APU13- AMD Kaveri details- 856Gflops, 3.7Ghz CPU,720Mhz GPU

[Meekers]

I have built desktops for my office on Llano and Richland and have tried a few games on them because I was curious. on a 720p monitor Llano could barely run games on low settings. Richland handles pretty well on medium settings, even manages to chug along in Guild Wars 2 WvW.

If Kaveri can really get to medium 1080p settings than I think it will be a great chip that will be surprisingly usable for light gaming. I am really interested in a seeing how games that use Mantle and True Audio perform.

 

[NaroonGTX]

^And yet SiliconWars is the one who is getting the infractions in this thread...

Yeah, I was trying to figure out exactly what he did wrong to receive those. Apparently it's okay to baselessly claim Chipzilla's future parts will "crush" whatever AMD is working on, but if you refute it, you get an infraction? Didn't say that in the sticky topic about "new rules for etiquette, etc." I read before I started posting here, but it seems mods may have agendas here after all. I've certainly heard about it before.

I'll probably get one for this very post, lol.

 

[erunion]

Have you been following SW's post history? Did you read his posts before mod edits? No, so why take the thread off topic to challenge the mods?

 

[NaroonGTX]

I've seen people take threads off topic all the time with much more inane drivel, so don't give me that. Why don't you enlighten me via PM of this, then?

 

[Arachnotronic]

Yeah, let's compare AMD's $100~$150 APU's to Intel's Iris Pro chips which are in completely different price brackets and not even available in anything outside of a BGA package. Makes sense. Let's also ignore how much bigger the Iris Pro's die size is compared to said APU's.

Just lol.



Seeing as how Kaveri is supposedly hitting retail in mid-January, I guess we'll be seeing benches either later this month or sometime in December.

The reason AMD sells its APUs for so cheaply is precisely because of their performance/power characteristics. Do you honestly think AMD is a charity that "likes" selling 200mm^2+ silicon dies for 37-40% gross margin? NO!

 

[Arachnotronic]

Yeah, I was trying to figure out exactly what he did wrong to receive those. Apparently it's okay to baselessly claim Chipzilla's future parts will "crush" whatever AMD is working on, but if you refute it, you get an infraction? Didn't say that in the sticky topic about "new rules for etiquette, etc." I read before I started posting here, but it seems mods may have agendas here after all. I've certainly heard about it before.

I'll probably get one for this very post, lol.

Oof, calling out a mod for having an agenda? Of course you'll get an infraction.

And there's nothing "baseless" about my claim. AMD is pumping raw GFLOPS, well, okay, a top bin Haswell i7 with Iris Pro well exceeds the 856GFLOPs number. Plenty of "base" for that assertion.

 

[SiliconWars]

Guys don't defend me, you'll get infractions for a mod callout and it's not worth it. Thanks to everybody who sent PM's though - some of you can't receive messages back btw, just incase you wondered why you didn't get a response from me.

As for Intel 17? This guy is literally an insane intel fanboy desperate for his warped reality to come true.

Guess he finally blew a gasket now AMD is about to put out a new chip that easily outperforms Iris Pro even with 22nm and on-package memory.

 

[Arachnotronic]

As for Intel 17? This guy is literally an insane intel fanboy desperate for his warped reality to come true.

Now we're resorting to personal attacks. I guess if you can't have a civilized discussion, just call the opposition "insane".

Guess he finally blew a gasket now AMD is about to put out a new chip that easily outperforms Iris Pro even with 22nm and on-package memory.

At what power consumption level? Remember, if Kaveri wants to wrench away any of the Iris Pro sockets, it's going to have to outperform it in a ~55W power envelope. It is likely that the performance characteristics indicated were of the very top, 100W Kaveri part.

Anyway, no gaskets blown, but it would be nice for you to be a little more civilized in your discussions here. We get that you don't like Intel, but denying facts isn't going to work out well for you in the long run.

Now, continue your little anti-Intel FUD posts...I'll let others rip apart the flawed logic in just about every one of your posts as I've got far better things to do with my time than to argue with some anonymous, anti-Intel individual over the internet ;-)

 

[SiliconWars]

Now we're resorting to personal attacks. I guess if you can't have a civilized discussion, just call the opposition "insane".

You mean like when you called me a liar earlier in this thread?

 

[Arachnotronic]

You mean like when you called me a liar earlier in this thread?

You claimed that Broadwell was coming in 2015. Intel has very explicitly said that it's a 2014 launch. In fact, they're going into VOLUME PRODUCTION of these products in Q1 2014.

So, while you might strike it lucky if Intel delays the chip several quarters, it's unlikely given that we have already seen the ULT version of the chip up and running. In other words, I think your post was highly misleading (i.e. lies). If you want to interpret that as me calling YOU a liar (as opposed to claiming that your posts are often filled with what appear to be lies), that's your business, but I am very careful to distinguish between attacking the CONTENT of your posts from attacking YOU.

BTW, did AMD give an ETA on the notebook version of Kaveri? You know, the one where the chip can't guzzle down 100W to produce those wonderful benchmark numbers that you expect?

 

[SiliconWars]

You claimed that Broadwell was coming in 2015. Intel has very explicitly said that it's a 2014 launch. In fact, they're going into VOLUME PRODUCTION of these products in Q1 2014.

Actually you said that "Broadwell's highest configuration will mop the floor...."

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/di...essors_for_Desktops_in_Late_2014_Roadmap.html

Mass availability of Broadwell LGA chips is expected in 2015.

Now I think there's a good chance that Broadwell's highest configuration will be a desktop part. That means 2015 before it's generally available. Who you calling a liar?

So, while you might strike it lucky if Intel delays the chip several quarters, it's unlikely given that we have already seen the ULT version of the chip up and running. In other words, I think your post was highly misleading (i.e. lies).

Nope, simply going on what you said I think it's more than likely that Broadwell's highest configuration will be on desktop in 2015.

If you want to interpret that as me calling YOU a liar (as opposed to claiming that your posts are often filled with what appear to be lies), that's your business, but I am very careful to distinguish between attacking the CONTENT of your post with attacking YOU.

Lol, if you only knew.

BTW, did AMD give an ETA on the notebook version of Kaveri? You know, the one where the chip can't guzzle down 100W to produce those wonderful benchmark numbers that you expect?

Considering AMD's current 65W desktop chips draw about the same power as the "47W" Haswell's during gaming, it doesn't really matter.

 

[NaroonGTX]

The reason AMD sells its APUs for so cheaply is precisely because of their performance/power characteristics. Do you honestly think AMD is a charity that "likes" selling 200mm^2+ silicon dies for 37-40% gross margin? NO!

Quite defensive. Tell me where I said anything to the contrary in any of my posts. Don't mistake me for some commoner fanboy -- keep your worthless extrapolations to yourself.

Oof, calling out a mod for having an agenda? Of course you'll get an infraction.

I didn't call out any mod here in particular. I said mods /may/ have an agenda. And I wasn't aware that content from his posts were cut out, but of course I have no idea what said content was.

And there's nothing "baseless" about my claim. AMD is pumping raw GFLOPS, well, okay, a top bin Haswell i7 with Iris Pro well exceeds the 856GFLOPs number. Plenty of "base" for that assertion.

Which means what, exactly? Comparing $100~$150 parts with stuff that well exceeds the $300 mark and then using terms like "CRUSHED DESTROYED LOLOL" as if it's mind-blowing? What's the point?

 

[Arachnotronic]

Actually you said that "Broadwell's highest configuration will mop the floor...."

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/di...essors_for_Desktops_in_Late_2014_Roadmap.html

Now I think there's a good chance that Broadwell's highest configuration will be a desktop part. That means 2015 before it's generally available. Who you calling a liar?

Nope, simply going on what you said I think it's more than likely that Broadwell's highest configuration will be on desktop in 2015.

Nice save, but a specious argument nonetheless as you know as well as I that Intel doesn't put the fastest GPU on the "K" series parts, and I see no reason why this would be the case with Broadwell. The top configuration will be the premium notebook parts, as per usual, since there is added value/upsell to be had in the notebook space. On the desktop, particularly the more enthusiast oriented ones, there is very little demand for an IGP when a good dGPU will do.

 

[AtenRa]

The reason AMD sells its APUs for so cheaply is precisely because of their performance/power characteristics. Do you honestly think AMD is a charity that "likes" selling 200mm^2+ silicon dies for 37-40% gross margin? NO!

37-40% gross margins are the average of all AMD products, you have no idea what's the APU margins.

 

[Arachnotronic]

Quite defensive. Tell me where I said anything to the contrary in any of my posts. Don't mistake me for some commoner fanboy -- keep your worthless extrapolations to yourself.

That's great that you think they're worthless, but this is a discussion board. As long as I'm not violating terms of service and directly attacking members, I'm going to make all of the "worthless extrapolations" that I please. Just as you are free to make yours.

I didn't call out any mod here in particular. I said mods /may/ have an agenda. And I wasn't aware that content from his posts were cut out, but of course I have no idea what said content was.

Do you think that making a blanket allegation of bad faith targeted at a group of individuals is better than calling out a particular mod?

Which means what, exactly? Comparing $100~$150 parts with stuff that well exceeds the $300 mark and then using terms like "CRUSHED DESTROYED LOLOL" as if it's mind-
blowing? What's the point?

My point is that there is a reason AMD can only fetch $100-$150 for its parts. Once again, if it could sell its parts with these fairly large die sizes for more, it would do so. I suppose if you're a fan of cheap products that perform well enough, that's fine, but AMD itself probably wishes it could charge $300+ for these chips.

 

[Arachnotronic]

37-40% gross margins are the average of all AMD products, you have no idea what's the APU margins.

I'd imagine APUs are higher GM than console and semi-custom parts, but lower than server parts. I'd bet on them being roughly in-line with the corporate averages, but you're right, I don't know for sure.

EDIT: Got my inequalities messed up. Dang

 

[AtenRa]

I'd imagine APUs are lower GM than console and semi-custom parts, but higher than server parts. I'd bet on them being roughly in-line with the corporate averages, but you're right, I don't know for sure.

I dont believe AMDs APUs GMs are lower than Console and Higher than Server SKUs. I will bet its the other way around.

 

[Arachnotronic]

I dont believe AMDs APUs GMs are lower than Console and Higher than Server SKUs. I will bet its the other way around.

Boy did I write it backwards. Editing now...

 

[NaroonGTX]

Do you think that making a blanket allegation of bad faith targeted at a group of individuals is better than calling out a particular mod?

Learn to read properly. I clearly said that I'd heard elsewhere that mods may possibly have agendas here. Once again, I did NOT specifically say "oh, the mods here are corrupt lololz".

My point is that there is a reason AMD can only fetch $100-$150 for its parts. Once again, if it could sell its parts with these fairly large die sizes for more, it would do so. I suppose if you're a fan of cheap products that perform well enough, that's fine, but AMD itself probably wishes it could charge $300+ for these chips.

I wouldn't call these die sizes fairly large. They're pretty conservative for what they are. The current prices are totally realistic for what you get. These are not meant to be super-enthusiast-tier chips. AMD has gone on record saying they could add more modules or CU's if they wanted, but don't since there's not a huge demand for it. Outside of gamers and benchmarkers and other enthusiasts, most people don't need or desire these things.

I find a lot of Intel's pricing to be fairly arbitrary and ridiculous anyway. Top i5? 4 cores 4 threads and around $220. Oh what's that? Hyperthreading? Lol add an extra hundred to that plz. It's stupid. Don't even get me started on the $550 hexacore, then them deciding that a little extra L3 cache and a couple hundred MHz boost in base clock warrants another $450 on top of that for the $1000 version.

And before I get accused of being some anti-Intel shill, I'm well aware of the fact that when AMD was rockin' out with the A64, they did the same pricing practices with their original FX series.

 

[monstercameron]

I have built desktops for my office on Llano and Richland and have tried a few games on them because I was curious. on a 720p monitor Llano could barely run games on low settings. Richland handles pretty well on medium settings, even manages to chug along in Guild Wars 2 WvW.

If Kaveri can really get to medium 1080p settings than I think it will be a great chip that will be surprisingly usable for light gaming. I am really interested in a seeing how games that use Mantle and True Audio perform.

I don't think this is accurate, what "games" were you playing that at 720P and what skus of llano or even richland?

 

[monstercameron]

the most important question for kaveri is whether they have significantly improved the memory subsystem, because honestly the a10-6800ks gpu is very capable, just very starved for bandwidth. Maybe hq[hetero queuing] allows the gpu to use the cpus caches to help alleviate the bandwidth issue even if just a few percent.

 

[AtenRa]

On Topic,
This time a single Module two threads Kaveri with 256 SPs will be a nice entry APU. CPU performance will be considerably faster than Trinity due to higher IPC and lower impact of CMT.

I will really like to see A8-10 Kaveri vs Core i3 Haswell.

 

[monstercameron]

On Topic,
This time a single Module two threads Kaveri with 256 SPs will be a nice entry APU. CPU performance will be considerably faster than Trinity due to higher IPC and lower impact of CMT.

I will really like to see A8-10 Kaveri vs Core i3 Haswell.

then again this will be the same song and dance...
i3 will have the cpu perf lead, kaveri will have the gpu perf lead, avg joe and his grandma wont be able to tell the difference but SIs and OEMs will opt for intel parts...

 

[NaroonGTX]

It's likely that the Kaveri parts would leave the i3's behind once OC'd.

 

[R0H1T]

Oof, calling out a mod for having an agenda? Of course you'll get an infraction.

And there's nothing "baseless" about my claim. AMD is pumping raw GFLOPS, well, okay, a top bin Haswell i7 with Iris Pro well exceeds the 856GFLOPs number. Plenty of "base" for that assertion.

Talking about raw FLOPS here are some numbers for A8 5550M(35W TDP) based notebook with Hainan(GCN+GDDR3) GPU ~