Slashdot Mirror
AMD Launches New Richland APUs For the Desktop, Speeds Up To 4.4GHz
MojoKid writes "AMD recently unveiled a handful of mobile Elite A-Series APUs, formerly codenamed Richland. Those products built upon the company's existing Trinity-based products but offered additional power and frequency optimizations designed to enhance overall performance and increase battery life. Today AMD is launching a handful of new Richland APUs for desktops and small form factor PCs. The additional power and thermal headroom afforded by desktop form factors has allowed AMD to crank things up a few notches further on both the CPU and GPU sides. The highest-end parts feature quad-CPU cores with 384 Radeon cores and 4MB of total cache. The top end APUs have GPU cores clocked at 844MHz (a 44MHz increase over Trinity) with CPU core boost clocks that top out at lofty 4.4GHz. In addition, AMD's top-end part, the A10-6800K, has been validated for use with DDR3-2133MHz memory. The rest of the APUs max out at with a 1866MHz DDR memory interface."
As with the last few APUs, the conclusion is that the new A10 chips beat Intel's Haswell graphics solidly, but lag a bit in CPU performance and power consumption.
I thought I'm computer literate but this summary is so full of acronyms that I understand nada. Are we talking about discrete graphics cards here or what?
And they're still crippled by the FSB bottleneck.
Is Windows 8 the only (Microsoft) desktop OS that will be able to use PC's built with this?
4.4 GHz? Oddly not mentioned in TFA....
but will it run 4 instances of crysis 3 running at 1080p on a single 4k monitor?
AMD's marketing department wrote that summary!
Richland's GPU is at best about 20% faster than the intentionally-midrange HD-4600 GPU in Haswell. Add in any form of desktop GPU, including midrange models from 2011, and Haswell wins by a landslide.
At CPU, I recall seeing delightfully hilarious graph where a 6800K overclocked to 5GHz had exactly half the score of the (stock clocked) 4770K. Before we get to the usual "But AMD is cheap!" argument, when you take into account the $150 price of the 6800K and the $350 price of the 4770K, AMD only wins on price/performance if you intentionally buy the most expensive Haswell model available and intentionally don't overclock it while also overclocking the crap out of the 6800K.
Kaveri could be a very interesting product. Richland is a placeholder meant to fight Haswell with numeric model number inflation.
AntiFA: An abbreviation for Anti First Amendment.
I applaud the advancement of integrated graphics but I think Intel will beat AMD in this generation.
Intel will soon be launching Haswell parts with significantly improved integrated graphics. GPUs need access to very fast memory, and that's not something that can be provided on memory modules. The signaling tolerances mean the chip and memory have to be soldered on to the motherboard.(Eg - I'm not talking about the socket 1550 parts they launced earlier this week. Those have similar performance to the last gen.)
Intel has coming soldered-on-motherboard desktop parts and laptop parts that have access to high speed GDDR memory, and that alone will make them faster than any current AMD APU. Intel even has a high-end product that will have 128MB of very fast chip-on-package edram.
Funilly enough this is a similar solution to the AMD chip that will be in the xbox one (Chip on package edram).. When will AMD bring that tech to their PC part line?
Bulldozer 8150. It rocks the house. Headroom still for a 8350 without having to change platforms- thanks AMD ! 189 bucks. Can't touch it for the price. Highly recommended.
I'm trying to figure out right now whether office PCs will see the difference between AMD and Intel. It seems like as long as you install plenty of RAM, pretty much anything should handle a moderately multitasking business PC for at least a few years. I keep seeing posts of Intel vs AMD benchmarks, but even with the benchmarks being what they are, how much difference will a nontechnical end user really notice in an office environment? I run an AMD A8 quad core laptop at home, but it runs Linux and does just fine. I don't want to judge Windows performance based on my experience with Linux though.
In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
Within about a month or so I'll be building a PC- initially when I started the process of selecting parts I was happy to go with an i5 from the last series, but now AMD and Intel both release their new guns...
I'm not sure which to go with any more- still leaning towards Intel since I'll be getting a separate graphics card and I like their raw power, but at the same time, it's hard to beat the price on AMD.
Good thing I've still got a month to mull it over.
A10-6800K GPU Cores..384
Xbox One GPU Cores....768
PS4 GPU Cores...........1152
...is how fast each family of integrated graphics is improving. This chip is a nice little linear bump in AMD's APU power. Intel's iGPU power is increasing exponentially, and their lithography advantage is about to widen even more with Broadwell, 16nm seems to have three times the transistors per die area of 28nm, which AMD will be moving to soon. Intel is still figuring out graphics, and scaling them up, but if they throw in three times the transistors, and they could, I think it's fair to say Broadwell's iGPU will outclass this easily, as well as AMD's future offerings. Hell, I think the Intel Iris Pro 5200 will at least match it within a few months.
solder in kills MB choice so you may not be able to get a board with what you need.
Say you need a board with lots of slots but so much in the cpu sorry the broads with lot slots only come with the high end cpus.
Need a lot of cpu power but not all kinds of OC and other stuff found in higher end MB no we don't have the mid range or lower boards with fast cpus.
Intel provides rather extensive technical documentation of all their products. http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/core/CoreTechnicalResources.html is the page with basic datasheets (basic in this case meaning a couple hundred pages, their more detailed ones are a thousand). If you truly are as interested in the technical details as you pretend, then go look them up.
However if you are just throwing out technical shit in an attempt to deflect the argument then knock it off. Particularly since much of what you are asking for are the kind of the things that would be of concern for high end dedicated GPUs for particular applications, not for an integrated controller for general use.
For most people, what matters is how fast it is at running the programs they want to use, like games. All the other stuff is for, as Tam McGleish would say "Specy wanks who get excited about fuckin' GPU clock speeds and hardware tessellation and all that shite folk who are actually interested in playing games dunnie give a stuff about." It's all well and good, and matters for certain markets and applications, but those markets are generally not the ones using an integrated GPU. Most people just care how fast it runs their stuff.
Also, consider things like smaller form factor cases, or even laptops. In many cases where space in a concern, a decent mobile APU is better than a CPU+GPU.
In other situations, well, good enough is good enough. I'm building a small luggable (basically suitcase-PC) for LAN parties, to replace a shuttle which I previously used to drag around.
Some people show up with *huge* Antec cases and dual CPU,capable of playing [latest shooter] resolution at >1080P at superhigh detail, and then we end up playing Starcraft 2, DOTA, and Left 4 Dead 2, possible BF3... which worked just as well on an older dual/quad-core AMD with a cheap GPU.
An upgrade to a APU would be more than enough for most of our needs.
i've heard of a CPU, GPU and FPU, but not an APU. had to search for APU - Accelerated Processing Unit
What Is An APU? [Technology Explained], http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/apu-technology-explained/
wonder what kind of heatsink the 4.4 gigahertz process would need.
I have a 2yr old core i3 laptop that runs office apps just fine. It'll do high def streaming just fine too. "Regular" office stuff just isn't all that strenuous.
There are scenarios where you would see a difference, but they tend to be more technical users...video editing or transcoding, source code compilation, database indexing, numerical simulation, etc.
Here, have some more facts:
Radeon 7870GE GPU Cores: 1280
Radeon 7950 GPU Cores: 1792
Radeon 7970GE GPU Cores: 2048
Radeon 7990 GPU Cores: 4096
Oh, and don't forget the clock speeds. The A10 and PS4 (and probably the Xb1) run at 800MHz, while many of the discrete cards run at 1GHz (only the 7950 runs at less, at 850MHz).
According to pretty much every benchmarks available, it's still barely an upgrade over the previous gen from AMD and still barely arrives to the knees of Intel.
Only good thing about it is the integrated GPU.
But whatever.
"The Adobe Updater must update itself before it can check for updates. Would you like to update the Adobe Updater now?"
Why don't you try and see things objectively instead of being brobro dickriders for either company. Competition is good, but trying to say that your apple is better than my orange is totally fucking asinine.
This is what pisses me off: Video card designers release a dual gpu videocard that over saturates the pci 3.0 bus, charges 1000 bucks for it, even though they know that you can't use all of it. So now the CPU guys are doing this too? Maybe we should try and come up another architecture for sending these massive chunks of information instead of sending small pieces of it down a small tube really really quickly, why not build a wider lane.......
having a beowulf cluster of these suckers!
I got an overclocked A10 Trinity original to 4.3GHz stable at a mere 127 Fahrenheit after 1 hour of 100% usage using an aftermarket $20 cooler. The GPU registered a 6.4 graphics rating with 1600 MHz memory and 6.9 with 1866MHz memory. So the more you make it look like a graphics card with GDDR5, the more performance you got out of the graphics. So cue the angry rantings over bad graphics performance from the Kingston value line 1333 CL10 RAM users on forums.
Anyway, that gaming grade computer was $575 retail at my shop and ran most modern games at medium to high settings. It blows away a GT430 and most GT440's so that's nice. Now if someone wants a doable graphics card with good video encoding speed to boot, boom, APU. These are amazing for that! Usually you're talking about a $500 computer going to $650 minimum to bump up the power supply to support a GTX640 or 650 minimum to even call it a gaming computer. Now you just swap an i3 out for a 4-core APU and tada, basic gaming computer.