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.
but will it run 4 instances of crysis 3 running at 1080p on a single 4k monitor?
4.4 GHz? Oddly not mentioned in TFA....
See page 2
Accelerated processing unit. Basically a CPU with integrated graphics. Both AMD and Intel's recent CPUs have been APUs.
P.S. --> the score in question from my previous post was for Cinebench 11.5, but there are many many others like it. And don't think that OpenCL holds any miracles for Trinity either, the 4600 is actually a better OpenCL part than it is a GPU.
AntiFA: An abbreviation for Anti First Amendment.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD_Accelerated_Processing_Unit
APU is the only unusual acronym in the summary. It refers to a chip with both the CPU and graphics processor on the same die. It was previously called Fusion, but trademarks got in the way.
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.
Intel can get away with solder in components because they change the socket type so often that people are unlikely to be able to upgrade the processor anyways. AMD OTOH, has a tradition of not forcing you to do that every single time you upgrade.
Personally, I refuse to buy Intel parts, and quite frankly, the way I use my computer, I don't need the overpriced solutions that Intel is pushing.
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.
Yeah you're right. Fuck AMD. Let's support Intel, the anti-competitive market-abusing cocksuckers who had to secretly pay off Michael Dell to use their chips. That's a company I want to support with my money.
If I buy $350 cpu and a discrete GPU it will beat the hell out of 150 cpu, did I get your logic right?
Haswell has launched. They could have made a socket for the R-series, but it couldn't have been the same socket as the other processors. The socket is LGA1150, not 1550. No Intel part uses GDDR, it's all eDRAM + system memory (DDR3). I guess we'll see when Intel releases their sub-$300 line, so far it's only been the top models on display. Personally I ordered an i7-4665T for a fanless build, looks to pack an awful lot of power in a 35W TDP.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
A10-6800K GPU Cores..384
Xbox One GPU Cores....768
PS4 GPU Cores...........1152
Huh? The front-side bus hasn't existed in years. AMD abolished it way back in 2003 when they moved the Athlon 64's memory controller on-die. Intel did the same thing with Nehalem in 2008.
Perhaps you just meant that there isn't enough memory bandwidth to use the GPU to its full potential with games? The good news is that AMD's upcoming Kaveri will have GDDR5 support, with a homogenous memory architecture similar to the new consoles.
P.S. --> the score in question from my previous post was for Cinebench 11.5, but there are many many others like it. And don't think that OpenCL holds any miracles for Trinity either, the 4600 is actually a better OpenCL part than it is a GPU.
Really? Because the one OpenCL benchmark I can find in TFA pegs the new chips at 2.5 times faster than the 4600 that comes with the i5-4670k. I wouldn't consider a part that is less than half as fast to be "better." Maybe that's just me? Could be. Also, I wouldn't say "at best" 20% faster when several benchmarks peg it at 30% or more. The Enemy Territory: Quake Wars high-res benchmark, in particular, is... hilariously one sided (and since most people are going to be playing at high-res settings, it's a benchmark that actually matters). Actually, all the high-res gaming tests are, with the new chips often coming in close to twice the Haswell chips. In fact, the Cinebench 11.5 tests peg the Richland at 60% faster than the i5-4670k, so I'm not sure where the hell you got any of your numbers from.
"None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
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?
In the second half of 2013.
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.
Yes, if you buy a $250-$350 CPU and then add a $100 video card, it will outperform a $150 all-in-one unit. No shit.
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 $350 price of the 4770K, AMD only wins on price/performance if you intentionally buy the most expensive Haswell model available and intentionally don't overclock it while also overclocking the crap out of the 6800K.
You're looking at this from an enthusiast perspective. But if I'm building a system for someone who mostly does web surfing, Office, and occasionally some light gaming like WoW and The Sims, then an AMD APU starts to look a lot better from a price/performance perspective. You assume that as long as the performance per dollar stays high, the buyer is willing to spend as much as necessary, but that's simply not true for most users. Probably 90% of users will never even hit the maximum limit of an A10-6800K, so for these people, Haswell is overkill.
In practice, how often do people upgrade a CPU in the same mobo these days anyway? Even in server settings it's not that common; it's more common to buy a CPU/mobo package, and keep it until it's time to replace both.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
Richland's GPU is at best about 20% faster than the intentionally-midrange HD-4600 GPU in Haswell.
Yes, but what OpenGL features does the Haswell APU have compared to the full GL 4.3 found in the AMD version? How good are the Intel drivers? How many textures can I bind at once? What anti-aliasing modes does it support? What are the max number of shader varying/uniform attribs? How many shader instructions can I fit within my shaders? Back in 1999, comparing raw polygon speed may have meant something, but these days it's not really as interesting as the rest of the details....
If I buy $350 cpu and a discrete GPU it will beat the hell out of 150 cpu, did I get your logic right?
I think the point is that regardless of whether you buy Intel or AMD, you'll still probably be playing new games on the lowest graphics settings available. If you actually bought a PC to play games, you'll be buying a discrete graphics card, so the on-chip GPU is just a waste of space unless the OS is able to switch back to it for the desktop to save power when you're not running games.
Who in their right mind would intentionally buy a cpu that uses thermal paste under the heatspreader?
The 99.9% of PC users who don't overclock them?
Can't speak to everyone else, but I "upgraded" the APU in my HP laptop to an A8 from an A4 last year, and if the new FS sockets were still backwards compatible, I'd have upgraded again (and that still irritates me that it's not). The computer is fine.. keyboard, lcd, drive, etc.
If you were me, you'd be good lookin'. - six string samurai
In a world were heat and power are becoming REALLY important, AMD is lagging behind.
Good-bye
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.
Where can you order Tray (T) processors?
Good-bye
Yeah but it's only 128bit and it's mutually exclusive with DDR3 so you cap out at 4GB with yet-unreleased high density GDDR chips, not exactly useful for a general purpose computer.
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
In practice, how often do people upgrade a CPU in the same mobo these days anyway?
Which people? I upgraded my X3 720 to an X6 1045T. Almost the same base clock, it overclocks itself to the same speed I was able to get out of my 720 when I am running few threads so I don't even lose single-thread performance, cost me $120 shipped and taxed... used. And my 720 cost me only $110 shipped and taxed, new. I did this because I could. And I went AM3 in the first place with the expectation that I'd be able to do this.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
The market for both series of products, is that you don't add anything. Use the on-CPU graphics. If you are using a graphics card instead of the integrated graphics, then neither Haswell or Richland is of interest to you. You have a Sandy Bridge-E or a non-APU AMD equivalent, which you're using along with the graphics card.
"Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
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.
They provide GL 4.3 support in the APU driver? Nice, I might buy one now.
So if I buy this I won't need my Radeon 7850 video card anymore? Should I sell it on ebay now before resale value plummets?
Or is this APU just a slightly better version of motherboard integrated graphics that's been around for decades? Not fit to play 3-D games?
Piledriver is not the only CPU core they have. The Jaguar core (to be used in the PS4 and XBox One) is low power and has better performance than the Intel Atom cores.
It's the same story every generation.
CPUs: AMD wins in the $/performance category but loses in terms of pure performance. For 2 generations AMD won the pure performance crown as well.
Onboard (or on-die) GPUs: Intel's implementation will get you moderate FPS on games released in [PurchaseYear - 1] at a sub-native resolution. AMD's implementation will at least run medium settings around 30 fps at native resolution. AMD wins in the $/performance category AND the pure performance category.
Discrete GPUs: AMD wins in the $/performance category but loses in terms of pure performance. If you want the top of the line, you spend big money on two of Nvidia's top-end cards every year.
CPU performance has been good enough for the vast majority of tasks that it's taking a back seat for me. I still need it for video encoding since the x264 kids don't want to do an OpenCL version.
If the DivX can get their HEVC encoder running on OpenCL (or if the x264 team does the same), then I'll see no reason to go with Intel in the near future. I'd rather spend the $ difference on more SSDs.
I'm not sure where the hell you got any of your numbers from.
It's CajunArson, he's a known fanboi/troll, and he loves to reply to himself with additional info to whore +1 Informative mods.
128bit GDDR5 is still twice the bandwidth of 128bit DDR3 (quad-pumped, not double-pumped). And won't they have banked memory, so you can have more DIMMs than channels (just like you can have four DIMMs in a dual-channel DDR3 system)?
Well there's three things:
1) Ability to upgrade
2) Ability to mix/match motherboard/CPU
3) Replacement cost if it fails out of warranty
On the other hand, if you buy a new motherboard/CPU combo you have a working old machine to sell or re-purpose, if you upgrade just the CPU is a low end CPU with no motherboard will usually be a complete write-off. The BGA package is cheaper, which might offset the lack of choice and most the functionality is now on the processor or chipset anyway. The repair cost is pretty real, but if you found a cheap motherboard or CPU to repair with in the past now you'll be looking for a cheap combo instead.
Remember that PCs overall are seeing a slump, desktops have long been in decline, non-OEM desktops are a small part of the desktop market and people are not whining about this on laptops which by far outships desktops, nor or smartphones or tablets so most of the market is already used to this being one piece of hardware. If anything maybe you'll see a small revival of the expansion card market where you get "just" the standard CPU/chipset features on the motherboard and the rest as extras on daughterboards. Overall a lot of drama and not that much reality...
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Even if you're not overclocking, you can expect a shorter service from the parts.
Funny thing about the overclockers - they're good at showing up design flaws that can affect the rest of us. The on-the-fly overclocking most modern CPUs do on thier own now (intel 'turbo speed' is just a situationally triggered overclock) just makes it more relevant.
With Intel it is less likely to be a possibility. I have built low priced machines for family and friends with AM3 twin core CPU's, all of them are upgradable to six core now (and some were already upgraded to four core when those were cheap).
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.
The whole heat spreader design is so stupid. Instead of a thin aluminum (or whatever) cap, why not make it a thick copper block with fins and fan mounting points, and attach that directly to the core right at the factory? You'd get much better results.
Yeah, then you have a larger and less flexible design that OEMs have to deal with. I say fuck em.
I am not sure but it looks like you're confusing what you do for what everybody else does. I really don't know but, well... I upgrade CPUs sometimes. It doesn't help that I have a number of fairly new PCs and am always tweaking and poking. But, yeah, I buy new CPUs, update RAM, upgrade GPUs, etc...
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
You're looking at this from an enthusiast perspective. But if I'm building a system for someone who mostly does web surfing, Office, and occasionally some light gaming like WoW and The Sims, then an AMD APU starts to look a lot better from a price/performance perspective. You assume that as long as the performance per dollar stays high, the buyer is willing to spend as much as necessary, but that's simply not true for most users. Probably 90% of users will never even hit the maximum limit of an A10-6800K, so for these people, Haswell is overkill.
For gaming the graphics part is most important, but otherwise as a general rule light usage is poorly threaded and heavy usage well threaded. Often the "snappiness" of the computer is based on the performance of a single thread. So for the non-gamer I'd go with high single thread performance, for the gamer I'd suggest a discrete card but for the right level of casual gamer I guess an APU is what serves them best.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Thanks. I was wondering myself. For some reason all my brain could come up with was "analog processing unit" but I was pretty sure that wasn't right.
It's the same story every generation.
CPUs:
CPUs: The low price AMD units win the performance/purchase price competition. Low price Intel units win the performance/(purchase + operating costs) competition, at least they do if your computer is on very much and you pay for your own electricity.
Considering the ARM Cortex-A15 has better performance than the Atom, that's not saying much. Intel's been pretty neglectful of the Atom line.
for desktops, that is.
Gee, if only AMD had a line of chips that didn't have the graphics unit in them...
If only AMD had a line of chips which didn't have the graphics unit in them and were actually competitive with anything other than Intel's low-end parts....
Here is your Radeon HD7850: http://www.gpureview.com/Radeon-HD-7850-card-678.html
It has 1024 Shader Processors ("Radeon Cores" in the summary), and (stock) is clocked at 860MHz. The 8670D included in this new APU has 384 Shader Processors, and is clocked at 844MHz. So about 2/5ths of the computing power; presuming all other factors are equal.
So while for high-end gaming, it won't quite cut it (Turning on most of the shiny and enabling it across 3 monitors with Eyefinity would make it beg) - it should be plenty powerful for light/medium gaming on a single monitor, or any light/moderate duties across multiple monitors with Eyefinity.
With the GDDR5 version memory will be soldered onto the mobo, along with the APU. No DIMMs. Though it isn't clear to me if it maxes out at 4GB or 8GB - might well be 4GB which makes it useful for gaming but sucks if you want to do crazy hungry web browsing or something else on the side.
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).
If you feel the 7850 is needed then these will be too slow for you.
The GPU in the A10-5800 (the one currently on the shelves) is fairly accurately labeled a 6550d and requires settings to be turned down to Low@720p/1366x768 to get acceptable performance in a game like Battlefield3. The new APU is only incrementally more powerful and faster.
What these "APU" chips (which in my mind includes Haswell Chips) are obsoleting are the lowend budget cards with 64bitGDDR5 and 128bitDDR3 that get put in a lot of office desktops.
"The Adobe Updater must update itself before it can check for updates. Would you like to update the Adobe Updater now?"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD_Accelerated_Processing_Unit
APU is the only unusual acronym in the summary. It refers to a chip with both the CPU and graphics processor on the same die. It was previously called Fusion, but trademarks got in the way.
Unfortunate, because it already stands for Auxiliary Power Unit in aerospace. But I think we've passed peak TLA.
I was confused what Auxiliary Power Units had to do with this.
I think aviation/spaceflight has dibs on this acronym.
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
My understanding is that while copper has higher contact heat conductance than aluminum, aluminum has higher conductance with air. Hence (in addition to how much lighter aluminum is), the large number of heatsinks that have a copper core and aluminum fins.
(no sig)
Also, P.S.
APU is taken. They need to come up with a different acronym. They can't toss the "well that's not computing!" card either, because it's still taken.
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
I'll support the company that develops the best technology. When AMD build their own fab again and develop 22nm process technology I'll support them.
Might be never because if they did they would probably spin it off again.
http://soylentnews.org/~tibman
If only people would stop measuring their penis sizes and focus on what it's used for. Can the CPU play games? without even breaking a sweat. If you need a CPU that is 75% idle while playing a game then that's your preference though.
http://soylentnews.org/~tibman
LOL, I designed some ECU emulators for training on APU interrogation processes.. ;-) But in this case, my PC geekiness got it.
Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
But whatever.
"The Adobe Updater must update itself before it can check for updates. Would you like to update the Adobe Updater now?"
Well seeing as the only chips in the wild at the moment all have 8 gigs sodered on (ps4 and xbone) I'd have to guess that the limit is at least 8 gigs.
Even if you're not overclocking, you can expect a shorter service from the parts.
It's very unlikely that you would ever experience this in practice.
Funny thing about the overclockers - they're good at showing up design flaws that can affect the rest of us.
Funny thing about the overclockers -- they have a vastly overinflated sense of their expertise and relevance.
The on-the-fly overclocking most modern CPUs do on thier own now (intel 'turbo speed' is just a situationally triggered overclock) just makes it more relevant.
Turbo is not an overclock. Intel closes timing over all turbo boost clock speeds (as well as other parameters like the classic trio of process variation, voltage, and temperature). Overclocking is when you operate a chip at some combination of PVT and frequency where the manufacturer didn't close timing.
Intel's turbo is really about keeping power under control. The chip's internal power control unit (PCU) senses how much power the processor cores (and also the uncore portions of the chip) are using, and adjusts clock speeds and voltage to keep total chip power at or under the thermal design power (TDP) rating. This is done because these days an active core can have quite large swings in power use based on the software it's running. When you're running particularly power-intensive code it may be necessary to clock down to keep actual power use under TDP. Turbo also permits treating the TDP as a total budget -- when some cores are idle, their portion of the TDP budget can be shifted to active cores to permit those cores to run faster than normal.
AMD does really well on multi-threaded performance as well.. I went with the 8-core AMD for my development workstation, as it handles the background services during development (webserver, sql database, no-sql database) etc better... at the same price AMD spanks Intel for my use case, and would have to spend a lot more to get the same level of performance (more expensive MB and CPU).. Of course most people would be happy with any >= $150 CPU combined with enough ram and an SSD these days.
Lately I've suggested people get the cheapest laptop they can find (mostly in the $300-450 range) and max out the RAM and put in an SSD. Generally a better experience than more expensive laptops... unless you need a high end display.
Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
Depends on your workload... for a developer workstation, AMD is much better for the price... I'd have to pay twice as much from Intel to get equivalent performance as AMD for multiple threads (and background services). For gaming, a $200 AMD combined with a $400 GPU does well enough for me... but I don't game much.
Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
Exactly. In reality 99% of people don't actually need raw performance. And 90% of the 1% are idiots.
My current computer is a AMD Phenom II X4 (well actually a X3 but Asus kindly allows me to unlock the extra core for free). Its been serving me nicely for the last 4 years.
I went with it because of the good performance/price point. I still don't actually have any plans to replace it.
The target of the APU is exactly like my computer. Work machines and everything from a casual gamer down.
Thats a pretty massive market and price is a decent concern for that market. Performance is stunning for all those uses as well - probably excessive actually.
Intel's actually gotten comparative in mid-range pricing (just looking at newegg)... I went with the fastest 8-core AMD a few months ago, because getting similar performance for my use case (development workstation) was almost twice as much (CPU + MB)...
Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
AMD does really well on multi-threaded performance as well.. I went with the 8-core AMD for my development workstation, as it handles the background services during development (webserver, sql database, no-sql database) etc better... at the same price AMD spanks Intel for my use case, and would have to spend a lot more to get the same level of performance (more expensive MB and CPU).. Of course most people would be happy with any >= $150 CPU combined with enough ram and an SSD these days.
Lately I've suggested people get the cheapest laptop they can find (mostly in the $300-450 range) and max out the RAM and put in an SSD. Generally a better experience than more expensive laptops... unless you need a high end display.
Oh absolutely. Everyone who considers Bulldozer a failure is obviously not doing any heavily-multi threaded work.
We recently bought a new server (ESXi host) and we went with AMD because of the cost and scalability.
We ended up spending the $3000 difference (had we gone with Intel) on SSDs (vs. 15k SCSI drives).
"But if I'm building a system for someone who mostly does web surfing, Office, and occasionally some light gaming like WoW and The Sims, ..."
Then who cares about the "price/performance perspective" either? When performance doesn't really matter, there's no reason to consider it in the equation at all.
GPUs need access to very fast memory, and that's not something that can be provided on memory modules.
Isn't that all onboard the graphics card now?
In my experience, and in just about all the benchmarks I've looked at ever, memory speed has absolutely 0 effect apart from some very specific situations. In many cases, lower latency, slower RAM will be quicker.
It's all a bit pointless, really, IMO, since RAM is RAM is RAM. I've never seen a system significantly (ie more than 10%) improve by adding different memory. More RAM, that's a different issue.... you can never have too much.
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.
And after the APU is done processing, it says in a catchy Middle Eastern accent, "THANK YOU, COME AGAIN!"
India is not in the middle east.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
Pointing out that India is not in the Middle East is flamebait? For the geographically challenged, India is in Asia (technically most of the Middle East is on the European continent with some ME nations being in Africa and Asia) and the Simpsons character referenced by the OP, Apu is from India.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
How so? If Intel is providing the best product out there, then most people will buy it and ignore their underhanded dealings since its the outcome they're interested in. I'm not screwed in any way because of how Intel has behaved. If AMD dies and Intel raise their prices due to a lack of competition, big deal. AMD would do EXACTLY the same thing if the roles were reversed. No-one is innocent here.
Does this offer any benefit at all when you're using a discreet card? or for those of us who always do is it just a complete waste of silicon integrating it in?
Intel could only afford to do that due to their market dominance, and their market dominance comes from the anti-competitive tricks they pulled (see http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3825865&cid=43916359 ).
AMD would do EXACTLY the same thing if the roles were reversed. No-one is innocent here..
And as soon as AMD started abusing a position of power, I would switch to buying Intel or products from some other competing vendor. Until that time, I'm going to give AMD the benefit of the doubt.
Don't get me started. :) We can't tax the wealthy, that would be unfair. We can't raise minimum wages or strengthen unions, that would hurt the economy. Pay not attention to the GDP and corporate profits, if we dared to share even a tiny percentage of them with the proletariat, the world would end.
You can watch videos with the APU while the separate GPU is busy mining Litecoins.
It depends on the kind of videos whether you like your graphics cards discreet.
Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
That doesn't really make much sense. Your Northwood PC was a Socket 478 machine. Intel came out with this socket when AMD was in the middle of the long-lived Socket A era, and Intel stuck with it while AMD went through Sockets 754 (which was pretty short-lived) and 939. When DDR2 came out both Intel and AMD came out with new sockets. Intel created LGA775, which was another fairly long-lived socket as it spanned the later P4's, the Pentium D, then the Core 2 Duo (including the Conroe) and the Core 2 Quad. Granted AMD came out with AM2 at the same time which maintained some lineage of compatibility through AM2+, AM3, and AM3+. However, I will admit that Intel has been crapping out new sockets at an alarming rate now, but AMD has also gone through a few recently themselves.
I find it hard to understand how “technically” most of the Middle East is in Europe, when none of the countries of the area are in the European continent. Only a small part of contemporary Turkey is to the west of Bosporus.
I speak England very best
Don't forget ECC/REG memory. That only seems to be available if you buy Xeons. And the new i7 4770K doesn't even have VT-x enabled. (GAH!)