Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

AMD Radeon HD 7730 Review: A Harbinger Of The Kaveri APU?

Last response: in Reviews comments
Share
August 4, 2013 10:00:32 PM

Just look at that performance difference between DDR3 and GDDR5. AMD sure needs to implement GDDR5 in Kaveri in order not to waist all that GPU potential.
August 4, 2013 10:20:33 PM

Typo on second page, both 7730 GPUs say DDR3 but the second one should say GDDR5
Related resources
August 4, 2013 10:21:24 PM

rmpumper said:
Just look at that performance difference between DDR3 and GDDR5. AMD sure needs to implement GDDR5 in Kaveri in order not to waist all that GPU potential.


Your comment, while being perfectly accurate, actually made me notice something interesting. Take a look at the charts, and you'll see that the GCN 7730s are less affected by the switch from DDR3 to GDDR5 than the VLIW 6670s! That means GCN is leaving less performance on the table if it's paired with slower memory, which is ideal for the situation an APU is usually in (PS4 aside).
a c 175 U Graphics card
a b À AMD
August 4, 2013 10:26:01 PM

At the right price, this looks like a real winner, especially the GDDR5 version. If a $90 HD7750 is too rich, an HD7730 for $65 looks like it is still capable of playing most games, especially at 720p resolutions where a lot of HTPC cards operate.
The "secret sauce" that could really catapult this one would be if some of its disabled pieces might be able to be switched on.
August 4, 2013 11:04:57 PM

Regarding Kaveri, it looks from this that CGN means better performance with DDR3, but also higher power consumption. If AMD wants to keep to the same power envelope it might have to reduce GPU clock speeds, which will eat into the performance advantage. In the end, it feels from this that Kaveri will offer only a minor performance boost.

Hopefully AMD has done more power optimisations and that won't be the case.
a c 538 U Graphics card
a c 131 À AMD
August 4, 2013 11:06:27 PM

There it is, F1 creeping its way back into the test suite.
August 5, 2013 12:10:16 AM

I'm a little dissapointed if this is what we can expect from Kaveri. I was hoping for something that would come closer to matching the APU in the Xbox One. I want to build a small HTPC for gaming in my living room, and an APU would have been ideal for that since the smaller HTPC cases don't have room for large discrete graphics cards. I don't know, maybe Kaveri could still be useful if they actually get Hybrid Crossfire working properly, a Kaveri APU paired with a discrete 7730 and DDR3 2133 might just work out for my purposes.
a b U Graphics card
August 5, 2013 12:27:53 AM

I don't see why manufacturers continue to utilize this ram in newer products... Just get rid of DDR3 already...


Also, how is this Cape Verde GPU a "Harbinger Of The Kaveri APU"? It is a trimmed down 7750 and since a 7750 can provide no real insight into the performance of upcoming Kaveri APUs then how does this entry level card provide any better insight?
August 5, 2013 12:39:43 AM

On page 10, does the reference HD 7750 really have a load temp of 97C?
(73C + 24C ambient = 93C)

Anyway, the GDDR5 HD 7750 looks like a viable game-enabler for PC gamers on a budget. Also, it's a nice refresh for that price point's options. I do hope it sells for around $60 or less. :-D
August 5, 2013 12:40:47 AM

shikamaru31789 said:
I'm a little dissapointed if this is what we can expect from Kaveri. I was hoping for something that would come closer to matching the APU in the Xbox One. I want to build a small HTPC for gaming in my living room, and an APU would have been ideal for that since the smaller HTPC cases don't have room for large discrete graphics cards. I don't know, maybe Kaveri could still be useful if they actually get Hybrid Crossfire working properly, a Kaveri APU paired with a discrete 7730 and DDR3 2133 might just work out for my purposes.


I have found a Trinity based APU more than enough for a HTPC. I would not have banked on Kaveri matching the XB1 and PS4's custom build silicon as in the name the APU designed for MS and Sony was of custom design and the hardware was always going to scale beyond that for desktop parts. If you offered me HD7730-7750 performance on a Kaveri I would be very pleased with that. What hasn't been brought to light is that the Spectre IGPU on Kaveri features around 512 Stream Processors and increased ROP's and compute units so it may very well be a potent iGPU.

Dual Graphics has improved with Catalyst 13.8 to the point it is now playable, if a Richland can DG with the HD7730's that would be tremendous fo gaming under $200 for chip and card.

a b U Graphics card
August 5, 2013 1:29:01 AM

They should have only introduced the DDR5 version and scrap the DDR3
August 5, 2013 1:30:38 AM

Wouldn't it be cool if the DDR3 version was made because in hybrid crossfire, with a kaveri APU, the hUMA architecture allows the CPU and integrated graphics to use the 2GB of dedicated Vram as well? Maybe it's AMD's secret super weapon? That way a system with 8Gb of DDR3 now has 10 Gb :0. Or at the very least maybe it'll sync better with the integrated graphics, since memory isn't added together in crossfire?
August 5, 2013 1:50:20 AM

If Kaveri is even near the performance of 7730, it will blow Hasvel GPU put out of the sky! But as it has been said they have to reduce the clockspeed, so the difference would not be so huge, but as it allso has been said Trinity allready is very good and if the CPU will get even better, the Kaveri will be a great HTPC CPU. It may even be reasonable good all around CPU and that is a big deal. Ofcource if you want good gaming rig, you need something much, much more powerfull, like 3 way Titan and so on, but that tould cost near 5000$ without desent monitor (4K monitor +5000$) so they are not exacly in the same league :-)
All in all, not a bad budget card!
August 5, 2013 2:49:14 AM

hannibal said:
If Kaveri is even near the performance of 7730, it will blow Hasvel GPU put out of the sky! But as it has been said they have to reduce the clockspeed, so the difference would not be so huge, but as it allso has been said Trinity allready is very good and if the CPU will get even better, the Kaveri will be a great HTPC CPU. It may even be reasonable good all around CPU and that is a big deal. Ofcource if you want good gaming rig, you need something much, much more powerfull, like 3 way Titan and so on, but that tould cost near 5000$ without desent monitor (4K monitor +5000$) so they are not exacly in the same league :-)
All in all, not a bad budget card!


Trinity's HD7660D and HD7650D are already faster than Intels desktop Graphics in HD4600 ilk and not just on Frame rates but latencies as well, They have done a review of HD5100 and 5200 Pro's with the HD5100 still slower than Richlands HD8670D by a margin and Iris is faster but costs around $600 for the all in one BGA setups which prevent expansion.

Kaveri will be based on the smaller Steamroller cores which will improve performance/watt clock for clock with Vishera based cores and the IGPU will be on a more efficient GCN opposed to the Turks based VLIW4 architecture. If Trinity and Richland are already impressive I think Kaveri is going to top it by at least doubling iGPU over Trinity/Richland and x86 anywhere from 20-40% depending on the nature of the application, then there is HUMA and the HSA environment it think its going to be a very exciting release if you accept it for what it is, it will not be a champion chip in traditional computing sense but in a HSA environment it will blow away everything before it, cue the adobe premier pro benches 6800K vs 3770K is already around 500% faster in that environment AMD is king in integrated graphics AMD will be head and shoulders above its competition.

a b U Graphics card
August 5, 2013 4:57:32 AM

Come sapphire could you at least put 1 heatpipe on it
August 5, 2013 5:44:07 AM

I know that card is outdated but would LOVE to see HD 5770 1GB card added in such benchmarks.
August 5, 2013 6:08:19 AM

hmmm... why no HD 7750 DDR3 in the charts, if you want to mention kaveri in the article, then please remember that high end kaveri will ship with 512 shaders and not 384, so comparing it with 7730 doesnt make much sense , i like the review of the 7730, but its not comparable with kaveri, the hd 7750 1GB DDR3 which is missing from this article is much more closer to kaveri
August 5, 2013 6:49:10 AM

Is DDR3 significantly cheaper to produce?
a b U Graphics card
a b À AMD
August 5, 2013 7:16:06 AM

That's an impressive news for some guys who has only OEM rigs and it helps a lot for them to easily upgrade their GPU without worrying too much about the power consumption.

But for me, I care more about the Kaveri APU. I've heard rumors that the flagship Kaveri APU, probably A10s, would sport iGPU like HD 7750/7770 which has 512 or 768 shaders (but the 768 may blow the sale of HD 7790 so making it 512 shaders is more possible), so we would see better performance. This review has a better picture for us and even if the flagship has equipped only 384 shaders the performance could be still impressive esp. using 2133 or 2400 mhz memory. We're looking forward to the launch of the new APUs and hope it would be a great leap forward compared w/ Richland and Trinity APUs
August 5, 2013 8:23:34 AM

I have a HD 7750 GDDR3 and I want to know where it stacks up, since I also have the GTX 650 GDDR5 and GT 440 GDDR5. If the 7750 is better than the GT 440, I will replace it for my tower.
a b U Graphics card
August 5, 2013 8:47:21 AM

Low profile, please?

I know you guys at Sapphire can do it!

Cheers!
August 5, 2013 8:58:59 AM

Yuka said:
Low profile, please?

I know you guys at Sapphire can do it!

Cheers!


With Sapphire there will always be a LP varient.

August 5, 2013 9:18:11 AM

megamanxtreme said:
I have a HD 7750 GDDR3 and I want to know where it stacks up, since I also have the GTX 650 GDDR5 and GT 440 GDDR5. If the 7750 is better than the GT 440, I will replace it for my tower.


Just using the toms graphics hierarchy chart, it looks like the regular 7750 is 6 tiers above your GT 440 with GDDR 5. Given that you have a GDDR3 version of the 7750, that puts it probably no lower than 3 tiers under the regular 7750, which is still 3 tiers higher than your GT 440m which should be a pretty solid upgrade honestly. The chart isn't perfect but its a good general reference for where things stack up, and honestly that 7750 should give you a nice boost.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-graphics-car...
August 5, 2013 9:41:41 AM

I fail to understand why you tested all of these cards at 1920X1080 when they will most likely not be used at that resolution. Why not test them at the resolution that people who buy these would actually be using? Like 720p? I think that it would make for a better review and be closer to real world use.
August 5, 2013 9:50:05 AM

artk2219 said:
Just using the toms graphics hierarchy chart, it looks like the regular 7750 is 6 tiers above your GT 440 with GDDR 5. Given that you have a GDDR3 version of the 7750, that puts it probably no lower than 3 tiers under the regular 7750, which is still 3 tiers higher than your GT 440m which should be a pretty solid upgrade honestly. The chart isn't perfect but its a good general reference for where things stack up, and honestly that 7750 should give you a nice boost.

Thanks for the information, it is a head-scratcher when they don't include benchmarks for those cards that we might have lying around and we have to guess-ti-mate.

a b U Graphics card
August 5, 2013 10:07:42 AM

I love my 7750 1gb gddr5 and its great for upto 900p gaming at high settings.Good to see more cards coming out giving customers more to choose from but also confusing them.I think its time for ddr3 cards to die in retail cards though oem's may continue to use them if they want.
August 5, 2013 10:36:59 AM

Talk about Kaveri using GDDR5 is plain uninformed.

It's a terrible memory for a CPU. Latency is too high. It would kill the processor. Not to mention power use.

PS4 gets away with it because it's a game machine. Most people buying a Kaveri APU aren't particularly interested in using it as a game machine, or they'd buy something with a discrete card. So, it's a CPU first, and that means it needs lower latency memory to perform, not higher.

GDDR is great for graphics implementations, but not a good memory for CPUs. If AMD really wanted to make an APU beast, which is highly doubtful, they would be better off going with DDR3 and going with a wider memory channel. It comes with a cost, so it's doubtful, but at least you wouldn't kill your processor with horrible memory latency.
a b U Graphics card
August 5, 2013 1:59:26 PM

salh said:
Is DDR3 significantly cheaper to produce?

Not really.

But the much lower production volumes do mean much fewer units to spread engineering and tooling costs on. The tighter timing margins on GDDR5 signals and much higher power also make GDDR for large memory configurations or designs on a tight power budget, pretty much guaranteeing that GDDR will remain a niche-market memory type.
a c 175 U Graphics card
a b À AMD
August 5, 2013 2:30:58 PM

This card being able to flash to a HD7750 would be a killer deal. Mainstream users would scarf it down at $60 for its stock capabilities vs. a typical IGP, and because it won't require a new PSU. Poor gamers would buy it and flash it, and be able to play their games without suffering too badly.

Are you listening, AMD?
a b U Graphics card
August 5, 2013 6:23:40 PM

Onus said:
This card being able to flash to a HD7750 would be a killer deal.

But that would also kill AMD's margins - as if they weren't dangerously thin already.

I can't imagine AMD under-cutting themselves at such low price points doing any good to their bottom line.
a c 175 U Graphics card
a b À AMD
August 5, 2013 8:11:07 PM

Yeah, that's possible. It's not like as-is it doesn't render the GT640 irrelevant.
August 5, 2013 11:42:22 PM

slomo4sho said:
Also, how is this Cape Verde GPU a "Harbinger Of The Kaveri APU"? It is a trimmed down 7750 and since a 7750 can provide no real insight into the performance of upcoming Kaveri APUs then how does this entry level card provide any better insight?


Kaveri leverages the GCN architecture, and so a cut-down 7750 most definitely has the potential to portent what Kaveri will do...

August 5, 2013 11:43:40 PM

army_ant7 said:
On page 10, does the reference HD 7750 really have a load temp of 97C?
(73C + 24C ambient = 93C)

Anyway, the GDDR5 HD 7750 looks like a viable game-enabler for PC gamers on a budget. Also, it's a nice refresh for that price point's options. I do hope it sells for around $60 or less. :-D


I think you might misunderstand. The temperatures are absolute, but we simply started the beginning of the chart at the ambient temp (notice it doesn't start at zero, the chart starts at 24 degree ambient).

August 5, 2013 11:46:15 PM

emad_ramlawi said:
...f you want to mention kaveri in the article, then please remember that high end kaveri will ship with 512 shaders and not 384...


There is no reliable source I'm aware of that suggests Kaveri will be 512 shaders.

That's speculation, and the same kind of misinformation has unsuccessfully predicted the launch of every single one of AMD's APUs so far.

August 5, 2013 11:47:46 PM

twstd1 said:
I fail to understand why you tested all of these cards at 1920X1080 when they will most likely not be used at that resolution. Why not test them at the resolution that people who buy these would actually be using? Like 720p? I think that it would make for a better review and be closer to real world use.


1080p is the most common gaming monitor resolution, and the GDDR5 7730 can handle it.

a b U Graphics card
August 6, 2013 7:12:22 AM

twstd1 said:
I fail to understand why you tested all of these cards at 1920X1080 when they will most likely not be used at that resolution.

Why wouldn't they get run at that resolution? There are dozens of 1080p screen models in the $100-150 range and it seems quite reasonable for the average would-be PC gamer to try their native resolution first. Without the fancy bling enabled, even old-ish GPUs can handle 1080p reasonably well without giving up that much detail.

I'm still using my old HD5770 and most of the details I disable are things like clutter and shadows that I would disable even if I had high-end graphics to remove unnecessary distractions/obstructions anyway.
a b U Graphics card
August 6, 2013 8:54:50 AM

cleeve said:
twstd1 said:
I fail to understand why you tested all of these cards at 1920X1080 when they will most likely not be used at that resolution. Why not test them at the resolution that people who buy these would actually be using? Like 720p? I think that it would make for a better review and be closer to real world use.


1080p is the most common gaming monitor resolution, and the GDDR5 7730 can handle it.



Just noticed your avatar, pretty sweet.
a b U Graphics card
a b À AMD
August 6, 2013 9:20:12 AM

cleeve said:
emad_ramlawi said:
...f you want to mention kaveri in the article, then please remember that high end kaveri will ship with 512 shaders and not 384...


There is no reliable source I'm aware of that suggests Kaveri will be 512 shaders.

That's speculation, and the same kind of misinformation has unsuccessfully predicted the launch of every single one of AMD's APUs so far.



Far be it for me to tamp down expectations, but pretty much this.

The Kaveri APU 'SIMD Engine' is likely structured similar to the Mobility Radeon HD 86XX 'Mars' discreet chips with 384 cores ... with all the fancy power-gated zero-core and power-tune logic. It's performance envelop should fall easily between the GT640 and Radeon HD 7750



August 6, 2013 10:46:03 AM

spentshells said:

Just noticed your avatar, pretty sweet.


Heheh, thanks man.

You're one of the three people who get it. :) 

a c 175 U Graphics card
a b À AMD
August 12, 2013 10:23:34 AM

That's way overpriced, for a DDR3 version. It needs to lose at least $10. That would be an ok price for GDDR5.
August 13, 2013 2:24:21 PM

I seriously fail to understand what is happening here. How is the power consumption between the GDDR5 6670 and the 7730 the same and yet you only have a negligible increase in performance. The average game performance shows a relative performance from the 6670 ddr3 set as a baseline that the 6670 GDDR5 is 41% faster and the 7730 GDDR5 is 52% and if you do the math you get 52/41=1.08. That is odd... you only have a 8% improvement when you have a die shrink from 40nm to 28nm and on top of that you have a new architecture. What am i missing guys?
a b U Graphics card
August 13, 2013 5:25:40 PM

rp20 said:
That is odd... you only have a 8% improvement when you have a die shrink from 40nm to 28nm and on top of that you have a new architecture. What am i missing guys?

Both have the same 900MHz reference design clock so neither has an advantage over the other there which leaves everything down to architecture. The 6670 has 480 VLIW cores while the 7730 has only 384 GCN shaders so most of the architectural gains are offset by losing 20% of the shader count.

Not that much of a surprise. What does surprise me is that 7730-GDDR5 uses a fair bit more power than 6670-GDDR5 despite the die shrink and lower shader count. This implies individual transistors in GCN are much busier than VLIW's - enough to eat power savings from both the die shrink, axed shaders and some more beyond that.
August 13, 2013 5:34:49 PM

InvalidError said:
rp20 said:
That is odd... you only have a 8% improvement when you have a die shrink from 40nm to 28nm and on top of that you have a new architecture. What am i missing guys?

Both have the same 900MHz reference design clock so neither has an advantage over the other there which leaves everything down to architecture. The 6670 has 480 VLIW cores while the 7730 has only 384 GCN shaders so most of the architectural gains are offset by losing 20% of the shader count.

Not that much of a surprise. What does surprise me is that 7730-GDDR5 uses a fair bit more power than 6670-GDDR5 despite the die shrink and lower shader count. This implies individual transistors in GCN are much busier than VLIW's - enough to eat power savings from both the die shrink, axed shaders and some more beyond that.


That is the thing, where is the power savings? I cannot wrap my head around the fact that you have about a 8% increase in perf and 5% increase in peak power consumption. Where is the advantage of the die shrink? Either people have been bullshitting this whole time when they tout the increased efficiency of the GCN or there is an incomplete story.
a c 175 U Graphics card
a b À AMD
August 13, 2013 5:58:03 PM

The increased efficiency is right there; you use 5% more power, but get 8% more performance, and you're using 384 GCN shaders vs. 480 VLIW cores.
a b U Graphics card
August 13, 2013 6:07:18 PM

rp20 said:
Where is the advantage of the die shrink? Either people have been bullshitting this whole time when they tout the increased efficiency of the GCN or there is an incomplete story.

Advantage of the die shrink: smaller die.
Advantage of GCN: slightly better performance and power-efficiency using a smaller transistor budget.
Combined advantage: lower manufacturing cost (more dies per wafer) for the same performance level - which AMD desperately needs if they are to keep the low-end GPU market alive with their APUs eroding that very same market.

Personally, I'm just surprised the sub-$100 segments still exist.
August 13, 2013 7:02:02 PM

The die size is actually greater. http://hexus.net/tech/reviews/graphics/58677-sapphire-r...

That just means that these are most likely 7750 with defects. Which is not a bad thing.

On whether the efficiency gain is acceptable, I always had the assumption that you would get 30% savings in power per die shrink yet in this case it is negligible.
August 14, 2013 2:21:35 AM

If it can run dual graphics this could be a mother of a chip at that price tag.
August 14, 2013 7:59:20 PM

No surprises here then, but you really should go for a 7770 if you want decent frame rates in most games. A little money goes a long way in low-level graphics.
!