Which AMD processor for latest gaming?

[anon12]

Hello, I wanna buy a laptop but I am confused with the processor. I'm not going to buy Intel any more. I used the Intel i3 and i5 but didn't enjoyed by playing games. Latest games like BF3 and Black ops 2. So which processor(AMD) will suit the best? and which laptop brand's will be good.........

 

[FinneousPJ]

AMD A10 with hybrid crossfire if you're on a budget.

 

[HEXiT]

you doidnt enjoy playing games on an intel cpu? what makes you think they will be better on an amd cpu which by its very nature is 2 gens behind intel.
the only recent amd cpu to come close to what could be considered a good gaming part since the 960t is the 8350 which will give comparable single threaded performance to an i7 nephlim...
the a10 is a good cpu for what it does but cant really be called a gaming part as its designed for mobile apps market. things like tablets which although can do light gaming will struggle to play games like codBO2 or bf3 at anything higher than low settings. yeah i know the benches say medium but thats medium 35fps where low will get you nearly 60 on some games.
but like i said if you didnt like gaming on intel, amd will likely make you hate it more.

 

[FinneousPJ]

you doidnt enjoy playing games on an intel cpu? what makes you think they will be better on an amd cpu which by its very nature is 2 gens behind intel.
the only recent amd cpu to come close to what could be considered a good gaming part since the 960t is the 8350 which will give comparable single threaded performance to an i7 nephlim...
the a10 is a good cpu for what it does but cant really be called a gaming part as its designed for mobile apps market. things like tablets which although can do light gaming will struggle to play games like codBO2 or bf3 at anything higher than low settings. yeah i know the benches say medium but thats medium 35fps where low will get you nearly 60 on some games.
but like i said if you didnt like gaming on intel, amd will likely make you hate it more.

lolwut he's asking about laptops

 

[computernewb]

im guessing he was playing on intels integrated graphics.

if you state your budget people can pick the best performing machine for you.

edit: for good gaming laptops you should be looking to spend around a $1000 or more.

 

[deadjon]

I suggest you post us a budget and we will be able to identify the best laptop for your needs.

 

[stantheman123]

Do you really need a laptop?. for gaming a desktop is much better just make sure you got a deep pocket because Good gaming laptops wil cost you some cash

 

[satyamdubey]

AMD A10 with hybrid crossfire if you're on a budget.

+1.

 

[Xavier Tan Sync]

I think it would be the AMD Fx 8-Core processor ,AMD FX-6 core processor. This 2 processor is way too good . 199.99 , 135.99$

 

[8350rocks]

you doidnt enjoy playing games on an intel cpu? what makes you think they will be better on an amd cpu which by its very nature is 2 gens behind intel.
the only recent amd cpu to come close to what could be considered a good gaming part since the 960t is the 8350 which will give comparable single threaded performance to an i7 nephlim...
the a10 is a good cpu for what it does but cant really be called a gaming part as its designed for mobile apps market. things like tablets which although can do light gaming will struggle to play games like codBO2 or bf3 at anything higher than low settings. yeah i know the benches say medium but thats medium 35fps where low will get you nearly 60 on some games.
but like i said if you didnt like gaming on intel, amd will likely make you hate it more.

Do you even own an AMD APU/CPU of any kind? How can you speak about how they perform when you don't know what you're talking about?

You can't...

Intel's inboard graphics are 3-4 generations behind AMD. If you want to talk weaknesses, let's talk about intel's integrated graphics that can barely play LoL, even though any A8 or better APU can run it like a champ. The A10-5800k (A10-5750M for laptops) can run crysis 3 on medium settings. Show me one intel that can do that with onboard graphics...you can't...because even the i5-3570k can't run Crysis 3 at playable frame rates with onboard GPU from intel.

So, instead of ranting about weaknesses that were irrelevant, let's consider the OP's question instead, huh?

@OP: There are several gaming laptops out there with AMD solutions that would make sense, the one I would most heavily recommend would be the MSI GX60 for about $1000-1200. That would be a monster gaming machine on a budget if you're looking for a laptop solution. It would do just about anything else you need as well.

 

[HEXiT]

actually i do know what im talking about, 33 years of owning computers with everything from sinclair spectrum to amiga and imb to amd to intel i have owned a cpu from all of them at 1 point or another. so yeah i do know what im talking about and my stats on here prove it.
i had good reason for my post and thats the parts he wants wont play the games he wants at anything over low-medium settings.
games like black ops 2 actually tie there packet data to the fps so the more fps you get up to 100(fps) the more packet data can be sent. so if your stuck at 30 fps you only get 1/3 of the packets which means your immediately 2/3 short of what the other players are getting data wise for position, hit reg and so on.... end result you get hammered by people with better hardware not because there more skilled.


i never at any point said he should use an intel integrated solution so remove the bunch from your panties.
also your telling me that the amd a10 is as powerfull as an intel i5/ amd 8350 with a 560ti? because thats what you need to play crysis 3 at medium 1080p now thats fanboi-ism no connection to reality.

http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph6332/50167.png medium you say? oops... more fanboi crap.

dont get me wrong i love what amd are doing with the cpugpu integration and for mobile platforms its very decent for media and light gaming. but it really isnt up to par with a none apu build with a dedicated gfx card.

also adding a dedicated gpu to an apu setup will reduce the overall cpu perfomance by over 20% which will result is worse performance than an intel with a dedicated gpu. so its not all hunky dory as you say...

as for your assumption that the gfx is 4 gens behind. there both dx11. intels solution isnt as integrated so doesnt take the same performance hit when you add a dedicated card this is both good and bad for intel. as a dedicated gaming 1 stop shop the amd apu is a better solution but the reality is neither of em are stunning.
if you want gaming you want a true quad core with a dedicated gpu, whether it be desktop or laptop...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VQdm28zJLgE just for giggles this is crysis 3 at minimum settings at 1280/720... i think you will agree it aint smooth. whats fun about the vid is you can see the fraps in the top corner going red when it drops below 30. yes it says 35 but the fps is bouncing between 25 and 35 so fast fraps cant keep up.
so there you have it. the a10 isnt strong enopugh to play crysis 3 at medium..... so dont believe the fanbois hype.

 

[8350rocks]

Crysis 3, no discrete GPU:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CIdqRvcHhO0

Crysis 2 on high without discrete GPU @ 38 FPS with 4xAA:

http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/29340-amd-a10-5800k-reviewed?tmpl=component&print=1

 

[whyso]

you doidnt enjoy playing games on an intel cpu? what makes you think they will be better on an amd cpu which by its very nature is 2 gens behind intel.
the only recent amd cpu to come close to what could be considered a good gaming part since the 960t is the 8350 which will give comparable single threaded performance to an i7 nephlim...
the a10 is a good cpu for what it does but cant really be called a gaming part as its designed for mobile apps market. things like tablets which although can do light gaming will struggle to play games like codBO2 or bf3 at anything higher than low settings. yeah i know the benches say medium but thats medium 35fps where low will get you nearly 60 on some games.
but like i said if you didnt like gaming on intel, amd will likely make you hate it more.

Do you even own an AMD APU/CPU of any kind? How can you speak about how they perform when you don't know what you're talking about?

You can't...

Intel's inboard graphics are 3-4 generations behind AMD. If you want to talk weaknesses, let's talk about intel's integrated graphics that can barely play LoL, even though any A8 or better APU can run it like a champ. The A10-5800k (A10-5750M for laptops) can run crysis 3 on medium settings. Show me one intel that can do that with onboard graphics...you can't...because even the i5-3570k can't run Crysis 3 at playable frame rates with onboard GPU from intel.

So, instead of ranting about weaknesses that were irrelevant, let's consider the OP's question instead, huh?

@OP: There are several gaming laptops out there with AMD solutions that would make sense, the one I would most heavily recommend would be the MSI GX60 for about $1000-1200. That would be a monster gaming machine on a budget if you're looking for a laptop solution. It would do just about anything else you need as well.

We are talking about mobile here right?

LOL no, haswell is pretty much on par with trinity mobile wise, Desktop its about 30% faster for trinity/richland. 3-4 generations? 30% is basically one generation considering (HD 3000-> HD 4000, 30-40%, HD 4000-> HD 4600, 30%).

HD 4000 having trouble with LOL? LOL!!!

a10-5750m can't run crysis 3 on medium settings (720p) considering the a10-4600m can only get 15 fps and there is no way the a10-5750m is twice as fast.

 

[8350rocks]

The original conversation was about mobile, though the comments were about the A10-5800k that someone suggested in a desktop.

EDIT: Additionally...notice the screen resolution went up as well...not just the settings? @ 1024x768 you can probably squeeze 20+ FPS out of the A10-4600M without the AF on (which many people do to bump frame rates)...though the desktop does it better, the mobile A10-5750M would likely get about 30 FPS on medium no AA/AF.

 

[whyso]

The original conversation was about mobile, though the comments were about the A10-5800k that someone suggested in a desktop.

EDIT: Additionally...notice the screen resolution went up as well...not just the settings? @ 1024x768 you can probably squeeze 20+ FPS out of the A10-4600M without the AF on (which many people do to bump frame rates)...though the desktop does it better, the mobile A10-5750M would likely get about 30 FPS on medium no AA/AF.

AF doesn't affect fps at all (maybe 0.5 fps from no AF to 16x AF).

Lets just say that when we talk about gaming on a notebook we are generally talking about native res (768p). Sure certain games can run at lower resolutions but saying that a game is playable on high at 600p is generally saying that its not playable on high at all in the way that its going to be played (its a misnomer).

Anyway at 768p the a10 gets around 15 fps on med. The desktop version is generally around 30-50% faster (50% here because the mobile chip throttles under crysis 3's high cpu load) so the a10-5800k would get around 23 fps. Richland gpu clock bump is 5.5% (from 800 to 844 mhz) so no richland a10-6800k wouldn't be playable.

Seems to support this. Trinity/richland (no difference for top desktop SKU) can get about 37 fps average at 768p low. 900p medium gets 21.5 fps and looking at scaling would be around 24-25 fps at 768p med.

 

[HEXiT]

+1^ its a real shame when a fanboi falls victim to facts and figures. all his argument of likely and probably performance tend to go out the windows.
funny thing is he accused me of not knowing what the performance delta was. OOPS!

 

[8350rocks]

you doidnt enjoy playing games on an intel cpu? what makes you think they will be better on an amd cpu which by its very nature is 2 gens behind intel.
the only recent amd cpu to come close to what could be considered a good gaming part since the 960t is the 8350 which will give comparable single threaded performance to an i7 nephlim...
the a10 is a good cpu for what it does but cant really be called a gaming part as its designed for mobile apps market. things like tablets which although can do light gaming will struggle to play games like codBO2 or bf3 at anything higher than low settings. yeah i know the benches say medium but thats medium 35fps where low will get you nearly 60 on some games.
but like i said if you didnt like gaming on intel, amd will likely make you hate it more.

Do you even own an AMD APU/CPU of any kind? How can you speak about how they perform when you don't know what you're talking about?

You can't...

Intel's inboard graphics are 3-4 generations behind AMD. If you want to talk weaknesses, let's talk about intel's integrated graphics that can barely play LoL, even though any A8 or better APU can run it like a champ. The A10-5800k (A10-5750M for laptops) can run crysis 3 on medium settings. Show me one intel that can do that with onboard graphics...you can't...because even the i5-3570k can't run Crysis 3 at playable frame rates with onboard GPU from intel.

So, instead of ranting about weaknesses that were irrelevant, let's consider the OP's question instead, huh?

@OP: There are several gaming laptops out there with AMD solutions that would make sense, the one I would most heavily recommend would be the MSI GX60 for about $1000-1200. That would be a monster gaming machine on a budget if you're looking for a laptop solution. It would do just about anything else you need as well.

This is the biggest troll post especially after haswell laptop cpus were released. The hd 5200 is similar speed to a gt 650m. Crysis 3 will run high on the new haswell hd 5200 gpu. Intel are 2 generations ahead of amd on 22nm and now haswell intel have focused on integrated gpu performance and finally high end gaming is possible with intel integrated gpu.

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Iris-Pro-Graphics-5200.90965.0.html
I thought the demo with the 650m and haswell igpu was rubbish but now with these benchmarks its about on par with it. Oh the gx60 with the amd cpu is one of the worst gaming laptops there is. The cpu is so slow that the 7970m performs similar to a gt640m I have lol as my i5 3317u is faster and the 7970m is not getting utilised much.

Actually, the HD5200 is about 25-30% slower than the GT650M, the benchmarks above you show that. Intel stated the GT650M was their "goal" and they got within 30% of performance...on the highest end GT3e Iris iGPU SKUs which are dramatically more expensive than the regular intel parts. The regular HD 4600 is about 40% slower than GT650M which are not included in the benchmarks posted directly above you.

@whyso: So explain to me, if you're sure it cannot be done at all, how this guy gets 30 FPS in medium settings on Crysis 3 with A10-5800k no AF?

http://tech2.in.com/video/rent-movies-online/870106/lp3J1LqoppW7o5WGuoe1ppeJvK7JorSXuKi5pbiqqISlh9qr/crysis-3-on-amd-vision-trinity-a105800k-and-hd-7660d-gameplay

If you read/write Spanish at the bottom of it he says: "Los Detalles del juego están en Calidad de Texturas Intermedia, Efectos y Objetos en Medio y el resto en Baja, Sin filtros y V-SYNC Desactivado. La Resolución Jugable es 1920*1080 Action! Modo Grabacion en 720p 30 FPS FPS Action!"

Translated: "The details of playing are in quality of textures medium, effects and objects in medium and the rest in low, without filters and V-SYNC deactivated. The playable resolution is 1920x1080 action! Recording mode in 720p 30 FPS Action!"

 

[whyso]

Actually, the HD5200 is about 25-30% slower than the GT650M, the benchmarks above you show that. Intel stated the GT650M was their "goal" and they got within 30% of performance...on the highest end GT3e Iris iGPU SKUs which are dramatically more expensive than the regular intel parts. The regular HD 4600 is about 40% slower than GT650M which are not included in the benchmarks posted directly above you.

@whyso: So explain to me, if you're sure it cannot be done at all, how this guy gets 30 FPS in medium settings on Crysis 3 with A10-5800k no AF?

http://tech2.in.com/video/rent-movies-online/870106/lp3J1LqoppW7o5WGuoe1ppeJvK7JorSXuKi5pbiqqISlh9qr/crysis-3-on-amd-vision-trinity-a105800k-and-hd-7660d-gameplay

If you read/write Spanish at the bottom of it he says: "Los Detalles del juego están en Calidad de Texturas Intermedia, Efectos y Objetos en Medio y el resto en Baja, Sin filtros y V-SYNC Desactivado. La Resolución Jugable es 1920*1080 Action! Modo Grabacion en 720p 30 FPS FPS Action!"

Translated: "The details of playing are in quality of textures medium, effects and objects in medium and the rest in low, without filters and V-SYNC deactivated. The playable resolution is 1920x1080 action! Recording mode in 720p 30 FPS Action!"

The HD 5200 is about 25-30% slower than the rmbp 650m which is 't what intel meant when they said that. RMBP 650m runs 900/1250 vs the 835/1000 in every other laptop. At standard clocks and with DDR3 (which a good many 650m have) Iris pro looks pretty similar. HD 4600 is even slower (not quite 630m levels).

And yes, I can explain. Right below your quote is this

off 25 - 33 MainBoard F2A85-M PRO BIOS 5109 CPU AMD A10 X4 5800K Quad Core 3.8GHz Memory G.SKILL RipjawsX F3-19200CL11D-8GBXLD 4GB x 2 DDR3 2400 MHz Dual Channel Graphics Card AMD RADEON HD 7660D 128Bit 1024MB Core Clock 800 MHz Overclock 1050 MHz

So it looks like without recording he is getting 25-33 fps on an a10-5800k running 2400 mhz RAM overclocked to 1050 mhz from 800 mhz (31% overclock).

He is playing at 1080p low (with a few medium settings).

 

[8350rocks]

Actually, the HD5200 is about 25-30% slower than the GT650M, the benchmarks above you show that. Intel stated the GT650M was their "goal" and they got within 30% of performance...on the highest end GT3e Iris iGPU SKUs which are dramatically more expensive than the regular intel parts. The regular HD 4600 is about 40% slower than GT650M which are not included in the benchmarks posted directly above you.

@whyso: So explain to me, if you're sure it cannot be done at all, how this guy gets 30 FPS in medium settings on Crysis 3 with A10-5800k no AF?

http://tech2.in.com/video/rent-movies-online/870106/lp3J1LqoppW7o5WGuoe1ppeJvK7JorSXuKi5pbiqqISlh9qr/crysis-3-on-amd-vision-trinity-a105800k-and-hd-7660d-gameplay

If you read/write Spanish at the bottom of it he says: "Los Detalles del juego están en Calidad de Texturas Intermedia, Efectos y Objetos en Medio y el resto en Baja, Sin filtros y V-SYNC Desactivado. La Resolución Jugable es 1920*1080 Action! Modo Grabacion en 720p 30 FPS FPS Action!"

Translated: "The details of playing are in quality of textures medium, effects and objects in medium and the rest in low, without filters and V-SYNC deactivated. The playable resolution is 1920x1080 action! Recording mode in 720p 30 FPS Action!"

The HD 5200 is about 25-30% slower than the rmbp 650m which is 't what intel meant when they said that. RMBP 650m runs 900/1250 vs the 835/1000 in every other laptop. At standard clocks and with DDR3 (which a good many 650m have) Iris pro looks pretty similar. HD 4600 is even slower (not quite 630m levels).

And yes, I can explain. Right below your quote is this

off 25 - 33 MainBoard F2A85-M PRO BIOS 5109 CPU AMD A10 X4 5800K Quad Core 3.8GHz Memory G.SKILL RipjawsX F3-19200CL11D-8GBXLD 4GB x 2 DDR3 2400 MHz Dual Channel Graphics Card AMD RADEON HD 7660D 128Bit 1024MB Core Clock 800 MHz Overclock 1050 MHz

So it looks like without recording he is getting 25-33 fps on an a10-5800k running 2400 mhz RAM overclocked to 1050 mhz from 800 mhz (31% overclock).

He is playing at 1080p low (with a few medium settings).

No...the RAM is not overclocked...the APU is what's overclocked. The core clock on the HD 7660D is 800 MHz. Which means he OC'ed to 1050 MHz on the iGPU and got that by overclocking the APU.

1080p with mediumish settings (no AA/AF basically, possibly lower draw distance) would be equivalent performance to 768p medium settings, no AF/AA would it not?

I guess, I am failing to see where you're qualifying this as it's not possible...but it's been done many, many, many times with an overclock on the APU (which is pretty common).

Either way...if you OC a CPU with HD4K you still can't run Crysis 3 on anything but low at all...if you can get playable frames. HD4600 I will be surprised if it's really much better. Considering the synthetics intel posted for haswell vs. the real world benchmark results on the new SKUs.

Take Haswell's improvements with a large helping of salt.

 

[whyso]

It says "Memory G.SKILL RipjawsX F3-19200CL11D-8GBXLD 4GB x 2 DDR3 2400 MHz Dual Channel" So yes the RAM is overclocked (or at least out of spec since the a10-5800k officially supports up to 1866 mhz RAM).

Yes 1080p low with a few medium wouls be about equal to 768p medium.

Anyway whether hd4600 can play or not play is moot. Trinity/richland cannot play 768p med at playable fps ;30 (which really for a first person shooter needs 35 fps+ avg).

Anyway if you look at the AT 768p low crysis 3 bench (only remotely playable setting) you can see that the HD 4600 is 13% faster than mobile trinity (which means that mobile Haswell is going to be essentially equal to Mobile trinity when you consider that mobile haswell i3/i5 are going to have 10-15% lower clocks); the 7660D is 32% faster than haswell. I expect richland to bring 10-15% for top igp mobile gpu performance (because it seems that the ULV parts gain more) and about 5% for desktop richland (gpu clocks from 800 to 844 mhz). That will mean that richland, I predict, will only be around 10-15% faster than HD 4600 (i3/i5 level). Kaveri should step it up though intel is aiming for another 30-50% igp performance in broadwell. Also note that intel is using more die space for its igp too (though its igp does compute and openCL quite good now).

 

[8350rocks]

It says "Memory G.SKILL RipjawsX F3-19200CL11D-8GBXLD 4GB x 2 DDR3 2400 MHz Dual Channel" So yes the RAM is overclocked (or at least out of spec since the a10-5800k officially supports up to 1866 mhz RAM).

I think it's likely out of spec, since many boards support as high as DDR3-2600+ MHz, like this one:

http://www.asrock.com/mb/AMD/FM2A85X%20Extreme6/

Yes 1080p low with a few medium wouls be about equal to 768p medium.

Anyway whether hd4600 can play or not play is moot. Trinity/richland cannot play 768p med at playable fps ;30 (which really for a first person shooter needs 35 fps+ avg).

Anyway if you look at the AT 768p low crysis 3 bench (only remotely playable setting) you can see that the HD 4600 is 13% faster than mobile trinity (which means that mobile Haswell is going to be essentially equal to Mobile trinity when you consider that mobile haswell i3/i5 are going to have 10-15% lower clocks); the 7660D is 32% faster than haswell. I expect richland to bring 10-15% for top igp mobile gpu performance (because it seems that the ULV parts gain more) and about 5% for desktop richland (gpu clocks from 800 to 844 mhz). That will mean that richland, I predict, will only be around 10-15% faster than HD 4600 (i3/i5 level). Kaveri should step it up though intel is aiming for another 30-50% igp performance in broadwell. Also note that intel is using more die space for its igp too (though its igp does compute and openCL quite good now).

Yes it will be interesting to watch it unfold in the next 6 months. If Kaveri is as advertised or better than advertised with GCN cores, etc. That may be a really dramatic improvement. An APU with HD 7770ish graphics would be pretty amazing!

 

[logainofhades]

Hello, I wanna buy a laptop but I am confused with the processor. I'm not going to buy Intel any more. I used the Intel i3 and i5 but didn't enjoyed by playing games. Latest games like BF3 and Black ops 2. So which processor(AMD) will suit the best? and which laptop brand's will be good.........

I am going to stay out of the slugfest in the rest of this thread and answer you directly. Your problem isn't processor, your problem is you have a laptop with Intel IGP which is poor for gaming. If you want to stay with an integrated graphics solution, then an A10 based laptop is the best you can get for gaming. Otherwise, an Intel based laptop with a dedicated GPU is the way to go.