The Official Kaveri Review Thread (A10-7850K, etc)

[erunion]

You think so.?..Let s check the site he s quoting and look
for their "integrity" when reviewing an AMD FX :

http://techreport.com/review/23750/amd-fx-8350-processor-reviewed/10

Let s look at what became thoses numbers when testing HW :

http://techreport.com/review/24879/intel-core-i7-4770k-and-4950hq-haswell-processors-reviewed/12

All scores of the FX have been reduced in the same benches
or the benches have been slightly "enhanced" to make the FX
look bad, i invite everybody to compare the scores in the two
reviews of what has been one of TR most disgusting data
manipulation of theses last years.

Those articles clearly state how the test rigs were different. The 3770 got faster too.
Drop the persecution complex.

 

[Abwx]

Those articles clearly state how the test rigs were different. The 3770 got faster too.
Drop the persecution complex.

The FX wasnt reviewed a second time on the HW review,
they used previous reviews numbers for the other CPUs
or better datas for the intel ones , of course , but let s see
in the details :

FX review first and HW review second for all following graphs :

Funny , they used k units in the second AES graph to make things
look imperceptible..

Twofish is about the only bench that wasnt doctored.

What happened in compression.??..The FX score was also compressed,
badly...

 

[Abwx]

Curiously in decompression the number didnt change , wich say
that they reused previous numbers but not always accurately...

This one was changed despite the same title but the results are
about the same.

FX score 15% worse , 2600K AND 3770k have improved , of course...

This test was modded , note that the 2600K is 30% faster
than the FX in the second graph while the difference was only
10% in the first graph , even more difference for the 3770K....

 

[AtenRa]

Those articles clearly state how the test rigs were different. The 3770 got faster too.
Drop the persecution complex.

I believe you should re-check those two reviews.

FX8350 review with Windows 7
http://techreport.com/review/23750/amd-fx-8350-processor-reviewed/10

Core i7 4770K review with windows 8
http://techreport.com/review/24879/intel-core-i7-4770k-and-4950hq-haswell-processors-reviewed/12

Everyone knows that FX8350 is faster with Windows 8 :whiste:

 

[pcsavvy]

With all this back and forth and back and forth, it is getting to the point where someone trying to find non-bias opinion and information, both pro and con, feels like saying "f***K it, I am going to buy what is within my budget and if it works for what I do 95% of the time, great.
It seems to me that 95% of the current processors in today's market can do everything and anything a computer user would like it to do whether it is as an HTPC, Office machine, office/media machine and gaming machine. The major problem to me is if you're a high end gamer and want all settings set to the highest settings and lowest power utilization curve while gaming then emptying the wallet for Intel parts is the way to go.
Some of us are not high end gamers and would like some information of what the pro's and con's of FM2+, FM2, and AM3+ especially with all the upgrades in the motherboards for some sockets. Compared to Kaveri and Richland, is AM3+ still a contender as a budget system or should everyone forget about AM3+ since the chipset is so old in technology terms.

Technically, I thought this is where I could find info about Kaveri as far as it relates to what kind of upgrades and improvements does it have compared to similar priced cpu's. Is it better than Richland or Trinity or LLano in terms of evolution? Is it better than FX 4300 with a dGPU? What improvements do FM2+ bring to the table? With Kaveri do I need a dGPU for a set of applications or is the IGPU ok?
Will AMD offer an Athlon II X4 style Kaveri in the future? Is it a big step up or incremental step in improvements compared to the previous generations of APU? Which Kaveri APU is the best balance between capability and cost if I am interested in upgrading? What is the total cost in buying an AMD system vs an Intel?

 

[Abwx]

Looking at the mass market PCs i see by there Kaveri will be quite
an improvement since 80% use IGPs and still , the weakest ones ,
the only problem is that a 4C Kaveri is not a mainstream product
whose APUs are rather 60-90$ offerings , generaly Celeron/Pentium
or more rarely i3s on the Intel camp and often even worse offerings
on the AMD side with Kabinis often used as cost cutter.

 

[AtenRa]

Technically, I thought this is where I could find info about Kaveri as far as it relates to what kind of upgrades and improvements does it have compared to similar priced cpu's. Is it better than Richland or Trinity or LLano in terms of evolution? Is it better than FX 4300 with a dGPU? What improvements do FM2+ bring to the table? With Kaveri do I need a dGPU for a set of applications or is the IGPU ok?
Will AMD offer an Athlon II X4 style Kaveri in the future? Is it a big step up or incremental step in improvements compared to the previous generations of APU? Which Kaveri APU is the best balance between capability and cost if I am interested in upgrading? What is the total cost in buying an AMD system vs an Intel?

All those questions have been answered from the reviews around the web.

I dont know if the following review have been posted here before, its very nice with lots of CPUs

http://uk.hardware.info/reviews/5156/amd-a10-7850k-kaveri-review-amds-new-apu

 

[USER8000]

you keep posting that chart, check out this link, it shows that different boards can have drastically different power usage
http://uk.hardware.info/reviews/513...d-asrock-asus-and-gigabyte-energy-consumption [note: tested a10-6800k]
so keep on trolling

they are using Gigabyte F2A88XN-WIFI
http://techreport.com/review/25908/amd-a8-7600-kaveri-processor-reviewed/4

Thanks for that! It looks like the ASRock FM2A88X-ITX is the FM2+ mini ITX motherboard to go for it seems.

 

[Galatian]

Holy **** 50W between two boards on Cinebench? Where does this discrepancy come from?

 

[ashetos]

It seems that A10-7850K is a pretty mediocre performer, due to poor memory bandwidth and low clocks.

On the other hand, it seems like the A8-7600 APU in the 45 Watt configuration offers pretty amazing power efficiency for AMD's standards. People also calculated the power consumption (load consumption minus idle consumption) which is indeed withing TDP specification, so there is no power consumption fiasco like with the FX line.

The one comparison I would like to see is the core i7-4950HQ (47 Watt TDP) versus the A8-7600 (45 Watt TDP). I realize that the intel part is an extremely expensive product and the AMD part is low end, but it seems there is not too large a difference in gaming performance. This comparison would be really interesting, same power budget, architectural and manufacturing differences.

 

[littlebluesmurf]

The results on this page show how Kaveri clock for clock is quite an improvement over Richland in a number of tests.

http://uk.hardware.info/reviews/515...review-amds-new-apu-steamroller-vs-piledriver

Kaveri on average is a smudge faster overall than the highest clock Richland part whilst being more energy efficient. Has a number of extra features and is deemed to be a total flop. What were people really expecting, a Pentium 4 to Conroe style leap in performance?

 

[ShintaiDK]

The results on this page show how Kaveri clock for clock is quite an improvement over Richland in a number of tests.

http://uk.hardware.info/reviews/515...review-amds-new-apu-steamroller-vs-piledriver

Kaveri on average is a smudge faster overall than the highest clock Richland part whilst being more energy efficient. Has a number of extra features and is deemed to be a total flop. What were people really expecting, a Pentium 4 to Conroe style leap in performance?

You forget the actual shipping clocks. If Kaveri had shipped with a baseclock of 4.1Ghz. Then yes, sure, but it doesnt. Performance ended up stagnant instead and the product is at a 22% higher cost just to make even more fun of the buyers.

 

[parvadomus]

The results on this page show how Kaveri clock for clock is quite an improvement over Richland in a number of tests.

http://uk.hardware.info/reviews/515...review-amds-new-apu-steamroller-vs-piledriver

Kaveri on average is a smudge faster overall than the highest clock Richland part whilst being more energy efficient. Has a number of extra features and is deemed to be a total flop. What were people really expecting, a Pentium 4 to Conroe style leap in performance?

AMD can achieve a bigger leap throwing the entire architecture just like the P4 to Conroe. They are probably working on something, to continue after XV

 

[schmuckley]

Let's see some benches with 7850K vs Athlon II x4 620

LOL

 

[AtenRa]

http://akiba-pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/mreview/buy/20140116_631060.html

Llano(A8-3850) Trinity(A8-5600K) Richland(A10-6700) Kaveri(A10-7700K)

 

[AtenRa]

Let's see some benches with 7850K vs Athlon II x4 620

LOL

You can see Kaveri against Llano, its almost the same

 

[B-Riz]

Kaveri competes CPU wise with Celerons and Pentiums at half the price. Those CPUs are also much more power efficient. So while the GPU part is an upgrade. Its a downgrade in about every other metric out there, including cost. And with the price increase for stagnant performance. AMD made sure OEMs will deslect the chips in even higher amount than they did with previous chips.

Apples and oranges "downgrade" argument; AMD is selling quad core budget chips while Intel is selling crippled (feature limited) dual core budget chips.

(All those Intel boxes in the link below suffer dearly from the Intel tax.)

Cost "downgrade"? Retail cost is not the same as bulk cost, and cannot be used as a comparison point as most of Kaveri is going to end up going to large OEM's.

"stagnant performance" - considering most x86 CPU's for the past few years have been quite capable for this market segment, budget quad core and good graphics is the future as software goes more multi-threaded and graphics processing becomes more ubiquitous.

Lets look at the real world and what OEM's offer right now, and what Kaveri will replace after the older supply dries up.

Oh my, look at all those awesome Celerons and Pentiums with Linux, Grandma and Grandpa will sure like that, coming from Win XP.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=Property&N=100019096%20600014732%20600217078%20600184112%20600014714%208000&IsNodeId=1&bop=And&page=1

Wow, I would love to have that Celeron 887 or 1007U over the A4 or A6 offering (*sarcasm*), which ALSO have more memory (A6 model), a larger HDD and a micro-ATX form factor, which allows some limited upgrading and repair if needed.

Throw benchmarks up all you want, the average user and target market (large OEM integraters) of this chip does not give two shakes about those benchmarks, and I would not hesitate to recommend an AMD box over an Intel box at the low end every day of the week.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Oh my, look at all those awesome Celerons and Pentiums with Linux, Grandma and Grandpa will sure like that, coming from Win XP.

The 4 cheapest are Celerons, small factors and one of them got Windows as well. What you seem to have missed is that the first A4 is Kabini based and a big chunky box. After that you get a Celeron G1620 and so on. There are no FM2/FM2+ based systems before 400$ and up. And then yous till get 1M/2T CPUs that are essentially glorified singlecores. And their performance is utterly in the ground.

So if you wanted to prove AMD only got expensive lackbuster parts in the entry level end. You succeeded.

 

[B-Riz]

The 4 cheapest are Celerons, small factors and one of them got Windows as well. What you seem to have missed is that the first A4 is Kabini based and a big chunky box. After that you get a Celeron G1620 and so on. There are no FM2/FM2+ based systems before 400$ and up.

Is the average consumer going to care about socket? Do they care to know?

No.

Those AMD comps are still quad core boxes with way better graphics than Intel HD.

Guess what Kaveri is? An improved quad core and an improved GPU cheap enough in mass quantity purchase to make Celeron and Pentium irrelevant.

Intel (and their associated tax) is a non-compete in the sub $400 box for any and all points a consumer is going to look at for comparison. (Where Kaveri will end up at some point)

 

[ShintaiDK]

Is the average consumer going to care about socket? Do they care to know?

No.

Those AMD comps are still quad core boxes with way better graphics than Intel HD.

Guess what Kaveri is? An improved quad core and an improved GPU cheap enough in mass quantity purchase to make Celeron and Pentium irrelevant.

Intel (and their associated tax) is a non-compete in the sub $400 box for any and all points a consumer is going to look at for comparison. (Where Kaveri will end up at some point)

There are no big core BD/PD/SR "quadcores" in the 400$ list you linked, you forgot they are A8 and A10 only. There was Kabini and single module big cores besides Llano. And with Kabini that GPU advantage...not so much. And CPU wise none of them are even near. But again, with Kabini we could start to talk about BayTrail too.

If AMDs chip was like everyone wanted. Then I am sure their marketshare would be better, alot better.

Its funny how you talk about an Intel tax. When you show people have to pay the AMD tax. And even more so after the 22% price increase as seen on the lackbuster 7850K.

 

[B-Riz]

The 4 cheapest are Celerons, small factors and one of them got Windows as well. What you seem to have missed is that the first A4 is Kabini based and a big chunky box. After that you get a Celeron G1620 and so on. There are no FM2/FM2+ based systems before 400$ and up. And then yous till get 1M/2T CPUs that are essentially glorified singlecores. And their performance is utterly in the ground.

So if you wanted to prove AMD only got expensive lackbuster parts in the entry level end. You succeeded.

And you do not understand a whole market segment and how a mfg is going to love a 45W / 65W part that allows easy WHOLE SYSTEM integration AND a lower bill of materials vs that awesome budget Intel stuff that is not really worth comparing Kaveri to.

 

[JDG1980]

AMD can achieve a bigger leap throwing the entire architecture just like the P4 to Conroe. They are probably working on something, to continue after XV

The cat cores would provide a good base to work with. Currently the IPC is somewhat limited because the front end is only 2-wide. If they doubled that to 4-wide, this by itself would make a big difference. They would also probably have to add additional features (for instance, I don't think the cat cores do advanced stuff like macro-op fusion, which is one thing that made Conroe such a big advance on Intel's side). But the cat cores are compact and low-power, and Intel's experience shows that it's easier to take a design like that and scale it up than to try to fix a big, hot, hungry, low-IPC design like Netburst - or Bulldozer.

 

[ShintaiDK]

And you do not understand a whole market segment and how a mfg is going to love a 45W / 65W part that allows easy WHOLE SYSTEM integration AND a lower bill of materials vs that awesome budget Intel stuff that is not really worth comparing Kaveri to.

While the Intel CPUs are 35W and 54W and with FIVR.

 

[B-Riz]

There are no big core BD/PD/SR "quadcores" in the 400$ list you linked, you forgot they are A8 and A10 only. There was Kabini and single module big cores besides Llano. And with Kabini that GPU advantage...not so much. And CPU wise none of them are even near. But again, with Kabini we could start to talk about BayTrail too.

If AMDs chip was like everyone wanted. Then I am sure their marketshare would be better, alot better.

Its funny how you talk about an Intel tax. When you show people have to pay the AMD tax. And even more so after the 22% price increase as seen on the lackbuster 7850K.

Stop shifting the salient point here, I am not talking about the 7850k at retail price, that is irrelevant to the volume seller that the A8-7600 will be.

A8-7600 and related lower models make Celeron and Pentium irrelevant.

Again, lets look at specific target markets.

The Intel tax is still apparent below, and the two A8 systems (since A8 is so important when comparing A4 and Celeron) still offer a better value (more RAM on a 64 bit OS AND better graphics) vs those i3's.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=Property&N=100019096%20600014733%20600014730%20600184108%20600337482%208000&IsNodeId=1&bop=And&page=1

Oh, and the heck with it to any benchmarks that will be thrown up. I am only talking value based on a non-biased recommendation.

 

[B-Riz]

While the Intel CPUs are 35W and 54W and with FIVR.

With half baked graphics compared to Kaveri...