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

Results: F1 2012 And The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim

As far as average frame rates go, All of the APUs are playable at 1920x1080 using Medium quality settings, maintaining at least 30 FPS. As we might have guessed, using system memory running at 2133 MT/s makes an appreciable difference, slightly outpacing the same APU complemented by a discrete Radeon HD 6670.

We knew going in that HD Graphics 2500 would have been unplayable. Intel figured the same thing out quite a while after introducing its modest Core i3-3220; the -3225 didn't become available until quite a while after. The company redeems itself, however, when we drop in the same Radeon HD 6670, though. Alleviating the A10's processor bottleneck allows AMD's add-in card to achieve much higher frame rates.

Charting frame rate over time gives us a clearer look at the peaks and valleys of each solution, though we don't derive any additional insight.

All of our tested configurations exhibit fairly low variance in the time it takes to render one frame to the next. Even when frame rates get slow, then, at least you have this consistency to look forward to.

No surprise; Intel's HD Graphics 2500 implementation isn't cut out for gaming. For that, you'd want to look to HD Graphics 4000, at least.

But even then, data from Chris Angelini's review of Core i7-4770K shows that Intel cannot keep up with AMD's APUs in The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim. It's not even close. HD Graphics 4600 doesn't even do the trick.

Faster memory isn't a huge deal for the AMD parts in this title, though we will note that the 2133 MT/s kit helps A10-6800K outperform Intel's Core i3 complemented by discrete graphics.

The frame rate over time chart shows how 2133 MT/s memory helps push the A10-6800K to the top during this benchmark run.

Unfortunately, playable frame rates don't guarantee smooth performance. When we look at worst-case scenarios, each one of these solutions incurs more than 10 ms of variance between frames. That's definitely a difference you're going to feel as you're playing. And indeed, our experience in Skyrim reflected relatively moderate consistency in how frames are delivered.

Create a new thread in the US Reviews comments forum about this subject
This thread is closed for comments
    Your comment
  • Novuake
    VLIW4... Are you kidding me??? WHen is that gonna be scrapped...
  • 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.
  • griptwister
    AMD, Good show! Now, release Kaveri Already! I need a new SteamRoller CPU!
  • tului
    They say it's VLIW4 then say it's GCN. They can't be both can they?
  • songorocosongo
    The 6800k is good, but I expected it to be a little more powerful.
  • 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)
  • kfronda26
    This is dumb. Still 6670 max card for dual graphics. Disappointing.
  • 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.
  • unknown9122
    AMD swings and misses once again.
  • unknown9122
    AMD swings and misses once again.
  • 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.
    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...

    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)
  • 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.
  • 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.
  • 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.
  • 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.
  • aibenq
    why you not tested with HD7750... (/゚Д゚)/
  • 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?
  • 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.
  • 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.
  • 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.