Slashdot Mirror
AMD Trinity APUs Stack Up Well To Intel's Core 3
Barence writes "AMD's APUs combine processor and graphics core in the same chip. Its latest Trinity chips are more powerful than ever, thanks to current-generation Radeon graphics and the same processing cores as AMD's full-fat FX processors. They're designed to take down Intel's Core i3 chips, and the first application and gaming benchmarks are out. With a slight improvement in applications and much more so in games, they're a genuine alternative to the Core i3."
MojoKid writes with Hot Hardware's review, which also says the new AMD systems "[look] solid in gaming and multimedia benchmarks, writing "the CPU cores clock in at 3.8GHz / 4.2GHz for the A10-5800K and 3.6GHz / 3.9GHz for A8-5600K, taking into account base and maximum turbo speeds, while the graphics cores scale up to 800MHz for the top A10 chip."
AMD has apparently forbidden testers to write about cpuperformance.
In their NDA-contract it's specified
"In previewing x86 applications, without providing hard numbers until October [something], we are hoping that you will be able to convey what is most important to the end-user which is what the experience of using the system is like. As one of the foremost evaluators of technology, you are in a unique position to draw educated comparisons and conclusions based on real-world experience with the platform,"
and
"The topics which you must be held for the October [sometime], 2012 embargo lift are
- Overclocking
- Pricing
- Non game benchmarks"
So the reviews coming out are only from sources that has decided to go along with those "guidelines". In other words, not complete, I would say extremly biased.
AMD allowed websites to publish a preview of the benchmarks before the estimated date if they only focused on graphics performance. This is an unfair move by AMD.
Read http://techreport.com/blog/23638/amd-attempts-to-shape-review-content-with-staged-release-of-info for more details
(maybe in a couple of weeks you will find that AMD Trinity APUs have abysmal x86 performance compared to Intel CPUs)
Disclaimer: I own a laptop with an AMD cpu inside
Ironic statement, since the main selling point of the chip being reviewed here is its integrated graphics.
Which I find just silly really. These are fine chips to build a PC for your little cousin who surfs the web and maybe plays world of warcraft. for any real build, integrated graphics, for all their advancements, still read like:
Intel: "Our new HD4000 graphics are nearly as fast as a mainstream card from 8 years ago!"
AMD: "HAH, our new chip's graphics cores are as fast as a mainstream card from 6 years ago! we're two years of obsolecense better!"
even a $100 modern dedicated card will whallop either of these chips solutions.
I gave up on ATI's drivers too and bought a new laptop with an nVidia card. The state of the drivers is so pathetic that the laptop will not even boot nine times out of ten unless I disable the discrete card and use the integrated Intel GPU because otherwise the Optimus screws everything up. I will take occasionally buggy ATI over completely non-functional nVidia next time.
Go green: turn off your refrigerator.