Athlon 5350 vs A6-6400K for general use...?

[Insert_Nickname]

The title really says it all. I was checking some pricing the other day. They're priced pretty much the same. So I was left wondering which would be "better" for a general-use non-CPU intensive machine? Even with some google-fu, I couldn't dig up any direct comparison.

A6-6400K (434DKK/$80)
Pros:
Higher single thread performance(?)
Slightly higher performance IGP.
Dual-channel memory controller.
Can potentially be overclocked.
Cons:
Power consumption, properly big time.
Only dual-core/single module. (~20% performance hit with second thread running)
Only 1MB L2 cache

Athlon 5350 (427DKK/$78)
Pros:
Four "real" cores.
2MB L2 cache
Newer IGP architechture.
Lower power consumption.
Very low-cost mainboards.
Cons:
Relatively low frequency.

I suppose it'll depend on what you're using the system for, but I'd like to hear everyone's opinion on this.

Before anyone asks, this is a purely hypothetical question. If I really where building such a system, I'd properly get a Celeron and call it a day.

 

[Justinbaileyman]

Go with the 5350.. its faster, stronger, takes less energy to run, and cheaper.
Not just that but you can in fact overclock the 5350 just as easily as the A6-6400k if you really wanted to as long as you get the ASUS AM1I-A motherboard.
Plus you will have an upgrade path with either option for future use,just not sure what that will be right now..

 

[SPBHM]

5350 for the power usage and MT performance,

but honestly, G1820.

 

[coercitiv]

AFAIK 2 Kabini cores are pretty close in IPC to 1 Kaveri module.

In the case of 1 Richland module vs 4 Kabini cores I would choose the Kabini and divert any savings towards a better SSD. The only advantage A6-6400K brings to the table is a somewhat stronger iGPU.

Keep in mind Kabini can also be overclocked by ~25% (5350 goes to 2.5-2.6Ghz before voltage needs serious bumping) with a Asus mainboard.

 

[AtenRa]

If you want to play with it then 6400K, it is king in tinkering both CPU, iGPU and Memory. FM2+ mobos also provide a nice upgrade path to Carrizo APU next year.

If you need low Power consumption and adequate everyday performance at cheapest package (SoC + Motherboard + single channel Memory) then Athlon 5350. You will not feel any difference in everyday tasks like Browsing, Video playback,light Office etc not only to A4-6400K but to any Intel ATOM/Haswell Celeron CPUs.

You can also choose the cheaper Athlon 5150(1.6GHz) and OC a little bit to reach performance close to 5350. I believe for everyday use and light office (word, e-mailing etc) the Athlon 5150 is better because it is cheaper both in CPU and Platform and adequate to perform all those tasks with added lower power consumption against Richland and Haswell.

Also to add, A4-6400K has a much higher performing iGPU than Kabini. It has 192 Cores vs 128 and Dual Channel at 1866MHz that can be OCed to 2133MHz or higher.
I have used the 6400K in many games at 720p and it can provide adequate performance at low settings.

ps: Dont ask me if it can play Crysis 3

 

[Justinbaileyman]

5350 for the power usage and MT performance,

but honestly, G1820.

There's always gotta be that one person that says go with intel even when this thread has nothing to do with intel..

 

[Insert_Nickname]

Go with the 5350.. its faster, stronger, takes less energy to run, and cheaper.
Not just that but you can in fact overclock the 5350 just as easily as the A6-6400k if you really wanted to as long as you get the ASUS AM1I-A motherboard.
Plus you will have an upgrade path with either option for future use,just not sure what that will be right now..

From what I've been able to gather, overclocking Kabini also involves overclocking PCIe/SATA. Not sure I'd take that risk for a "daily-driver" machine.

If I'm wrong then please enlighten me, a ~2500MHz Kabini sounds just about right...

If you want to play with it then 6400K, it is king in tinkering both CPU, iGPU and Memory. FM2+ mobos also provide a nice upgrade path to Carrizo APU next year.

If you need low Power consumption and adequate everyday performance at cheapest package (SoC + Motherboard + single channel Memory) then Athlon 5350. You will not feel any difference in everyday tasks like Browsing, Video playback,light Office etc not only to A4-6400K but to any Intel ATOM/Haswell Celeron CPUs.

You can also choose the cheaper Athlon 5150(1.6GHz) and OC a little bit to reach performance close to 5350. I believe for everyday use and light office (word, e-mailing etc) the Athlon 5150 is better because it is cheaper both in CPU and Platform and adequate to perform all those tasks with added lower power consumption against Richland and Haswell.

Also to add, A4-6400K has a much higher performing iGPU than Kabini. It has 192 Cores vs 128 and Dual Channel at 1866MHz that can be OCed to 2133MHz or higher.
I have used the 6400K in many games at 720p and it can provide adequate performance at low settings.

ps: Dont ask me if it can play Crysis 3

Looks like we're pretty much in line.

I will say one thing about AMD chipsets though.

Kabini only has two SATA ports (fine for a basic system BTW, but if you f.x. want an SSD, HDD and ODD you're one port short). If you want more there is really only the ASRock AM1H-ITX available (4 ports: 2x chipset, 2x ASMedia 1061). The problem is that that board costs the same as an ASUS A78M-A with 6(!) SATA3 ports. If you want a cheap board for FM2+, you can only get A55/A58-based boards (the A55 has been around since FM1, the A58 is just a re-brand) which only support SATA2. If you're just running a regular HDD fine, but SATA2 is a real limit to SSD performance.

AMD could really benefit from a "new" cheap southbridge with just one or two SATA3 ports (could always leave the rest SATA2) and no RAID functionality. Just to bring feature parity to the lowest-end FM2+ boards. As it stands, AMDs lowest-end SoC has "better" features then the next level low-end FM2+, which seems counter-intuitive... :hmm:

But I digress...

 

[coercitiv]

From what I've been able to gather, overclocking Kabini also involves overclocking PCIe/SATA. Not sure I'd take that risk for a "daily-driver" machine.

The upper limit observed on the Mini-ITX Asus board was 147 Mhz Bus Speed, and it might go higher than that on the microATX board if the 3.1Ghz overclock was possible.

 

[Roland00Address]

For general use this is not even close, go with the A6-6400k.

The advantages of the 5350 is that it has a lower tdp, it is cheaper, it can be passively cooled for htpc use, more/cheaper itx boards.

The lower tdp is not a big deal for you are probably not going to run the cpu at full throttle 24/7. Your cpu average usage will probably be less than 10% (figuring that you may use your cpu more than 10% but the times you are not using the cpu and it is at idle your cpu usage should be less than 5% and probably less than 1%. In the end a difference of 10w is less than a new led light bulb uses for power.

Cheaper is self explanatory.

Passively cooled for htpc use is possible if you get a big enough heatsink, you will need to use a third party heatsink and it may be large but it is very easy to do

----------------------------------------

The advantages of the 6400k is that it is night and day faster for single threaded use and they are about par for multithreaded use. While it is a limited benchmark, these passmark scores give you a good idea what I am talking about.

AMD Athlon 5350
2641 CPU Mark (aka Multithread)
819 Single Thread Rating

AMD A6-6400K
2395 CPU Mark (aka Multithread)
1444 Single Thread Rating

So if you are using 1 or 2 threads the A6 will destroy the 5350, even when you are using 3 threads it will be faster, the 5350 is only faster when you are using all 4 threads at near 100%.

1444/819=76% faster for single threaded. If you are use all 4 threads the 5350 is 10% faster (2641/2395).

----------------------------------------

So in sum for custom builds (non oems) the A6-6400k is better for most situations for general use. There are reasons to go with the 5350 and that is making a small computer, or making it small, or making it cheap (though the price difference is extremely minor and I do not think it is worth it.)

 

[Roland00Address]

For comparison these are the passmark scores of some other cpus

Celeron G1820 (Haswell Dual Core Celeron 2.7 Ghz) about $50
2677 CPU Mark
1504 Single Threaded

Pentium G3220 (Haswell Dual Core Pentium 3.0 Ghz) about $63
3187 CPU Mark
1750 Single Thread

Core i3 4130 (Haswell Dual Core+HT 3.4 Ghz) about $125
4834 CPU Mark
1978 Single Thread

Core i5 4430 (Haswell QC 3 to 3.2 ghz) about $190
6325 CPU Mark
1842 Single Thread

Core i5 4670k (Haswell QC 3.4 to 3.8 ghz) about $240
7782 CPU Mark
2235 Single Thread

Core i7 4770k (Haswell QC+HT 3.5 to 3.9 ghz) about $340
10327 CPU Mark
2284 Single Thread

 

[coercitiv]

Passively cooled for htpc use is possible if you get a big enough heatsink

Passive cooling with stock heatsink is possible at 1.65Ghz and a bit of undervolting.

 

[Insert_Nickname]

The advantages of the 6400k is that it is night and day faster for single threaded use and they are about par for multithreaded use. While it is a limited benchmark, these passmark scores give you a good idea what I am talking about.

AMD Athlon 5350
2641 CPU Mark (aka Multithread)
819 Single Thread Rating

AMD A6-6400K
2395 CPU Mark (aka Multithread)
1444 Single Thread Rating

So if you are using 1 or 2 threads the A6 will destroy the 5350, even when you are using 3 threads it will be faster, the 5350 is only faster when you are using all 4 threads at near 100%.

1444/819=76% faster for single threaded. If you are use all 4 threads the 5350 is 10% faster (2641/2395).

That is more-or-less what I figured. They'll trade blow depending on if its a single- or multi-threaded workload. I'm surprised they're that close though.

One thing to consider is that I suspect the 6400K is most likely able to overclock to 4.5GHz or even further. My 6800K is perfectly capable of 4.5GHz with proper cooling. I see no reason why the 6400K should not be, its based on the same (half of it at least ) Richland chip after all. A 400-500MHz (12%) bump should even out multi-threaded. It'll cost some power though. But since we're talking desktop systems with standard ATX PSUs its properly negligible.

 

[Roland00Address]

Passive cooling with stock heatsink is possible at 1.65Ghz and a bit of undervolting.

I am not disagreeing with that, but undervolting as well as overclocking I do not like to take for granted since it is not a guaranteed thing. Furthermore it takes time and energy to set up and and sometimes the result is not stable even if you think it is stable and you have problems down the road.

I rather just slap a twenty dollar to forty dollar piece of metal on the problem so I would not have to mess with undervolting/overclocking but that is just me.

 

[coercitiv]

Furthermore it takes time and energy to set up and and sometimes the result is not stable even if you think it is stable and you have problems down the road.

I rather just slap a twenty dollar to forty dollar piece of metal on the problem so I would not have to mess with undervolting/overclocking but that is just me.

Actually the fan is dead silent when running at low RPM anyway, there's no need for passive cooling unless one really does like to spend time, energy and/or a few bucks for a fun project.

 

[Roland00Address]

Actually the fan is dead silent when running at low RPM anyway, there's no need for passive cooling unless one really does like to spend time, energy and/or a few bucks for a fun project.

You get the point then, some people while watching a movie need a total silent machine but for general use you are good.