Well my laptop runs 30-40watts no matter what I do in windows 10. I think power management is kinda broken
What is power drain when running CB multi threaded.?.
The reviews at Notebookcheck point to Kaveri generaly not exhausting its TDP rating,
hence some weird CB scores that have 12% variations depending of the laptop, the model below with a A10 7350B consume a peak 32.5W before getting to 26.4W, indeed the battery life under full load point to 25W total comsumption of the laptop, wich induce no more than 14-15W real TDP for a 19W rated APU.
http://www.notebookcheck.net/HP-EliteBook-725-G2-Notebook-J0H65AW-Review.127636.0.html
The battery tests proved very time-consuming, and we had to perform them multiple times. The EliteBook only provided bad runtimes the first time
We ultimately installed Windows 8.1 Pro via the included recovery DVD and again performed the runtime tests. That led to realistic times. We assume that the problems were due to an error in the preloaded Windows 7 installation, and the laptop thus had a higher power requirement in battery mode.
small update:
driver 15.2 http://www.3dmark.com/is/2767752 35608(45104/20502)
vs.
driver 14.12 http://www.3dmark.com/is/2696916 32163(39376/19599)
So you got something close to the i3 SB non turbo performance, 4 years later. Thats 4 years of sales in between that people at best would have to sidegrade for. Assuming they didnt buy an i5.
And AMD fans only want to point out how great the igp is. So what? Personally, on the desktop, igpu means little to me above a basic level.
I love the fact that you gloss over the fact that the i3 SB has the crappiest integrated graphics money can buy. 4 years ago or today. Intel graphics still suck ass and have never been competitive with AMD or Nvidia at their respective price point.
Intel was ahead of AMD in 2010-2011 with Clarkdale and Sandy Bridge and before that Nvidia IGPs were generally competitive with AMD, it took until Llano for AMD to clearly dominate.
HD 2000 was faster than the AMD IGPs when launched, I've been a little disappointed with how the Intel IGPs progressed since Ivy Bridge, but I think Intel is not to far anymore (in great part because of the process/CPU efficiency advantage and memory bandwidth bottleneck)
Could you post the entire 3D Mark link with cat 15.2 ??
Thx for all your testing n stuff..but mann..That thing is weak!
I only ran that single benchmark.
could you run the entire benchmark with 15.2 and post the link ??
Welcome to the thread. The OP was about a laptop, dude.
Not only is IGP important, it is most important for many laptop power users. The 4 year old i3 Shintai was referring to -- is downright useless for OpenGL / Direct3D.
Also to paraphrase your "Any intel or amd big core igp is good enough."
B.S. -- Try running a professional OpenGL application on Intel IGP with their terrible drivers. I've never seen more graphical distortions in my life. Nvidia is the best in the industry. AMD/ATi has a rocky reputation for OpenGL, but they are still light years ahead of Intel.
The whole.... "Oh, yeah I know Intel IGP sucks. No worries, I can add a video card." Let me see you do that to a laptop.
can anyone put the graphics performance in terms I can understand? How many FPS at UT3 or Dirt3 max settings?
That's revisionist history.
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/6105351?
seems that when it is warmed up, it throttles a little...slightly lowered results.
You dont have to yell. And btw, for a robust gaming laptop, you *do* have to add a discrete card. They do exist for laptops you know.
You don't appear to understand that term, because it makes no sense how you used it.
The bottom line is that a lowly A8, A10 or FX laptop are perfectly suitable for professional graphics (OpenGL). Intel's drivers are still so poorly written -- that even great performing hardware like Iris Pro.... still gets replaced by a dedicated Nvidia GPU in almost all the laptops on the market. No one can touch AMD right now for a single chip solution for a laptop.