Budget CPU Integrated Graphics Performance

[mcgowan7]

I am interested to know how it does with tough emulation.

Can it play NBA Jam or Gauntlet Legends under MAME at full speed?

Generally how does it perform as the CPU for an emulation machine.
I'm interested in using this low end CPU for that purpose as well.

Can you test any higher end emulators? n64, dolphin, psx, PS2?

Whatever you got please.
Thanks.

 

[Yuriman]

I am interested to know how it does with tough emulation.

Can it play NBA Jam or Gauntlet Legends under MAME at full speed?

Generally how does it perform as the CPU for an emulation machine.
I'm interested in using this low end CPU for that purpose as well.

Can you test any higher end emulators? n64, dolphin, psx, PS2?

Whatever you got please.
Thanks.

It is almost certainly fast enough for N64 and PS2, and almost certainly too slow for Dolphin and PS2. Dolphin in particular can use 2 cores but needs *very* fast cores to get full speed emulation. There are a few Wii games I've tried that actually drop below 100% on a 4.6Ghz Ivy Bridge, and I cringe to think about how any Bulldozer chip would fare.

 

[Insert_Nickname]

If its not too much trouble could you run the whole AIDA64 bench section...?

Its not perfect, but that's what I usually use to roughly gauge CPU performance across various generations...

 

[ControlD]

I am interested to know how it does with tough emulation.

Can it play NBA Jam or Gauntlet Legends under MAME at full speed?

Generally how does it perform as the CPU for an emulation machine.
I'm interested in using this low end CPU for that purpose as well.

Can you test any higher end emulators? n64, dolphin, psx, PS2?

Whatever you got please.
Thanks.

I can do any MAME test with no problem. NBA Jam is one of my favorites so that will be tested foir sure. I can also test N64 emulation but I don't have the other systems emulated at this point (I'm too old to have any memories of the newer systems).

 

[ControlD]

If its not too much trouble could you run the whole AIDA64 bench section...?

Its not perfect, but that's what I usually use to roughly gauge CPU performance across various generations...

I will download that this weekend and run it.

Not that I put a whole lot of faith in the built in Windows 7 benchmarks, but the CPU gets a graphical score of 6.6 WEI. I can't remember the other numbers at this point. I will try to get everything tabulated this weekend.

 

[ControlD]

Getting ready to run some benchmarks, but this thing runs MAME and my front end like a champ.

 

[mcgowan7]

What Motherboard did you use?

I'm looking at the MSI FM2-A55M-E33 (because of price)

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...k=FM2-A55M-E33

Its the cheapest option with HDMI at 49.99, but I am worried its TOO cheap and maybe I should spend a little more for reliability...


-Mike

 

[ControlD]

What Motherboard did you use?

I'm looking at the MSI FM2-A55M-E33 (because of price)

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...k=FM2-A55M-E33

Its the cheapest option with HDMI at 49.99, but I am worried its TOO cheap and maybe I should spend a little more for reliability...


-Mike

Mike,

I went with the ASRock FM2A75M-DGS motherboard http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157331

The board itself is $54.99 but you get $10 off if you order the CPU and MB at the same time which is a pretty good deal. I needed something with 6 SATA ports and a LPT header and this one fits the bill. The board is quite nice and it has me wondering why I keep buying full sized ATX boards for my desktop builds.

*Edit: the board I went with has no HDMI out.

 

[blckgrffn]

It's likely a $10 dvi to hdmi cable would work like a champ, I'd check the manual on that ASRock board before you write it off

I would definitely go with an A75 board - if you are going to have it for bit, get the full featured chipset. The price is such a marginal difference.

 

[Rajala]

Here's a load of benchmarks for A4-5300 posted yesterday on youtube.

Something disconcerting to me was that the guy couldn't get the RAM running at 1600MHz; it defaulted to 1333MHz.

I found it helpful as I'm building a PC for my girlfriend's parents. Since they are on a budget and use the PC mostly for work, the A4-5300 seems ideal.

This is the setup they will be getting:
CPU: A4-5300
MOBO: Asus F2A55-M LK µATX
RAM: 2x4GB 1600MHz DDR3
PSU: XFX 450W Core Edition ATX
Box: Silverstone PS07B Micro-ATX
+ Some DVD R/W & HDD
Linux Mint

 

[ControlD]

Here's a load of benchmarks for A4-5300 posted yesterday on youtube.

Something disconcerting to me was that the guy couldn't get the RAM running at 1600MHz; it defaulted to 1333MHz.

I found it helpful as I'm building a PC for my girlfriend's parents. Since they are on a budget and use the PC mostly for work, the A4-5300 seems ideal.

This is the setup they will be getting:
CPU: A4-5300
MOBO: Asus F2A55-M LK µATX
RAM: 2x4GB 1600MHz DDR3
PSU: XFX 450W Core Edition ATX
Box: Silverstone PS07B Micro-ATX
+ Some DVD R/W & HDD
Linux Mint

I'm not sure why he had a problem running his RAM at rated speeds. I am using two sticks of cheap Crucial Ballistix on my board and it is running at 1600 MHz with no problems at all.

If I were you I would go with a A75 based motherboard over the A55. The price difference is only a few dollars and you get a more full featured board as a result. The Asrock A75 board I went with was $54.99 and it seems to be a solid performer so far.

 

[ControlD]

I have run the full set of AIDA64 benchmarks as well as the free version of 3DMark Vantage and once I figure out how to tabulate them here I will post them.

The end result for me is that the A4-5300 seems to be a perfect fit for my application. MAME emulation runs at full speed for everything I have tested to this point and my front end runs at more than acceptable speed. The best part is that compared to the E6550 I was running in there before, the amount of noise and heat generated is almost nothing.

 

[ControlD]

Not sure if this helps, but here are the AIDA64 benchmarks on the following system:

CPU : A4-5300
MB : Asrock FM2A75M-DGS
RAM : 2x2GB Crucial Ballistix PC-12800 CL9

Memory Read : 11027
Memory Write : 9045
Memory Copy : 14106
Memory Latency : 66.4

CPU Queen : 9081
CPU Photoworxx : 12122
CPU ZLib : 71.5
CPU AES : 164519
CPU Hash : 820
FPU VP8 : 1087
FPU Julia : 2790
FPU Mandel : 1433
FPU SinJulia : 804

 

[SPBHM]

Not sure if this helps, but here are the AIDA64 benchmarks on the following system:

CPU : A4-5300
MB : Asrock FM2A75M-DGS
RAM : 2x2GB Crucial Ballistix PC-12800 CL9

Memory Read : 11027
Memory Write : 9045
Memory Copy : 14106
Memory Latency : 66.4

CPU Queen : 9081
CPU Photoworxx : 12122
CPU ZLib : 71.5
CPU AES : 164519
CPU Hash : 820
FPU VP8 : 1087
FPU Julia : 2790
FPU Mandel : 1433
FPU SinJulia : 804

comparing to the results included on Aida, FPU performance looks around the Core 2 Duo 2.2GHz,
in most of the other "CPU tests" it varies from the 2.2 and 2.9 C2D, and on AES is much faster, only slower than the FXs, i5s and higher...

thanks for testing and sharing the results!

 

[ControlD]

comparing to the results included on Aida, FPU performance looks around the Core 2 Duo 2.2GHz,
in most of the other "CPU tests" it varies from the 2.2 and 2.9 C2D, and on AES is much faster, only slower than the FXs, i5s and higher...

thanks for testing and sharing the results!

That sounds about right to me as well. I used my old E6550 as a comparison and the two processors tested very close to each other.

 

[blckgrffn]

That sounds about right to me as well. I used my old E6550 as a comparison and the two processors tested very close to each other.

Don't we get spoiled by our big, shiny new things?

We treat this CPU like an outcast on this board, but at work we have many C2D machines I recently updated with W7 and M4's and think they are pretty speedy at what people need them for.

And this little cheap guy can compete with that? Progress is nice.

Before this thread, I wouldn't have touched this CPU because it is so "crippled". For the right price and application, this looks good to go. Certainly better than a bobcat or atom solution for only marginally more. Sure, the SB Celeron is cheaper, but having some actual graphics power is nice too - not too mention all of the ISA goodies they hack out of the Celerons and Pentiums.

 

[richierich1212]

Thanks Dave!

 

[ControlD]

Don't we get spoiled by our big, shiny new things?

We treat this CPU like an outcast on this board, but at work we have many C2D machines I recently updated with W7 and M4's and think they are pretty speedy at what people need them for.

And this little cheap guy can compete with that? Progress is nice.

Before this thread, I wouldn't have touched this CPU because it is so "crippled". For the right price and application, this looks good to go. Certainly better than a bobcat or atom solution for only marginally more. Sure, the SB Celeron is cheaper, but having some actual graphics power is nice too - not too mention all of the ISA goodies they hack out of the Celerons and Pentiums.

That is pretty much what I have taken away from this as well. I am thrilled with the performance from this chip and I was able to get a working solution for my application for well south of $200 which is a steal. I wouldn't want to make it my main desktop rig but I can think of a few applications where this absolutley fits the bill.

One other note on this. When it comes to chipset features the A75 board I am using here is a little better than any B75 based board (had I gone the Celeron route) when you factor in the 6xSATA III ports. Even though the video is probably wasted if using this for a NAS or cheap home server board, getting six high speed ports is a really good deal at such a low price point. I believe I will move this CPU and board over to my unRAID machine as my need is more pressing there. I will either go with another A4 in the near future for my MAME machine or perhaps even bump up to an A6 just to see how it compares.

 

[ControlD]

Thanks Dave!

Sure thing, it was fun.

I would love to see more poeple posting results for other budget friendly CPUs as well. For many applications it just doesn't make sense to drop big money on a CPU that will be under utilized. If anyone wants any other tests run I would be more than happy to oblige. Benchmarking is new to me so knowing what a good test is has been my main problem in getting any useful reults.

 

[Insert_Nickname]

Not sure if this helps, but here are the AIDA64 benchmarks on the following system:

CPU : A4-5300
MB : Asrock FM2A75M-DGS
RAM : 2x2GB Crucial Ballistix PC-12800 CL9

Memory Read : 11027
Memory Write : 9045
Memory Copy : 14106
Memory Latency : 66.4

CPU Queen : 9081
CPU Photoworxx : 12122
CPU ZLib : 71.5
CPU AES : 164519
CPU Hash : 820
FPU VP8 : 1087
FPU Julia : 2790
FPU Mandel : 1433
FPU SinJulia : 804

Thanks a bunch... :thumbsup:

Corresponding for Celeron G465:

System:
Intel Celeron G465, 1 core, HT enabled, 1895MHz
Asrock B75M-ITX, Intel B75
4GB Kingston DDR3-1066 CL7-7-7-20

Memory Read : 9547
Memory Write : 10635
Memory Copy : 10534
Memory Latency : 67.4

CPU Queen : 6681
CPU Photoworxx : 8858
CPU ZLib : 37.4
CPU AES : 5781
CPU Hash : 332
FPU VP8 : 540
FPU Julia : 1576
FPU Mandel : 804
FPU SinJulia : 632

It would appear the A4 is ~35% faster for integer work. The A4 completely trashes the Celeron in FPU workloads, being almost twice as fast... impressive... :thumbsup:

 

[sm625]

I remember when I got my hands on a llano first gen I had trouble getting RAM to run at 1600. So I went and looked at my llano thread. I found this:

I did get it to run at DDR3-1600 speed just by changing the CPU-NB Freq setting from Auto to 16. (Auto sets it to 20 I think.)