[WCCF] AMD Kaveri Mobile APUs Vs. ULV Haswell Benchmarks

[monstercameron]

It has the best iGPU performance by a huge margin to second best (Intel).



AMD has good enough CPU performance (within 10% in the same segment) and outstanding GPU performance. There are Games that are unplayable with an Intel iGPU, can you say the same for the AMD CPU ??? is there an app that doesnt run on AMD CPUs ??

Why Intel iGPU is good enough for the vast majority of users and AMD CPUs are not good enough for the same users ??

<troll>if it suits the pro intel argument then use it because logic. If it suites the pro-AMD argument, then obviously throw it out! duh! </troll>

yeah, more people will buy what ever they are marketed...and if intel is the only one marketing then the get the majority share.

 

[Sweepr]

It has the best iGPU performance by a huge margin to second best (Intel).

AMD has good enough CPU performance (within 10% in the same segment)

They are nowhere close to Intel in CPU perf/watt, a 15W Core i5 4300U is faster in MT tasks than AMD's fastest 35W chip and completely demolishes it in ST tasks, and I'm not even talking about i7s. Their GPU perf lead is shrinking every year and could be completely gone in the next couple generations. I dont think the same can be said about Intel's CPU advantage if they continue to focus on improving perf/watt and pushing the Core line to even lower TDPs.

 

[AtenRa]

Their GPU perf lead is shrinking every year and could be completely gone in the next couple generations.

I believe you are looking in to wrong numbers

 

[monstercameron]

They are nowhere close to Intel in CPU perf/watt, a 15W Core i5 4300U is faster in MT tasks than AMD's fastest 35W chip and completely demolishes it in ST tasks, and I'm not even talking about i7s. Their GPU perf lead is shrinking every year and could be completely gone in the next couple generations. I dont think the same can be said about Intel's CPU advantage if they continue to focus on improving perf/watt and pushing the Core line to even lower TDPs.

you think that intels gpu department can catch up to ATI's?
also are you claiming that amd are so inept that they cant upgrade their igps when they see intel's offerings catching up? its funny becasue you also think that AMD cant catch up in terms of cpu performance...

 

[Vesku]

Ever since Llano AMD has had decent notebook options, doesn't matter though if they don't get OEMs to put them in products. Have yet to see a product cycle where AMD gets more than a tiny handful of 13-14 inch notebook retail products. Not a single AMD Chromebook, either.

A good portion of the blame lies with AMD's almost complete focus on fulfilling historic customer orders while mimicking Intel SKUs as best they can. AM1 platform shows that might be changing a bit but let's see what sort of mobile Kaveri products actually hit retail.

 

[frozentundra123456]

the market values whatever is marketed to them...why do you think samsung is so successful? branding and marketing is what makes apple so successful. Not to say that is the end-all-be-all of business but in success it is a large portion.
To say that the "market" doesn't want AMD because of the current market share is a bit shortsided.
AMD needs to do more marketing to the mainstream, when was the last time you saw an AMD commercial on tv?

Undoubtedly marketing does play a part, but Intel, as well as Samsung, apple, et.al are so successful *both* because they have good marketing and a very good product that fits the demands of their market segment. AMD apus are a decent product, but are trying to fit in a nice of those who want better graphics performance than intel, but are satisfied with performance less than a low/mid range discrete card, and are willing to settle for lower cpu performance as well.

By the way, I could watch AMD marketing commercials every day, and it still would not convince me to buy one of their cpus, not because it is bad, but because there are similarly priced alternatives form Intel that are both faster and more efficient for the uses I am interested in.

 

[monstercameron]

Undoubtedly marketing does play a part, but Intel, as well as Samsung, apple, et.al are so successful *both* because they have good marketing and a very good product that fits the demands of their market segment. AMD apus are a decent product, but are trying to fit in a nice of those who want better graphics performance than intel, but are satisfied with performance less than a low/mid range discrete card, and are willing to settle for lower cpu performance as well.

marketing plays one of the largest roles imho, because in most products produced by the likes of samsung or even apple, there ican be other more focused, better and cheaper options that usually have less market visibility.

As for the roles of apus vs what intel offers, lowered processing power is markedly less visible than lowered gpu performance.

At worst AMD is a few seconds slower than an intel counterpart(and vice versa), so much so that joe six pack usually cant tell the difference but if the igp performance is lacking, then it can be clearly visible. Implying that it is a bad product because it hasn't had a very good showing so far is a bit shortsided (that is like saying the dreamcast or gamecube was bad because the ps2 sold more consoles).

Also why is the idea of an APU bad yet intel does the same thing and its a success in most forumers eyes?

By the way, I could watch AMD marketing commercials every day, and it still would not convince me to buy one of their cpus, not because it is bad, but because there are similarly priced alternatives form Intel that are both faster and more efficient for the uses I am interested in.

good to know that you are a great stand in for the majority of people, a one man survey.

 

[PPB]

good to know that you are a great stand in for the majority of people, a one man survey.

Statistical noise is a foreign concept to him most likely.

On the other hand, blind tests have proven the average joe (and even a awful lot of people in this very forum) wont distinguish between an AMD APU and a Intel CPU.

 

[frozentundra123456]

It has the best iGPU performance by a huge margin to second best (Intel).



AMD has good enough CPU performance (within 10% in the same segment) and outstanding GPU performance. There are Games that are unplayable with an Intel iGPU, can you say the same for the AMD CPU ??? is there an app that doesnt run on AMD CPUs ??

Why Intel iGPU is good enough for the vast majority of users and AMD CPUs are not good enough for the same users ??

The best igpu for a gpu intensive activity like gaming is like having the sharpest knife at a gunfight. You are twisting what I said. I never said that an AMD igp was not good enough when an intel one was. What I said was that either is good enough for 90 percent of users, and if you have an intensive gpu activity like gaming, you are better off with a dgpu.

Can you show me a game that plays better on an apu, lets say kaveri at 180.00 than on an 80.00 athlon X4 cpu and a 100.00 discrete gpu like a HD7770, or maybe even 7790 if one watches for sales carefully?

 

[frozentundra123456]

marketing plays one of the largest roles imho, because in most products produced by the likes of samsung or even apple, there ican be other more focused, better and cheaper options that usually have less market visibility.

As for the roles of apus vs what intel offers, lowered processing power is markedly less visible than lowered gpu performance.

At worst AMD is a few seconds slower than an intel counterpart(and vice versa), so much so that joe six pack usually cant tell the difference but if the igp performance is lacking, then it can be clearly visible. Implying that it is a bad product because it hasn't had a very good showing so far is a bit shortsided (that is like saying the dreamcast or gamecube was bad because the ps2 sold more consoles).

Also why is the idea of an APU bad yet intel does the same thing and its a success in most forumers eyes?


good to know that you are a great stand in for the majority of people, a one man survey.

Wow, you just dont get it do you? It is not the idea of an apu that is bad, it is the poor execution of the cpu part of it that makes AMD less attractive, i.e. lower performance and higher power consumption.

 

[monstercameron]

The best igpu for a gpu intensive activity like gaming is like having the sharpest knife at a gunfight. You are twisting what I said. I never said that an AMD igp was not good enough when an intel one was. What I said was that either is good enough for 90 percent of users, and if you have an intensive gpu activity like gaming, you are better off with a dgpu.

Can you show me a game that plays better on an apu, lets say kaveri at 180.00 than on an 80.00 athlon X4 cpu and a 100.00 discrete gpu like a HD7770, or maybe even 7790 if one watches for sales carefully?

kaveri's issues aside, this thread has a focus on mobile, so bringing desktop parts in to try and make an argument is a bit of a fallacy.

mobile parts are space restrained and BOM restrained(so are desktops but to a much lesser degree) having lowend gpu performance, with lowered BOM costs and less board space is a god-send for mobile.

Wow, you just dont get it do you? It is not the idea of an apu that is bad, it is the poor execution of the cpu part of it that makes AMD less attractive, i.e. lower performance and higher power consumption.

that isnt a "good" reason, as stated (anecdotal though) most people cannot tell the difference in performance on amd vs intel cpus, the only real differences are in benchmarks.
It is a compromise any way you slice it, better cpu performance(few seconds shaved off? not really noticeable) VS better gpu perf, this is very noticeable because of its nature.

 

[mrmt]

Ok i see, and because it's Intel this is ok for you? Is it a bad thing that AMD values iGPU a lot more than Intel does?
What's bad is AMD CPU performance and Intel GPU performance in comparable price brackets. They both need to improve their weak areas thats all.

AMD does not value more the iGPU than Intel does, but they *need* to bring better iGPU because their CPU sucks big time.

And the trade off is not just CPU/GPU. By going AMD, you get iGPU but you lose CPU performance, power consumption and battery life.

 

[monstercameron]

AMD does not value more the iGPU than Intel does, but they *need* to bring better iGPU because their CPU sucks big time.

And the trade off is not just CPU/GPU. By going AMD, you get iGPU but you lose CPU performance, power consumption and battery life.

the power woes of AMD arent the apu itself but platform power, AMD skus are never as power optimized as intels...

 

[Shivansps]

that isnt a "good" reason, as stated (anecdotal though) most people cannot tell the difference in performance on amd vs intel cpus, the only real differences are in benchmarks.
It is a compromise any way you slice it, better cpu performance(few seconds shaved off? not really noticeable) VS better gpu perf, this is very noticeable because of its nature.

Im with you on that one, but if we are talking about a game, we still need to figure out what gona happen once we fire up a few games, a benchmark does not really work that well for mobile, it gives a good idea of how a IGP perform, but not what happen once CPU+IGP is demanded, Intel has been caching up with AMD on old APUs because of a good turbo system + better IPC, how that AMD is doing the exact same thing we need to take a look at what happens.

Them again, its nothing new here, AMD has been better on IGP since forever.

Actually, i kinda feel that the FX-7500 is on Broadwell reach... Lets not forget that the HD5000 scores 1100 at 15W the FX-7500 is just 30% away, way too close, 2 years ago, it was crazy to even think that.

 

[erunion]

I guess you didnt read all of my comment?
"...Battery life is too dependent on platform power for you to make such claims."

besides the link you gave shows results all over the place.

I read it. I didn't address it because it wasn't substantial. The fact that other components draw power doesn't reduce the importance of CPU power consumption.


If you look the normalized benchmarks the M branded Cores last much longer than the APUs, its only the more powerful QMs that have less battery life.
And that was just one snap shot in time to prove a point. I haven't done the research but Trinity vs SNB was probably one of the smallest battery life gaps between Intel and AMD since Core 2.

 

[AtenRa]

The best igpu for a gpu intensive activity like gaming is like having the sharpest knife at a gunfight.

And since we are evaluating AMD vs Intel products(SKUs) the AMD has the superior product in the iGPU department. But you downplaying it every time you talk about it.

You are twisting what I said. I never said that an AMD igp was not good enough when an intel one was. What I said was that either is good enough for 90 percent of users, and if you have an intensive gpu activity like gaming, you are better off with a dgpu.

I did not twist anything you said, compared to the Core i3, the AMD Kaveri has ~90% of the Intel CPU performance and 40-50%+ higher Gaming performance. But you said the Intel Product has outstanding CPU performance and good enough iGPU performance for the vast majority of users.
Are you saying that the vast majority of users need that much more 10% higher CPU performance than 40-50%+ more GPU performance ??

Can you show me a game that plays better on an apu, lets say kaveri at 180.00 than on an 80.00 athlon X4 cpu and a 100.00 discrete gpu like a HD7770, or maybe even 7790 if one watches for sales carefully?

Apples to Oranges,
We are evaluating AMD vs Intel SKUs, not what is the best bang for the buck in Gaming performance.
At the same segment and or same price etc we can compare the A10-7700K/7850K vs the Intel Core i3 4330/4340. The Intel product has ~10% higher CPU performance on average when the AMD product has ~40-50% higher GPU performance on average.
So if Intel's iGPU is good enough for the vast majority of users as you said, then the AMD CPU is more than good enough for the vast majority of users as well.

 

[AtenRa]

AMD does not value more the iGPU than Intel does, but they *need* to bring better iGPU because their CPU sucks big time.

10% less performance at the same segment while at the same time providing 40-50% more graphics performance and it sucks big time ??? Are you trolling or what ??

And the trade off is not just CPU/GPU. By going AMD, you get iGPU but you lose CPU performance, power consumption and battery life.

You always have to compromise, one product gives you 10%+ higher CPU performance and less consumption, the other gives you 40-50% graphics and 90% of the CPU performance at higher consumption. And since you cannot upgrade your GPU in Laptops, AMD APUs provide a better all around product, especially now with Kaveri that has even lower power consumption and better CPU and iGPU than before.

 

[Gikaseixas]

Unbalanced chips from both camps IMO.
Like i said, Intel needs better graphics and better drivers
AMD needs better CPU performance and lower power consumption
If you read marketing slides, that's what they talking about

I wanted to game on my HTPC so i went with AMD since the CPU was acceptable and the iGPU was much better than anything else in the market. Now i'm looking to replace my trusty A8-3850 and i really like the i7 4770R with Iris Pro. Now that's a chip, really strong all around but very expensive and one is conditioned to buy it with a board damn.
Current Kaveri chips are ok but i want to experiment with Iris Pro this time around.

 

[AtenRa]

Unbalanced chips from both camps IMO.
Like i said, Intel needs better graphics and better drivers
AMD needs better CPU performance and lower power consumption
If you read marketing slides, that's what they talking about

I wanted to game on my HTPC so i went with AMD since the CPU was acceptable and the iGPU was much better than anything else in the market. Now i'm looking to replace my trusty A8-3850 and i really like the i7 4770R with Iris Pro. Now that's a chip, really strong all around but very expensive and one is conditioned to buy it with a board damn.
Current Kaveri chips are ok but i want to experiment with Iris Pro this time around.

Have you seen this ??

http://pclab.pl/art56975-4.html

Edit: just a note, Kaveri has higher performance/watt than even Iris Pro in Gaming at 1080p (at least in FarCry 3)

 

[Sweepr]

Have you seen this ??

http://pclab.pl/art56975-4.html

Edit: just a note, Kaveri has higher performance/watt than even Iris Pro in Gaming at 1080p (at least in FarCry 3)

Have you seen this?

Now power consumption:

www.4gamer.net/games/999/G999902/20140208005

The huge lead they had in the Llano vs Sandy Bridge days got immensely reduced with Haswell vs Richland last year (mobile parts). Now excuse me if I am not impressed that a higher TDP 19W mobile Kaveri launching roughly a year after 15W Haswell-U GT3 barely beats it by 30% (3DMark). These GCN APUs should have a much larger lead against Intel's old and not so efficient Gen 7.5 iGPUs otherwise Broadwell could very well catch up as soon as Q4.

 

[witeken]

Unbalanced chips from both camps IMO.
Like i said, Intel needs better graphics and better drivers
AMD needs better CPU performance and lower power consumption
If you read marketing slides, that's what they talking about

I wanted to game on my HTPC so i went with AMD since the CPU was acceptable and the iGPU was much better than anything else in the market. Now i'm looking to replace my trusty A8-3850 and i really like the i7 4770R with Iris Pro. Now that's a chip, really strong all around but very expensive and one is conditioned to buy it with a board damn.
Current Kaveri chips are ok but i want to experiment with Iris Pro this time around.

Wait until Broadwell for GPU performance.

 

[PPB]

Wait until Broadwell for GPU performance.

Wait until Excavator for CPU performance.





See what I did there?

 

[caswow]

Have you seen this?

price is the problem. their iris is so expensive to produce you can get a real gaming pc for that money of this gigabyte mini pc.

 

[witeken]

Wait until Excavator for CPU performance.

See what I did there?

These are not my words. Quote Intel architect:

If you like to overclock, Haswell is worth it (can't tell you why but read the Haswell Anandtech preview very carefully for buried treasure). On-die graphics is improving quite a bit as well. If you're into energy efficiency or even more graphics, Broadwell. I think the tech community will be very pleasantly surprised with Broadwell. But I'm biased, so we'll just going to have to prove it the hard way.

 

[ShintaiDK]

price is the problem. their iris is so expensive to produce you can get a real gaming pc for that money of this gigabyte mini pc.

4670R doesnt cost that much more than a 7850K. 235$ vs 180$. And thats 65W vs 95W and a real quadcore with huge performance lead CPU wise. And Iris pro will be much much more common on the Broadwell line.