APU as a dedicated CPU

Cind3rs

Honorable
May 12, 2013
12
0
10,510
The APUs are on sale on several sites, offering a low price CPU. My question is: is any CPU processing ability lost due to it being an APU? Is a 3.9 Ghz APU the same as a 3.9 Ghz CPU? Or is there some loss due to the chip having a GPU onboard?

I'm looking to build a economic, mini-tower gaming rig for the g/f. Probably going with AMD because they tend to be cheaper overall for what you get. Looking at CPUs, I noticed that these APUs are fairly cheap for what processing power they claim.

My idea would be to build a mini-atx system with a A10-6800K, see how it runs on mid-level games (like Planetside 2, medium graphics, upward of 35 fps). If it's not enough, add a discrete card in crossfire mode, hopefully that does the trick. Later, as it ages, replace the vid card with a higher-end one and run in dedicated mode with the GPU portion of the APU turned off.

Ideas, experiences, advice? I mean, just getting the A10-6800K for $120 is cheaper for a quad core 4 ghz than other CPUs. So if it does it's computing job, I'd even get it just for the price even if the graphics portion doesn't hold up. And if it could push enough graphics for a while, that's even better!
 

cynicalimpulse

Honorable
Oct 13, 2012
135
0
10,760
As esco_sid states you may as well get the athlon x4 750K, or go intel and get a cheap processor which can be later upgraded (use a series 9 chip set motherboard).

CPU performance is not entirely about the number of cores or the Raw GHz, its all about the architecture. with a good architecture a slower (slower in terms of GHz) quad core can beat a higher clock speed hex-core (i.e. any Core i5 vs. AMD FX 6300)

the A series Apu's lack L3 cache which can hurt in games and overall do not perform as well on a clock to clock basis compared to their intel counter part (Not just APUs just AMD CPUs in general).

Often what is the be all and end all of whether a computer can play a game is the graphics and the built-in graphics on the a10 6800K will play older games like Skyrim @ 1080p on med or newer games like tomb raider @ 1080p with the lowest possible settings all running at a bare minimum average frame rate of ~30fps (just playable).

There no point in continuously swapping out or adding parts with slightly better ones as a sort of quick fix, you might as well get something that will last you a while. I personally do not like dual graphics as Asymmetric Crossfire is significantly worst than regular crossfire and on rare occasions you may get the theoretical x2 performance but depending on the game the benefits of Dual graphics are minimal considering what you paid.

Just a suggestion but a better idea would be to post a budget for you economic mini gaming PC so we can help you make decisions.

Hope this helps! And sorry if i seem all over the place its 3 AM here :$
 


Using APU as an APU: Don't get the 6800k, real world performance is pretty much identical to the 5800k so if you're going APU get the 5800k or pay more for the 7850k.

Using APU in crossfire - doesn't work as well as AMD are selling it. In many games performance is identical or worse than running with just the discrete card. Don't do it.

Using APU as a CPU - it works. I'm using an A10-6800k with a HD7850 and it's good enough for me. The lack of L3 cache is thrown around a lot but most of the time, in most games, in most situations, it makes no difference. But you are throwing money away by not using the IGP - the only reason I went A10 over 760k is I acquired a second hand A10 for less than the cost of a new 760k.

I would also say 750k / 760k + discrete gives best bang for buck, you'll save a few pounds going the APU route but you lose some of that saving in having to buy faster RAM, and you lose all of that saving as soon as you decide to go discrete.