draw a line somewhere, and what Ferzerp and you guys don't understand is that this line is in different places for different people

I see it more that because it's the best igpu available, it magically gets a pass regardless of how poorly it performs in some folks' eyes. The performance is so low, that I feel it takes some interesting mental gymnastics to see it as more than just another pointless igpu.

 

[pelov]

I see it more that because it's the best igpu available, it magically gets a pass regardless of how poorly it performs in some folks' eyes. The performance is so low, that I feel it takes some interesting mental gymnastics to see it as more than just another pointless igpu.

See my post.

Then consider that 2/3s to 3/4s of all of the PCs sold are laptops.

 

[iCyborg]

I see it more that because it's the best igpu available, it magically gets a pass regardless of how poorly it performs in some folks' eyes. The performance is so low for me, that I feel it takes some interesting mental gymnastics to see it as more than just another pointless igpu.

You still didn't get what I'm saying, so I fixed the post for you

 

[Ferzerp]

See my post.

Then consider that 2/3s to 3/4s of all of the PCs sold are laptops.

Oh, I saw your post. Laptop screens aren't magical fps multipliers that magically make slideshows suddenly smooth, acceptable performance.

 

[Ferzerp]

You didn't agree with what I'm saying, so I presumed to put words in to your mouth

No, I get what you're saying. You're assuming that there is no such thing as too slow because someone, somewhere might accept it.

I find that argument pretty silly and unfounded.

 

[Gikaseixas]

No one is arguing with you in regards to that, but being the fastest available doesn't mean that it doesn't still suck. Some cannot see that.

Car analogy time!!!!

Let's pretend we're all bad life planners and have 100 mile (each way) commutes. Let's pretend ford has an EV that can go 45 miles on a charge!
Now, let's pretend chevy has one that can do 75 miles on a charge! (wowie!)

Well, either of these works fine for going to the grocery store and derping around town with. Unfortunately, both are pretty useless for our commutes.

Now, let's pretend that there are some days that our commutes are only 60 miles. Wow, there are the occasional days that your chevy might work for a commute. Too bad if I buy one, I can only get to work on those days and the rest of the time I am just out of luck.

It sucks only for you and a select few, don't you see it? How many people are coming here to put some sense into you?? Count the posters you are arguing with. It's just you and frozentundra. I'm done with you.

 

[frozentundra123456]

Your attention to detail is lacking too. I give up, please go read and see how I got to the 6770.

It is not our attention that is lacking, it is your logic.

 

[Ferzerp]

It sucks only for you and a select few, don't you see it? How many people are coming here to put some sense into you?? Count the posters you are arguing with. It's just you and frozentundra. I'm done with you.

Because after 500 and however many posts, all that's left in these kinds of threads are fanboys, and the people wasting their time trying to talk sense in to the fanboys. Typically, at this point, the fanboys outnumber the people visiting bizarro world who are trying to see just how deep the rabbit hole goes.

 

[pelov]

Oh, I saw your post. Laptop screens aren't magical fps multipliers that magically make slideshows suddenly smooth, acceptable performance.

They're also mostly 1366x768 The image quality and the "smoothness", aka response time, are equal to that of mobile discrete GPUs (FFS, look up. I've already posted that. Saying you've read what I've posted and actually reading it are two different things entirely). In both of those regards, Intel has a bit of work to do. Though a recent driver update has fixed some image quality issues that persisted with Ivy Bridge, they're still a bit away from discrete-level image quality.

So they're not bottom end anything. They're actually replacing mid-level mobile graphics cards already. AMD's 7660G compares roughly to a GT540m/GT630m while Intel is a bit behind, somewhere around the GT520m level.

Instead of going with your _____insert response here instead of reading the reviews_____, it might do you good to actually read the mobile reviews, specifically where the on-die GPU is concerned. The same scenario you're describing that you want on the desktop, discrete level performance that's actually respectable, is already there on laptops. You know... the segment of the market that makes up the majority of sales.

 

[Gikaseixas]

It is not our attention that is lacking, it is your logic.

My logic is perfect. As for your logic, you only see one thing as being logical an that's AMD is crap.

 

[frozentundra123456]

Price.

Size.

Price: 20% increase in price for 100% increase in performance: advantage discrete.

Size: Hmm, no computer I have ever added a discrete card to suddenly grew in size: advantage discrete.

 

[Gikaseixas]

Because after 500 and however many posts, all that's left in these kinds of threads are fanboys, and the people wasting their time trying to talk sense in to the fanboys. Typically, at this point, the fanboys outnumber the people visiting bizarro world who are trying to see just how deep the rabbit hole goes.

Its more the other way. At this point the real fanboys are always in lesser numbers. You aren't just a fanboy, you morphed into a troll by now.

 

[Ferzerp]

They're also mostly 1366x768 The image quality and the "smoothness", aka response time, are equal to that of mobile discrete GPUs. In both of those regards, Intel has a bit of work to do. Though a recent driver update has fixed some image quality issues that persisted with Ivy Bridge, they're still a bit away from discrete-level image quality.

So they're not bottom end anything. They're actually replacing mid-level mobile graphics cards already. AMD's 7660G compares roughly to a GT540m/GT630m while Intel is a bit behind, somewhere around the GT520m level.

Instead of going with your _____insert response here instead of reading the reviews_____, it might do you good to actually read the mobile reviews, specifically where the on-die GPU is concerned. The same scenario you're describing that you want on the desktop, discrete level performance that's actually respectable, is already there on laptops. You know... the segment of the market that makes up the majority of sales.

You're making the supposition that what you're calling "mid-level mobile graphics cards" are acceptable for games.

I do not accept that postulate. If I did, I would agree with you, but your basis is flawed.

Many, many bad products exist.

 

[Ferzerp]

Its more the other way. At this point the real fanboys are always in lesser numbers. You aren't just a fanboy, you morphed into a troll by now.

If you feel that I am not posting in accordance with the rules here, please feel free to report me.

edit: Disagreeing with you is not against the rules

 

[iCyborg]

No, I get what you're saying. You're assuming that there is no such thing as too slow because someone, somewhere might accept it.

I find that argument pretty silly and unfounded.

No, I'm not assuming that, it would a logic/math fail: everyone has some level that is too slow, there are a finite number of people, so when you take the minimum of this, you will get what is too slow for everyone. What I do say is that there isn't a sharp line that applies for everyone.

Second: if someone, somewhere finds something acceptable, then it's not too slow for him, isn't it? I don't understand: even though he's fine with it, it is still too slow for him, because you say so?

 

[pelov]

I'm not making a supposition. You're being thick. Quit posting and get to reading

The performance of the Radeon HD 7660G differs from the used benchmark. In synthetic benchmarks like 3DMark 11 it reaches the level of the dedicated Radeon HD 7670M. However, in games (and playable settings) the performance is more similar to the AMD Radeon HD 6630M. Therefore, the performance is significantly better than the Intel HD Graphics 4000 in the Ivy Bridge Quad-Core models.

http://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-Radeon-HD-7660G.69830.0.html

If you look at the benchmarks, the GT540m and the 7660G are within spitting distance of each other, trading blows depending on the title. Also consider that the 7660G will gain roughly ~5%-10% with driver updates, they're equal (the same can be said for the new Kepler/GCN cards. In general, GPUs get 5-10% with driver maturity).

The GT540m is still a popular card as far as OEMs go. It generally costs ~$50-$100 as a configuration option. So not only has Trinity dropped the price by that much, it's also removed the burden of having to worry about the heat and power consumption that come with the discrete GPU in a laptop. Discrete cards in a laptop are something that OEMs and buyers all want to avoid. It means more heat, higher power consumption, higher price, more stress on the surrounding components, adds weight to the laptop, and means you need to have a higher wattage adapter. None of these are good things.

 

[Gikaseixas]

If you feel that I am not posting in accordance with the rules here, please feel free to report me.

edit: Disagreeing with you is not against the rules

Didn't say that either. I actually think well of you as a poster, you're smart but with an extreme bias. Conclusion: we'll never agree as I'm a neutral hardware user and I usually choose the best available at a certain price.

 

[Ferzerp]

Second: if someone, somewhere finds something acceptable, then it's not too slow for him, isn't it? I don't understand: even though he's fine with it, it is still too slow for him, because you say so?

My position is that those few who might accept this type of performance are outliers.

Be honest, would you take a look at this things and say "wow, I gotta get me one of those instead of buying a discrete card"?

 

[iCyborg]

My position is that those few who might accept this type of performance are outliers.

Be honest, would you take a look at this things and say "wow, I gotta get me one of those instead of buying a discrete card"?

I personally wouldn't buy a 7770 that you recommend, for me 7850 would be a minimum if I'm buying today. I plan to buy A8-5600K for my dad though.

 

[TerryMathews]

My position is that those few who might accept this type of performance are outliers.

Be honest, would you take a look at this things and say "wow, I gotta get me one of those instead of buying a discrete card"?

You do realize that PC gamers like you are in fact the minority, right?

 

[Abwx]

the 8800GT (what, 4 or 5 year old tech) is still faster in most cases.

Yes , when running the 8800 in DX10 and the 7660D in DX11...

 

[Ferzerp]

you're smart but with an extreme bias

I don't hide my bias, but I suspect that you mistake my disdain for "budget" parts as disdain for AMD. If AMD were to produce superior products then I would be all for them! I'm interested in the performance, not who makes it, and it has to be good enough to actually do what I'm trying to do with it.