AMD A10-6700 And A10-6800K Review: Richland Hits The Desktop

Test Setup And Benchmarks

We're testing the Richland-based A10-6700 and A10-6800K APUs against their predecessor, AMD's Trinity-based A10-5800K. We have an Ivy Bridge-based Core i3-3220 in our Canadian lab with HD Graphics 2500. Unfortunately, we didn't have an opportunity to snag a Core i3-3225 before leaving for Computex, so the comparison to HD Graphics 4000 will have to wait.

The good news is our testing facility in Hillsboro, Oregon already ran the numbers comparing both Core i3 chips and A10-5800K. The pertinent data can be found in Gaming At 1920x1080: AMD's Trinity Takes On Intel HD Graphics. For the time being, Core i3-3220 reflects the x86 performance of both Intel chips in today's tests, and in the same $130-150 price range these new Richland-based APUs are expected to sell for.

In order to maximize performance in our game tests, we used DDR3-1866 and -2133 data rates, which are the highest officially-supported settings on AMD's new APUs. In addition, we included results with a discrete Radeon HD 6670 DDR3, a baseline mainstream gaming card.


Socket FM2
LGA 1155
CPU
AMD A10-6800K (Richland) 4.1 GHz Base, 4.4 GHz Turbo Core w/ Radeon HD 8670D (844 MHz)

AMD A10-6700 (Richland) 3.7 GHz Base, 4.3 GHz Turbo Core w/ Radeon HD 8670D (844 MHz)

AMD A10-5800K (Trinity) 3.8 GHz Base, 4.2 GHz Turbo Core w/ Radeon HD 7660D (800 MHz)
Intel Core i3-3220 (Ivy Bridge), 3.3 GHz, Hyper-Threading enabled w/ Intel HD 2500
Motherboard
ASRock FM2A85X
Socket FM2, Chipset: AMD A85
Asus P8Z77-V LX
LGA 1155, Chipset: Intel Z77M
Networking
On-Board Gigabit LAN controller
Memory
AMD Gamer Series Memory, 2 x 4 GB, 1866 MT/s, CL 9-9-9-34-2T
Overclocked: 2133 MT/s, CL 10-11-11-28
Graphics
AMD Radeon HD 6670 DDR3
800 MHz GPU, 1 GB GDDR5 at 800 MHz (1600 MHz effective)
Hard Drive
Western Digital Caviar Black 750 GB
7,200 RPM, 32 MB Cache, SATA 3Gb/s
Power
ePower EP-1200E10-T2 1,200 W
ATX12V, EPS12V
Software and Drivers
Operating System
Microsoft Windows 8 Pro x64
DirectX
DirectX 11
Graphics Drivers
AMD Catalyst 13.6 Beta; Intel HD Graphics Driver 15.31.3.64.3071


And here are the benchmark details:

Benchmark Configuration
3D Games
Metro: Last Light
Version 1.0.0.0, DirectX 10, Built-in Benchmark
The Elder Scrolls V: SkyrimVersion 1.6.89.06, Version 1.5.26.05, 25-Sec. Fraps
Tomb Raider
Version 1.04, Custom THG Benchmark, 60-Sec. Fraps
F1 2012Version 1.2, Direct X 11, Built-in Benchmark, 60-Sec. Fraps
Audio/Video Encoding
HandBrake CLIVersion: 0.98, Video: Video from Canon EOS 7D (1920x1080, 25 frames) 1 Minutes 22 Seconds, Audio: PCM-S16, 48,000 Hz, Two-Channel, to Video: AVC1 Audio: AAC (High Profile)
iTunesVersion 10.4.1.10 x64: Audio CD (Terminator II SE), 53 minutes, default AAC format 
Lame MP3Version 3.98.3: Audio CD "Terminator II SE", 53 min, convert WAV to MP3 audio format, Command: -b 160 --nores (160 Kb/s)
TotalCode Studio 2.5Version: 2.5.0.10677, MPEG-2 to H.264, MainConcept H.264/AVC Codec, 28 sec HDTV 1920x1080 (MPEG-2), Audio:MPEG2 (44.1 kHz, Two-Channel, 16-Bit, 224 Kb/s) Codec: H.264 Pro, Mode: PAL 50i (25 FPS), Profile: H.264 BD HDMV
Productivity
ABBYY FineReaderVersion 10.0.102.82: Read PDF save to Doc, Source: Political Economy (J. Broadhurst 1842) 111 Pages
Adobe Photoshop CS6Version 13 x64: Filter 15.7 MB TIF Image: Radial Blur, Shape Blur, Median, Polar Coordinates
Autodesk 3ds Max 2013Version 14.0 x64: Space Flyby Mentalray, 248 Frames, 1440x1080
7-ZipVersion 9.28, LZMA2, Syntax "a -t7z -r -m0=LZMA2 -mx=5"
Benchmark: THG-Workload-2012
WinRARVersion 4.2, RAR, Syntax "winrar a -r -m3"
Benchmark: THG-Workload-2012
WinZipVersion 17.0 Pro, Best Method, ZIPX
Benchmark: THG-Workload-2012
Synthetic Benchmarks and Settings
3DMark 11Version: 1.0.1, Entry, Performance, Extreme Suite
PCMark 7Version: 1.0.4, System, Productivity, Hard Disk Drive benchmarks
SiSoftware Sandra 2012Version: 2012 SP5c-1872, CPU Test = CPU Arithmetic / MultiMedia, Memory Test = Bandwidth Benchmark
Create a new thread in the US Reviews comments forum about this subject
This thread is closed for comments
98 comments
    Your comment
  • Novuake
    VLIW4... Are you kidding me??? WHen is that gonna be scrapped...
    0
  • esrever
    Numbering has never been for the architecture inside the chips. They have always been marketing for the current line of products. Normal people buy a laptop, they see the number, they get the performance associated with said number and they don't care about the inside of the chip. Richland is just a trinity refresh with better power management and higher clocks.
    2
  • griptwister
    AMD, Good show! Now, release Kaveri Already! I need a new SteamRoller CPU!
    4
  • tului
    They say it's VLIW4 then say it's GCN. They can't be both can they?
    1
  • songorocosongo
    The 6800k is good, but I expected it to be a little more powerful.
    3
  • Yuka
    No temps with power metrics page? 8(
    I guess Richland is still very hot going by the power figures alone. Still, it's a good step up (and stop gap) for AMD.
    Nice review still. Are you guys planning on a follow up for Dual Graphics? 8)
    Cheers!
    2
  • kfronda26
    This is dumb. Still 6670 max card for dual graphics. Disappointing.
    -1
  • Wes Young
    Anonymous said:
    This is dumb. Still 6670 max card for dual graphics. Disappointing.


    No, since driver 13.1 even the 5800k was able to run dual graphics with a HD 7750. I am typing on a system with that exact setup right now. I am not sure if the 6800k will allow anything above the 7750 though. When I tried a 7770 with the 5800k I wasn't given the option to enable dual graphics.
    5
  • unknown9122
    AMD swings and misses once again.
    -18
  • unknown9122
    AMD swings and misses once again.
    -19
  • slomo4sho
    Couple days late but thanks for the review.

    Richland does appear to be just a refinement of Trinity. This review does explain why Kaveri desktop APUs are due to release at the end of the year.
    Quote:
    The A10-6700 offers similar performance as a stock A10-5800K, but offers greater efficiency. Unfortunately, it's also multiplier-locked. I have to believe that if you're willing to spend $150 on a 65 W A10 that can't be overclocked easily, then you're probably better off with a 55 W Core i3 that's also stuck in place for $10 less.

    I don't see why this argument is even made since both the 6700 and 6800K have the same MSRP considering that the only real difference in power consumption observed between the two chips was in gaming...

    Quote:
    The Intel chip's performance in single-threaded apps is exceptional. It holds its own in more parallelized workloads.

    Your final graph suggests that the overall performance of the i3 is within margin of error of the A8-6800K(for which you didn't even bother to provide overclock benchmarks)

    Lastly, can you confirm the MSRP? Your values seem to differ, other sources suggest $142 instead of your stated $149 (in fact, the pricing on all of the models seems to be off)
    5
  • opmopadop
    Can someone review this chip with the APU turned off and CPU cranked with liquid cooling (or crazy air). That higher RAM timing has to do something positive... I hope.
    2
  • ingtar33
    so... you tested a chip that supports ddr3 2400 ram with ddr3 2133 ram... and no overclocking data? the A10-5800k already supported 2133 (maybe not officially, but it worked), the a10-6800k supports and works with ddr3 2400 ram, as other reviewers have noted elsewhere.

    Isn't this a tech enthusiast site? The few reviews I've seen out there claim Richland overclocks better, cooler and higher then Trinity. Furthermore, they claim the overclocked igpu performs at the level of a 6670... which is a huge jump in performance... as the 5800k, even overclocked and with fast ram, was only about 70% a HD 6670.

    where is the beef? Seriously i expected more from this site.
    8
  • Nintendo Maniac 64
    Two things. First, I really think you should have thrown in a lower-end quad Intel CPU as well. From reading older reviews it seems that an i5-2300 is actually a second SLOWER than the A10-6800k in the TotalCode Studio test.
    Secondly, the comment that Kaveri will require a new socket is largely unknown at this point - all that's been revealed is that it uses an "FM2+" socket - who knows what that'll mean in terms of mobo socket compatibility.
    1
  • envy14tpe
    I still feel like the A10-x800 line is designed for only adding RAM, not a GPU. If you add a GPU then performance parallels (or falls behind in games) a i3.
    3
  • aibenq
    why you not tested with HD7750... (/゚Д゚)/
    2
  • ohyouknow
    So this power consumption chart. Does that include the i3 with a 6670? or is that straight cpu vs apu? The gaming power consumption chart feels a bit wrong if it is running the i3 HD in metro w/o the gpu as that is misleading. Clarification?
    5
  • rmpumper
    Why not include G2020+HD6670 benchmarks? It would be ~the same cost as 6800K and I bet that everyone would want to know which setup is better.
    9
  • abitoms
    @ingtar33, does Richland chips officially support official DDR3-2400 RAM? If so, Toms should have tested with that RAM. However I think Richland supports 'just' 2133 MHz so that's what Toms has tested with.
    @Don, I have 3 queries for you.
    Does Richland crossfire with 7750 (officially or unofficially)? If it does, that is sure an interesting thing to explore.
    Also Don, yes even I've seen the figure of $142 floating around in other tech sites. Why do you quote it otherwise?
    Lastly, you 'could' have added the Core i3 with Radeon 6670 in the power consumption charts just to show the increased performance in games and other applications comes with the added power consumption of the 6670 if it is present.
    2
  • slomo4sho
    Anonymous said:
    Why not include G2020+HD6670 benchmarks? It would be ~the same cost as 6800K and I bet that everyone would want to know which setup is better.


    Is this necessary? The gaming benchmarks already show the 6800K paired with 2133 ram to perform equal to the i3-3220 + HD 6670.

    Anonymous said:
    does Richland chips officially support official DDR3-2400 RAM? If so, Toms should have tested with that RAM. However I think Richland supports 'just' 2133 MHz so that's what Toms has tested with.

    Richland officially only supports 2133 but 2400 seems to be compatible.
    0