• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

AMD FX-7500 user review take 2

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Abwx said:
What is power drain when running CB multi threaded.?.

The reviews at Notebookcheck point to Kaveri generaly not exhausting its TDP rating,
hence some weird CB scores that have 12% variations depending of the laptop, the model below with a A10 7350B consume a peak 32.5W before getting to 26.4W, indeed the battery life under full load point to 25W total comsumption of the laptop, wich induce no more than 14-15W real TDP for a 19W rated APU.

http://www.notebookcheck.net/HP-EliteBook-725-G2-Notebook-J0H65AW-Review.127636.0.html
Click to expand...


Well my laptop runs 30-40watts no matter what I do in windows 10. I think power management is kinda broken
 
Notebokkcheck got about the same problem with a HP laptop using an A 10 7350B :

The battery tests proved very time-consuming, and we had to perform them multiple times. The EliteBook only provided bad runtimes the first time

We ultimately installed Windows 8.1 Pro via the included recovery DVD and again performed the runtime tests. That led to realistic times. We assume that the problems were due to an error in the preloaded Windows 7 installation, and the laptop thus had a higher power requirement in battery mode.
Click to expand...

http://www.notebookcheck.net/HP-EliteBook-745-G2-Notebook-Review.125934.0.html
 
ShintaiDK said:
So you got something close to the i3 SB non turbo performance, 4 years later. Thats 4 years of sales in between that people at best would have to sidegrade for. Assuming they didnt buy an i5.
Click to expand...

I love the fact that you gloss over the fact that the i3 SB has the crappiest integrated graphics money can buy. 4 years ago or today. Intel graphics still suck ass and have never been competitive with AMD or Nvidia at their respective price point.
 
And AMD fans only want to point out how great the igp is. So what? Personally, on the desktop, igpu means little to me above a basic level. Any intel or amd big core igp is good enough for casual use, and if I want good gpu performance I will add a discrete card. I suppose there are niche applications where one might want to game (or do some other gpu intensive task) on an igpu on the desktop, but they seem limited.

Now mobile is a different story. I am interested in how Carizzo will perform in mobile and if it will be a significant bump over mobile Kaveri, which never really was very well represented.
 
frozentundra123456 said:
And AMD fans only want to point out how great the igp is. So what? Personally, on the desktop, igpu means little to me above a basic level.
Click to expand...

Welcome to the thread. The OP was about a laptop, dude.

Not only is IGP important, it is most important for many laptop power users. The 4 year old i3 Shintai was referring to -- is downright useless for OpenGL / Direct3D.

Also to paraphrase your "Any intel or amd big core igp is good enough."

B.S. -- Try running a professional OpenGL application on Intel IGP with their terrible drivers. I've never seen more graphical distortions in my life. Nvidia is the best in the industry. AMD/ATi has a rocky reputation for OpenGL, but they are still light years ahead of Intel.

The whole.... "Oh, yeah I know Intel IGP sucks. No worries, I can add a video card." Let me see you do that to a laptop.
 
Last edited:
MiddleOfTheRoad said:
I love the fact that you gloss over the fact that the i3 SB has the crappiest integrated graphics money can buy. 4 years ago or today. Intel graphics still suck ass and have never been competitive with AMD or Nvidia at their respective price point.
Click to expand...

Intel was ahead of AMD in 2010-2011 with Clarkdale and Sandy Bridge and before that Nvidia IGPs were generally competitive with AMD, it took until Llano for AMD to clearly dominate.

HD 2000 was faster than the AMD IGPs when launched, I've been a little disappointed with how the Intel IGPs progressed since Ivy Bridge, but I think Intel is not to far anymore (in great part because of the process/CPU efficiency advantage and memory bandwidth bottleneck)
 
SPBHM said:
Intel was ahead of AMD in 2010-2011 with Clarkdale and Sandy Bridge and before that Nvidia IGPs were generally competitive with AMD, it took until Llano for AMD to clearly dominate.

HD 2000 was faster than the AMD IGPs when launched, I've been a little disappointed with how the Intel IGPs progressed since Ivy Bridge, but I think Intel is not to far anymore (in great part because of the process/CPU efficiency advantage and memory bandwidth bottleneck)
Click to expand...

That's revisionist history. Because even when Intel integrated graphics hardware had matched the performance of comparable Radeons -- Intel's drivers/software compatibility has never been close. Intel's GPU drivers are way more buggy than Nvidia or AMD. To this day, Intel's IGP is still an afterthought.
 
Last edited:
MiddleOfTheRoad said:
Welcome to the thread. The OP was about a laptop, dude.

Not only is IGP important, it is most important for many laptop power users. The 4 year old i3 Shintai was referring to -- is downright useless for OpenGL / Direct3D.

Also to paraphrase your "Any intel or amd big core igp is good enough."

B.S. -- Try running a professional OpenGL application on Intel IGP with their terrible drivers. I've never seen more graphical distortions in my life. Nvidia is the best in the industry. AMD/ATi has a rocky reputation for OpenGL, but they are still light years ahead of Intel.

The whole.... "Oh, yeah I know Intel IGP sucks. No worries, I can add a video card." Let me see you do that to a laptop.
Click to expand...

You dont have to yell. And btw, for a robust gaming laptop, you *do* have to add a discrete card. They do exist for laptops you know.
 
frozentundra123456 said:
You dont have to yell. And btw, for a robust gaming laptop, you *do* have to add a discrete card. They do exist for laptops you know.
Click to expand...

Again, you don't have that discrete option after you bought the laptop. It was either manufactured that way or it wasn't.

I think the tell tale is that PC World's 10 Best Gaming Laptops -- not a single one is running Iris Pro. All 10 of them are powered by dedicated Nvidia Geforce GTX M variants.

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2020688,00.asp

The bottom line is that a lowly A8, A10 or FX laptop are perfectly suitable for professional graphics (OpenGL). Intel's drivers are still so poorly written -- that even great performing hardware like Iris Pro.... still gets replaced by a dedicated Nvidia GPU in almost all the laptops on the market. No one can touch AMD right now for a single chip solution for a laptop.
 
Phynaz said:
You don't appear to understand that term, because it makes no sense how you used it.
Click to expand...

I am well aware of the term. People remembering something as better than what it actually was.

So you can't understand that Intel was never really competitive because their GPU drivers have always sucked? Would you prefer if I typed it in braille.

Intel has yet to deliver the total package for any of their GPU's. Good hardware with good drivers. Iris Pro is quite good hardware that is let down by buggy drivers.
 
Last edited:
MiddleOfTheRoad said:
The bottom line is that a lowly A8, A10 or FX laptop are perfectly suitable for professional graphics (OpenGL). Intel's drivers are still so poorly written -- that even great performing hardware like Iris Pro.... still gets replaced by a dedicated Nvidia GPU in almost all the laptops on the market. No one can touch AMD right now for a single chip solution for a laptop.
Click to expand...

No offense but if you are making money with the laptop just get a dgpu model.

CPU isn't powerful enough for anything that requires a lot of CPU time.
GPU isn't powerful for larger projects.
Professional applications are increasingly moving to DX (ie autodesk).

AMD's OpenGL drivers are not particularly great. System is often power constrained and throttles.

You can argue that nobody seems to be able to touch AMD for a single chip solution (debatable as some may disagree), but it seems that the market doesn't care.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top