A10-7870K vs Athlon 860K + GT730 [AtenRa & cbn]

[frozentundra123456]

1366 x 768 is still around.

In fact, looking at this Best Buy listing for TV's 28" to 32" it is even more common that 1080p:

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/searchp...creensizerange_facet=TV Screen Size~28" - 32"

(39 listings at 720p/768 vs. 24 listings at 1080p)

And Newegg's listing for 32" shows a split of 21 720p vs. 15 for 1080p:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=100167585 600054118 8000&IsNodeId=1

We have a 720p 32 inch TV, and I have to say, it really looks terrible unless you are quite far back from it.

 

[sm625]

GT730 is such a tiny gpu.... AMD really scored big with fusion!

 

[SlowSpyder]

GT730 is such a tiny gpu.... AMD really scored big with fusion!

I always wondered about how they'd get around the memory problem, looks like they didn't have much of an answer. I think we'll see APU's really start to stretch their legs with DDR4.

AtenRa, cbn, thanks for the benchs!

 

[SPBHM]

even with DDR4 3200 you are still around 50GB/s with 128bit

like... lower than a 9600gt/HD3850 (in practice they can build something way way faster, but still it somewhat limits the potential, even aiming at 260X, GTX 750 level must be difficult)

 

[know of fence]

1366 x 768 is still around.

In fact, looking at this Best Buy listing for TV's 28" to 32" it is even more common that 1080p:

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/searchp...creensizerange_facet=TV Screen Size~28" - 32"

(39 listings at 720p/768 vs. 24 listings at 1080p)

And Newegg's listing for 32" shows a split of 21 720p vs. 15 for 1080p:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=100167585 600054118 8000&IsNodeId=1

I appreciate the research, let me correct my statement.

"Sold" in a sense that nobody buys them to use as a monitor, both resolutions amount to less than 2% in the steam survey. I guess the issue is not availability but that 768p is rough for normal reading and browsing even on small monitors, it's fine for games and video. Though obviously 2 generations behind the curve.

Personally I was thinking about maybe buying a 2.5K (120 Hz) monitor and stretching games in 4 to 1 scaling from a low power card/ iGPU.

 

[cbn]

I appreciate the research, let me correct my statement.

"Sold" in a sense that nobody buys them to use as a monitor, both resolutions amount to less than 2% in the steam survey. I guess the issue is not availability but that 768p is rough for normal reading and browsing even on small monitors, it's fine for games and video. Though obviously 2 generations behind the curve.

Personally I was thinking about maybe buying a 2.5K (120 Hz) monitor and stretching games in 4 to 1 scaling from a low power card/ iGPU.

http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey

1366 x 768 (the maximum resolution of a the typical modern 720p TV like this one) has 26.6% share. This is most likely due, in part, to it being a very popular resolution for laptops. The only resolution with a higher share is 1080p at 35.11%.

But you are right that 1280 x 720 is less than 2% at 1.37%.

P.S. I do have a 28" 1366 x 768 TV that I sometimes use as a monitor. It does have 4;4:4 chroma sampling though which is essential for that purpose. More about that in the following thread:

http://www.avsforum.com/forum/166-l...official-4-4-4-chroma-subsampling-thread.html

 

[SlowSpyder]

even with DDR4 3200 you are still around 50GB/s with 128bit

like... lower than a 9600gt/HD3850 (in practice they can build something way way faster, but still it somewhat limits the potential, even aiming at 260X, GTX 750 level must be difficult)

Look at the scaling between 1600 - 2500. And I bet it'd still keep climbing, and that's with today's 512SP part. With faster DDR4 and a beefier GPU portion APU's could have some grunt.

With that said, largely I suppose you are right, even with a hypothetical future speed of 65GB/s you can only have so much GPU performance. They'll need HBM or some other technology sooner than later.

 

[DrMrLordX]

I will soon enough

ps. its the Core i3 6300

ps 2. For those taking the A10-7870K price against Athlon + GT730, just use the A10-7850K and OC the iGPU to 866MHz or even higher.
No need to buy the top SKU, its always not the best perf/$ either on AMD or Intel.

Only issue with the 7850k, is that you will get a better OC out of the 7870k in most circumstances (if you're going down that road). Great thread btw.

Suggestions: have you considered adding results for the 7870k after using a UEFI revision provided by The Stilt?

http://www.overclock.net/t/1588994/...d-cpu-throttling-geapm-steamroller-apus/0_100

It can help with that pesky throttling business, apparently without requiring the use of a 3rd-party utility like amdmsrtweaker.

 

[AtenRa]

Any chance you can compare them to the A8 7600 or A8 7650K??

Ill try to include the A8-7600.

 

[AtenRa]

Only issue with the 7850k, is that you will get a better OC out of the 7870k in most circumstances (if you're going down that road). Great thread btw.

Well for Games, you will only have to OC the iGPU. I was able to OC A10-7850K iGPU to 960MHz, so the OCed 7850K is faster and cheaper than the default 7870K .

Suggestions: have you considered adding results for the 7870k after using a UEFI revision provided by The Stilt?

http://www.overclock.net/t/1588994/...d-cpu-throttling-geapm-steamroller-apus/0_100

It can help with that pesky throttling business, apparently without requiring the use of a 3rd-party utility like amdmsrtweaker.

Ill try to find time to play with that.

 

[MrTeal]

Here is the best deal I can find on a low profile GT 740 ($84.99 shipped):

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00KO0IENG/?tag=extension-kb-20


So 60% more expensive than the PNY GT 730 GDDR5 after its $10 rebate is applied. Also notice the cooler on the GT 740 is taller than the cooler on the PNY Gt 730 shown below:



With that mentioned, GT 740 GDDR5 does have 10% higher core clock, twice the ROPs, twice the bandwidth.....but in the case of that Zotac card VRAM is still 1GB.

Yeah, the 740 GDDR5 is kind of a dog, especially at that price. For the same $80 you could buy an OCed 2GB GDDR5 250X from Newegg, and the 250X is pretty damn close to twice as fast as the GK107-based 740 GDDR5.

 

[FlanK3r]

good revieew of performance. Seems the same performance as GT730. Do you will test later iGPU with OCed Memory freqency (2400MHz)?

 

[know of fence]

http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey

1366 x 768 (the maximum resolution of a the typical modern 720p TV like this one) has 26.6% share. This is most likely due, in part, to it being a very popular resolution for laptops. The only resolution with a higher share is 1080p at 35.11%.

But you are right that 1280 x 720 is less than 2% at 1.37%.

P.S. I do have a 28" 1366 x 768 TV that I sometimes use as a monitor. It does have 4;4:4 chroma sampling though which is essential for that purpose. More about that in the following thread:

http://www.avsforum.com/forum/166-l...official-4-4-4-chroma-subsampling-thread.html

OK, let's just say that I intentionally posted something incorrect to provoke a response, rather than getting confused by resolution numbers.

1366x768 res with a 26.6% share could be perceived as a huge potential market for APUs, unfortunately it's hard to say how much of it is made up by notebook screens and how much my TV/monitors. I concede not having any numbers to back up my claim, numbers are hard after all.
That said it should be self-evident that these resolutions aren't really desirable, but I could imagine a case where someone has a monitor and a HDTV already.

 

[NTMBK]

I wonder how Bristol Ridge will compare to this? It's supposed to have higher GPU clocks (>900MHz), memory compression tech, and slightly higher memory bandwidth (DDR4-2400). Could be a decent bit faster, get it into GT 740 territory.

 

[MrTeal]

OK, let's just say that I intentionally posted something incorrect to provoke a response, rather than getting confused by resolution numbers.

1366x768 res with a 26.6% share could be perceived as a huge potential market for APUs, unfortunately it's hard to say how much of it is made up by notebook screens and how much my TV/monitors. I concede not having any numbers to back up my claim, numbers are hard after all.
That said it should be self-evident that these resolutions aren't really desirable, but I could imagine a case where someone has a monitor and a HDTV already.

The vast majority of 768 screens will be laptops. It's (unfortunately) still the most common laptop display resolution by a mile, while being very rare in a desktop monitor. There could be some running that resolution on a TV, but that's going to be pretty niche vs the 100M+ 768 laptops that would ship in a year.

 

[AtenRa]

The 720p was used because its just half of 1080p. It has nothing to do with the Monitor market share. Now days the vast majority of Desktop gamers use 1080p monitors.
1600x900 was used because 19-20" monitors are still using this resolution, so its addressing exactly the performance for a cheap entry level iGPU Gaming system.

 

[AtenRa]

I wonder how Bristol Ridge will compare to this? It's supposed to have higher GPU clocks (>900MHz), memory compression tech, and slightly higher memory bandwidth (DDR4-2400). Could be a decent bit faster, get it into GT 740 territory.

Im expecting something like 10-15% faster than Godavari 95W TDP like the A10-7870K but at 65W TDP.

 

[cbn]

1366x768 res with a 26.6% share could be perceived as a huge potential market for APUs, unfortunately it's hard to say how much of it is made up by notebook screens and how much my TV/monitors. I concede not having any numbers to back up my claim, numbers are hard after all.
That said it should be self-evident that these resolutions aren't really desirable, but I could imagine a case where someone has a monitor and a HDTV already.

Yes, I'm sure most of the 1366 x 768 screens are from notebooks.

And according to this article back in 2009 Sony and Samsung stopped producing 720p above 32" (although other brands were still doing it).

However, at one point 720p TV on a large screen was common to find. Tough to say how many people are holding on to those?

That said it should be self-evident that these resolutions aren't really desirable, but I could imagine a case where someone has a monitor and a HDTV already.

1080p on a large TV is also getting very affordable.

In fact, today at Walmart I saw two 48" 1080p for $400 while the sole 720p TV over 32" (a 39" Vizio) was $228.

So eventually even those holding onto to their old large screen 720p will turn those over if they haven't already done so.

With that mentioned, maybe some folks are repurposing old large screen 720p TV sets for kids? A kids game room perhaps?

 

[USER8000]

Ill try to include the A8-7600.

Thanks!

 

[cbn]

The 720p was used because its just half of 1080p. It has nothing to do with the Monitor market share. Now days the vast majority of Desktop gamers use 1080p monitors.
1600x900 was used because 19-20" monitors are still using this resolution, so its addressing exactly the performance for a cheap entry level iGPU Gaming system.

Another common monitor resolution is 1280 x 1024 found on many 17" and 19" used monitors,

Pixel count of 1280 x 1024 is ~91% of the pixel count of 1600 x 900....so both resolutions are roughly in the same ballpark.

P.S. My own personal monitor set-up is one 21.5" 1080p with a 17" 1280 x 1024 next to it. The monitor heights match very close and the vertical pixel count is very close as well (1080 vs. 1024). This makes for a good dual monitor set-up and if I need to cut my resolution down for a game I switch from my 1920 x 1080 to the 1280 x 1024.

 

[MrTeal]

Another common monitor resolution is 1280 x 1024 found on many 17" and 19" used monitors,

Pixel count of 1280 x 1024 is ~91% of the pixel count of 1600 x 900....so both resolutions are roughly in the same ballpark.

P.S. My own personal monitor set-up is one 21.5" 1080p with a 17" 1280 x 1024 next to it. The monitor heights match very close and the vertical pixel count is very close as well (1080 vs. 1024). This makes for a good dual monitor set-up and if I need to cut my resolution down for a game I switch from my 1920 x 1080 to the 1280 x 1024.

+1 to that. I have a similar setup at a work station, with a 24" 1080p and a 19" 1280x1024 beside it. The 5:4 displays are great for displaying Outlook, or a PDF. It's so much more efficient for the consumption of text compared to 16:9.

 

[SPBHM]

I still have some 1280x1024 monitors (LCDs never die...) and yes it's a good resolution for low end hardware most of the time,
also it tends to be a significantly lighter than a 16:9 resolution with the same pixel count due to FOV and stuff.

 

[DrMrLordX]

Hell I game at 1600x1200 on my 7700k. It does alright on older titles. I haven't tried anything recent, unless you count Dirty Bomb which has an old engine (UT3).

 

[mohit9206]

Hell I game at 1600x1200 on my 7700k. It does alright on older titles. I haven't tried anything recent, unless you count Dirty Bomb which has an old engine (UT3).

I also game on 1600x900 with Pentium+gt730 gddr5 and boy its terrible for ps4 and xbox one ports.
Ryse Son of Rome plays at 20 fps and Assassin’s Creed Syndicate runs at 12fps both at lowest settings.
However xbox 360 and ps3 gen games run decently at mid high settings.
So these cards were enough but since the PS4 and xbox one generation has begun, these cards are almost useless even at lowest settings for AAA titles.

 

[SpaceBeer]

I played Hitman:Absolution, Sniper Elite 3, Tomb Raider, Deus Ex: Human Revolution, Bioshock Infinite and many more on my A10-7850K and 1920x1080. I didn't measure FPS, but it was obviously good enough for me to play (>= 30 FPS). I set IGP at 900 or 960 MHz, and RAM at 2400 MHz. And I haven't bough APU for gaming, but when I discovered its possibilities, I was very pleased

Of course, latest AAA titles require better hardware (Rise of the Tomb Raider was unplayable on IGP, luckily I bought 260X). So if you don't chase high details and 60FPS, APU is still good choice, especially for indie games or older (=< 2014) titles.

Yes, Athlon X4 + GT 740/R7 250(X) would have better performance, but with higher price