
Our Photoshop test employs a handful of filters optimized for multi-core processors. It’s purely x86-based, though, so the latest OpenCL-based enhancements aren’t reflected.
Nevertheless, AMD’s quad-core APUs outperform Intel’s Core i3s in the first example of what we’re going to see as a trend throughout testing: that is, threaded benchmarks favor AMD’s design, while an ever-shrinking collection of single-threaded metrics give Ivy Bridge’s tremendous IPC throughput advantage a stage on which to shine.

We have a completely different test able to benefit from OpenCL acceleration, too.
Because the HD Graphics 4000 and 2500 engines are OpenCL-capable, Intel actually improves its position against AMD, outperforming the A10-5800K. It takes an aggressive overclock for the flagship APU to secure a first-place spot.
This brings up an interesting question. Although AMD currently seems like the biggest proponent of addressing parallelized workloads with its graphics hardware, Intel has the same capability. Will we simply see the competition speed up alongside AMD, or does AMD have a genuine advantage? We'll see one way the company is addressing Intel's ability to follow its path to glory in our WinZip testing.

The finishing order in Premiere Pro is fairly close, with 30 seconds or so separating the first- and last-place finishers.
Both Intel chips edge past the stock A10-5800K, though, and it again takes an overclock to 4.4 GHz in order for the APU to take the lead.

After Effects CS6 is an even closer race, with the Core i3s and A10 two seconds apart. Overclocked, the APU does enjoy a five-second lead, trivial though that may be.
- Trinity: Great Gamer, But What About Power?
- A10-5800K: The Undervolt And Overclock
- Test Setup And Software
- Benchmark Results: 3DMark 11
- Benchmark Results: Adobe CS6
- Benchmark Results: Content Creation
- Benchmark Results: Productivity
- Benchmark Results: Compression Utilities
- Benchmark Results: Media Encoding
- Power Consumption
- Efficiency
- The Pursuit Of Balance Warms Our Hearts
At this price point, i would choose AMD Trinity.
Happy to set a couple of systems up and let you know what I find.
At this price point, i would choose AMD Trinity.
Happy to set a couple of systems up and let you know what I find.
So, it's probable that we're seeing a difference in configuration. It looks like Anand is using the Gigabyte A85X board and perhaps an older driver version. I'm on the MSI board and Cat 12.8, with a different Intel setup as well. On the Windows desktop, after 10 minutes on each config, I get 59 W for Intel and 67 W for AMD at idle.
Hopefully this articale can start to filter around particularly for the budget users which A-series is premised to target.
overclock the locked Intel chips? how do you suppose they do that? they weren't testing against Intel K series unlocked chips.
I can't be the only one who was waiting for the money shot of what is the difference in performance when you clock up from 800Mhz to >1000Mhz.
SUCH AN OVERSIGHT. UNFORGIVABLE!
1. overclocked/undervolted benchmarks for the i3 parts
2. dedicated gpu game benchmarks at 1440, 1680, 1920 for the A10 and the A8
3. More OpenCl benchmarks with and without dedicated GPUs for the i3 parts as well as the A10 parts
p.s. I realised I was getting thumbed up and down for this. do these seem like too many requests? nobody has covered trinity like toms and that too with superb writing quality. is it wrong for me to get greedy to read more of their stuff? :-) i'm addicted to this stuff is all. now if you'd excuse me, I have an F5 button to press.