AMD A10-7800 APU Review: Kaveri Hits the Efficiency Sweet Spot

[ajac09]

pissing contest has begun

 

[ajac09]

pissing contest has begun

 

[IInuyasha74]

I'm properly going to get down rated for this
AMD APUs, while they bring in budget friendly PCs for those on a budget, but stop making them like their actually worth buying, cause it's not. Just look at those gaming benchmarks, in order to make them attractive the games have to run at the lowest settings. Who in the real world runs games at the lowest settings? I know I don't, and I bet none of you here as well. The other is the price, AMD A10-7800 at Newegg cost $169.99, the cheapest Intel Core i5 at Newegg cost $184.99, that is the difference of $15 dollars. If a you were to buy a CPU for yourself you doing to get a AMD 10? I doubt it. If a friend asked you to help them build a gaming computer, you going to recommend a AMD A10 or even think about AMD A10 as your very first CPU pick? The most cheapest CPU would be a AMD FX 6300. Seriously, AMD really need to bring some focus back to their FX line up as many of us would still like to have a proper desktop cpu. and none of these APUs but you can pretend it still a great desktop CPU nonsense.
AMD A10 = those peddle cars that toddler drives around with
AMD FX = a proper car

Links to them APU and CPU
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113372
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819116942

You are missing the point completely. They don't try to make the CPU seem more powerful than it is, they really just try to point it out to be as fast as you need. The part they really advertise is the GPU side and it is the fastest CPU with built in graphics money can buy. True, an Intel Core i5 isn't much more expensive, but what if someone is buying a gaming PC and doesn't have a lot of cash? To get a solid graphics card they at least need $80 to get a graphics card that can beat the graphics in this GPU. So now they are close to being $100 more expensive, and that is before considering motherboards which are usually a little higher for Intel.

Granted you could get an Intel Core i3 or an FX 6300 CPU which performs better, but that will cost $120, add an $80 GPU to get a better graphics card and you are $40 past this one for little gain in performance. For someone who is very tight on cash that extra $40 is really important.

So stop being so narrow minded and remember not everyone can afford to go out and buy an i7 and a GTX 780 Ti.

All prices from Newegg

AMD APU
AMD A10-7800.................................$169.99
Team 8GB (2x4GB) DDR3 2400.....$75.99
Asus A78M-A...................................$67.79
Total.................................................$313.77
Sapphire R7-260X 2GB..................$119.99
Total with card................................$433.76

Intel Core i5
Intel Core i5 4440............................$184.99
Team 8GB (2x4GB) DDR3 2400....$75.99
Asus H81M-D Plus.........................$54.99
Total................................................$315.97
Sapphire R7-260X 2GB.................$119.99
Total with card................................$435.96
In terms of IGP performance in games, the AMD is the clear winner, but the game would either have to run at a the lowest detail as possible or even at a lower resolution like 720P.
Adding a graphic card, then the Core i5 is clearly the better pick because it will dance around that AMD A10-7800. To some Core i5 may be out of their budget, so that is the reason I've mentioned before the cheapest way to go is get a AMD FX 6300.

AMD FX
AMD FX 6300...................................$119.99
Team 8GB (2x4GB) DDR3 2400.....$75.99
Asus M5A78L-M/USB3....................$59.79
Total.................................................$255.77
Sapphire R7-260X 2GB..................$119.99
Total with card.................................$375.76
Price difference between AMD A10-7800 vs AMD FX6300 $58
With AMD FX 6300 you get 6 cores and it's a proper desktop CPU. So I'm not being narrow minded. AMD's APU do have their places, but when it comes to real computing power for games, its crap. All this pom pom shaking about how good a APU is, is nothing but a waste of time. AMD needs to do something about their FX. Sadly they had given up and right now only focus on their APUs. If it wasn't for them to actually buy ATi, they probably won't be here today. it's their graphic cards that's keeping them up.
For those that still want to get a APU as a gaming PC, then get a AMD X4 740, 750K, or 760K because that money save, can be put towards a better video card.
AMD X4
AMD X4 760K........$89.99
Team 8GB (2x4GB) DDR3 2400...$79.99
Asus A78M-A.................................$67.79
Total................................................$233.77
Sapphire R7-260X 2GB..................$119.99
Total with card.................................$353.76
AMD X4 740 with card...............$338.76
AMD X4 750K with card.............$343.76

Some how you still are missing the point. Going by your own prices you are stating, ignoring the fact that a suitable FM2+ motherboard can be had for $20 less than the one you listed, this APU and motherbaord is still best for people who don't have the extra cash.

Not a single person is going to say that the A10-7800 APU is going to beat an Intel Core i5 with an R7 260. The point is that to get that system you are looking at a total of $435, while just getting the APU and being able to play games on medium settings right off will only cost you $313. Its only $293 once you switch to a $50 motherboard, and even cheaper motherboards exist. What if a user only has $400 to spend total? You are going to tell him to get an extra $35 buy an i5, motherboard, that RAM, and the graphics card and be left without a hard drive, disk drive, power supply, or case? Its possible they get buy the APU, motherboard, and RAM as listed and still have enough cash to buy all the other parts needed without breaking $400 and still have a computer when they are finished which is decent and can play games pretty well. Its not possible they could do the same buying an i5.

Again you could argue that an i5 has better performance, but only if you really don't get the point that this product is aimed at people on a tight budget, and if that is the case there is just no talking to you.

As for the FX 6300, similar scenario. It has about $50 edge to play with, and if you buy a used graphics card its possible you could get a better PC overall. However, that extra $50 is only going to get them as high as an R7 240 which only has about half the ahaders as the APU and will have much lower gaming performance.

 

[pmarceau]

Regarding Game Consoles: They are specialized with primary purpose of playing video games. So often when release are in many ways superior. It is obvious that with today's technology [they already do, not not the whole PC]. like integrated on board CPU's and integrated Sound, Network card. all of these used to be separate. Now simply design the Board smaller with GDD5/DDR5 for system, and everything is integrated, so A gaming console will perform as well your average semi-serious Gamers PC (That's me). Often when console is new it looks better and works faster in the past anyway, but after I update my PC, and they are used to their version, they cannot help but see the difference and say so. for a time they used the old TV blur to their advantage even . But on a serious to Fanatical, or anything in between Gamers high end PC, there is only one way I know of where the same game's console version would out perform the PC version of same game. And that would be by design , such as having everything integrated and very close. They have in the past used modified or unmodified PC parts you could buy. But everything is closer and integrated it can out perform the same items on a larger board.
Just as laptops have much faster response time on easy to medium tasks, as everything is closer and or integrated. But are not designed for raw power, at least in my experience, like many desktop PC's. They are essentially a highly specialized computer.

 

[pmarceau]

Sorry for duplicate post [Edited by User].
And I don't see an erase option yet.
Is there a delete option?
Sorry,
And any well meaning help is appreciated.
Even the attempt to help means as much to me, but mt computer is more stubborn

 

[pmarceau]

We [me too] should remember purpose. Share useful info, opinions, conclusions based on experience.
I used to do customer service and best advice I got was don't take it personal. Remember you havr most likely never met another here, or ever will. and even if you did you'd never know.
But I know all too weel how text only conversation things can be taken multiple ways, and honestly it being text only is at least half the problem.
I hope this is helpful, and not considered to mean everyone else, as I have been guilty of the same in the past, and probably will again. Nor do I assume or mean to infer this is not totally obvious to all, but that we all are affected by this.
But we, all of us me included in a different mood are different time, will react differently to the same thing.
Just try not to take it personally, nor make it sound personal.
I prefer not know their age, sex, height, national heritage, etc etc. So then I can honestly state my opinion in a general way, and with more thought. if I know any details I will have to fight off programmed assumptions. and assuming the opposite can also be offensive, even if not intended. I always say we can generalize just 1 step further and generalize all humans are...

 

[pmarceau]

And then there are typos....

 

[computertech82]

Sorry. getting about 30fps in games is NOT awesome nor record breaking. And with amd cpus many generation BEHIND intel, it's not worth it.
Better to get a Intel i5 with a good video card so it will last much longer than just one year.

 

[mitch074]

Erf... A few things:
- gaming at 720p is perfectly good enough if you're playing older games (which are often made for sub-1080p resolutions), or on smaller/older screens; that it is now possible without an extra card is fantastic;
- a low-heat, low-power machine based on that APU is perfect for a living room PC;
- some people just don't care about the very latest visuals and only want to play a game once in a while, and would rather do web browsing or whatever on their PC, which they'd rather have small, silent, cheap and nimble enough to work with;
- about the FPU, it's been on-die only since the 486DX (486SX didn't include it) and became standard only with the Pentium. Pretty much useless in games, it can be emulated rather easily on an integer core and its performance only matters in apps like audio/video encoders and such. Extensions like MMX and SSE are actually more efficient than the generic FPU for many of these uses anyway.

 

[IInuyasha74]

Erf... A few things:
- gaming at 720p is perfectly good enough if you're playing older games (which are often made for sub-1080p resolutions), or on smaller/older screens; that it is now possible without an extra card is fantastic;
- a low-heat, low-power machine based on that APU is perfect for a living room PC;
- some people just don't care about the very latest visuals and only want to play a game once in a while, and would rather do web browsing or whatever on their PC, which they'd rather have small, silent, cheap and nimble enough to work with;
- about the FPU, it's been on-die only since the 486DX (486SX didn't include it) and became standard only with the Pentium. Pretty much useless in games, it can be emulated rather easily on an integer core and its performance only matters in apps like audio/video encoders and such. Extensions like MMX and SSE are actually more efficient than the generic FPU for many of these uses anyway.

I would agree with most of what you are saying, but the FPU is actually usually used quite a bit in games and I doubt you could play games without one if they would ever make a CPU without one. Though it seems that some people are debating arguing that the APU doesn't have an FPU for some reason.

The current AMD CPUs as most of you probably know have one FPU for every two Integer units. What is a little less known is how good the performance of these FPUs are. They aren't as weak as a FPU found inside of a modern Pentium for example. AMD implements simultaneous multithreading, very similar to Multithreading inside of the FPU. They don't inside of the full processor. However, this means the FPU can actually work on two threads simultaneously similar to how an i3 would do. Not only that but AMD focuses heavily on the FPU performance in the last few CPUs to help compensate for the it holding back the Integer units. Also it has AES support while Intel holds that back from its i3 CPUs letting it perform those operations a lot faster.

So really the APU isn't FPU weak. It is for a quad core, but for a dual core its very very strong.
http://cdn3.wccftech.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/AMD-Steamroller-vs-Bulldozer.jpg

 

[damric]

Kaveri A10-7850K APUs have 737GFLOPS of FPU power, much more FPU power than any Intel APU.

 

[IInuyasha74]

Kaveri A10-7850K APUs have 737GFLOPS of FPU power, much more FPU power than any Intel APU.

Yes the A10-7850k does win in GPU and CPU FPU against any Intel dual-core.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7711/floating-point-peak-performance-of-kaveri-and-other-recent-amd-and-intel-chips

In the GPU it wins almost completely. Only Haswell CPUs with the embedded RAM cache gets close, the rest are only half as powerful for FP32. Intel wins in FP64 but really this is less important than the CPU FPU.

The A10-7850k APU 59.2 Gflops at FP32 and 29.6 Gflops at FP64 using the SSE instructions. Haswell and Ivy Bridge get 112 Gflops for FP32 and 56 Gflops for FP64 using the same instruction. Granted that is a lot higher, but think about compared to an i3? An i3 is basically half of an i7, so just dividing the numbers by 2 gives us a fair estimate leaving FP32 at 56 Gfops and 28 Gflops for FP64.

Obviously given this information, the A10-7850k's FPUs aren't majorly faster but they do have an extra edge making them faster than an i3 would have. Granted you might think it would be faster with AVX instruction set, and given the data available it most likely would be much faster, but Intel only puts that instruction set as enabled on Core i5 and above.

 

[damric]

Kaveri A10-7850K APUs have 737GFLOPS of FPU power, much more FPU power than any Intel APU.

Yes the A10-7850k does win in GPU and CPU FPU against any Intel dual-core.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7711/floating-point-peak-performance-of-kaveri-and-other-recent-amd-and-intel-chips

In the GPU it wins almost completely. Only Haswell CPUs with the embedded RAM cache gets close, the rest are only half as powerful for FP32. Intel wins in FP64 but really this is less important than the CPU FPU.

The A10-7850k APU 59.2 Gflops at FP32 and 29.6 Gflops at FP64 using the SSE instructions. Haswell and Ivy Bridge get 112 Gflops for FP32 and 56 Gflops for FP64 using the same instruction. Granted that is a lot higher, but think about compared to an i3? An i3 is basically half of an i7, so just dividing the numbers by 2 gives us a fair estimate leaving FP32 at 56 Gfops and 28 Gflops for FP64.

Obviously given this information, the A10-7850k's FPUs aren't majorly faster but they do have an extra edge making them faster than an i3 would have. Granted you might think it would be faster with AVX instruction set, and given the data available it most likely would be much faster, but Intel only puts that instruction set as enabled on Core i5 and above.

I'm talking about using the APU for something like mining or folding.

 

[BustaRhymes]

Wow you save a whole $4 from the better 7850K. What is the point in this processor? Just make 7850Ks

 

[noko]

How do you get the 45w profile for the A10 7800? Would like to see how Mantle performs, this API does represent DX12 improvements plus there are a number of upcoming games that will support Mantle as it is.

 

[Memnarchon]

Kaveri A10-7850K APUs have 737GFLOPS of FPU power, much more FPU power than any Intel APU.

In the GPU it wins almost completely. Only Haswell CPUs with the embedded RAM cache gets close, the rest are only half as powerful for FP32. Intel wins in FP64 but really this is less important than the CPU FPU.

Well that was true till Haswell came out. And they are not getting close. Intel CPUs with GT3e are even more powerful. The 4770R can go beyond A10-7850K in FP32 performance, achieving 832GFLOPs of FPU power.

 

[IInuyasha74]

Kaveri A10-7850K APUs have 737GFLOPS of FPU power, much more FPU power than any Intel APU.

In the GPU it wins almost completely. Only Haswell CPUs with the embedded RAM cache gets close, the rest are only half as powerful for FP32. Intel wins in FP64 but really this is less important than the CPU FPU.

Well that was true till Haswell came out. And they are not getting close. Intel CPUs with GT3e are even more powerful. The 4770R can go beyond A10-7850K in FP32 performance, achieving 832GFLOPs of FPU power.

The AMD GPU is much more powerful. The GT3e is the one which has the dedicated RAM built into the CPU, and those are extremely rare and almost completely non-existent. Only two desktop CPUs have this, neither of which can be bought without buying a fully built OEM computer and very few of those have it either.
When the two GPUs both are forced to rely entirely on system RAM the AMD GPU is nearly twice as powerful. If you need evidence, read the article you linked more closely.

 

[Memnarchon]

]The GT3e is the one which has the dedicated RAM built into the CPU, and those are extremely rare and almost completely non-existent. Only two desktop CPUs have this, neither of which can be bought without buying a fully built OEM computer and very few of those have it either.

Well who buys a $350 desktop 4770R which is 3,2Ghz and wants to pair it just with its own GPU only?
Price and usuability of this CPU makes it rare.

 

[Duckhunt]

it is good to see AMD is still in there and fighting.

 

[SuyashJoshi]

AMD is always better then Intel in gaming performance.

For more info go to http://www.geekbaba.com

 

[mitch074]

[...]

I would agree with most of what you are saying, but the FPU is actually usually used quite a bit in games and I doubt you could play games without one if they would ever make a CPU without one. Though it seems that some people are debating arguing that the APU doesn't have an FPU for some reason.

The current AMD CPUs as most of you probably know have one FPU for every two Integer units. What is a little less known is how good the performance of these FPUs are. They aren't as weak as a FPU found inside of a modern Pentium for example. AMD implements simultaneous multithreading, very similar to Multithreading inside of the FPU. They don't inside of the full processor. However, this means the FPU can actually work on two threads simultaneously similar to how an i3 would do. Not only that but AMD focuses heavily on the FPU performance in the last few CPUs to help compensate for the it holding back the Integer units. Also it has AES support while Intel holds that back from its i3 CPUs letting it perform those operations a lot faster.

So really the APU isn't FPU weak. It is for a quad core, but for a dual core its very very strong.
http://cdn3.wccftech.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/AMD-Steamroller-vs-Bulldozer.jpg

The FPU is used since it is always present, yes, but it is far from being very useful in games ever since MMX came out: if one compiled a current game engine with FPU support disabled and used only integer emulation, MMX and SSE, the impact in most of today's games would be negligible - except maybe when it comes to physics, and even then I would think that SSE would be more efficient at physics computations anyway.

A little precision about AMD's FPU: as you said each of these is crazy powerful, as one can compute one 256-bit instruction per clock cycle - or two 128-bit operations per clock cycle. This essentially represents a 128-bit FPU per integer core; 128-bit precision is what's used for most video decompression formats, and several compression formats too.