Ed.: After discussing with AMD earlier today, it would seem that eight-channel LPCM is not one of the features present in 785G. As a result, we've made a couple of edits to the original story, while you'll find on this page, and page three. Overall, our assessment of 785G does not change. However, true HTPC enthusiasts will likely want to reconsider 785G if software-decoded Dolby TrueHD or DTS-HD MA is a buying requirement.
Since the beginning of last year, integrated graphics processors (IGPs) have become a lot more exciting. Consumers now have solid options from all of the major players, including AMD’s 780G/790GX, Intel’s G45, and Nvidia’s 8200/9300/9400. All of these components have their respective strengths and weaknesses, but compared to past offerings, these chipsets are light-years ahead.
Now, AMD is bringing a new product to the table, and the fresh 785G chipset is an evolution of the 780G; certainly not revolutionary. It was created to address some of the features that the 780G lacked, such as eight-channel LPCM audio over HDMI, picture-in-picture video acceleration, ATI Stream technology support, DirectX 10.1, and Windows 7 compatibility. In addition, AMD promises lower power usage with the 785G. None of these features represent a "killer app" for the company, especially since the competition already offers most of these capabilities in their existing products. But taken as a whole, the 785G is a very positive step in the right direction. That is, of course, assuming it can deliver the goods, which our testing will flesh out.
The State of IGP
While Intel's G45 for Socket 775 is over most of its teething problems and can playback a Blu-ray disc in a competent fashion, it isn't very impressive in the graphics department. Nvidia's 8200 for Socket AM2+ isn't much better when it comes to 3D horsepower, but Nvidia has addressed that weakness with its GeForce 9300/9400 chipsets for Socket 775. As far as AMD’s portfolio goes, the 780G is a fantastic low-budget chipset, and the 790GX is a solid midrange offering. With these products leading the IGP segment when it comes to price/performance superiority, why change the 780G now?

Perhaps AMD's best reason to introduce the 785G chipset isn't the chipset itself, but its new Phenom II-based processors that can be used with it, including the Athlon II. While the original Phenom was somewhat anemic compared to Intel's Core 2 offerings (and was stigmatized early on for its TLB issue), the Phenom II sports a more refined architecture that has returned AMD to price/performance leadership with some of its parts.
With this in mind, there probably isn't a better time to re-introduce the improved 785G as an alternative to Nvidia's 9300/9400, and to highlight the 785G's strengths over Intel's G45.
- Introduction
- 785G Northbridge And SB710 Southbridge Vital Statistics
- Features For The Home-Theater Crowd
- Radeon HD 4200 Enhancements
- Other 785G Goodies
- Hardware Choices, Setup, And Overclocking
- Test System And Benchmarks
- Benchmark Results: Synthetics
- Benchmark Results: Audio And Video Encoding
- Benchmark Results: 3D Rendering And Productivity
- Game Benchmarks: First-Person Shooters
- Game Benchmarks: Flight Sim And RTS
- HD Video Playback Benchmarks
- GPGPU Benchmark
- Power Usage Benchmark
- Conclusion
A integrated GPU that can game. =D
Makes my lil Pentium D with a 4670 seem puny...
3.3GB/s memory bandwidth (single channel DDR2 533... though 2 sticks, it runs in single channel... damn prebuilts) also seems sad on my rig...
Good question. A dual core Atom with a 4200 integrated would be nice.
We all know Intel makes shitty mothebroards and AMD makes kickass motherboards anyways.
Not correct, the P2 has a built in memory controller so the switch to ddr3 affected that controller
Native ram for a pentium d is PC4200 which has a max of 4.2gb/s per channel etc and the FSB has the max of 6.4gb/s
The Intel atom would most likely underpower any video card out there, and Intel does actually make a good reliable business platform where video performance is not required etc
Perhaps the next task could be a power comparison to tell us how long a computer needs to stand in active state to consume more power than turning it off and back on again (including starting msn,av software and a bunch of other stuff running in the background).
Anyway good article
PS: Phenom II does support DDR3, there are only 2 models out of 12 that don't...
========
My take on it is except for some specific HTPC features, the 790GX is still the better of the two, especially if any gaming is involved. They compared an OC'ed 785G to a stock 790GX; what if they'd OC'ed the 790GX also?
And, lest anyone develop any false hope, the Intel IGP has once again been shown to be a toad.
Let's seee... Decent performance, able to play HD videos, low cost. That covers everything I need for a HTPC!
We concentrated on the new aspects of the 785G in this article; hybrid crossfire is exactly the same as it was with the 780G, that is to say it maxes out with a 3450 card.
Nope, it's using a 24 W difference. I think that's why your numbers are different too. I get:
24 Watts * 24 hours = 576 WHrs / 1000 W/KW = .576 KWHrs * $0.15 cents/KWHr * 365 days = $31.54
Good article otherwise, thanks.
That is incorrect, if that was the case, the Phenom II wouldn't benchmark so much better and it wouldn't overclock so much better. Just because it has the Phenom name to it, doesn't mean all they did was give it a bit more L3 Cache and call it a day. You could've given the original Phenom more L3 cache all day long and it wouldn't still ran like poop. Not necessarily poop, but just not as well as the Phenom II.
If this is true, then why does the Hybrid crossfire graphic on the first page show HD4350, HD4550 and HD4650 as compatible hybrid crossfire GPUs?
It makes sense.. the 780G used an integrated 3200-series GPU, so it was compatible with lower-end dedicated 3000-series GPUs. The 785G uses an integrated 4200-series GPU, so it should be compatible with the lower-end dedicated 4000-series GPUs.
Can you clear this up? I was also wondering what GPU's can be used as Hybrid crossfire with the 785G. I thought I knew from that graphic on page 1, but your response confused me.
Thanks
Thanks for clearing it out, Cleeve! There is not much sense using Hybrid CF then. However, my original question still remains: how much extra wattage may one expect with mid-range 4600 or 4700 card added for example? Does disabling the device help here a bit more when not in use? Hope this is not too off-topic already...