AMD Desktop Trinity Update: Now With Core i3 And A8-3870K

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.

slabbo

Distinguished
Feb 11, 2009
457
0
18,780
[citation][nom]ava__[/nom]Eyegasses, perhaps ?[/citation]
The Benchmarks are there for the productivity programs, but the A8-3870 is missing from ALL the Gaming Benchmarks. Get on it TOMS!!!
 

falchard

Distinguished
Jun 13, 2008
2,360
0
19,790
I think the only fair comparison in games for Intel is to use the top bin IvyBridge without any discrete GPU against A10. A10 will get decimated in things that need a CPU, but in games it will still probably win out. lol at how poorly a 3.8 Ghz processor does against a 3.1 ghz processor. Ghz means nothing after all.

Can play Skyrim with A10 for $500. Thats a step up from, Can play games for $400 with Llano.
 

tmk221

Distinguished
Jul 27, 2008
173
0
18,690
In "Test Setup And Benchmarks" you have listed "AMD A8-3850 (Llano) 2.9 GHz (14.5 * 200 MHz), Four Cores, Socket FM1, 4 MB Total L2 Cache, Power-savings enabled" two times.

 

thestatic1982

Honorable
Jul 2, 2012
3
0
10,510
Am I the only one curious to see how these perform with a dedicated GPU or with a 7660 crossfired? I'm really curious if we do actually see improved gaming due to improved IPC.
 
G

Guest

Guest
I can't believe that in some of the single-threaded tests, Trinity is there nipping on Sandy's heels. That's a massive improvement in very little time from BD's release.
 
[citation][nom]amdfangirl[/nom]AMD really needs to release Trinity ASAP before Intel can react.[/citation]
But in reality it won't really effect Intel at all! They'll just lower their prices a little and screw over AMD.
 

silverblue

Distinguished
Jul 22, 2009
1,199
4
19,285
[citation][nom]falchard[/nom]I think the only fair comparison in games for Intel is to use the top bin IvyBridge without any discrete GPU against A10. A10 will get decimated in things that need a CPU, but in games it will still probably win out. lol at how poorly a 3.8 Ghz processor does against a 3.1 ghz processor. Ghz means nothing after all.Can play Skyrim with A10 for $500. Thats a step up from, Can play games for $400 with Llano.[/citation]
It's not really about the instructions per clock with Bulldozer/Piledriver, more how much you can get out per core per second. Sure, we're talking a single Piledriver core being barely comparable to a single Sandy Bridge core, but consider the fact that the Sandy core is much larger and more powerful. In multithreading scenarios, Trinity more than holds its own and without L3 cache either.

I'm more interested in the power readings. Throughout the previous article's testing, the A10 had a peak system usage of 105W. Anandtech had the i3-2105 at 101W running Metro 2033 but obviously this isn't completely comparable.
 

Forde3654Eire

Distinguished
Aug 11, 2011
314
0
18,780
I know one place where Llano and Trinity would make waves... that would where I live: Saudi Arabia. Graphics cards are crazily overpriced here!!! Just one example, I managed to get a Sapphire Radeon 6850 for $200... everywhere else in the market its $225!!!

Its the same story throughout the entire Saudi market for all graphics cards in all price ranges... at least $50 higher than normal retail prices. In a situation like this, getting an APU with decent integrated graphics saves having to shell out the money for an extremely overpriced graphics card.

I would've been a potential customer... unfortunately, there are no plans to introduce the APU to the Saudi market anytime soon. I have an i3 2100 with a 6850... and frankly, its way more than enough for everything I do: Gaming, video-rendering and video-editing, simulators etc... the APU would be ideal, and would save a heck load of money!
 

hingsun

Honorable
Jul 2, 2012
2
0
10,510
My AMD / Nvidia w 8GB ECC Memory Computer just died this morning after 6 years of service. I has it on 24 7 doing SLI. Since Nvidia no longer do chipset and SLI support with MB that support ECC memory remain on low supply, it feels almost impossible to find a replacement. Why can't we standardize the use of ECC memory which make computers crash less often.
 

jdwii

Splendid
This is why this site is better then Anandtech you guys don't review a A10 next to a I7 you review it next to its actual competition.

A10 will be between a cheap I5 and a High-end I3 and then prices well probably fall down to around 130-120$ for one of these.

+1 Toms.
 
[citation][nom]Forde3654Eire[/nom]It doesn't really make much sense to buy an APU. Might as well get an entry level CPU and a dedicated graphics card for the same price.[/citation]

You can't get the same performance for the money that way anymore. Let's use Llano as an example since Trinity isn't out for desktop yet.

A8-3850 can be had on newegg, new, for as little as $90. With 1600MHz memory, it's almost as fast as the 6570 with a slightly higher CPU performance than an Athlon II of the same core count, cache capacity, and CPU frequency. The Athlon II alone would be almost as expensive as the A8 and with even a Radeon 5550, it's significantly more expensive. Not even a Celeron G530 from Intel, priced at about $50 and having half the core count of the A8, can fit with the 5550 at the same price point. So, you're going for a more expensive yet inferior performing setup if you go with the Celeron plus Radeon 5550. There's no getting around this for most people. Trinity is probably going to continue this.
 
For enthusiasts and computer junkies, maybe. But for the vast majority of basic computer users, an i3-21XX is a very capable CPU. And I'd consider it a better upgrade path than a Llano or Trinity ( based on how often AMD has changed their socket the past few years. ) LGA 1155 will handle anything from an i3-2100 up through an i7-3770K. That's a lot of flexibility. Where is FM1 going to take you?
 

silverblue

Distinguished
Jul 22, 2009
1,199
4
19,285
[citation][nom]jdwii[/nom]This is why this site is better then Anandtech you guys don't review a A10 next to a I7 you review it next to its actual competition. A10 will be between a cheap I5 and a High-end I3 and then prices well probably fall down to around 130-120$ for one of these. +1 Toms.[/citation]
Think of it as a back-handed compliment from AT. They've only reviewed the mobile variant to the best of my knowledge, and in most gaming tests it still matches up well against an HD4000-equipped mobile i7. I think what you're forgetting is that, in this review, the HD4000 is nowhere to be seen; Chris does point out the lack of an HD4000-equipped i3 which would be the perfect reference point. It probably wouldn't be very fair to compare to the desktop i7 but it would certainly be interesting to see how much those CPU cores hide the deficiencies of the iGPU (and likewise, the opposite can be said for Trinity).
 

leeashton

Distinguished
Aug 25, 2011
202
0
18,710
[citation][nom]belardo[/nom]Thing is... in truth, Piledriver is more than good enough for todays needs. But if I am going to spend close to $200 for a CPU... i5-3570K without blinking.When I look at $100 CPUs for a budget user, I have to think: Is this an office/typical work or a low-cost gaming PC. If they are getting a dedicated card, the GPU part of the AMD CPU becomes useless. if its a biz PC that won't play 3D games... then the HD2000~3000 is overkill.The Trinity platform is FM2, so any AMD lovers (snif) are going to have to buy FM2 motherboards. Things that won't be on the market soon, and doesn't matter so much as people who are building their own PCs are going intel anyways.For AMD to compete, their A10 CPU needs to cost as much as an i3 class CPU... you get about the same performance + gaming abilities, if needed. Selling the FX at i5~i7 pricing didn't help at all.I don't consider any of the AMD dozer/driver CPUs to be true 4/6/8 CORE CPUs... they are not complete enough to be so and their performance against TRUE dual and quad core CPUs shows it.With that said... I think I can go with FM2 with a $100 quad core *IF* AMD had such a CPU for clients who need a good office PC. I can't go with FM1 or AM3 since those are EOL... and there are no FM2 products for us to choose from yet.[/citation]
that's where you are wrong the FX made AMD a ton of money through the OEM channels, the trinity will make when 2 tons of money
 
So its still not good for gaming, and not really better than the A8 architecture per clock, and certainly not for FP tasks. Im sorry but i just cant see the positives that others are seeing. These chips will likely cost a fair bit more than an i3 2100, will be closer to the higher end i3's, so I would rather have the i3 + cheap dedicated graphics if i wanted a budget gaming rig. And if this represents PD performance in any way, then it doesn't look good for AMD that they can still only just beat an i3 with more cores and higher clocks. They can pretty much forget about coming close to i5's and i7's. Sorry AMD, but since you released that FX chip, you have lost mine and many peoples business.
 

gondor

Distinguished
Apr 14, 2011
80
14
18,635
So Trinity beats Sandy Bridge at gaming and is reasonably close in productivity tasks (with 4 cores against 2).

Given the TDP difference I'd say it is A10-5700 (the best performing 65W part) that should really be on par with Sandy/Ivy Bridge two core + HT chips while beating them at low-resolution gaming ... now if only its price was right. This, and whether FM2 is going to get killed after 12 months (just like socket FM1 was), is going to decide whether Trinity becomes a success or a flop on desktop - the potential is there, AMD just needs to deliver fast and at a reasonable price point (around the price of A8-3870K Llano part or Intel's i3 offerings).
 
G

Guest

Guest
[citation][nom]sarinaide[/nom]Frankly if you are not buying a i5 at least, then you are wasting money on intels "budget" end. While yes i3 and Pentium perform well in gaming, thats about the end of the line. I was using a 2100 as a basic workbench and had to upgrade to a i5 due to the inherent work load issues with a dual core.Trinity adds the dimension of being a low cost gaming rig, ultimately at a lower cost than intels i3 range and offering significantly more performance outside of pure core efficiency, this may change with discrete GPU setups but again a Trinity will have a massive trump card in the form of assymetrical crossfire.[/citation]


so according to you a person needs a quad core for desktop publication? web design? internet browsing and emailing? c'mon get off of it. just because you didn't get away with buying an economical dual core to stress/benchmark components that makes it a bad/limited cpu?

there is no way around the need for a discrete cpu if someone is going to game. i have had to break the bad news to people on more than one occasion what the deal was when they complained about the performance their "budget" amd rig had when gaming. they ended up having to sell it and start over.

the only thing that gets accomplished by amd or it's fan base by trying to promote a gloried HTPC rig as a budget gaming rig is reinforcing the stereotype that amd puts out inferior products. and when the latter feels the need to slag on intel also, not very good form at all.
 

ozicom

Distinguished
Jun 21, 2012
51
0
18,640
Well,
I never think to work on an in-CPU graphics also i never think to work with an i3 CPU.
But i also never think to buy 100W CPU and get low performance than another CPU that consumes only 65W. AMD must make better CPUs and they also must consume less energy than intel's CPUs does.
At price point yes AMD sell at same price that intel do but you have to buy a bigger CPU fan to cool the AMD APUs. I used a 130W extreme edition CPU from intel at past. CPU cooling must be a consideration point too.
My conclusion shows that at performance and cooling perspective i should go with intel.
 


A 100w APU is both the CPU and the GPU, so it's not directly comparable to a similarly Intel system when you only compare the APU and the CPU because no Intel system can compete in integrated graphics perfomrance unless you spend much more, so Intel needs a discrete card. These APUs, with the IGP disabled, would likely consume similar amounts of power to the i3s, especially considering that more than half of a Trinity APU is the IGP. CPU power consumption versus CPU power consumption, Piledriver and Llano do very well.
 

abitoms

Distinguished
Apr 15, 2010
81
0
18,630
i get a feeling the author set out to do more-detailed review/preview but stopped short. I got this feeling seeing some of the CPUs/APUs/GPUs that are present in the 'Test Setup and Benchmarks' page but did not make it to the benchmarks themselves
 

youssef 2010

Distinguished
Jan 1, 2009
1,263
0
19,360
[citation][nom]jtt283[/nom]This gives me real hope that Piledriver will be a worthwhile chip to put on my 990FX rather than scrapping it for Intel as software becomes more demanding.I made myself read the entire article. I consider myself a literate person, but I still cannot find words to properly (and respectfully) express just how physically Beautiful your announcer is.[/citation]

If you're thinking about running demanding apps on your platform. Then, from my personal experience, you're torturing yourself by sticking with AMD. I've used my phenom II for the past 3 years but, eventually, I switched to Intel. Turns out that my AMD CPU was one bad bottleneck.

Don't get me wrong, I really like AMD and what they're trying to do. But they just can't beat Intel's latest i7 CPUs
 
Status
Not open for further replies.