AMD Q414 results

[cbn]

Check out the top 20 CPU best sellers on Amazon - at time of writing, AMD's APU's are way down in 15th (A8-6600K), 17th (A10-7850K) and 19th place (A6-6400K) - below the i7-4790K (1st), i5-4690K (2nd), FX-6300 (3rd), FX-8350 (4th), G3258 (5th), FX-8320 (6th), i3-4150 (9th), and mostly 14 out of 20 Intel CPU's.

That is a massive discrepancy in ranking between A6, A8, A10 APUs and the AM3+ chips, but it makes sense to me.

I can only hope AMD proceeds forward with a cost reduced (lower amount of cache, tiny iGPU) hexcore for FM2+ (or FM3)? (Then maybe up-bins more of the FX-6300s to a higher end SKU.)

 

[Abwx]

Here is the Anandtech Bench for Core i3-4330 (they didn't have Core i3-4150) vs. A10-7850K:

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1200?vs=1192

The core i3 appears to win most of the cpu tests. The A10, of course, wins in pretty much any of the iGPU tests.

You realize that Agisoft is used 6 times, that is all subscores plus the global score....?

You call this 6 benches..?.

Also is Cinebench single threaded relevant, or 3D particle single threaded.?.

No one do rendering in ST, the only score that matter is the MT score in such applications, yet there are 3 tests wich are cinebench single threaded, i also dont hold the 4 Sysmark tests as relevant, AMD clearly stated that Sysmark is heavily influenced by Intel PR, WebXPRT is an Intel designed test, that s really a lot of either irrelevant or ultra biased benches.

Hardware.fr old suite use :

3DS MAX 2011 Mental Ray
3DS MAX 2011 V Ray
Visual Studio 2010 SP1
MinGW/GCC
Winrar 4.01
7 Zip 9.2
StaxRip X264 v2216
ROVI TotalCode Studio H.264 Pro 2.5
Lighroom 3.4
Bibble 5.2.2
Fritz chess 4.3
Houdini 2 Pro


http://www.hardware.fr/articles/913-7/cpu-performances-applicatives.html

I guess that it s quite different from AT obscure benches, yet they improved their suite by updating it, unfortunately they have only a few scores with their update but the softs are worth mentionning :

3DSMAX 2015 Mental Ray 3.12
3DSMAX 2015 V Ray3
Visual Studio 2013
MinGW-W64 GCC 4.7.1
Winrar 5.01
7 Zip 9.2
X264 V2453
X265 V1.2+507
Lightroom 5.5
DxO Optics Pro 9.5
Stockfish 5
Houdini 4 Pro

So what is the bench suite that is more adequate to check CPU perfs, AT or Hardware.fr..?..

 

[Abwx]

Check out the top 20 CPU best sellers on Amazon - at time of writing, AMD's APU's are way down in 15th (A8-6600K), 17th (A10-7850K) and 19th place (A6-6400K) - below the i7-4790K (1st), i5-4690K (2nd), FX-6300 (3rd), FX-8350 (4th), G3258 (5th), FX-8320 (6th), i3-4150 (9th), and mostly 14 out of 20 Intel CPU's.

Lawl, i guess that it took too long to write, i just clicked and the 7850 is ranked 13, or did you willfully blur the real numbers..?.

 

[BSim500]

Lawl, i guess that it took too long to write, i just clicked and the 7850 is ranked 13, or did you willfully blur the real numbers..?.

It changes hour by hour which is precisely why I said "at time of writing". Sure the 7850K varies from 10th to 20th, but it never consistently outsells either the Intel G3258 / i3 / i5 / i7 range nor the AMD FX 6xxx/8xxx range.

So what is the bench suite that is more adequate to check CPU perfs, AT or Hardware.fr..?..

Both. I know it's a shock to some, but in the real world most people do read more than one website, and not just obsess over "hardware.fr" day after day...

 

[mrmt]

I can only hope AMD proceeds forward with a cost reduced (lower amount of cache, tiny iGPU) hexcore for FM2+ (or FM3)? (Then maybe up-bins more of the FX-6300s to a higher end SKU.)

Those are boxed processors for the DYI market, it doesn't really reflects overall market trends. OEMs run like hell from the FX series, and right now OEMs are the market AMD is trying - and failing - to win.

 

[AtenRa]

1.) Trouble is the Core i3-4150 cost less money than the A10-7700K and yet is faster than the even pricier A10-7850K in most cpu tasks.

A8-7600 at 45W TDP is faster AND Cheaper than Core i3 Haswell at 55W TDP in iGPU performance.

2.) For everyday jobs, slower/cheaper processors from Intel can also get the job done (depending on what you mean by that).

So an AMD APU at $100 (A8-7600) has more CPU performance than lower end Intel CPUs and thus it is more than enough for everyday jobs. It also has more iGPU performance to play every game available today at higher resolutions/image quality. That makes the AMD APU the better all around product at lower price and lower TDP (45W vs 55W).

Dont try to spin it, for everyday all in one solution at $100 the AMD Kaveri at 45W is undisputed the better product by far.

 

[Abwx]

It changes hour by hour which is precisely why I said "at time of writing". Sure the 7850K varies from 10th to 20th, but it never consistently outsells either the Intel G3258 / i3 / i5 / i7 range nor the AMD FX 6xxx/8xxx range.

Well, let s assume that it s the case, but i clicked several time, and just before posting this, to be sure and the ranks didnt change, though.

Both. I know it's a shock to some, but in the real world most people do read more than one website, and not just obsess over "hardware.fr" day after day...

I wont answer you on this matter, other people on this forum can compare and see by themselves what are the most relevant softs, Hardware.fr doesnt use pure syhthetic benches, only real applications with often professional softs of very high quality, this one for exemple that i didnt knew before seeing it in their review :

http://www.dxo.com/fr/photographie/logiciels-photo/dxo-opticspro

 

[AtenRa]

snip..

Are you want us to believe the Intel BayTrail is DA BEST APU in the Tablet market and the reason it sold 46M in one year ???. Intel sold more Pentium 4 than AMD ever sold Athlons.

When people will understand that selling a product is not about performance only.

Also,

What CPU performance did consumer gained from Core i3 SandyBridge to Core i3 Haswell ?? 10-20% ??? will a average user with a Core i3 SandyBridge will ever understand/feel the difference of the CPU performance between his CPU and a Core i3 Haswell ???
But what iGPU performance did Core i3 Haswell brought against Core i3 Sandy ?? 2x-3x ??? Will the same user feel and see a DRAMATIC performance gain in iGPU related application like Games etc ???

I believe everyone knows the answer to that

 

[cbn]

Those are boxed processors for the DYI market, it doesn't really reflects overall market trends. OEMs run like hell from the FX series, and right now OEMs are the market AMD is trying - and failing - to win.

Looking under the Newegg search engine for Desktop PCs (those sold only at Newegg) --> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...lt=True&page=1, I am counting the following listings (by looking under "CPU type" in the left hand column):

A10 series: 21
A4-series: 14 (four of these were jaguar based A4-5000, not construction core A4 APUs)
A6 series: 8 (one is A6-6310 which I believe is Puma based, not construction core)
A8 series: 21 (one is A8-6410 which I believe is Pumabased, not construction core)

FX series: 44

So 58 construction core APU boxes vs. 44 FX based boxes. The split is not that large (at least at Newegg). However, keep in mind some the listings on both the APU and FX sides were refurbs or open box, not all the listing represent new in box products.

P.S. Interestingly with an OEM desktop, all the construction core APUs I have seen come with DDR3 1600 memory. Of course, that is going to slow down pretty much any Kaveri quad core in games. I guess a person could swap out the memory of an OEM box, but I bet most people will use as is. They might even think "meh" this processor is not so good at games.

 

[AtenRa]

P.S. Interestingly with an OEM desktop, all the construction core APUs I have seen come with DDR3 1600 memory. Of course, that is going to slow down pretty much any Kaveri quad core in games. I guess a person could swap out the memory of an OEM box, but I bet most people will use as is. They might even think "meh" this processor is not so good at games.

1: Even with 1600MHz memory the Kaveri APUs are way faster than Intel iGPUs.

2: If the user will think that Kaveri is not good for games, what the same user may think about an Intel processor ?? They could easily say "this is the worst CPU I ever had".

 

[cbn]

1: Even with 1600MHz memory the Kaveri APUs are way faster than Intel iGPUs.

2: If the user will think that Kaveri is not good for games, what the same user may think about an Intel processor ?? They could easily say "this is the worst CPU I ever had".

I guess my point has always been the Intel user simply adds in the dGPU (which are pretty affordable these days)....expectations being what they are.

The APU buyer on the other hand is expecting graphics performance and believing they can fix problem (to some degree) with faster memory may not come to them as obviously as buying a dGPU is for the Intel buyer. In fact, I would expect the average non-geek APU desktop buyer to choose a new video card rather than faster memory if they wanted higher FPS.

 

[Idontcare]

In a nutshell, I believe AMD has been mistaken in thinking a large premium can be charged for iGPU on desktop.

This is truly a concern. Monetizing that which the consumer doesn't hold an intrinsic value for. It is true whether you are talking about iGPU, web-page impressions, or ram speed.

The memory makers have been scrambling for years to sell you premium speed memory kits, with questionable performance benefits. But that is every company's plight. Intel is not exempt either.

Are you want us to believe the Intel BayTrail is DA BEST APU in the Tablet market and the reason it sold 46M in one year ???. Intel sold more Pentium 4 than AMD ever sold Athlons.

Very true. But I would argue that was solely due to AMD being capacity constrained. And thus they (AMD) sought to strike a balance between supply and demand but raising price.

I desperately wanted an AMD K8 X2, but the prices were absolutely outrageous. For lack of any other financially viable option, I ended up buying a single-core P4 instead of what I really wanted to buy.

In Intel's case they aren't winning because their competitors are capacity constrained. They are winning once they remove the barrier to entry that their specific SKUs incur when engineered by the OEM to be integrated into a tablet.

Much like AMD's loss of sale to me, because their price was too high, Intel's price is too high. So they are eliminating that barrier and reducing prices, enabling consumers to buy the product at a reasonable price.

They aren't winning with crappy performance against a capacity constrained competitor (ala P4 vs K8 X2 comparison), rather they are winning by doing what AMD didn't do in the time of the K8 X2 in that they are taking the bullet (lowering margins) by making sure a competitive product isn't priced out of the market as far as their customers are concerned. I wish AMD had done that for me when I wanted their X2 and couldn't afford it because the BOM for an AMD X2 was too high for my wallet.

 

[AtenRa]

I guess my point has always been the Intel user simply adds in the dGPU (which are pretty affordable these days)....expectations being what they are.

The APU buyer on the other hand is expecting graphics performance and believing they can fix problem (to some degree) with faster memory may not come to them as obviously as buying a dGPU is for the Intel buyer. In fact, I would expect the average non-geek APU desktop buyer to choose a new video card rather than faster memory if they wanted higher FPS.

For a cheaper price and lower TDP (A8-7600 vs Core i3), the AMD user will have adequate CPU performance and way better gaming experience than the Intel user.
The Intel user will have to spend more money to upgrade to a dGPU way earlier than the AMD APU user.

Also, the AMD user will be able to upgrade to a dGPU at a later date when it will be needed.

 

[frozentundra123456]

And yet the only people who care about Intel's iGPU performance for desktop "gaming" always seem to be AMD users who loudly declare they aren't part of Intel's target market... :whiste: (Hint: Amazon were recently selling R7 260's for under $70 with +75-80% higher GPU perf than Kaveri and no DDR3 bottleneck. When matched with a $70 CPU (X4 750K / G3258, it really is a no brainer if dirt-cheap sub $150 "bottom rung" GPU perf is priority...)

You constantly seem to misread the overall market for APU's. Check out the top 20 CPU best sellers on Amazon - at time of writing, AMD's APU's are way down in 15th (A8-6600K), 17th (A10-7850K) and 19th place (A6-6400K) - below the i7-4790K (1st), i5-4690K (2nd), FX-6300 (3rd), FX-8350 (4th), G3258 (5th), FX-8320 (6th), i3-4150 (9th), and mostly 14 out of 20 Intel CPU's. And out of the APU sales, almost half the reviews are like "Not using the integrated video, sticking with my older, yet beefier & faster nvidia card." / "not a great processor for gaming but it works fine if you have a good graphics card" / "I use this with a hd7770 oc. So I can't say much about the internal graphics" / "if your main focus is gaming, I would not recommend getting this. Try to get a dedicated graphics card", (A8 6600K) / "Don't be fool by all the gaming claims about not needing a discrete GPU. Unless you run at low resolution, you will be disappointed by 1080p performance. Games are barely playable at 1080p unless you turn all the graphics setting to the Lowest setting and disable all the effects" (A10 7850K), etc.

What you want people to buy (AMD APU's) based on the niche metrics you want them to buy on (DDR3 bottlenecked iGPU perf in glorious blurry 720p or 1080p @ 20-35fps) - and what they are actually buying in reality (Intel's & FX chips + 1080p dGPU's) are obviously not the same thing. Most people aren't stupid and see little value in arguing over the "joys" of 25-35fps AMD vs 15-20 Intel iGPU 1080p "gaming" performance... And for those not interested in gaming at all (ie, basic office / work box), iGPU performance is totally irrelevant (hardly anyone uses HSA due to lack of software support which is why you see exactly the same year's old "Luxmark" & "Libreoffice calc" charts repasted over & over).

Same goes with top 10 best selling GPU's - 4x GTX 970's, 2x GTX 960's, 1x GTX 980 and 1x GTX 750Ti. It's pretty obvious what people are buying in reality for a new modern 2015 gaming rig (from top to bottom) in every tier. Professional GPGPU apps in the "time is money" arena universally use Quadro / FirePro dGPU's. This so called "target market" where people are falling over themselves to throw away their dGPU's and downgrade to 720p with an arbitrary combined CPU+GPU budget of $90 is mostly illusory.

I totally agree. I have never understood why AMD fans continually insist that gaming on an APU is the next great thing. Even if one hates both intel and nvidia, AMDs own product line offers much better alternatives with Athlon x4 or FX6300 plus a discrete card. Additionally, the increasingly demanding new console ports make an APU even less adequate for gaming than previously.

 

[frozentundra123456]

1: Even with 1600MHz memory the Kaveri APUs are way faster than Intel iGPUs.

2: If the user will think that Kaveri is not good for games, what the same user may think about an Intel processor ?? They could easily say "this is the worst CPU I ever had".

No they will just say "I need a discrete gpu", exactly as they will say with an apu if they want to play a demanding game at 1080p and decent settings.

 

[BSim500]

A8-7600 at 45W TDP is faster AND Cheaper than Core i3 Haswell at 55W TDP in iGPU performance.

And a 55w i3 + 50w 750Ti trashes 95w APU's in performance & perf-per-watt in overall GPU / gaming performance. So what? All this stuff does shows is how easily people will cherry-pick obscure metrics to suit their needs. "I want to build a desktop rig inside an Akasa Euler and play heavy games but no more than 45w combined CPU & GPU to enjoy sub 30fps gaming from day 1 and it will have to last me another 3-4 years, and want the cheapest CPU whilst also being happy to spend a premium on Mini-ITX components" must be important to all of 12 people on the planet. AMD FX users don't seem to have those arbitrary limitations either (even in Mini-ITX builds). Nor do most people pick the most restrictive & inflexible Mini-ITX cases to artificially exclude dGPU's. As said, the only people who care about Intel iGPU performance in desktop gaming or ultra-low TDP for heavy gaming are certain AMD advocates looking to prove a fake point, as most gamers trying to build a rig that will actually last 3 years will have already factored in even a $99 dGPU irrespective of CPU brand (or simply bought a console if their budget is that low and all they want is 720p)...

Likewise AMD's 45w TDP doesn't actually use 10w less than Intel's 55w under full CPU+GPU load on a system level due to platform efficiency differences:-
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2014/01/14/amd-a8-7600-kaveri-review/12

So an AMD APU at $100 (A8-7600) has more CPU performance than lower end Intel CPUs

Sometimes. Other times at 45w an A8-7600 ranges from from being slightly slower than an i3 to barely faster than a G3258 at stock (and that's excluding the fact as soon as you load the iGPU, the CPU clocks down.):-
http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph7677/60941.png
http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph7677/60936.png
http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph7677/60937.png
http://www.legitreviews.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/x264-645x684.jpg
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2014/01/14/amd-a8-7600-kaveri-review/7
http://img.hexus.net/v2/cpu/amd/Steamroller/Kaveri/HB.png

And over 50-60% higher in single-threaded apps:-
http://cdn.eteknix.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/kaveri_CinebenchR115_part1.png

It also has more iGPU performance to play every game available today at higher resolutions/image quality.

ROFL. You mean like:-

24-26fps BF4 on medium with 16 min fps slowdowns?
22-23fps on Metro Last Light on medium with 15fps slowdowns?
23-25ps Bioshock Infinite on Medium (with not even the 7850K managing to hit 30fps on a 3 year old game that doesn't even strain a Pentium's 2 cores?)

All these are on Medium not High. Turn settings up to "High" (as you claim) and they drop into the teens for many games. All these are also avg fps whereas min fps regularly dip down into 12-13fps). I tried to find "higher resolutions/image quality" 1080p clips for Far Cry 4, etc, but there were none due to the typical unplayable 12-18fps rates. Plenty were at 720p, though even for these fps was typically 22-26fps.

So I guess your definition of "play every game available today at high resolution / quality" differs significantly from what most gamers are seeing with their own eyes and posting on Youtube. If you sold me a 13fps "gaming" rig, I'd be rapidly seeking a refund for blatant mis-selling and false hype of $90 APU overall capability in modern games... :thumbsdown: There's a very good reason why there are a lot of fresh-faced A10 / A8 new buyers on Youtube who when you check back 6 months later, have ended up buying a dGPU...

Are you want us to believe the Intel BayTrail is DA BEST APU in the Tablet market and the reason it sold 46M in one year ???. Intel sold more Pentium 4 than AMD ever sold Athlons.

When people will understand that selling a product is not about performance only.

Translation : "Sales don't matter" and "people buy CPU's based on the color of the packaging". Sure thing...

 

[Sweepr]

ROFL. You mean like:-

24-26fps BF4 on medium with 16 min fps slowdowns?
22-23fps on Metro Last Light on medium with 15fps slowdowns?
23-25ps Bioshock Infinite on Medium (with not even the 7850K managing to hit 30fps on a 3 year old game that doesn't even strain a Pentium's 2 cores?)

All these are on Medium not High. Turn settings up to "High" (as you claim) and they drop into the teens for many games. All these are also avg fps whereas min fps regularly dip down into 12-13fps). I tried to find "higher resolutions/image quality" 1080p clips for Far Cry 4, etc, but there were none due to the typical unplayable 12-18fps rates. Plenty were at 720p, though even for these fps was typically 22-26fps.

So I guess your definition of "play every game available today at high resolution / quality" differs significantly from what most gamers are seeing with their own eyes and posting on Youtube. If you sold me a 13fps "gaming" rig, I'd be rapidly seeking a refund for blatant mis-selling and false hype of $90 APU overall capability in modern games... :thumbsdown: There's a very good reason why there are a lot of fresh-faced A10 / A8 new buyers on Youtube who when you check back 6 months later, have ended up buying a dGPU...

Translation : "Sales don't matter" and "people buy CPU's based on the color of the packaging". Sure thing...

Lol. It's impressive that people still try to paint these turd APUs as awesome options for gaming in the X1/PS4 era. Unless you're looking for an ultraportable device with limited battery capacity you'll want discrete graphics to play the latest games at decent settings.

 

[Abwx]

Lol. It's impressive that people still try to paint these turd APUs as awesome options for gaming in the X1/PS4 era. Unless you're looking for an ultraportable device with limited battery capacity you'll want discrete graphics to play the latest games at decent settings.

The turds are the baytrails, you know thoses CPUs that are below AMD s
2011 Bobcat, yet you re promoting thoses rubbish Baytrails CPUs as the best thing since sliced bread even we all know that they are the lowest performing part of the market, for both CPU and GPU...

And dont tell me that they have high frequency, they can assuming that they consume double the specced power, all 4W Baytrails consume actualy 8-10W, i guess that it s intel way of computing perf/watt, benches at 8-10W and computation of perf/Watt with truncated numbers, a la Nvidia..

 

[NTMBK]

The turds are the baytrails, you know thoses CPUs that are below AMD s
2011 Bobcat, yet you re promoting thoses rubbish Baytrails CPUs as the best thing since sliced bread even we all know that they are the lowest performing part of the market, for both CPU and GPU...

Well that's complete nonsense. Bay Trail beats Bobcat in single threaded and multithreaded, only losing out slightly in the GPU benchmarks. And all at a significantly lower TDP than the E-350.

 

[AtenRa]

I totally agree. I have never understood why AMD fans continually insist that gaming on an APU is the next great thing. Even if one hates both intel and nvidia, AMDs own product line offers much better alternatives with Athlon x4 or FX6300 plus a discrete card. Additionally, the increasingly demanding new console ports make an APU even less adequate for gaming than previously.

Nobody ever recommended an APU for high-end gaming with high image quality and high res. But current AMD APUs even at 45W TDP can play every single Game at 720p, lots of games at 900p and older games at 1080p. Actually new racing games(Formula 1 2014) are playable(30fps) at ultra settings at 1080p.
But if CPU performance of Core i3 SandyBridge is enough for the average user, then AMDs Kaveri CPU performance is even better. Add a iGPU that lets you play every current game at least at 720p with 30fps and you have the best all around solution.
You cannot say that for the Intel CPUs at the same price/TDP.

 

[Enigmoid]

You realize that Agisoft is used 6 times, that is all subscores plus the global score....?

You call this 6 benches..?.

Also is Cinebench single threaded relevant, or 3D particle single threaded.?.

No one do rendering in ST, the only score that matter is the MT score in such applications, yet there are 3 tests wich are cinebench single threaded, i also dont hold the 4 Sysmark tests as relevant, AMD clearly stated that Sysmark is heavily influenced by Intel PR, WebXPRT is an Intel designed test, that s really a lot of either irrelevant or ultra biased benches.

Hardware.fr old suite use :

3DS MAX 2011 Mental Ray
3DS MAX 2011 V Ray
Visual Studio 2010 SP1
MinGW/GCC
Winrar 4.01
7 Zip 9.2
StaxRip X264 v2216
ROVI TotalCode Studio H.264 Pro 2.5
Lighroom 3.4
Bibble 5.2.2
Fritz chess 4.3
Houdini 2 Pro


http://www.hardware.fr/articles/913-7/cpu-performances-applicatives.html

I guess that it s quite different from AT obscure benches, yet they improved their suite by updating it, unfortunately they have only a few scores with their update but the softs are worth mentionning :

3DSMAX 2015 Mental Ray 3.12
3DSMAX 2015 V Ray3
Visual Studio 2013
MinGW-W64 GCC 4.7.1
Winrar 5.01
7 Zip 9.2
X264 V2453
X265 V1.2+507
Lightroom 5.5
DxO Optics Pro 9.5
Stockfish 5
Houdini 4 Pro

So what is the bench suite that is more adequate to check CPU perfs, AT or Hardware.fr..?..

I see the two are basically the same.

Look at the PII x4 980 go!

 

[AtenRa]

And a 55w i3 + 50w 750Ti trashes 95w APU's in performance & perf-per-watt in overall GPU / gaming performance. So what?

AMD A8-7600 = $90

Intel Core i3 4160 = $120
NVIDIA GTX750Ti = $120

Total = $240

Are you trolling or what ??? A8-7600 is cheaper than any Core i3 Haswell and it provides 50% or more higher iGPU performance.

Likewise AMD's 45w TDP doesn't actually use 10w less than Intel's 55w under full CPU+GPU load on a system level due to platform efficiency differences:-
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2014/01/14/amd-a8-7600-kaveri-review/12

I never talked about power consumption, but TDP. You cannot directly compare power usage when one APU have 20-50% higher performance at a lower TDP than the other. If you understand what im saying you will see how pathetic Intel iGPU is with an added node advantage.

Sometimes. Other times at 45w an A8-7600 ranges from from being slightly slower than an i3 to barely faster than a G3258 at stock (and that's excluding the fact as soon as you load the iGPU, the CPU clocks down.):-

When the CPU works to lower P state the performance of the APU (Games, OpenCL) is higher than the Intel CPU. So i dont see how that negatively affects the AMD APU in any way.

ROFL. You mean like:-

24-26fps BF4 on medium with 16 min fps slowdowns?
22-23fps on Metro Last Light on medium with 15fps slowdowns?
23-25ps Bioshock Infinite on Medium (with not even the 7850K managing to hit 30fps on a 3 year old game that doesn't even strain a Pentium's 2 cores?)

All these are on Medium not High. Turn settings up to "High" (as you claim) and they drop into the teens for many games. All these are also avg fps whereas min fps regularly dip down into 12-13fps). I tried to find "higher resolutions/image quality" 1080p clips for Far Cry 4, etc, but there were none due to the typical unplayable 12-18fps rates. Plenty were at 720p, though even for these fps was typically 22-26fps.

Did i ever said you could play every game at 1080p high ??? You quoted me, read again what i said. You can play games at higher res/IQ than any Core i Haswell.
There are current games that are UNPLAYABLE even at 720p Low with the Intel Haswell iGPUs. But you can play every game even if that is 720p with the Kaveri APU even at 45W TDP.

I just wonder why Intel bother increasing the iGPU die size with every generation. Even haswell at 14nm is slower than last year Kaveri.

 

[Dribble]

Nobody ever recommended an APU for high-end gaming with high image quality and high res. But current AMD APUs even at 45W TDP can play every single Game at 720p, lots of games at 900p and older games at 1080p. Actually new racing games(Formula 1 2014) are playable(30fps) at ultra settings at 1080p.
But if CPU performance of Core i3 SandyBridge is enough for the average user, then AMDs Kaveri CPU performance is even better. Add a iGPU that lets you play every current game at least at 720p with 30fps and you have the best all around solution.
You cannot say that for the Intel CPUs at the same price/TDP.

But you don't need too as anyone actually caring about playing all those games would have bought a discrete gpu and be enjoying a much better experience then the APU can offer. Now if it were a laptop or tablet where you couldn't upgrade the graphics, sure then it might make a bit more sense but you don't find these in laptops or tablets because the power usage is far too high.

 

[AtenRa]

But you don't need too as anyone actually caring about playing all those games would have bought a discrete gpu and be enjoying a much better experience then the APU can offer. Now if it were a laptop or tablet where you couldn't upgrade the graphics, sure then it might make a bit more sense but you don't find these in laptops or tablets because the power usage is far to high.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frcaJ4pFEvU

Do you know that the vast majority of Desktop PCs sold are with iGPUs ??? just go to newegg and see for your self

 

[frozentundra123456]

Way to deflect the argument. I never said an intel igp was better than an AMD, or that it was adequate for gaming. That argument is like trying to decide which knife is bigger when you are going to a gunfight. Both are easily outclassed by a 2 or 3 year discrete card. As for cpu performance, it is telling that you have to bring up comparison to a several generation old intel cpu to make the comparison. Even then I think the benchmarks would be split between the two.

I also seriously doubt any APU can play "next gen" console ports like Watchdogs, AC:Unity and so forth with a good gameplay experience, even at low settings at 720p(although I would argue that that in it self disqualifies it as a good experience). I managed to struggle through DA:I with an i5 and a HD7770, which is stronger than any apu, and it was barely adequate, and that is a better performing game that a lot of other new console ports.