Slashdot Mirror


AMD's Kaveri APU Debuts With GCN-based Radeon Graphics

crookedvulture writes "AMD's next-generation Kaveri APU is now available, and the first reviews have hit the web. The chip combines updated Steamroller CPU cores with integrated graphics based on the latest Radeon graphics cards. It's also infused with a dedicated TrueAudio DSP, a faster memory interface, and several features that fall under AMD's Heterogeneous System Architecture for mixed-mode computing. As expected, the APU's graphics performance is excellent; even the entry level, $119 A8-6700 is capable of playing Battlefield 4 at 1080p with medium detail settings. But the powerful GPU doesn't always translate to superior performance in OpenCL-accelerated applications, where comparable Intel chips are very competitive. Intel still has an advantage in power efficiency and raw CPU performance, too. Kaveri's CPU cores are certainly an improvement over the previous generation of Richland chips, but they can't match the per-thread throughput of Intel's rival Haswell CPU. In the end, Kaveri's appeal largely rests on whether the integrated graphics are fast enough for your needs. Serious gamers are better off with discrete GPUs, but more casual players can benefit from the extra Radeon horsepower. Eventually, HSA-enabled applications may benefit, as well."

4 of 123 comments (clear)

  1. Best choice for 4 out of 5 desktop users by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Most of the people who decide they still need a full-sized desktop computer will be completely covered with one of the AMD A-series APUs, at a bargain price. Only the remaining 1 out of 5 users are power-users who need the highest CPU and/or GPU performance, and have to resort to expensive Intel CPUs and discrete graphics boards.

  2. Re:Sadly, a near total disaster for AMD by Bengie · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Ohh yes. Lets solder memory right on, increasing board complexity and gaining almost no advantage. The APU is meant to be a mixture of a "good enough" GPU, and a higher performance compute-unit for low memory problems, which there are a lot of. As for open source, AMD is actively committing work to the Linux kernel in both the mantle framework and better driver support. They are also working with Steam, because the SteamOS is Linux which means AMD needs decent Linux drivers if they plan to be used.

    Yes, it is not a very good GPU when it comes to high end graphics because it has about 1/3rd the flops of a discreet GPU and it is memory bandwidth starved for those work loads, but for non graphics related work loads, it's perfect. It is the first of something new. How many people piss and moaned about FPUs when they came out? "derp, there's no software that uses them, so they must be useless". You need to have the platform before you can have the developers. Once the next gen consoles start taking off, expect games to be nearly directly ported and taking advantage of this new GPU paradigm.

  3. Re:How about competition on price? by s.petry · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The summary also spends a lot of time talking about how great Intel is. It makes sense that prices are not discussed because the submitter appears to be heavily biased, and price always favors AMD.

    --

    -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

  4. Re:How about competition on price? by WuphonsReach · · Score: 3, Insightful

    As a long time AMD fan (if we whitebox build, it's always an AMD chip), I have to say "it depends".

    For a lot of applications, per-core performance is what matters. And for the last few years, Intel beats AMD hands-down on per-core performance. As in 30-50% faster. That i3 for $200 is going to run rings around the AMD for $200. For a lot of single-threaded programs (many games are CPU-bound by a single thread), that 30-50% faster speed matters.

    However, if your application is multi-threaded and the problem you are trying to solve (media transcoding) is easily done in parallel, then the AMD chips are a better fit.

    The "Bulldozer" architecture was a dud. Lots of cores for cheap, but low performance per core under a lot of workloads. The Piledriver architecture is better and AMD is at least somewhat competitive again.

    I'm very curious to see how well the new Steamroller (Kaveri) series chips perform.

    --
    Wolde you bothe eate your cake, and have your cake?