AMD Richland for desktops reviewed

[Insert_Nickname]

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16819113328
X4 750k = $85
8GB = $46 (even if it's the cheapest single channel 1333, it's irrelevant compared to the GPU difference for gaming)
7750 DDR5 $84-94 (or a 7770, 650 Ti, quite a few for lower price like $100, $110 or something).

looks like it's the same price as the richland build, but with a GPU faster than the Kaveri IGP

I'm not sure why the 750K doesn't get more press. Its a real killer budget chip. You get 5800K level CPU performance easily on stock cooling, with very decent power consumption too.

 

[SiliconWars]

We are talking about the desktop here. Do you honestly think people are still using (or ever used) 720p monitors. They might not know much about computers, but I bet they can see that most games look like crap when run at non native resolutions.

Very few people who buy these machines will have 1080p monitors, that's why the motherboards generally come with D-Sub and DVI connectors instead of DVI and HDMI.

You should check out some youtube video's of some of the games running on the 5800K - people are happy with these PC's, happy with the performance for the price they paid.

Another thing - the 6700 is a 65W chip with a fairly quiet fan. You can pay $50 more for an i3 and 6670 DDR3 and sure you get marginally better performance in some games but you also have two fans in there instead of one, creating more noise.

Is it worth paying $50 more and having a noisier system while gaming for 10-20% higher fps? Not for me.

 

[inf64]

I'm not sure why the 750K doesn't get more press. Its a real killer budget chip. You get 5800K level CPU performance easily on stock cooling, with very decent power consumption too.

I have 750K it's awesome value .
You want even better news? 760K is listed at UK's scan website (67 pounds vs 58 for 750K) . It's based on Richland stepping and has 3.8Ghz/4.1Ghz 100W specification. Plus I bet it OCs better than 750K

 

[Subyman]

People paying $140 for an APU are most likely not dropping $60 on new games. They are playing old titles or indie games. Its a great choice for the casual gamer.

 

[SPBHM]

I'm not sure why the 750K doesn't get more press. Its a real killer budget chip. You get 5800K level CPU performance easily on stock cooling, with very decent power consumption too.

I agree, it's great value, but... it took to long to get good availability unfortunately...

People paying $140 for an APU are most likely not dropping $60 on new games. They are playing old titles or indie games. Its a great choice for the casual gamer.

you don't need to pay $60 to get demanding games, you can have F2P, cheap "used" never settle bundle or something... and some great deals on steam,

 

[Insert_Nickname]

I have 750K it's awesome value .
You want even better news? 760K is listed at UK's scan website (67 pounds vs 58 for 750K) . It's based on Richland stepping and has 3.8Ghz/4.1Ghz 100W specification. Plus I bet it OCs better than 750K

Now that's got potential. I was planning to use a 750K+MB as an inexpensive upgrade for a family member later this year (still running an ancient Windsor F2 Athlon64 X2 3800+). I might hold out for this...

I agree, it's great value, but... it took to long to get good availability unfortunately...

Oh, yeah I forgot. You have had supply issues in North America. Its been available here in Europe for quite a while.

 

[Wall Street]

I think that for GPUs there is something like an uncanny valley. On one side there are office and facebook PCs. They only need a GPU to decode HD video and to run windows aero interface. On the other side is gaming. For anyone not gaming, the Intel HD series graphics are fine. I use a PC at my office daily with a Core i5-2400 and it is fine, no lag at all despite the low end GPU.

For gaming, I have a hard time telling anyone with a straight face that integrated graphics are good enough. I remember integrated graphics makers showing off Quake 3 at 800x600 right around when DooM 3 and Half-life 2 were released. Integrated graphics are perpetually 5 years behind. I am sure that in 2018, we will have GTX 680 class hardware integrated.

However, right now it is hard to not recommend a Pentium G2020/Athlon II x3 paired with a discrete HD 7750 in that price range. The discretes are just so much faster. For that matter, I really would say that the HD 7770 is the minimum that I would recommend a gamer get unless they really don't want to be able to play games coming out in the next 2-3 years. The PS4 and XBone GPU specs destroy the 6800k, so if devs use those systems as a baseline, good luck.

 

[frozentundra123456]

I think that for GPUs there is something like an uncanny valley. On one side there are office and facebook PCs. They only need a GPU to decode HD video and to run windows aero interface. On the other side is gaming. For anyone not gaming, the Intel HD series graphics are fine. I use a PC at my office daily with a Core i5-2400 and it is fine, no lag at all despite the low end GPU.

For gaming, I have a hard time telling anyone with a straight face that integrated graphics are good enough. I remember integrated graphics makers showing off Quake 3 at 800x600 right around when DooM 3 and Half-life 2 were released. Integrated graphics are perpetually 5 years behind. I am sure that in 2018, we will have GTX 680 class hardware integrated.

However, right now it is hard to not recommend a Pentium G2020/Athlon II x3 paired with a discrete HD 7750 in that price range. The discretes are just so much faster. For that matter, I really would say that the HD 7770 is the minimum that I would recommend a gamer get unless they really don't want to be able to play games coming out in the next 2-3 years. The PS4 and XBone GPU specs destroy the 6800k, so if devs use those systems as a baseline, good luck.

Well said. APUs on the desktop kind of fit the old saying "jack of all trades and master of none". They are in limbo between being more than needed for everyday use and not really adequate for any kind of quality gaming. It just mystifies me how hard some posters on these forums try to insist APUs are a good choice for gaming when there are so much better options available at a minimal additional cost. I guess they just want to prove AMD got something fantastic from the 5b they paid for ATI, but so far except for the console APUs it hasnt really proven to be a compelling purchase point, as seen by their cpu market share.

 

[leper84]

Millions of people still have 1280x1024, 1440x900, 1600x900 and 1680x1050 monitors. Just have a look at steam to get a glimpse. Also, millions of people game at sub 720p on big TVs with PS3 and Xbox, why gaming at 720p or above with an APU is not ok ??

Obviously APUs are not for you but guess again, You and Me are a minority, most of PCs sold globally are sub $500-600. And people still play on them.

I'm sorta surprised this isn't a bigger trend. IMHO 720p Samsung plasma > 1080p Asus LCD, just in IQ alone not to mention double the screen size.

 

[Abwx]

Quite amazing that in Anand IGP comparison the HD4000
with the 3770k is barely capable to keep up with the mobile
35W Trinity 4600M , yet some people unrelentlessly insisted that
Ivy Brdige mobile IGP could beat its AMD counterpart and the
myths was kept rolling by people who just repeated what
they did read from another poster....

Urban legends are rapidly created in the net era.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7032/...ll-gpu-on-the-desktop-radeon-hd-8670d-hd-4600

 

[Enigmoid]

Quite amazing that in Anand IGP comparison the HD4000
with the 3770k is barely capable to keep up with the mobile
35W Trinity 4600M , yet some people unrelentlessly insisted that
Ivy Brdige mobile IGP could beat its AMD counterpart and the
myths was kept rolling by people who just repeated what
they did read from another poster....

Urban legends are rapidly created in the net era.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7032/...ll-gpu-on-the-desktop-radeon-hd-8670d-hd-4600

I don't know of anyone who actually said that but I could be wrong.

 

[insertcarehere]

From NewEgg

A10-6700K $148,99
G.SKILL Ripjaws X Series 8GB 2400MHz $64,99

Total = $213,98

Core i3 3220 $129,99
Crucial Ballistix Sport 8GB DDR3 1333 $50,99
PowerColor HD 6670 1GB $54,99

Total = 235,97

Hell, it is cheaper to get the A10-6700K + 8GB 2400MHz memory than Core i3 3220 + 8GB 1333MHz + HD6670(DDR3) while having the same performance and im sure lower consumption. That's amazing.

Again, Intel will have to lower the price of Core i3.

Why not just save $20 and get the A10-5800k, considering the difference in cpu/gpu performance is frankly negligible.

 

[Abwx]

I don't know of anyone who actually said that but I could be wrong.

The "consensus" was that Trinity was king in DT
but that in mobile IB had the upper hand , more
precisely , if we can say so of what is actualy
a complete phony claim .

I must admit that i never tried to check if it was true ,
hence my surprise when reading Anand s said article.

 

[Enigmoid]

The "consensus" was that Trinity was king in DT
but that in mobile IB had the upper hand , more
precisely , if we can say so of what is actualy
a complete phony claim .

I must admit that i never tried to check if it was true ,
hence my surprise when reading Anand s said article.

Well at ULV levels HD 4000 is very comparable to what AMD has to offer. Difference is smaller for mobile.

 

[moonbogg]

Its a decent, fully functional chip. Yes, my opinion matters.

 

[insertcarehere]

Well at ULV levels HD 4000 is very comparable to what AMD has to offer. Difference is smaller for mobile.

It'll be interesting to see how much this may apply to the Intel GT3 igps when compared to the GT2 igps in the same tdp, especially in ULV levels.

 

[AtenRa]

Why not just save $20 and get the A10-5800k, considering the difference in cpu/gpu performance is frankly negligible.

The point is, that A10-6700 + 2133MHz Ram is not only cheaper but consumes less power than Core i3 + dGPU (HD6670). Since power consumption was the only metric that core i3 had an advantage over Trinity, the situation changes now with Richland.

As of now A10-6700 is the clear winner, A10-6800K is for people wanting to get even more performance and play with OC without caring about power consumption.

 

[tential]

It'll be interesting to see how much this may apply to the Intel GT3 igps when compared to the GT2 igps in the same tdp, especially in ULV levels.

They cost so much I don't think I'll have any interest in them at all. They're close to $500 MSRP if I'm not mistaken (too tired to check right now sleepy time).

 

[SiliconWars]

It just mystifies me how hard some posters on these forums try to insist APUs are a good choice for gaming when there are so much better options available at a minimal additional cost. I guess they just want to prove AMD got something fantastic from the 5b they paid for ATI, but so far except for the console APUs it hasnt really proven to be a compelling purchase point, as seen by their cpu market share.

I guess Intel paying $8 billion for McAfee was a compelling purchase point for you?

The minimal additional cost you keep bringing up isn't minimal. To get the true "next level" performance you need to add a 7750 which is going to cost another ~$90. That's a lot of money for people who just want to play some games at below 1080p.

 

[beginner99]

I think that for GPUs there is something like an uncanny valley. On one side there are office and facebook PCs. They only need a GPU to decode HD video and to run windows aero interface. On the other side is gaming. For anyone not gaming, the Intel HD series graphics are fine. I use a PC at my office daily with a Core i5-2400 and it is fine, no lag at all despite the low end GPU.

For gaming, I have a hard time telling anyone with a straight face that integrated graphics are good enough. I remember integrated graphics makers showing off Quake 3 at 800x600 right around when DooM 3 and Half-life 2 were released. Integrated graphics are perpetually 5 years behind. I am sure that in 2018, we will have GTX 680 class hardware integrated.

However, right now it is hard to not recommend a Pentium G2020/Athlon II x3 paired with a discrete HD 7750 in that price range. The discretes are just so much faster. For that matter, I really would say that the HD 7770 is the minimum that I would recommend a gamer get unless they really don't want to be able to play games coming out in the next 2-3 years. The PS4 and XBone GPU specs destroy the 6800k, so if devs use those systems as a baseline, good luck.

Fully agree! APUs are useful on cheap gaming laptops and that is it for now. APUs need to be ale to use the GPU for something else than gaming. Else it's a huge waste of die space. Yeah I know there are some OpenCL benchmarks out there and some niche applications but I'm taking about regular apps.

But then code being able to profit from a GPU isn't ubiquitous in standard consumer apps. So I'm still in doubt. The place for APUs is mobile...

 

[Shephard]

I don't think APU's are a good choice for a gamer. I don't think they are a good choice period.

Some people here are saying they play with an APU at 1080p with 40 frames... 40 peak frames?

Anything under 30 is not enjoyable and really not playable. So basically your games stutter and choke, playing at low graphic on newer titles. How is that fun?

Then there is 'well a lot of people have old monitors with low resolution' argument. Yes I have a 1680x1050 monitor, but a person going to build a new system for gaming is probably going to get a new monitor. 1080p monitors are very cheap now.

Lowering your resolution to 720p is not enjoyable. So you either get black bars all around your screen, or you can stretch your picture. So with low graphics and low resolution it looks horrendous.

The one pro I can say about the A10-5800k is for video rendering. It actually does quite well pairing it against the FX cpu's. It's beats the quad cores and is close to the FX-6300 on certain benchmarks.

I see no reason for a gamer to get a CPU. An i3 with a 7770 will let you play on HIGH graphics 1080p for not much more. The CPU is much better and draws less power.

I really see no reason for a casual user to get an APU either. A Celeron with onboard graphics can do 1080p blu-ray, stream 1080p and should do future 4k no problem.

There is no reason to get an APU unless you find a good deal.

 

[AtenRa]

APUs are useful on cheap gaming laptops and that is it for now.

If APUs are useful on cheap gaming laptops(1366x768) then why they are not useful for cheap desktop PCs for 1080p on Low settings ??

Is it because Intel doesnt have a product in this category ??? Cheap and able to play on 1080p Low Settings ??

 

[AtenRa]

I don't think APU's are a good choice for a gamer. I don't think they are a good choice period.

..... playing at low graphic on newer titles. How is that fun?

You and others (including me) will be amazed how beautiful latest PC games look at 1080p Low settings. Have a look bellow from Crysis 3, Bioshock Infinite and FC3. All of them are Playable with AMD A10-6800K and 2133MHz memory.

Crysis 3 1920x1080 Low Settings

Bioshock Infinite 1920x1080 Low Settings

FarCry 3 1920x1080 Low Settings

 

[frozentundra123456]

If APUs are useful on cheap gaming laptops(1366x768) then why they are not useful for cheap desktop PCs for 1080p on Low settings ??

Is it because Intel doesnt have a product in this category ??? Cheap and able to play on 1080p Low Settings ??

The answer is obvious, but you refuse to acknowledge it. You cannot add a discrete card to a laptop.

 

[SiliconWars]

Then there is 'well a lot of people have old monitors with low resolution' argument. Yes I have a 1680x1050 monitor, but a person going to build a new system for gaming is probably going to get a new monitor. 1080p monitors are very cheap now.

According to the Steam hardware survey, two-thirds of people are still gaming below 1080p - http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey

A couple of weeks ago I showed how three-quarters of gamers were currently using graphics cards less powerful than a 7750 - http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=35051846&postcount=16

Forget about the top third of gamers and you can quite clearly see that APU's are good enough. Kaveri will close the gap more and before long 90%+ of people will be gaming on an APU (or believe it or not - something less powerful).