Achoo22 :
These processors are a reflection of what AMD can offer, not what consumers actually need or want. Anyone buying a low-end PC is better served by Intel for the same money. If AMD ever makes chips with integrated graphics that are "good enough", maybe the situation will change. For the present, however, inventing the APU jargon isn't enough to move these chips at this price.
Perhaps you should actually know what you are talking about before you comment. AMD's integrated graphics are miles ahead of Intel's. Compared to buying a discounted Intel i3 which is actually a little more expensive, the A10-6800k gives a huge boost in gaming performance over it. Granted the CPU performance isn't amazing, but working on the two systems you will never notice the difference in web browsing, video editing, photo shop, or numerous other tasks between the two.
When it comes to gaming, with a GPU that is at R9 level and above, you will see some mild improvements on an i3 against an A10-6800k, but since we are talking about budget systems and no one plans to buy a high-end GPU that costs $200 for a system they are trying to build for under $400. So that leaves us with integrated graphics, and when it comes to that its not so uncommon to see double the performance of Intel integrated graphics from the APUs.
Long story short, you get a significantly better system for lite gaming on a tight budget by buying the APU than you do an Intel system. The performance gap in iGPU only gets bigger if you go with one of the new APUs based on Kaveri, and the typical CPU performance stays pretty much unnoticeable between them.
As for inventing the "APU" jargon, you clearly have no idea what AMD is doing. This wasn't invented to just try to increase sales. They did this for numerous reasons, and not a single one is a stupid marketing ploy. First, they needed to distinguish it from their CPUs which do not have graphics, to better help users know what they are buying. Second, since the they acquired ATI they have been working with integrating graphics into CPU operations. The ultimate idea would be the eventual remove of FPUs from CPUs, because the GPU performs much better at these tasks. The idea was that with a GPU core on the CPU, eventually to send all FPU instructions to the GPU which would be able to perform them much faster and give a much greater performance. This is part of the reasoning behind their CPU design as well, since they are Integer heavy architecture but only have half the number of FPUs as Integer units, obviously preparing for GPUs to do the work. Had they been successful, the floating point performance would of given them a huge performance advantage. This is why they are called APUs more than anything as the use of GPU for floating point would accelerate their processing performance greatly.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram