Thoughts on AMD's new APUs
Posted on 24th Oct 2012 at 07:10 by Antony Leather with 12 comments
I've been a big fan of AMD's recent desktop APUs. While its embedded offerings aren't much to shout about, Socket FM1 was a small triumph for AMD in an otherwise poor showing on the desktop CPU/APU front. I'm not going to mention the 'B' word here, as it's not really relevant but needless to say, it was nice to see an AMD desktop chip actually scoring highly for a change.
What made Llano so good (when the supply shortages were finally under control) is that despite its market being a niche one, it filled this gap and filled it well. X86 performance has been an issue with AMD's chips for a while, and Llano was no exception, with Intel's Pentiums and Core i3s running rings round it in single-threaded applications. However, for a gaming setup for less than £100 including a CPU and GPU, Llano was hard to beat.
Motherboards eventually came down in price with half-decent overclocking models still available for less than £60, meaning £160 is all you needed to spend to get a respectable CPU, GPU and motherboard. I didn't build any budget PCs for friends or family in the last year or so, but if I had done, I'd definitely have considered using a Llano APU.
Socket FM2, sadly, meant that Socket FM1's roadmap was chopped but as a consolation, AMD has released its latest APUs and promised they'll be supported for two generations. They're also proving themselves to be worthy considerations at the low end and gained ground on Intel's x86 dominance. The A10-5800K in particular is considerably faster than any Llano-based APU, yet it still costs around the same £100 mark as the A8-3870K.
However, motherboards are very much a mixed bag in terms of price and in some cases, risk damaging AMD's favourable reputation at the low end for gaming performance on a budget. Socket FM2's flagship chipset, A85X, doesn't really offer that much over A75, which has migrated from FM1 to FM2. You get dual eight-lane PCI-E 16x slots (some A75 boards can do CrossFireX but they're limited by one slot only offering four lanes), as well as couple more SATA 6Gbps ports - nothing really to write home about.
Despite this though, many A85X-equipped boards are retailing for well over £100. This might be board partner's ideas of cashing in on some sexy margins, but it's terrible news for AMD. Many Socket FM2 A75 motherboards are available for less than £60 - the sweet spot if you're looking to build a budget gaming system. However, factoring in one of the more expensive A85X boards will mean the CPU/GPU/motherboard combination will cost well over £200.
Of course the issue here is that AMD is playing with fire by going up against Intel's budget offerings. Not with its in-board graphics mind you, but with discrete graphics cards. A Core i3 combined with something like a Radeon HD 7750 1GB plus a £50 budget LGA1155 motherboard will be significantly faster yet cost about the same.
My concern is that with so much emphasis going on these A85X motherboards, potential punters will be put off by their high prices. They may overlook Socket FM2 entirely when in fact, if you look at the platform at it's strongest - with a £60 A75 motherboard and high-end FM2 APU - it beats anything Intel can throw at it in its price range and is definitely worth buying.
It's a situation that AMD should be careful to manage, given how long and hard it's tried to get something out the door that can compete with the Santa Clara giant. At the moment, the success of Trinity and Socket FM2 could rest in the hands of motherboard manufacturers.
What are your thoughts on AMD's new APUs? Let us know in the forum...
What made Llano so good (when the supply shortages were finally under control) is that despite its market being a niche one, it filled this gap and filled it well. X86 performance has been an issue with AMD's chips for a while, and Llano was no exception, with Intel's Pentiums and Core i3s running rings round it in single-threaded applications. However, for a gaming setup for less than £100 including a CPU and GPU, Llano was hard to beat.
Motherboards eventually came down in price with half-decent overclocking models still available for less than £60, meaning £160 is all you needed to spend to get a respectable CPU, GPU and motherboard. I didn't build any budget PCs for friends or family in the last year or so, but if I had done, I'd definitely have considered using a Llano APU.
Click to enlarge
Socket FM2, sadly, meant that Socket FM1's roadmap was chopped but as a consolation, AMD has released its latest APUs and promised they'll be supported for two generations. They're also proving themselves to be worthy considerations at the low end and gained ground on Intel's x86 dominance. The A10-5800K in particular is considerably faster than any Llano-based APU, yet it still costs around the same £100 mark as the A8-3870K.
However, motherboards are very much a mixed bag in terms of price and in some cases, risk damaging AMD's favourable reputation at the low end for gaming performance on a budget. Socket FM2's flagship chipset, A85X, doesn't really offer that much over A75, which has migrated from FM1 to FM2. You get dual eight-lane PCI-E 16x slots (some A75 boards can do CrossFireX but they're limited by one slot only offering four lanes), as well as couple more SATA 6Gbps ports - nothing really to write home about.
Despite this though, many A85X-equipped boards are retailing for well over £100. This might be board partner's ideas of cashing in on some sexy margins, but it's terrible news for AMD. Many Socket FM2 A75 motherboards are available for less than £60 - the sweet spot if you're looking to build a budget gaming system. However, factoring in one of the more expensive A85X boards will mean the CPU/GPU/motherboard combination will cost well over £200.
Click to enlarge
Of course the issue here is that AMD is playing with fire by going up against Intel's budget offerings. Not with its in-board graphics mind you, but with discrete graphics cards. A Core i3 combined with something like a Radeon HD 7750 1GB plus a £50 budget LGA1155 motherboard will be significantly faster yet cost about the same.
My concern is that with so much emphasis going on these A85X motherboards, potential punters will be put off by their high prices. They may overlook Socket FM2 entirely when in fact, if you look at the platform at it's strongest - with a £60 A75 motherboard and high-end FM2 APU - it beats anything Intel can throw at it in its price range and is definitely worth buying.
It's a situation that AMD should be careful to manage, given how long and hard it's tried to get something out the door that can compete with the Santa Clara giant. At the moment, the success of Trinity and Socket FM2 could rest in the hands of motherboard manufacturers.
What are your thoughts on AMD's new APUs? Let us know in the forum...







12 Comments
Discuss in the forums ReplyIt is sad that I have not seen one product announcement that would feature WiFi on an FM2 Board. It is desperate, however, that there's still not one m-ITX FM2 Board available - in Germany that is.
As it stands the chip is a bit of a chocolate teapot.
You could argue that this is probably due to their weaker position, but I would disagree, and I think their history would dispute this argument. AMD has a history dating to before their recent troubles of not strong-arming their partners.
This is one of the benefits of being an AMD partner, you get to make your own product choices and AMD gets to develop a more responsive eco-system around their products, which also costs them less money in kick-backs, incentives, "marketing reimbursements" and "development programs" which provides various forms of funding. AMD puts options down in front partners, which they will either take up and run with or they won't, but it really is a bit of a scatter-gun approach. How many AMD initiatives have we had where we thought "that could be good" and then it went nowhere?
The down side is that AMD exerts less control over the products that bears their name and has little say over the products, message and marketing.
On the other side Intel and Nvidia get greater control of the message and the marketing and have far more influence over products and their development, but they pay for the privilege of doing so. If they want more of a certain form factor then they can force the matter, whether through "incentives" or coercion. AMD does not/can not do the same (you can choose which option it is).
And being a partner of Intel and Nvidia can be a good thing too. They will provide engineering resources (money and people) and marketing resources (money and people), and while AMD will do it too, their efforts do not have the depth of resources given. Especially Intel's, whose "resources" have a measurable effect to a hardware company's financial results.
While I personally favour the AMD approach because it better reflects my own personal values, business has ethics not morals, so there is no correct path to take with partners.
And if I'm going to be honest, my mouse cursor hasn't hesitated over the "Buy" button worrying about Intel's or Nvidia's partner relations. So long as the relationship isn't abusively violent (which might prompt me to call the police, battered partners are no joking matter), this isn't a reason to stop me going Intel/Nvidia.
I'd even settle for one of those tiny pre-built systems but no one makes them either.
Pro:
It's quicker than my old E8400, especially when I'm running dozens of things simultaneously - which is most of the time - and having four cores (and scads of memory, which is by-the-by) makes it more realistic for me to leave one or more VMs running in the background. It's also bleedin' low power: socket draw while typing or browsing t'internet oscillates between a minimum of about 86W to a peak of about 91W, including the monitor. By contrast, my E8400 with GeForce 9800GT single-slot card idled at about 129W - so I'm saving a not-inconsiderable amount of electricity, and my UPS will run longer before shutting the system down. Peak power draw including monitor, measured while running the Unigine Heaven benchmark, hit about 175W.
Con:
Driver support in Linux is a bit sketchy - which is only to be expected, given how new the chip is. Most things work fine under the latest kernel, but AMD's binary-blob drivers do have a few glitches. Particularly annoying is a problem taking screenshots under the Cinnamon DE - although this isn't exclusive to the new APUs, as it affects any AMD GPU running the Catalyst closed-source driver package. Oh, and the heatsink is cheap and nasty with a base that fails to even cover the entire heatspreader.
Overall, I'm pretty pleased - and as AMD works on its drivers, most of the little glitches should be ironed out. If I get tired of the relatively slow graphics performance - Heaven gets about 7fps at stock settings running at 1920x1080 - I'll stick in a Radeon HD 6670 and see how much of a pain Dual Graphics is under Linux.
I just hope AMD can keep it together in spite of intel's best efforts to knock them out completely.
Other thoughts, we frequently want the latest, greatest hardware and I used to be able to afford it. This isn't as fast as I want but for how I use it it does my school work, mostly large office files and plays my music and email and video and... all without a hitch. I have higher grade parts all bought on sale, seasonic x-series ps, well featured Gigabyte mb, 8g 1866, ssd, lian li case... I typically get 2-3 mb through a case and ps. I still want a faster cpu but AMD has hit a sweet spot. I have to say my unicomp keyboard has been one of my best buys it games well according to my son and is easy to type fast and is much quieter than my cherry kb.
EDIT : I think I found the answer :D
http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph6332/50163.png
But, if people have expereicne with it handling small games (Minecraft, Terraria, Bit trip runner, Orc Must Die, League of Legends, etc.) I'd be more than happy with some return on experience :D