| Test System Configuration | |
|---|---|
| CPU | AMD Athlon 5350 (Kabini): 2.05 GHz, 2 MB L2 Cache, Socket FS1b |
| CPU Cooler | AMD Socket FS1b boxed (2-pin) cooler |
| RAM | Patriot Viper 3 PV316G240C1K (16 GB) at DDR3-1600 C9 Defaults |
| Graphics | AMD Radeon HD 8400 integrated (600 MHz) |
| Hard Drive | Samsung 840 Series MZ-7PD256, 256 GB SSD |
| Sound | Integrated HD Audio |
| Network | Integrated Gigabit Networking |
| Power | Corsair AX860i: ATX12V v2.3, EPS12V, 80 PLUS Platinum |
| Software | |
| OS | Microsoft Windows 8 Professional RTM x64 |
| Graphics | AMD Catalyst 13.4 |
| Chipset | AMD 13.250.26 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We purchased a new, retail-boxed AMD Athlon 5350 specifically for today’s test. It will probably end up in the hands of a contributing editor, eventually.

We specifically seek out DRAM that defaults to DDR3-1600 CAS 9 for use in motherboard round-ups, since some boards don’t use XMP properly and others make unwanted changes when XMP is enabled. We started with Patriot’s PV332G240C1QK 32 GB DDR3-2400 kit and removed two modules, transforming it into the same company’s 16 GB dual-channel part number PV316G240C1K.

Far overcapacity for these low-power platform, Corsair’s AX860i remains efficient even at low loads. Since I don’t have any smaller-yet-more-efficient parts laying around, it stays on the test bench.
| Benchmark Settings | |
|---|---|
| 3D Games | |
| Battlefield 4 | Version 1.0.0.1, DirectX 11, 100-sec. Fraps "Tashgar" Test Set 1: Low Quality Preset (No AA, No AF, SSAO) Test Set 2: Medium Preset (No AA, 4X AF, SSAO) |
| Grid 2 | Version 1.0.85.8679, Direct X 11, Built-in Benchmark Test Set 1: Medium Quality, No AA Test Set 2: High Quality, No AA |
| Arma 3 | Version 1.08.113494, 30-sec. Fraps "Infantry Showcase" Test Set 1: Low Quality Preset (No AA, No AF) Test Set 2: Standard Preset (No AA, Standard AF) |
| Far Cry 3 | V. 1.04, DirectX 11, 50-sec. Fraps "Amanaki Outpost" Test Set 1: Low Quality, No AA, No ATC., SSAO Test Set 2: High Quality, No AA, Standard ATC., SSAO |
| Adobe Creative Suite | |
| Adobe After Effects CC | Version 12.0.0.404: Create Video which includes 3 Streams, 210 Frames, Render Multiple Frames Simultaneosly |
| Adobe Photoshop CC | Version 14.0 x64: Filter 15.7 MB TIF Image: Radial Blur, Shape Blur, Median, Polar Coordinates |
| Adobe Premeire Pro CC | Version 7.0.0 (342), 6.61 GB MXF Project to H.264 to H.264 Blu-ray, Output 1920x1080, Maximum Quality |
| Audio/Video Encoding | |
| iTunes | Version 11.0.4.4 x64: Audio CD (Terminator II SE), 53 minutes, default AAC format |
| LAME MP3 | Version 3.98.3: Audio CD "Terminator II SE", 53 min, convert WAV to MP3 audio format, Command: -b 160 --nores (160 Kb/s) |
| HandBrake CLI | Version: 0.99: Video from Canon Eos 7D (1920x1080, 25 FPS) 1 Minutes 22 Seconds Audio: PCM-S16, 48,000 Hz, Two-Channel, to Video: AVC1 Audio: AAC (High Profile) |
| TotalCode Studio 2.5 | Version: 2.5.0.10677: MPEG-2 to H.264, MainConcept H.264/AVC Codec, 28 sec HDTV 1920x1080 (MPEG-2), Audio: MPEG-2 (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 FineReader | Version 10.0.102.95: Read PDF save to Doc, Source: Political Economy (J. Broadhurst 1842) 111 Pages |
| Adobe Acrobat 11 | Version 11.0.0.379: Print PDF from 115 Page PowerPoint, 128-bit RC4 Encryption |
| Autodesk 3ds Max 2013 | Version 15.0 x64: Space Flyby Mentalray, 248 Frames, 1440x1080 |
| Blender | Version: 2.68A, Cycles Engine, Syntax blender -b thg.blend -f 1, 1920x1080, 8x Anti-Aliasing, Render THG.blend frame 1 |
| Visual Studio 2010 | Version 10.0, Compile Google Chrome, Scripted |
| File Compression | |
| WinZip | Version 18.0 Pro: THG-Workload (1.3 GB) to ZIP, command line switches "-a -ez -p -r" |
| WinRAR | Version 5.0: THG-Workload (1.3 GB) to RAR, command line switches "winrar a -r -m3" |
| 7-Zip | Version 9.30 alpha (64-bit): THG-Workload (1.3 GB) to .7z, command line switches "a -t7z -r -m0=LZMA2 -mx=5" |
| Synthetic Benchmarks and Settings | |
| 3DMark 11 | Version: 1.0.5.0, Benchmark Only |
| 3DMark Professional | Version: 1.2.250.0 (64-bit), Fire Strike Benchmark |
| PCMark 8 | Version: 1.0.0 x64, Full Test |
| SiSoftware Sandra | Version 2014.02.20.10, CPU Test = CPU Arithmetic / Multimedia / Cryptography, Memory Bandwidth Benchmarks |
Previous
Next
Summary
- Kabini Appeals To Low-Cost, Low-Power
- Asus AM1I-A Features
- Asus AM1I-A Software and Firmware
- Gigabyte AM1M-S2H Features
- Gigabyte AM1M-S2H Software and Firmware
- MSI AM1I Features
- MSI AM1I Software and Firmware
- How We Test AM1 Kabini APU Motherboards
- Results: 3DMark and PCMark
- Results: SiSoftware Sandra
- Results: Battlefield 4 and Arma 3
- Results: Grid 2 And Far Cry 3
- Results: Audio and Video Encoding
- Results: Adobe Creative Suite
- Results: Productivity
- Results: File Compression
- Results: Power and Efficiency
- Choosing The Right AM1 Motherboard
Ask a Category Expert
These sites often make the same mistake, I think intentionally in some cases (not in Tom's, I think it's just not understanding), of taking products out of their context market. They might put a line up here or there reminding people of the market, but then test it in ways it was never intended to be used. The overall effect is misleading and inappropriate, but under the guise of being accurate since somewhere on some page they mention it's a lower end unit.
Probably they don't know how to test appropriately. In any case, there aren't the right benchmarks for this type of unit, and so the confused author complains about the CPU on the last page with one last misplaced remark.
But, for the more informed people, this is a very effective and efficient architecture. It performs as much work per clock cycle as their larger cores, despite being less than 1/3 the size. It's the same size as Bay Trail, despite being on 28nm as compared to 22nm, but has roughly 20% higher IPC, as well as much greater GPU performance. It's a great design.
Tom's just doesn't know better. They should. They don't. In their blundering and dull-witted way, they think it should be used for gaming, because everyone wanting a gaming processor is going to want one. Kids will be kids.
Minimally, put a discrete GPU in each, something cheap, if you want to test with games, although it's very difficult to see people buying this platform for gaming in any context. PS4 has that covered with a derivation of this successful architecture.
To complete the lack of understanding of this baffled author, we have the uninformed remark about the processor costing twice as much as the motherboard. Sadly, this author's lack of understanding precludes him from realizing this is the point. More was put on the APU so it wouldn't have to be put on the motherboard.
Just a bad article, with no understanding of the segment or product.
Also, these motherboards and products are more geared for countries that have less disposable income. You can get a 5150 and MB for less than $90, or a 5350 and MB for around $100, and both offer good enough performance to make these attractive products for people needing a computer, but with a limited budget. And no, that market doesn't buy these things for games.
In any case, the most interesting motherboard for the U.S. market was left out ASRock AM1H-ITX. If you want DisplayPort, it's the only game in town, as well.
My Temash with 2 CUs at 3-400MHz is more than capable of playing RB6: Vegas2 and FEAR at great frame rates. A Kabini with higher clocks and greater memory through-put will play older DX games just dandy.
It's just a big fail when testers throw BF4 at a 15w APU and exclaim, "It can't play!"
It's quite dumb, too.
Can it play 1080p/4k videos? (30 or 60fps) youtube or downloaded
Can it play games that are meant to work on low end PCs?
What is the HTML5 performance?
What is the average total cost of the system?
How can you further improve the system value, depending on the components you choose to buy for it?
Why not throw a mid-ranged discreet GPU in there and see what happens? It's all we really want to know. Otherwise this platform is for strictly 2D flash games.
Just because the technology is the same, it doesn't mean that it well perform on par with the PS4.
Asus 33 Euro
Gigabyte 32 Euro
MSI 30 Euro
I am gonna get the Asus at that price...
Can it play 1080p/4k videos? (30 or 60fps) youtube or downloaded
Can it play games that are meant to work on low end PCs?
What is the HTML5 performance?
What is the average total cost of the system?
How can you further improve the system value, depending on the components you choose to buy for it?
My Temash with 2 CUs at 3-400MHz is more than capable of playing RB6: Vegas2 and FEAR at great frame rates. A Kabini with higher clocks and greater memory through-put will play older DX games just dandy.
It's just a big fail when testers throw BF4 at a 15w APU and exclaim, "It can't play!"
It's quite dumb, too.
These sites often make the same mistake, I think intentionally in some cases (not in Tom's, I think it's just not understanding), of taking products out of their context market. They might put a line up here or there reminding people of the market, but then test it in ways it was never intended to be used. The overall effect is misleading and inappropriate, but under the guise of being accurate since somewhere on some page they mention it's a lower end unit.
Probably they don't know how to test appropriately. In any case, there aren't the right benchmarks for this type of unit, and so the confused author complains about the CPU on the last page with one last misplaced remark.
But, for the more informed people, this is a very effective and efficient architecture. It performs as much work per clock cycle as their larger cores, despite being less than 1/3 the size. It's the same size as Bay Trail, despite being on 28nm as compared to 22nm, but has roughly 20% higher IPC, as well as much greater GPU performance. It's a great design.
Tom's just doesn't know better. They should. They don't. In their blundering and dull-witted way, they think it should be used for gaming, because everyone wanting a gaming processor is going to want one. Kids will be kids.
Minimally, put a discrete GPU in each, something cheap, if you want to test with games, although it's very difficult to see people buying this platform for gaming in any context. PS4 has that covered with a derivation of this successful architecture.
To complete the lack of understanding of this baffled author, we have the uninformed remark about the processor costing twice as much as the motherboard. Sadly, this author's lack of understanding precludes him from realizing this is the point. More was put on the APU so it wouldn't have to be put on the motherboard.
Just a bad article, with no understanding of the segment or product.
Also, these motherboards and products are more geared for countries that have less disposable income. You can get a 5150 and MB for less than $90, or a 5350 and MB for around $100, and both offer good enough performance to make these attractive products for people needing a computer, but with a limited budget. And no, that market doesn't buy these things for games.
In any case, the most interesting motherboard for the U.S. market was left out ASRock AM1H-ITX. If you want DisplayPort, it's the only game in town, as well.
As for POV, I come at this from the viewpoint of someone who's gamed on Haswell's integrated GPU. I'm just looking for entry-level performance. As in, barely useful 3D. I'm not finding it.
The same jaguar core that is in the mighty PS4, that must be why the PS4 is sub par, lol...
Asus AM1I-A Mini ITX ---> 25- to 30% OC's
THG announced the mobo on March 16th ...
THG announced the mobo on March 16th ...
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/am1-motherboard-socket-fs1b-athlon-5350,3850-3.html
No reference clock control in firmware or motherboard software. If you'd like to recommend a different application, feel free.
Where are the tests that reflect that? I don't see any HD playback testing. I also don't see but one graph that shows any testing on power consumption. Do you not think people would be interested in seeing results for tests that aren't maxing out the CPU or GPU? What about a comparison to Intel Atom configurations? Anyone who is honestly interested in learning more about this platform could care less how well BF4 benches.