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.
Current page: Results: Synthetic BenchmarksPrev Page Test Setup And Benchmarks Next Page Results: F1 2012 And The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim
Stay on the Cutting Edge
Join the experts who read Tom's Hardware for the inside track on enthusiast PC tech news — and have for over 25 years. We'll send breaking news and in-depth reviews of CPUs, GPUs, AI, maker hardware and more straight to your inbox.
VLIW4... Are you kidding me??? WHen is that gonna be scrapped...Reply
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.Reply
AMD, Good show! Now, release Kaveri Already! I need a new SteamRoller CPU!Reply
They say it's VLIW4 then say it's GCN. They can't be both can they?Reply
The 6800k is good, but I expected it to be a little more powerful.Reply
No temps with power metrics page? 8(Reply
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)
This is dumb. Still 6670 max card for dual graphics. Disappointing.Reply
10920935 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.
AMD swings and misses once again.Reply
AMD swings and misses once again.Reply