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

Results: Synthetic Benchmarks

Sporting the same number of Radeon cores (384), it's hardly surprising that all of the A10s score fairly similarly. A slight 44 MHz clock rate increase gives the Richland-based parts an imperceptible speed-up. The Core i3-3220's HD Graphics 2500 engine is ill-equipped to fight off any of AMD's APUs, though we know full-well that HD Graphics 4000 and 4600 do narrow the gap.

The Physics module is a pure measure of x86 processing performance though, and in this one, the dual-core Core i3 finishes in first place (albeit just barely).

Although PCMark 8 launched a couple of days ago, AMD wasn't able to get us the test before we needed to board planes and head to Taipei for Computex. At least for one last processor launch, PCMark 7 will have to do. We don't see this as a problem; the benchmark is build using components of Windows 7, which many enthusiasts continues to use, and is representative of many common desktop workloads.

It's not much of a surprise why AMD doesn't care for PCMark 7, though. The Core i3's two Hyper-Threaded cores outperform AMD's two Piledriver modules in the Overall, Creativity, and Productivity subtests.

Intel's IPC advantage gives Core i3 the lead in Cinebench's single-core test. AMD comes surging back in the threaded component of this test, though, as its four integer pipelines outperform SMT technology.

Intel's Core i3-3220 returns higher integer and floating-point results in Sandra's Arithmetic module, though the A10-6800K isn't far behind in either metric.

Intel has a bad habit of using important features to differentiate its processors. The Core i3s, for example, arbitrarily lose AES-NI support. So, the Core i3 performs dismally in this measurement. Meanwhile, AMD's APUs process instructions as fast as they can be fed from memory, resulting in the great AES256 numbers.

This is an interesting result. Intel's two x86 cores deliver the top OpenCL-based result in LuxMark. All three Radeon-based graphics engines fare roughly the same when we limit processing to the GPUs. And the A10-6800K scores a first-place finish with both the CPU and GPU working cooperatively.

Remember, though that we're only testing Intel's HD Graphics 2500 engine. If you want some interesting data from HD Graphics 4000, check out this page in The Core i7-4770K Review: Haswell Is Faster; Desktop Enthusiasts Yawn. The A10-5800K's numbers match almost identically. But HD Graphics 4000 and 4600 kick performance up significantly, suggesting that a Core i3-3225 would make a big difference in this test.

Create a new thread in the US Reviews comments forum about this subject
This thread is closed for comments
97 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)
    4
  • 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.
    7
  • 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.
    1
  • 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