GTA V CPU benches - AMD gets hammered (again)

[Flapdrol1337]

These are some strange results, i3 beats FX6300, but 8350 beats 4670K

 

[Erenhardt]

These are some strange results, i3 beats FX6300, but 8350 beats 4670K

fx6300 is the lowest clocked pilediver and is not a good representation of its performance.

fx6350 is 10%+ faster at stock which would put it ahead of i3.

Notice how the game scales with cores.

/mystery

 

[soccerballtux]

I would figure more people would be hooked up to 26-32'' t.vs which usually more times then not support 720/768p then there would be 4k users.

More reviews should include lower end cards at least catering to the resolutions those cards most likely can only support.My cousins 1gb gtx650 with the lowest of settings apparently hits 997mb according to the menu at 768p,willing to bet that card couldn't do 900p without stuttering.That would go for any 1gb card either its the 9800gt recommended or one of the rare 7870 1gb cards which happens to be the fastest 1gb card ever made as of today.

I'm sorry, what? haha, I mean, are you trying to say these guys are relevant?

 

[escrow4]

I'm sorry, what? haha, I mean, are you trying to say these guys are relevant?

Agree. 1GB GPUs and low end gamers are irrelevant. If you want to AAA game on PC with noticeably better quality settings to PS4/X1 you need $$$$$. Not an office box. Devs shouldn't even bother trying to squeeze out FPS on crap.

 

[AtenRa]

Agree. 1GB GPUs and low end gamers are irrelevant. If you want to AAA game on PC with noticeably better quality settings to PS4/X1 you need $$$$$. Not an office box. Devs shouldn't even bother trying to squeeze out FPS on crap.

http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/videocard/

1: Intel HD4000 ---> 6,85%
4: Intel HD4400 ---> 2,67%
8: NVIDIA GT630 ---> 2,19%

I would hardly call all those people irrelevant.

With a entry level Gaming PC at lower price than PS4/XBone you can play more than 200 free games.

 

[seitur]

Bulldozer architecture damaged even AMD APU business.

I remember that at beggining of APU times Llano APUs while not having big market penetration - it did started to get positive opinion on various PC forums.

Then Trinity/Richland chips came and AMD lost opportunity on low-end market. Some people were buying those 5400/6400 APUs but it started to get bad opinions quite fast because of it's bad CPU performance. It quickly got christened "1,5" core and a slow one at that.

Kaveri had a shot on changing that, but AMD have not released low end parts for a very long time and high-end/mid-end kaveri SKUs were expensive.

Would AMD release 7400K as first Kaveri SKU and at current price (not like Kaveri were price first) then it IMHO would penetrate low-end desktop market quite well gaining lot of popularity and giving Intel Big-core Celeron/Pentium CPUs big competition.

Yet AMD did not do that. Another bad AMD decision imho.

Now AMD has fallen to such irrelevance in CPU department in opinion of consumers that most people on forums don't even know that 7400K exist and that it's good option for low-end desktop.

 

[Erenhardt]

My sister plays all latest games on kaveri apu. It was a major upgrade from old hd4650 and athlon 64x2.

Didn't try GTA5, but according to anandtech it works quite good.
https://twitter.com/IanCutress/status/588637032412422144
https://twitter.com/IanCutress/status/588741538873618432

a10 apu on low 720p is running about the same as i7+gtx770 on vhigh at 1080p.
Quite good for someone who don't needs all bells and whistles graphics.

Very High quality:

Normal quality:

I can see how some can live with lower quality settings for a fraction of the price

 

[frozentundra123456]

These are some strange results, i3 beats FX6300, but 8350 beats 4670K

The 4670k results look wrong in that graph. i remember thinking that when the test came out. they look too low relative to other intel processors. For instance they get a 40% increase from 4670k to 4770k, which seems like way too much.

 

[seitur]

I can see how some can live with lower quality settings for a fraction of the price

Why are you showing Very High vs Normal Quality when you are saying about playing GTA V on low setting on APU?

Post High/Normal vs Low - then it would be relevant to what are you saying.

 

[frozentundra123456]

yea, i saw some screenshots of low settings on another site and they looked awful.

 

[Erenhardt]

Why are you showing Very High vs Normal Quality when you are saying about playing GTA V on low setting on APU?

Post High/Normal vs Low - then it would be relevant to what are you saying.

Because it is the lowest pclab had on their site, and it should be playable on apu. No one who plays games on apu is targeting 60fps.

Which shows that for a lot of people who use low end gpus and intel igp for gaming amd have some very good products. The additional igp performance enables them to play games that are otherwise a slideshow on intel igp.

If anyting, intel igp is worthless and doesn't do much more than what is integrated in old amd motherboards.

 

[frozentundra123456]

Or you could pay less than 40.00 more and get 50 to 100 percent improvement. For instance, new egg prices: 7850k = 150.00
Athlon X4 860k plus GTX 750 = 188.00

Plus you could make the price even closer by getting cheaper ram for the discrete solution. Nobody is really arguing that you cant play games on an APU, or that Intel's igp is as good as AMDs. It is just that such a superior solution is available at very minimal additional cost.

Even if you are determined to use a totally AMD system, simply substitute an R7 250x for the GTX 750 and the comparison is similar. In fact I think the 250x often goes on sale cheaper than the 750.

 

[AtenRa]

Or you could pay less than 40.00 more and get 50 to 100 percent improvement. For instance, new egg prices: 7850k = 150.00
Athlon X4 860k plus GTX 750 = 188.00

Plus you could make the price even closer by getting cheaper ram for the discrete solution. Nobody is really arguing that you cant play games on an APU, or that Intel's igp is as good as AMDs. It is just that such a superior solution is available at very minimal additional cost.

Even if you are determined to use a totally AMD system, simply substitute an R7 250x for the GTX 750 and the comparison is similar. In fact I think the 250x often goes on sale cheaper than the 750.

Why do you always take the worst perf/price APU ????
A8-7600/7650K is 33% cheaper than 7850K and it can still play the latest games. Hell even the A6-7400K can play the latest games at 720p and it only cost $65.

 

[Erenhardt]

Or you could pay less than 40.00 more and get 50 to 100 percent improvement. For instance, new egg prices: 7850k = 150.00
Athlon X4 860k plus GTX 750 = 188.00

Plus you could make the price even closer by getting cheaper ram for the discrete solution. Nobody is really arguing that you cant play games on an APU, or that Intel's igp is as good as AMDs. It is just that such a superior solution is available at very minimal additional cost.

Even if you are determined to use a totally AMD system, simply substitute an R7 250x for the GTX 750 and the comparison is similar. In fact I think the 250x often goes on sale cheaper than the 750.

or you could pay $30 on top of that and grab 260x. For additional 50$ there is r9 280 on sale. From there, it would be wise to grab one of those sick perf/$ deals on r9 290 available for not much above $200. Baby steps. Add 10-20% more to your total budget and spend it on better gpu is always good.

Anyway, this is going OT...

 

[Phynaz]

Why do you always take the worst perf/price APU ????
A8-7600/7650K is 33% cheaper than 7850K and it can still play the latest games. Hell even the A6-7400K can play the latest games at 720p and it only cost $65.

You consider 25fps at 720p playable?

Maybe in 2005.

 

[AtenRa]

You consider 25fps at 720p playable?

Maybe in 2005.

Have a second look, the above graph is at 1080p. At 720p they all have more than 30fps.

 

[escrow4]

http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/videocard/

1: Intel HD4000 ---> 6,85%
4: Intel HD4400 ---> 2,67%
8: NVIDIA GT630 ---> 2,19%

I would hardly call all those people irrelevant.

With a entry level Gaming PC at lower price than PS4/XBone you can play more than 200 free games.

AAA titles not indies made in a basement for a $1.50. People who spend $60 on an AAA title that cost millions obviously want to jack the settings up otherwise you may as well go XB1/PS4 if you are playing on maximum ugly run away screaming settings.

 

[Erenhardt]

AAA titles not indies made in a basement for a $1.50. People who spend $60 on an AAA title that cost millions obviously want to jack the settings up otherwise you may as well go XB1/PS4 if you are playing on maximum ugly run away screaming settings.

People who sent $60 on AAA game have proper gaming PC.

Someone who picks apu to save $40 with his build is not going to bo and buy 10 $60 AAA games a year. Anyway, apus play aaa games just fine.

Back to topic. The only hammering I see is pentium having its ass handed to it. 4,5GHz 2 core haswell is in average hardly any faster than stock fx6350, but the 11fps minimum is disastrous.

And we talk about CPU people loosed their sh1t about, taunted as second coming of Buddha.

I bet intel made moremoney on these unlocked pentiums than amd on all their apu+cpu combined.

 

[frozentundra123456]

Well, then the Pentium was a bigger success than AMDs apu wasn't it? The point of a company *is* to make money.

 

[Erenhardt]

Well, then the Pentium was a bigger success than AMDs apu wasn't it? The point of a company *is* to make money.

Yep, that is why claiming intel igp is a great success is dumb.
People buy this crap because "intel". The same with intel igp, if someone pissed in your fries, it doesn't mean piss is good because people buy it. They just didn't knew/had no choice.

 

[AtenRa]

Well, then the Pentium was a bigger success than AMDs apu wasn't it? The point of a company *is* to make money.

If the products were in reverse and Intel had Trinities/Richlands/Kaveris they would sell the same or even more than they are selling now Celerons/Pentiums and Core i3s.
Think about it

 

[AtenRa]

AAA titles not indies made in a basement for a $1.50. People who spend $60 on an AAA title that cost millions obviously want to jack the settings up otherwise you may as well go XB1/PS4 if you are playing on maximum ugly run away screaming settings.

Why get a PS4/XBone when it will reach and exceed $1000 in 6-12 months when you start buying Console games. ??

A $300 entry-level HTCP with the A4-7400K will not cost a cent more while you will have access to 200+ free games and will do more thinks than the PS4/XBone can do because it is a PC. Ohh not to mention it could also be upgraded later on something the Consoles cant do either.

 

[Yuriman]

If the products were in reverse and Intel had Trinities/Richlands/Kaveris they would sell the same or even more than they are selling now Celerons/Pentiums and Core i3s.
Think about it

I'm pretty sure if Intel were selling chips with higher power consumption and lower performance (for the CPU portion), they'd sell fewer of them, and AMD would be selling more chips. i3's don't sell well solely by virtue of having a blue logo.

Yep, that is why claiming intel igp is a great success is dumb.
People buy this crap because "intel". The same with intel igp, if someone pissed in your fries, it doesn't mean piss is good because people buy it. They just didn't knew/had no choice.

Intel's IGP is terrible for gaming, but that's really quite a small portion of the overall market (IGP gamers). It supports all of the major HTPC standards and has fixed-hardware for encoding which produces a reasonable output quality. For everyone else, it's more than enough. Arguably, everyone else would probably be better served with an IGP half the size (or less) than what Intel is including on their current chips.

Certainly AMD's iGPUs do the same, but in 99% of cases I doubt they're more useful in practice.

EDIT: For the record, I'm looking forward to the day you can buy a reasonably fast APU from AMD. Current offerings aren't up to my standards yet.

 

[TheELF]

Back to topic. The only hammering I see is pentium having its ass handed to it. 4,5GHz 2 core haswell is in average hardly any faster than stock fx6350, but the 11fps minimum is disastrous.

I don't know how they did their benches but GTA V is the anti-frame drop game
no.1 ,the game limits texture loading to avoid them,so getting such low FPS minimums is impossible.
But you do have to limit your FPS to something your CPU can handle to avoid the texture pop ins.
You can see this in my youtube video: GTA V on celeron G1820

Edit:
Posted new link,in the first link the video was not all there,probably a disconnect or something

 

[Magic Carpet]

Source.

Looks like it doesn't like HT much. Not the first time though. Too bad they didn't throw in 5820K for a test.