AMD A10-6700 And A10-6800K Review: Richland Hits The Desktop
-
Page 1:Richland APUs Make Their Way To The Desktop
-
Page 2:AMD Dual Graphics: Not Ready For Benchmark Results
-
Page 3:Test Setup And Benchmarks
-
Page 4:Results: Synthetic Benchmarks
-
Page 5:Results: F1 2012 And The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim
-
Page 6:Results: Tomb Raider And Metro: Last Light
-
Page 7:Results: Media Encoding
-
Page 8:Results: Adobe CS6
-
Page 9:Results: Productivity
-
Page 10:Results: Compression
-
Page 11:Results: Power Consumption
-
Page 12:As Expected, Richland Is A Little Better; Not Massively So
Results: Tomb Raider And Metro: Last Light
While we're able to run Tomb Raider at 1920x1080 using on-die graphics, we had to drop the quality settings as low as they go (except for keeping FXAA and 8x AF turned on).
Again, we see that HD Graphics 2500 aren't viable in a 3D workload like this. Also again, there's plenty of data in Chris' Core i7-4770K review to show that neither HD Graphics 4000 or HD Graphics 4600 can overtake A10-5800K. So, A10-6800K is probably safe unless Intel decides to enable its GT3/GT3e configuration on the desktop. The company currently has no plans to do this.
Mapping frame rates out over time simply gives us a little extra detail.
Although the variance between subsequent frames appears low in general, we found this title to suffer from noticeable stuttering. Perhaps it was simply a result of lower overall frame rates giving the perception of less-smooth performance.
Metro: Last Light is easily the most demanding title in our suite, requiring us to drop the graphics details to their lowest settings and dial the resolution back to 1280x720. Fortunately, the game still looks good at those settings.
A demanding benchmark sequence pushes frame rates under 20 at times, despite decent averages from the A10 APUs. The discrete Radeon HD 6670 doesn't do any better, and Intel's HD Graphics 2500 isn't viable at all.
As you can see, the APUs manage to maintain frame rates in excess of 30 for much of the test, but are pushed under 20 FPS in several cases. It's tempting to say that you'll see better real-world performance from this title, though we know taxing sequences like the built-in benchmark are when gamers most commonly decry the inability of their hardware to perform.
Variance between subsequent frames isn't bad, but we simply cannot get around the fact that the experience in this title suffers from frame rates that are simply low.
- Richland APUs Make Their Way To The Desktop
- AMD Dual Graphics: Not Ready For Benchmark Results
- Test Setup And Benchmarks
- Results: Synthetic Benchmarks
- Results: F1 2012 And The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim
- Results: Tomb Raider And Metro: Last Light
- Results: Media Encoding
- Results: Adobe CS6
- Results: Productivity
- Results: Compression
- Results: Power Consumption
- As Expected, Richland Is A Little Better; Not Massively So
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!
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.
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.
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...
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)
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.
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.
@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.
Is this necessary? The gaming benchmarks already show the 6800K paired with 2133 ram to perform equal to the i3-3220 + HD 6670.
Richland officially only supports 2133 but 2400 seems to be compatible.