Xbitlabs: Comparison of current APUs

[Sleepingforest]

Ah, I was unaware of his posting history. From a neutral perspective, he looks like he's being really sarcastic.

 

[AtenRa]

Please give us a break. More gpu limited benchmarks to "prove" cpu parity. Doesnt prove anything.

If they were gpu limited they wouldnt scale higher with faster CPUs. ( Yes Max Payne 3 seems to be GPU limited with every QuadCore CPU)

They prove that at 1080p AMD CPUs are within a few fps against Intel CPUs (same price/category) and in the majority of games produce 60fps or more.

Edit: you also didnt need to include the "or faster". In none of the games was the 8350 faster than the 3770k, and maybe only 1 fps faster than a low end i5 when the closest competitor, 3570k was not tested. Of course like I said, most of the results you show are gpu limited anyway, but even if one accepts your dubious testing criteria, AMD is not faster.

If the closest competitor is the 3570K then why did you compare the FX8350 to the 3770K ??
Also, this topic is about AMD APUs, the 5800K is faster than Core i3 3220 in more than one game and within a few fps in the majority of the games.

http://www.techspot.com/articles-info/642/bench/CPU_03.png

http://www.techspot.com/articles-info/591/bench/CPU_01.png

The point that all of you conveniently disregarding is the fact that you can play games with an AMD CPU even if it is a few fps slower than Intel but you cannot play newer games with the Intel iGPU.

 

[Mallibu]

If they were gpu limited they wouldnt scale higher with faster CPUs. ( Yes Max Payne 3 seems to be GPU limited with every QuadCore CPU)

They prove that at 1080p AMD CPUs are within a few fps against Intel CPUs (same price/category) and in the majority of games produce 60fps or more.



If the closest competitor is the 3570K then why did you compare the FX8350 to the 3770K ??
Also, this topic is about AMD APUs, the 5800K is faster than Core i3 3220 in more than one game and within a few fps in the majority of the games.

http://www.techspot.com/articles-info/642/bench/CPU_03.png



http://www.techspot.com/articles-info/591/bench/CPU_01.png

The point that all of you conveniently disregarding is the fact that you can play games with an AMD CPU even if it is a few fps slower than Intel but you cannot play newer games with the Intel iGPU.

No you cannot play games with the intel igpu, it sucks. So does AMDs. 20 fps,720p and low settings is something noone is interested about. Anyone slightly interested in gaming will get discrete gpu with 10-20$ more, and anyone who doesnt game will not care about igpu performance. That's the part you dont get. The current igpu performance from both is so low, that they serve absolutely no purpose and thats why the market rejected amd apus. You are obsessing and spamming "intel is inferior,lolz!" over a feature that almost noone cares about and serves no real purpose.

 

[Durp]

No you cannot play games with the intel igpu, it sucks. So does AMDs. 20 fps,720p and low settings is something noone is interested about. Anyone slightly interested in gaming will get discrete gpu with 10-20$ more, and anyone who doesnt game will not care about igpu performance. That's the part you dont get. The current igpu performance from both is so low, that they serve absolutely no purpose and thats why the market rejected amd apus. You are obsessing and spamming "intel is inferior,lolz!" over a feature that almost noone cares about and serves no real purpose.

This is exactly how I feel about the situation. They just aren't fast enough to matter yet.

 

[monstercameron]

No you cannot play games with the intel igpu, it sucks. So does AMDs. 20 fps,720p and low settings is something noone is interested about. Anyone slightly interested in gaming will get discrete gpu with 10-20$ more, and anyone who doesnt game will not care about igpu performance. That's the part you dont get. The current igpu performance from both is so low, that they serve absolutely no purpose and thats why the market rejected amd apus. You are obsessing and spamming "intel is inferior,lolz!" over a feature that almost noone cares about and serves no real purpose.

Not everyone decides to be a gamer and starts off building a system, sometimes people buy boxed computers...where an amd would be a better choice if they wanna play some cod, css, csgo all at 1080p60, something intel IS truely inferior in. The igp is faster than a gt520 or 6570, for budget builds its both cheaper and simpler. Where do you guys get the 20fps numbers at 720p, low settings? The apu is more capable than that surely...my lil bro plays codblops 2 with a hd6570, triple core amd, 4gb 1333 and is capable of sustaining 60fps.

 

[Arkadrel]

No you cannot play games with the intel igpu, it sucks. So does AMDs. 20 fps,720p and low settings is something noone is interested about. Anyone slightly interested in gaming will get discrete gpu with 10-20$ more, and anyone who doesnt game will not care about igpu performance. That's the part you dont get. The current igpu performance from both is so low, that they serve absolutely no purpose and thats why the market rejected amd apus. You are obsessing and spamming "intel is inferior,lolz!" over a feature that almost noone cares about and serves no real purpose.

A10 - 5800k CPU@4,5Ghz + iGPU@1169mhz (46% iGPU overclock, and it shows)
1280x720 ~high settings.

Watch these 2 videos (looks 30-50 fps in most things):

A10-5800K Gameplay 1/3 Overclocked
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=69jX72MNhVk

Batman Arkham City,
Diablo 3,
Starcraft 2,
Dirt 3,
Skyrim
Battlefield 3 (Davamand Peak 64 person "Rush").

A10-5800K Gameplat 2/3 Overclocked
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1GqidG-3uE

Borderlands
Dragon Age: Origins
Darksiders
Sleeping Dogs
Metro 2033.




^ all these games look playable to me, for this guy.
And hes playing on the iGPU.

 

[Sleepingforest]

Not everyone decides to be a gamer and starts off building a system, sometimes people buy boxed computers...where an amd would be a better choice if they wanna play some cod, css, csgo all at 1080p60, something intel IS truely inferior in. The igp is faster than a gt520 or 6570, for budget builds its both cheaper and simpler. Where do you guys get the 20fps numbers at 720p, low settings? The apu is more capable than that surely...my lil bro plays codblops 2 with a hd6570, triple core amd, 4gb 1333 and is capable of sustaining 60fps.

I disagree. For $20 more than an APU build (less than the APU build after rebate), you can get a 7750, which is 50% more powerful. Additionally, if you're putting together a PC, the GPU is probably one of the easiest parts--just snap it into the PCIe slot. It's no harder than putting in the CPU. You can argue that overclocking is possible, but that still won't make up for 50% and takes away from the "simpler" point. The point is, unless you absolutely cannot afford the extra $20 up front (you save over time as the rebates come in), the Athlon plus 7750 is a better choice. In prebuilts and laptops, it's obviously different. That consumer audience doesn't want to have to mess around with the guts of the PC or can't. But definitely in the roll-your-own PC market, there is no reason to get an APU over a CPU+dGPU right now.

Also, I'm going to call BS on that "60 fps in CODBLOPS2." The 6670, a more powerful card than the 6570, can only get 40 frames per second with the lowest details at 1280x1024. Sure, it's probably playable. But it will be a stuttery mess and look like a slideshow during the more demanding parts.

 

[AtenRa]

You are obsessing and spamming "intel is inferior,lolz!" over a feature that almost noone cares about and serves no real purpose.

And yet Intel doubles the iGPU logic and die space in Haswell because nobody cares and serves no real purpose. :whiste:

I love it when people downplay the iGPUs because Intel is behind.

Just to give you a little glimpse as to what the iGPU can do for its users and what the future brings.

More apps can be found here, http://openclnews.com/apps

APUs are not only for Gaming

 

[monstercameron]

I disagree. For $20 more than an APU build (less than the APU build after rebate), you can get a 7750, which is 50% more powerful. Additionally, if you're putting together a PC, the GPU is probably one of the easiest parts--just snap it into the PCIe slot. It's no harder than putting in the CPU. You can argue that overclocking is possible, but that still won't make up for 50% and takes away from the "simpler" point. The point is, unless you absolutely cannot afford the extra $20 up front (you save over time as the rebates come in), the Athlon plus 7750 is a better choice. In prebuilts and laptops, it's obviously different. That consumer audience doesn't want to have to mess around with the guts of the PC or can't. But definitely in the roll-your-own PC market, there is no reason to get an APU over a CPU+dGPU right now.

Also, I'm going to call BS on that "60 fps in CODBLOPS2." The 6670, a more powerful card than the 6570, can only get 40 frames per second with the lowest details at 1280x1024. Sure, it's probably playable. But it will be a stuttery mess and look like a slideshow during the more demanding parts.

Oops forgot to mention reso of 1440*900

 

[Sleepingforest]

Oops forgot to mention reso of 1440*900

I hate to say this, but 1440x900 (1296000 pixels) is barely smaller than than 1280x1024 (1310720). It's 98.9% of the pixels. You'd squeeze out like 1 extra frame.

 

[AtenRa]

I disagree. For $20 more than an APU build (less than the APU build after rebate), you can get a 7750, which is 50% more powerful.

Yes but at the price of less CPU performance, more power consumption, higher noise (extra fan on the GPU), bigger form factor, less features(No AVX, no AES etc) and more.

Nobody have said that the APUs are faster than discrete GPUs, but you cannot build a slim mini-itx PC with a discrete GPU. Also, in the future you can always install a discrete GPU in your APU based PC.

 

[SPBHM]

Yes but at the price of less CPU performance, more power consumption, higher noise (extra fan on the GPU), bigger form factor, less features(No AVX, no AES etc) and more.

for around $100 you can buy a low profile 7750 if needed, which can fit in any case, also the power usage running a game should increase by only some 25w (last graphic), while the performance increase is much higher, performance per watt is much better with a 7750.

 

[AtenRa]

for around $100 you can buy a low profile 7750 if needed, which can fit in any case,

No it cannot be fitted to slim Mini-itx cases

 

[laputan machine]

No it cannot be fitted to slim Mini-itx cases

Also, many of the smaller itx cases that do fit low profile gpus don't have the airflow for them and you end up with a noisy mess (had to cut an ugly hole on the side of mine for it to be bearable, and it's still a bit loud and hot).

 

[NTMBK]

No it cannot be fitted to slim Mini-itx cases

Well that's just a bad example of a case, let's face it You could move to PSU to an external power brick and still fit a 7750 into a chassis that size. It's more when you get something the size of the Xi3 Piston, or Zotac ZBox, that it gets genuinely impossible:

That model of the ZBox has a 2.5GHz Ivy Bridge i3 with HD4000, not some puny Atom. Imagine if you had one of those packing a mobile Richland, or a Haswell GT3e- that'd make a pretty nice compact gaming rig.

 

[AtenRa]

Well that's just a bad example of a case, let's face it

Thats a tipical SLIM Mini-iTX case, you will not find a SLIM Mini-iTX case to fit a low profile GPU.

 

[inf64]

Ah, I was unaware of his posting history. From a neutral perspective, he looks like he's being really sarcastic.

I was being sarcastic and neutral is the last thing you can say for frozenthundra and company .

 

[frozentundra123456]

I was being sarcastic and neutral is the last thing you can say for frozenthundra and company .

Yea, your posts are a bastion of objectivity.

 

[Insert_Nickname]

Thats a tipical SLIM Mini-iTX case, you will not find a SLIM Mini-iTX case to fit a low profile GPU.

They do exist though. If you look for them...

http://www.silverstonetek.com/product.php?pid=84&area=en

 

[RussianSensation]

for around $100 you can buy a low profile 7750 if needed, which can fit in any case, also the power usage running a game should increase by only some 25w (last graphic), while the performance increase is much higher, performance per watt is much better with a 7750.

That makes your system $100 more expensive than say an A10-5700 setup. Naturally a Core i3 + HD7750 will outperform AMD's APUs but if a prospective buyer needs a budget gaming APU and can only afford to spend $130-140, A10s are superior to any existing i3s. Otherwise you have to go with a dual core Pentiums and a low-end discrete GPU. A10-5700 has an average speed in apps similar to i3 3220:
http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/prozessoren/2012/alle-desktop-trinity-im-cpu-vergleichstest/6/

I disagree. For $20 more than an APU build (less than the APU build after rebate), you can get a 7750, which is 50% more powerful. Additionally, if you're putting together a PC, the GPU is probably one of the easiest parts--just snap it into the PCIe slot. It's no harder than putting in the CPU. You can argue that overclocking is possible, but that still won't make up for 50% and takes away from the "simpler" point. The point is, unless you absolutely cannot afford the extra $20 up front (you save over time as the rebates come in), the Athlon plus 7750 is a better choice. In prebuilts and laptops, it's obviously different.

It's not $20 more, but $100 more.

i3 3220/3225 is only as fast as an A10-5700 in CPU speed (see link above) and this:

Source

That means you'd need to compare an i3 3220 + HD7750 against something like an A10-5700. $100 more. If someone can afford to spend $100 on top of the A10, an A10 is not the target market for that customer to begin with.

 

[Homeles]

If they were gpu limited they wouldnt scale higher with faster CPUs.

You clearly lack an understanding of how CPU and GPU bottlenecks work. There is no such thing as a hard bottleneck -- there are only diminishing returns.

 

[AtenRa]

They do exist though. If you look for them...

http://www.silverstonetek.com/product.php?pid=84&area=en

Well, nice case but the PSU(96W at 12V rail) is too small for a quad core + Discrete GPU(7750 is 55W TDP alone) + HDD.

 

[AtenRa]

You clearly lack an understanding of how CPU and GPU bottlenecks work. There is no such thing as a hard bottleneck -- there are only diminishing returns.

http://www.techspot.com/articles-info/537/bench/CPU3.png

 

[Insert_Nickname]

Well, nice case but the PSU(96W at 12V rail) is too small for a quad core + Discrete GPU(7750 is 55W TDP alone) + HDD.

I do suppose you could cram a 35W T series (no quads though, they're all 45W ) and HD7750 in there, but it will run very close to the limit though.

But in such a case an APU makes sense. Just need to avoid the 100W ones...

 

[Homeles]

http://www.techspot.com/articles-info/537/bench/CPU3.png

And if you overclocked those to 8GHz (or more reasonably, 5GHz with the 3700K), guess what? You'd still manage to get higher FPS.

It's a math game. You can't hit the asymptote unless you take performance out to infinity.

Take that same benchmark with the 680, and throw a CPU from next year or a Skylake processor, and you'll get a higher frame rate.

Like I said, there is no such thing as a hard bottleneck -- there are only diminishing returns.