bit-tech.net

AMD A8-7600 (Kaveri) Review

Comments 1 to 25 of 150

Reply
rollo 14th January 2014, 14:47 Quote
I know bit insists 30 FPS is approaching playable but for most people it ain't.

Still no onboard APU or IGPU capable of 1080p which is strange considering a ps4 can now manage such a feat. Which if I'm not mistaken is a AMD APU they are using after all.
Dogbert666 14th January 2014, 14:55 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by rollo
I know bit insists 30 FPS is approaching playable but for most people it ain't.

Still no onboard APU or IGPU capable of 1080p which is strange considering a ps4 can now manage such a feat. Which if I'm not mistaken is a AMD APU they are using after all.

Well the cutoff has to be somewhere, and 30 fps is a reasonable one. Remember we also focus on minimum results too, so on average you'd be getting 35-40fps with a minimum of 30fps. Nevertheless, the results are always there for each game so you can make up your mind about what suits you and what doesn't :)

The A10-7850K has a more powerful GPU and a higher TDP - it's likely to do a better job at 1080p but don't expect massive jump. The PS4's APU has 18 active Compute Units, 3 times as many as the APU reviewed here, and developers have lower level access to the hardware meaning they can optimise games to run better on it as well. If AMD wanted to stick that many on a desktop APU, the chip itself would be massive, and power and heat consumption would be greatly increased too.
Harlequin 14th January 2014, 15:00 Quote
cheers guys - cinebench is up to R15 now - R11.5 is *only* 4 years out of date


edit:

I must say though ` well done` on the new OCL and OGL benchmarks - compute is very relevant and ay system which can offload work needed for better performance , how ever it does it , is great for home users!

and typo page 5:
Quote:
its CPU clock speeds are also down compared to the A10 parts: 3.3GHz base and 3.1GHz turbo

should be 3.3ghz base and 3.8ghz turbo ;)
Harlequin 14th January 2014, 15:02 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by rollo
I know bit insists 30 FPS is approaching playable but for most people it ain't.
.


really


you have never played an xbox or PS3 then. like ever.
rollo 14th January 2014, 15:07 Quote
Can't say I've played Xbox no.

Wipeout hd did 60 fps last i checked.

As I said in another thread to some one looking to replace a 360 these Apus would all struggle to do the job at the resolution he was after. ( 1080p )

Also surprised AMD sent you a pre built pc to test with never heard of such things before.
sandys 14th January 2014, 15:08 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by rollo
I know bit insists 30 FPS is approaching playable but for most people it ain't.

Still no onboard APU or IGPU capable of 1080p which is strange considering a ps4 can now manage such a feat. Which if I'm not mistaken is a AMD APU they are using after all.

PS4 has the benefit of GDDR5, runs more than double the number of CUs and has a higher clockspeed to boot.

The Xbox One is closer to this with DDR3 hence why its doesn't perform so well but even there it has more CUs than this chip, it falls mid way between this and a PS4.

I would of liked to see some overclocking, my a10 6700 gpu overclocks to somewhere in the region of 1.1-1.2Ghz which helps its performance particularly when backed up with a RAM OC, I do this with a CPU underclock to keep heat in check and play a few games already at 1080p with acceptable performance and quality in general, this chip should do quite well in a HTPC if it has same ability.

Wipeout does 60fps but has some tricky dynamic resolution scaling to hit that consistent which you don't notice because its a damn fast game.
Harlequin 14th January 2014, 15:13 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by rollo
Can't say I've played Xbox no.

Wipeout hd did 60 fps last i checked.

As I said in another thread to some one looking to replace a 360 these Apus would all struggle to do the job at the resolution he was after. ( 1080p )

Also surprised AMD sent you a pre built pc to test with never heard of such things before.

wipehd is a `high def` version of wipeout pure and pulse..... - from the vita.... so not really a huge amount of extra data for the game engine to run at 60fps. And in fact I would go so far to say its rendering faster than 60 fps , just frame capped.


and BT reviewed the A8 not the A10
jrs77 14th January 2014, 15:29 Quote
The CPU-part is still absolut rubbish. And wiith the A10-7850k being the same price as an i5-4430, there's no reason to buy Kaveri for rigs you wan't to do work with.

Hell, my old i5-3450 beats the A10-7850k in Cinebench R15 by allmost 100 points, with 20W lower TDP.
Harlequin 14th January 2014, 15:34 Quote
because cinebench is a game- oh wait


it can game at 1080p on medium details @ 30fps in BF4 with the on die gpu - something NO intel cpu can do.

but you enjoy `playing` cinebench - I`ll go and game thank you.
Dogbert666 14th January 2014, 15:34 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harlequin
should be 3.3ghz base and 3.8ghz turbo ;)

Ha, good spot, cheers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandys
I would of liked to see some overclocking, my a10 6700 gpu overclocks to somewhere in the region of 1.1-1.2Ghz which helps its performance particularly when backed up with a RAM OC, I do this with a CPU underclock to keep heat in check and play a few games already at 1080p with acceptable performance and quality in general, this chip should do quite well in a HTPC if it has same ability.

I would've done some had I the time! The samples came through stupidly late and I wanted to focus on getting as many comparable results as possible and also looking at the customisable TDP difference.
GuilleAcoustic 14th January 2014, 15:39 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harlequin
because cinebench is a game- oh wait


it can game at 1080p on medium details @ 30fps in BF4 with the on die gpu - something NO intel cpu can do.

but you enjoy `playing` cinebench - I`ll go and game thank you.

JRS clrealy stated : "no reason to buy Kaveri for rigs you wan't to do work with".

For little gaming it's perfectly fine, but still no use for 3D rendering or computational intensive tasks. A10 has more GPU core and higher frequency, so that might help. Waiting for the A1 review to make a decision, but with Linux into the equation I might end up with an i5 on a thin ITX board like the Asus Q87T.
jrs77 14th January 2014, 15:39 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harlequin
because cinebench is a game- oh wait


it can game at 1080p on medium details @ 30fps in BF4 with the on die gpu - something NO intel cpu can do.

but you enjoy `playing` cinebench - I`ll go and game thank you.

I'm not playing PC-games anymore. I'm working with my rig, most of the time doing DTP, image-editing and rendering (not high-end rendering, but illustrations).

I was eagerly waiting for Kaveri and hoped for good improvements on the CPU-side, but I guess I'll be doing the same as Guille and buy me a H87 mITX-board and simply slap an i7-4770 on it with a low-profile HD7750 1GB GDDR.
Dogbert666 14th January 2014, 16:11 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrs77
I'm not playing PC-games anymore. I'm working with my rig, most of the time doing DTP, image-editing and rendering (not high-end rendering, but illustrations).

I was eagerly waiting for Kaveri and hoped for good improvements on the CPU-side, but I guess I'll be doing the same as Guille and buy me a H87 mITX-board and simply slap an i7-4770 on it with a low-profile HD7750 1GB GDDR.

Those usage scenarios could benefit from Kaveri, the problem is that there just aren't the applications available right now that can take full advantage of its architecture.
Anakha 14th January 2014, 16:19 Quote
So, not much new, still can't compute as fast as it's older Intel rivals. And another kick in the teeth for those who invested in AMD's high-end architecture - No new FX processors until 2015.
azazel1024 14th January 2014, 16:31 Quote
Actually I am relatively impressed by the improvement. It still lags horribly in CPU performance to Intel's offerings, exmplified by the fact that Core i3 Ivy bridge parts can eat Kaveri's lunch in most CPU tests except wPrime. Even the higher end Kaveri parts don't bring anything to the tablet except higher clocks speeds, which aren't a massive improvement. Where as a step up to even a low end i5 brings twice the cores for the Intel processors and a close to doubling of multithreaded performance (which means from eating the AMD chip's lunch to destroying it).

The AMD chip has a nice healthy lead in gaming though, I'll give it that. For massively better CPU performance and possibly better GPU performance and deffinitely lower power consumption, the low end Intel 65w Iris Pro quad core chip though could be a good option. Granted, a good $100 premium over the top end AMD Kaveri chip, but CPU performance should probably be a significant improvement over the AMD part, lower power consumption and probably roughly similar graphical performance (looking at what the top end Kaveri has versus the "entry level").

I think the combined CPU/GPU performance is telling though. The Kaveri chips have a nice superior GPU, but the problem is, running it full tilt prevents the CPU from running full tilt (and or it causes the GPU to throttle back) because of thermal constraints. That combined with poor (in general) CPU performance means when both have to come to bear on a task, the low end Intel chips out perform the AMD chips (let alone the medium market Intel chips). So generally better CPU performance and generally better CPU+GPU performance, at the expense of generally somewhat worse GPU standalone performance.

I know what I'd want.
azazel1024 14th January 2014, 16:39 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dogbert666
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrs77
I'm not playing PC-games anymore. I'm working with my rig, most of the time doing DTP, image-editing and rendering (not high-end rendering, but illustrations).

I was eagerly waiting for Kaveri and hoped for good improvements on the CPU-side, but I guess I'll be doing the same as Guille and buy me a H87 mITX-board and simply slap an i7-4770 on it with a low-profile HD7750 1GB GDDR.

Those usage scenarios could benefit from Kaveri, the problem is that there just aren't the applications available right now that can take full advantage of its architecture.

The problem is there just might not be all that many even years from now. GPGPU computing is expanding, OpenCL is getting adopted more and more, but the problem is, many computing problems can not be massively parralleled out. A lot of times you are limited to a single thread, or at most a very small number of threads, or a main thread and a few small secondary threads. So for a lot of applications, you are limited to single thread performance only, or at best limited improvements through parrallelism.

If single thread performance doesn't improve, you can have better and better multithread performance or even more threads to run stuff on, but the main thread takes most of the processing grunt and limits you.

GPGPU is not likely to ever to be able to be leveraged by "the vast majority of workloads". At best it'll be a wide spread minority, which leaves single thread performance as the majority, or single thread and low count multithreaded performance being the majority of workloads still.

So I commend AMD for its work on their APUs. I think the issue is that Intel is still the best were it typically counts, single thread and in most cases, multithreaded performance (and deffinitely power consumption), but they have, generally, with some exception, decent if not as good GPGPU performance.

I don't generally see giant leaps in performance between Kaveri and RIchland on GPU performance though. Its some good improvement, but Haswell seems to have a bigger gain on that end over Ivy than Kaveri does over Richland. Which means Intel is catching up. Slowly, but they certainly seem to be catching up (and they have VERY good combined CPU+GPU performance, ignoring that evidence in the benchmarks for combined performance, its what I have noticed in real use). Broadwell is supposed to another huge boost in GPU peformance over Haswell, which means AMD is going to need another big generational boost in whatever come next to try to maintain their lead.

At a guess, Broadwell is going to close or eliminate the gap with Kaveri in GPU performance (I won't speculate take the lead) and then whatever AMD comes out with next will take the lead back, but a much smaller lead than Kaveri has over Haswell.
rollo 14th January 2014, 16:40 Quote
Yeh i read the no new 8 core chips pre 2015 that's a major disappointment. Was expecting some semi high end chip to at least force intel to reduce prices a little.

Expecting intels next chip to break £300 for the 4770k equivalent. AMDs none compete starting to bite end users in there pockets.

If you want a APU you are not really that serous in pc gaming anyway. Bf 4 using bits benches did not run a 30 FPS on low harle so not sure where you got it will do medium.(18 on medium and 22 on low is hardly in the realms of playability.)

Harle last I checked you own a top end AMD chip with 2 gpus. So your not exactly gaming on a APU either are you?
loftie 14th January 2014, 16:55 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dogbert666
Those usage scenarios could benefit from Kaveri, the problem is that there just aren't the applications available right now that can take full advantage of its architecture.

^What he said. At least one site has an A10 7850k reviewed, though I won't post it here as it seems poor form to do so. Besides it's big enough for you to find on google.
jrs77 14th January 2014, 16:57 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by azazel1024
The problem is there just might not be all that many even years from now. GPGPU computing is expanding, OpenCL is getting adopted more and more, but the problem is, many computing problems can not be massively parralleled out. A lot of times you are limited to a single thread, or at most a very small number of threads, or a main thread and a few small secondary threads. So for a lot of applications, you are limited to single thread performance only, or at best limited improvements through parrallelism.

If single thread performance doesn't improve, you can have better and better multithread performance or even more threads to run stuff on, but the main thread takes most of the processing grunt and limits you.

GPGPU is not likely to ever to be able to be leveraged by "the vast majority of workloads". At best it'll be a wide spread minority, which leaves single thread performance as the majority, or single thread and low count multithreaded performance being the majority of workloads still.

This sums it up exactly.

Tasks like wordprocessing, image-rendering (final rendering, not preview without high-res textures!), moost of the fiilters in image-editing, etc are basically all dependant on single-thread performance.

The few things that progit from GPGPU or multithreading are simply not worth getting a AMD APU, especially not when you can get an intel i5 at the same price.
faugusztin 14th January 2014, 17:07 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by rollo
Expecting intels next chip to break £300 for the 4770k equivalent. AMDs none compete starting to bite end users in there pockets.

Then you expect it wrong. Intel has the same price ranges since long time ago. Just look at launch prices of those high end desktop models :
i7-4770K $339
i7-3770K $313
i7-2700K $332
i7-2600K $317
i7-875K $342
i7-860 $284
Core 2 Quad Q9450 $316
Core 2 Duo E6850 $266

In short - the highend mainstream Intel CPU were around $300 +/- $30 since forever, even P4 has similar price brackets - that is ~$999 for extreme CPU, ~$500 for 2nd best CPU, ~$300 for lower highend/higher mainstream, and according to the features from there down to the cheapest CPU.

So no, price will not go up, i7-5770K will again be in that ~$320-$340 price bracket.
Harlequin 14th January 2014, 17:19 Quote
$339 is for 1000 units at a time....

and ALL the `AMD ` killing iris pro`s are BGA only and start @ $288 for 1000 (i5-4570R) , rising to $392 for the i7-4770R; IF you could buy them - since APPLE are buying entire production runs
Harlequin 14th January 2014, 17:24 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by rollo
Yeh i read the no new 8 core chips pre 2015 that's a major disappointment. Was expecting some semi high end chip to at least force intel to reduce prices a little.

AMD are maxed making the next gen console , but also making money in APU`s and can see where the land lies - atom is making inroads inspite of it still being X86.
Quote:
Expecting intels next chip to break £300 for the 4770k equivalent. AMDs none compete starting to bite end users in there pockets.

3770 came in at £240 , 4770 came in at £270 so its logical really ;)
Quote:
If you want a APU you are not really that serous in pc gaming anyway. Bf 4 using bits benches did not run a 30 FPS on low harle so not sure where you got it will do medium.(18 on medium and 22 on low is hardly in the realms of playability.)

http://techreport.com/review/25908/amd-a8-7600-kaveri-processor-reviewed/6

28.1 average fps on medium at 1080p
Quote:
Harle last I checked you own a top end AMD chip with 2 gpus. So your not exactly gaming on a APU either are you?

single MSI GTX 770 for now - aiming at going GTX 780....


but I built a 5800K rig for my parents , with the crucial M4 I got them as well its blows away the Q6600 they did have. Just looking at faster DDR3 for them next , 1600 > some 2133.
GeorgeStorm 14th January 2014, 17:30 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harlequin

http://techreport.com/review/25908/amd-a8-7600-kaveri-processor-reviewed/6

28.1 average fps on medium at 1080p

Personally I wouldn't call that playable but playable is very subjective (I'm pretty sure when I first got Crysis I was playing that on anything ranging from 10-30fps!).

I'm going to wait and see what happens, might be improvements with drivers and I'll do some googling for reviews of other models since it's viable that I may end up getting one of these to replace the 5800k in the media pc build I did for my family over Christmas sometime in the future.
Harlequin 14th January 2014, 17:32 Quote
as I did say - xbox gamers are used to 30fps
MrJay 14th January 2014, 17:35 Quote
Friend of mine has just updated his 8 year old Family computer.

Not having much of a budget he went for an A10-5800K (can be found for sub £85!)
A mid range FM2 motherboard (£55)
8GB DDR3 1600mhz (£50)
120Gb SSD (£50)
System builder 450W PSU (£35)
HD 6670 (£50)
Reused his WIN 7 Licence (Free)
Reused his old case (Free)

£275 all in, for a computer that can spit out decent frame rates on his 1080p Monitor.

Keep it coming AMD
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums