Why have AMD APUs failed on the market?

[cbn]

First of all we are talking about GT730 with 64bit memory and GDDR5, not 640.

The Gt730 GDDR5 and the GT640 GDDR5 are the same video card (both have 384 Kepler cores based on GK208 and 40 GB/s bandwidth)

Nvidia just rebranded it, just like they rebranded 650 GTX as GT 740.

edit: my mistake if you were referring to the GK107 based GT 640. (I'm not sure how much difference there is between GK208 and the GK 107 core on a performance level. Both have equivalent clocks though.)

 

[NTMBK]

Comparing prices on R7 250X and R7 250:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...bop=And&page=1

The R7 250X is actually $10 less than the cheapest R7 250 at the moment.

I've been thinking AMD must churn out a lot more Cape Verde (R7 250X, formerly known as HD7770) than the Oland cards.

Wow, US pricing is completely jacked up. Why the heck is the 250 that expensive?

 

[Yuriman]

Just like to point out, that VRAM is used by iGPUs, so a Pentium with a discrete card and 4GB of RAM has more RAM available to the system than a 7850K with 4GB.

 

[AtenRa]

The Gt730 GDDR5 and the GT640 GDDR5 are the same video card (both have 384 Kepler cores based on GK208 and 40 GB/s bandwidth)

Nvidia just rebranded it, just like they rebranded 650 GTX as GT 740.

GT640 (GK107) with 128-bit DDR3 was clocked at 900MHz, with 16ROPs and 32TMUs

GT640 rev 2 (GK208) with 64bit GDDR5 was clocked at 1045MHz, with 8ROPs and 16TMUs

GT730 (GK208) with 64bit GDDR5 is clocked at 900MHz with 8ROPs and 16TMUs

Also, in the AT IRIS PRO review they are using a 65W TDP GT640. That means it is a GK107 with 16ROPs, 32TMUs and 128-bit DDR3. So do not compare the performance of the GT640 in the AT review to the GT730 (GDDR5).

Edit:

my mistake if you were referring to the GK107 based GT 640. (I'm not sure how much difference there is between GK208 and the GK 107 core on a performance level. Both have equivalent clocks though.)

I will say that GK107 even with 128-bit DDR3 will be faster than GT730 64bit GDDR5 due to douple of ROPs and TMUs

 

[SPBHM]

GT640 (GK107) with 128-bit DDR3 was clocked at 900MHz, with 16ROPs and 32TMUs

GT640 rev 2 (GK208) with 64bit GDDR5 was clocked at 1045MHz, with 8ROPs and 16TMUs

GT730 (GK208) with 64bit GDDR5 is clocked at 900MHz with 8ROPs and 16TMUs

Also, in the AT IRIS PRO review they are using a 65W TDP GT640. That means it is a GK107 with 16ROPs, 32TMUs and 128-bit DDR3. So do not compare the performance of the GT640 in the AT review to the GT730 (GDDR5).

Edit:


I will say that GK107 even with 128-bit DDR3 will be faster than GT730 64bit GDDR5 due to douple of ROPs and TMUs

GK208 640 is actually the same or a little better than the GK107 one (if comparing the 64bit GDDR5 vs 128bit DDR3)
http://hexus.net/tech/reviews/graphics/59081-nvidia-gainward-geforce-gt-640-rev-2-gk208/?page=4

higher clock and higher memory bandwidth are enough to compensate the loss of the ROP/TMUs

 

[mrmt]

Because AMD switchable graphics is a disaster. NVidia's Optimus is significantly better and works well with Intel APUs.

Power efficiency shouldn't be a factor too?

 

[NTMBK]

Power efficiency shouldn't be a factor too?

In mobile, certainly. But surely nobody would want a mobile GPU slower than Oland? You would be better off using the HD4400 than something like that.

...I'm slightly lost here Are you arguing that AMD lost market share because they don't offer enough low end parts, or because lower efficiency keeps them out of mobile? I would agree with the latter, but not the former.

 

[AtenRa]

GK208 640 is actually the same or a little better than the GK107 one (if comparing the 64bit GDDR5 vs 128bit DDR3)
http://hexus.net/tech/reviews/graphics/59081-nvidia-gainward-geforce-gt-640-rev-2-gk208/?page=4

higher clock and higher memory bandwidth are enough to compensate the loss of the ROP/TMUs

Thanks for the link,

Out of curiosity i just run Bioshock Infinity at the same settings with my A8-7600 at 65W TDP 2x 4GB 2133MHz and Catalyst 14:12 Omega

720p Medium : minimum = 22,83 , Avg = 51,79
1080p Medium : minimum = 14,37 , Avg = 27,37

 

[mrmt]

...I'm slightly lost here Are you arguing that AMD lost market share because they don't offer enough low end parts, or because lower efficiency keeps them out of mobile? I would agree with the latter, but not the former.

Both. And the former was confirmed by AMD execs. It was a strategy of them to not offer a huge number of low end parts.

 

[VirtualLarry]

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16883266613

 

[Phynaz]

Thanks for the link,

Out of curiosity i just run Bioshock Infinity at the same settings with my A8-7600 at 65W TDP 2x 4GB 2133MHz and Catalyst 14:12 Omega

720p Medium : minimum = 22,83 , Avg = 51,79
1080p Medium : minimum = 14,37 , Avg = 27,37

Stock?

 

[cbn]

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16883266613

A8-7600 with R9 255 2GB Video card, 8GB RAM, 1 TB HDD, Windows 8.1 for $569.99 free shipping.

The R9 255 is a cut down Cape Verde with 512sp @ 925 Mhz and 128 bit GDDR5 (2GB VRAM) according to game debate --> http://www.game-debate.com/gpu/inde...em-vs-radeon-r7-250-sapphire-2gb-ddr3-edition

Interesting that Lenovo included discrete video card with this mid range APU. For more cpu grunt and to lower price I would have expected something like a Athlon x4 860K in there instead (since dGPU was included).

 

[cbn]

Both. And the former was confirmed by AMD execs. It was a strategy of them to not offer a huge number of low end parts.

That is quite ironic when we consider how the Core i3 prebuilt desktops are priced so much lower than the A8 desktops (thus allowing a greater opportunity for low end video card sales).

Then to make matters worse Nvidia has been relatively strong in the low end video cards.

 

[frozentundra123456]

A8-7600 with R9 255 2GB Video card, 8GB RAM, 1 TB HDD, Windows 8.1 for $569.99 free shipping.

The R9 255 is a cut down Cape Verde with 512sp @ 925 Mhz and 128 bit GDDR5 (2GB VRAM) according to game debate --> http://www.game-debate.com/gpu/inde...em-vs-radeon-r7-250-sapphire-2gb-ddr3-edition

Interesting that Lenovo included discrete video card with this mid range APU. For more cpu grunt and to lower price I would have expected something like a Athlon x4 860K in there instead (since dGPU was included).

Are they trying to make asymetric crossfire work? That is the only way that would make sense. AMD touted it for a while, but I havent heard much lately.

Edit: Price seems a bit too high also. At that price I would go for a cheaper i3 prebuilt and add a stronger video card like the GT750 or 750Ti. Also, if they are trying to make crossfire work with the APU, mobile would be a better place than a desktop where you can just add a powerful card.

 

[Ancalagon44]

Yes up until now people are saying that AMD APUs are not selling first because of lower CPU performance and because they are not price competitive because of large dies.
So why Beem/Mullins didnt sell when CPU performance both Single/MultiThread and especially the iGPU is faster than Bay Trail at almost the same die size and at a much cheaper 28nm planar process ??

Because, as I said, they are almost impossible to buy. AMD, in it's infinite wisdom, did not think it was necessary to get hardware partners to actually manufacture devices that use Beema or Mullins, except for a handful of devices. This means we have no idea if the single core CPU performance is putting people off, because few people can actually get hold of them.

 

[cbn]

Because, as I said, they are almost impossible to buy. AMD, in it's infinite wisdom, did not think it was necessary to get hardware partners to actually manufacture devices that use Beema or Mullins, except for a handful of devices.

I did find Beema Laptops (during my newegg search), but Yes Ancalagon44 the selection was limited to models with screen size 15.6" or greater. I didn't see any Mullins Laptops.

 

[AtenRa]

Stock?

Yeap, A8-7600 is locked by the way

 

[AtenRa]

Because, as I said, they are almost impossible to buy. AMD, in it's infinite wisdom, did not think it was necessary to get hardware partners to actually manufacture devices that use Beema or Mullins, except for a handful of devices. This means we have no idea if the single core CPU performance is putting people off, because few people can actually get hold of them.

You get it wrong, it was the OEMs that didnt make products with Beema/Mullns not that AMD didnt want OEM to use those APUs.

 

[cbn]

I wonder how the idle power consumption compares on the cat core SOC vs. ULV Kaveri for mobile?

I'm guessing Kaveri idle would be higher (due to the southbridge being on 65nm and the large 512sp iGPU) vs. cat core SOC with 128sp iGPU, but to be honest I haven't had a chance to research differences in mobile for AMD.

With that mentioned, I'll bet the performance per watt and definitely absolute performance is better with a ULV Kaveri on the cpu cores and ,of course, the iGPU.

 

[Ancalagon44]

You get it wrong, it was the OEMs that didnt make products with Beema/Mullns not that AMD didnt want OEM to use those APUs.

I know, my point is, AMD's job is to make sure that their partners make products using their inventory. AMD is failing in this. Whatever they need to do, whether it be provide technical experts, or rebates, or whatever, they are not doing it.

AMD is thus failing in their job to get their products to market.

 

[AtenRa]

I know, my point is, AMD's job is to make sure that their partners make products using their inventory. AMD is failing in this. Whatever they need to do, whether it be provide technical experts, or rebates, or whatever, they are not doing it.

AMD is thus failing in their job to get their products to market.

Ahh yes, i agree with that.

 

[coercitiv]

With that mentioned, I'll bet the performance per watt and definitely absolute performance is better with a ULV Kaveri on the cpu cores and ,of course, the iGPU.

Under 20W Beema is more efficient than Kaveri, it only looses in ST performance.

Cinebench 11.5 scores:
FX 7500 19W TDP - 0.7 ST, 1.9 MT
A8 6410 15W TDP - 0.6 ST, 2.0 MT

 

[mrmt]

Because, as I said, they are almost impossible to buy. AMD, in it's infinite wisdom, did not think it was necessary to get hardware partners to actually manufacture devices that use Beema or Mullins, except for a handful of devices. This means we have no idea if the single core CPU performance is putting people off, because few people can actually get hold of them.

Beema and Mullins are failing against Bay Trail because it is a much more competitive product than Clover Trail, both in terms of cost and efficiency. Devinder Kumar highlighted these facts when he said that the product allowed Intel to have a different behavior on the bottom market, getting prices AMD could not match while also having equal/better performance.

Are they trying to make asymetric crossfire work? That is the only way that would make sense. AMD touted it for a while, but I havent heard much lately.

It seems that they gave up this sales bullet. Pity, it would give them a real edge on gaming.

With that mentioned, I'll bet the performance per watt and definitely absolute performance is better with a ULV Kaveri on the cpu cores and ,of course, the iGPU.

I doubt that the cat cores could be more inefficient than the big cores, especially at power levels it was supposed to excel.

 

[cbn]

I know, my point is, AMD's job is to make sure that their partners make products using their inventory. AMD is failing in this. Whatever they need to do, whether it be provide technical experts, or rebates, or whatever, they are not doing it.

AMD is thus failing in their job to get their products to market.

Ahh yes, i agree with that.

I know your discussion has been with regard to Beema/mullins in laptops (specifically those screens 13" and smaller), but looking at AMD's supply chain relationship on some additional levels would it be so outrageous to ask AMD to do what we all want Intel to do (but we know Intel won't do) ? That is for Intel to make quad big core chips with small GT1 iGPUs the same price as the dual core chips with GT2 iGPUs.

Wouldn't it actually benefit AMD in so many ways to make some kind of a cpu-heavy construction core small iGPU chip very affordable and accessible to more people than it has been in the past? (ie, to differentiate from Intel by offering a better CPU at a lower price point.)

I feel very sure such a chip (particularly if it were based on a hexcore) would go over well in the DIY market. And as far as OEMs go I think it would also do better as well (considering how price sensitive the pre-built market is)

I'm also thinking having a more cpu oriented big core small die chip could increase volumes and help spread around the burden of certain high fixed costs that probably plague the large die Kaveri chip in the OEM market. Hopefully this would lower the unexpected high price delta we see between Intel and AMD boxes.

Lastly, I would like to see AMD restore focus to the low end discrete graphics market place and fab the next version of those chips at GF.

 

[cbn]

Under 20W Beema is more efficient than Kaveri, it only looses in ST performance.

Cinebench 11.5 scores:
FX 7500 19W TDP - 0.7 ST, 1.9 MT
A8 6410 15W TDP - 0.6 ST, 2.0 MT

Here are the passmark scores:

FX-7500: 3410 cpu marks http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=AMD+FX-7500+APU

A8 6410: 2498 cpu marks http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=AMD+A8-6410+APU