AMD's low budget APUs beat Intel's i5s

>AMD's low budget APUs beat Intel's i5s

Why do so many people still fall for the Intel meme?

Other urls found in this thread:

amd.com/en-us/solutions/pro/performance
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TOP500#/media/File:Supercomputers-history.svg
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

>3dMark
OP, you could at least try

A12s are their top end apus.

>believing AMD branded benchmarks

You also don't understand what APU means

AMD's APU's have always bean better GPU wise.

all new apus are low budget for am4 platform

>A12s are their top end apus.
>top end apus.
>APU

This new APU's look quite nice, the top end 9800E has a 35W TDP with 4 modules and 3.1 Ghz base clock, my 7650K has a 3.3 Ghz base clock with 65W at the lowest cTDP, both do the same boost 3.8 Ghz
Unfortunately I can't see anyone but OEM's interested in them, Zen APU's are around a year from now, and Zen is around 6 months from now
Maybe they would be nice as a placeholder for an AM4 mobo if you're desperate to get something new and still want to wait for Zen

I hope this is true

AM4 not FM2 on AM4 we will get ZEN APU

7th gen amd beating 6th gen intel core, really make u think, got a new 7 gen intel core benchmark?

AMD BTFO!!!

> The AMD PRO A-Series APU combines advanced technologies on a single chip for a revolutionary computing experience: exceptional graphics, up to 12 compute cores (4 CPU + 8 GPU)2, and a highly responsive system. Our latest APUs deliver over 950 gigaflops of compute power. That’s serious PRO-level processing for seamless performance, online collaboration, and productivity.

- amd.com/en-us/solutions/pro/performance

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TOP500#/media/File:Supercomputers-history.svg

xD

Because most aren't poor and can afford a dGPU.

You do know that 80% of computers have I GPUs right

It's mostly graphic workloads but thank fuck the graphs go from 0% like a normal graph should.

AMD CPUs work well for synthetic because of the way bulldozer-like architectures are structured

>Unfortunately I can't see anyone but OEM's interested in them
Starting prices for Zen will be between $300-600, so I can totally see who who be interested in them: poorfags

>Performance
>RX 480 1
>GTX 1060 1.2

user, seriously?

Considering 80% of Intel's range also falls in that $300-$600 price range, by your own 'logic' that means people who buy Intel are also poor.

>that means people who buy Intel are also poor.
If they buy i3s and lower, then yes.

>A12-9500 3.8/4.2 GHz
>i5-6500 3.2/3.6 GHz
>same number of cores, but needs to be clocked higher to match the i5's multithreaded performance
It's still shit. Call me when they can beat an i5-6600K at 4.2GHz

you said $300-$600 range
i5 6600K is $234 on jewmazon, so it's not the cheapest one that can be found

how is that price range for poorfags

Zen will start at $300-600. I don't care about the i5-6600k because that's the CPU poorfags buy when they want to live on ramen noodles for a month to afford it.

Their APUs still only have 8 CUs, which means they are still shit, who cares.

>3dmark
An APU has better graphics performance than a CPU with integrated video

In what world is this supposed to be impressive?

>graph goes from .8 to 1.5
It's pretty fucking retarded and skews the graphs to look like Nvidia's 2-3x faster when they're barely 15%.

It's really just impressive that they've taken Bulldozer and reworked it into this.

Bulldozer would've needed twice as high of clocks as that 6500 to reach the same performance and at 3x the power draw.

This still needs higher clocks, but manages to do it at nearly the same power draw.

i3 and i5 considered "performance", any year after 2012 is the real meme

That would make graph less readable.

>An APU has better graphics performance than another APU

>only has 8 PCIe lanes from the APU
>only has 6 PCIe lanes (and not even Gen 3 like Lynx Pont) from the highest end chipset AT BEST
AhahahaAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

^this

My i5 6600 is very aggressive in power savings.

What's the point of having more PCIe lanes?

Except Intel's CPUs aren't being sold as APUs. The integrated video is a bonus.

For example, I just bought an Intel i5-6600k with a dedicated graphics card. Am I ever going to use the integrated graphics? No. Did I spend a little extra money for a graphics chip I'm not going to use? Of course, I got jewed. Intel is a corporation after all.

However, I would NEVER spend a premium on an AMD APU if I was planning on using a dedicated graphics card. So they are not comparable at all.

Can't use an M.2 drive at its fullest speed, can't use 10GbE NICs to its max bandwidth, can't use two graphics cards, etc.
Besides, this REALLY doesn't look good for Zen's competitiveness in the HEDT market.

M.2, multiple gpu's, expansion cards, usb.

>sold as
"marketed as" is more appropriate

Would you use an Athlon X4 950 knowing that it only has half the available bandwidth for any graphics card?

You could just buy the Athlon X4 950 if you don't need an iGPU.

So what's the difference between the Athlon X4 845 and the X4 950? Other than the DIMM standard and the socket type?

how does it make is less readable than literally skewing information?

What's impressive it's that it matches the 6500 at almost the same power usage, with a 28nm node despite having somewhat highish clocks
They really polished the turd that was the shit 28nm GloFo process they're using, and the turd that was bulldozer, it even feels like Bulldozer finally became what it was supposed to be
>Except Intel's CPUs aren't being sold as APUs. The integrated video is a bonus.
It's not, there's i7's and Xeon's that lack a iGPU for people that don't need a iGPU
First gen Zen isn't going head to head against Intel's HEDT, at best it will be competitive with most i7's, FPU wise Intel will still keep absolute dominance
They're heavily targeting the server market with Zen, Zen+ might compete head to head with Intel's HEDT though, a lot of stuff didn't make it to Zen due to area and energy constraints
All the chipsets launched today are for the mainstream market, there's a enthusiast chipset TBA that will be beefier
The X4 850 is Steamroller, the X4 950 is Excavator , in theory Excavator should have higher IPC and energy efficiency, but we won't really now until we get benchmarks
Also, some chipset improvements like USB 3.1 and NVMe

>All the chipsets launched today are for the mainstream market, there's a enthusiast chipset TBA that will be beefier

>It's not, there's i7's and Xeon's that lack a iGPU for people that don't need a iGPU
But these are generally more expensive. If you're in that price range, yeah, they're more cost-effective since you're getting a super powerful CPU and not wasting money on an iGPU you won't use.

In the lower price ranges however, where you typically get more bang for your buck, you're basically forced to waste money on an iGPU you're not going to use.

I said X4 845, which IS Excavator for the FM2+ socket

80% of computers are also in schools, offices, and other lines of work where dgpus just take more power and arent necessary.

>Can't use an M.2 drive at its fullest speed
Arguable, I can't find any sources on what version of PCIe would be best, but from what I see on various M.2 drive specs, one 3.0 lane would be enough to let it saturate.

>can't use 10GbE NICs to its max bandwidth
So where are you getting your 1.25GB/s internet from?

>can't use two graphics cards
Blatantly false, there's no difference between 4x3.0 lanes and 8x 3.0 lanes.
Chipset+SoC combined gives 8x3.0 lanes and 6x2.0 lanes.

4x2.0 go to the M.2 (could also just go with 2x2.0)
2x2.0 go to another PCI slot
4x3.0 go to 2 other PCI slots, or if one is unoccupied, run one at x8.

There you have full speed M.2, two full speed GPUs, and if manufacturers would put in an x4 slot instead of M.2 x4 you could run your 10GbE NIC at full speed instead of the 1GB/s of 2x2.0.

We don't know whether the 950 will have L3 cache but if it does, it'll mop the floor with the 845.

>Arguable, I can't find any sources on what version of PCIe would be best
I've tested by SM951 on an adapter card using lanes from the southbridge on both the Z97 and Z170. The Z97 is undoubtedly slower by at least 80% with increasingly smaller packet sized. Even though it doesn't seem to use all four lanes of PCIe 3.0, that's largely down to the controller on the drive and not the bandwidth made available to it. It will use as much of the bandwidth as possible.
>1.25GB/s internet
LAN connection. I have a NAS box that's 10GbE capable and a costly switch with two SFP connectors.
>Blatantly false
Disabled on the released chipsets, as stated by AMD. Even though I know AMD will allow Crossfire on their boards at some point, Nvidia cards won't work in SLI, and SLI is far more important to the current multi-GPU market due to Nvidia's market dominance.

Also, putting a M.2/PCIe SSD on the PCIe lanes directly from the CPU makes it go a smidge faster in almost every metric, especially with the Z97 boards. I'm guessing that might have to do with latencies from going to the southbridge through the DMI to the CPU rather than going to the CPU directly.

>low budget APU

Kaby Lake is just Skylake with higher clocks.

>Kaby Lake is just Skylake with higher clock
Oh, okay then. It's not like higher clocks are going to have any impact on a benchmark test, right?

that's for integrated graphics performance, holy shit

Nobody claimed otherwise :^)

PCMark has CPU-bound benchmarks, though it seems biased towards GPU's nowadays

I can't wait for Zen to come out.
I will order the highest end AMD Zen on day 0.

Go back to Mecca, OP.

What I really hope for (though I doubt it will happen) is Zen - or at least the high performance versions - to be soldered. Plus i'd like AM3+ mounting to fit AM4. Plus i'd like a unicorn.

>1060
>faster
good joke

>Starting prices for Zen will be between $300-600
source?

What was your first AMD CPU, Sup Forums?

Looks like I'll be getting an A12-9800 for a quiet workstation build

I never made an AMD build for myself. But my brother had a low budget and I built him a pretty decent gaming rig with an AMD Phenom II X4 955 black edition. It got the job done.

A first gen Athlon that ran at 600 Mhz paired with a Trident GPU

I also have an sm951 nvme drive and I think it throttles more than saturates. That said new drives and interfaces are coming out quick pci-e x8 I believe it is.

AMD 386 @ 40 MHz

No, it's definitely the controller on the SSD. There is no way that the SM951 is pushing the current M.2 standard with its current simultaneous read/write speeds. It should be way faster than that. Either the controller still can't push past PCIe 2.0 (not 3.0) 4x speeds, or the accessing the NANDs are causing the hold-back.

No new APUs with k, all of them has locked multipliers, what a bummer. Max base of 3.8 and max boost of 4.2 for 2 Excavator modules. Carrizo & BR confirmed to be non-overclockers for shit at that 28nm process node.

14nm LPP will hit 4GHz for 8 core zen on OC maybe? I'm not hopeful. 2.8-3.8 range looks more realistic for base-boost

>14nm LPP will hit 4GHz for 8 core zen on OC maybe
Nope. It looks like it will struggle to break 3.3GHz, if the sample chips are anything to go by.
RIP Zen

The real question is how will a A12-9800 compare to a Pentium G4400 + Nvidia 730GT build in proprietary video games?

>A12-9800 compare to a Pentium G4400
Not well, since single-threaded games still abound and Excavator is still at least 20% behind Skylake in that instance.

>APU my son poo in loo or poo in street?

>Nvidia 730GT
why

The GPU in an A12-9800 would shit all over a crappy GT 730.

>The GPU in an A12-9800 would shit all over a crappy GT 730
No it won't. The GPU in the A12 struggles to match the APU in the Xbone. A GT 730 can at least match the XBone's performance.

>6600k is on par with an I7
>bad cpu
even the 6500 is as good as an i7 for gaming if gta v is anything to go by since it relies alot on the cpu

>A GT 730 can at least match the XBone's performance.

It really doesn't.

It does if you lower the settings down to the XBone's level. Nvidia just works better on PCs.

I don't think you understand the level of potato the 730 is. The closest desktop equivalent to the chip found in the xbone is the same chip in the 370 and the 370 fights a 760 - a far cry from the potato of the GT 730 (it doesn't even have GTX branding).

>370 fights a 760
Don't make me laugh. A GT 740 can beat the R7 370. The Xbone is weaker than the 370 anyway.

I guess Nvidiocy really is a condition on Sup Forums. Notice the 7850 (aka 370 give or take) miles ahead of chips that are faster than the 730. Especially considering the 7850 isn't factory clocked as high as a 370.

>KI
>not AMD-"optimized" garbage

>i-i-i-t doesn't count.

Its not like you could actually provide any evidence showing the 739 faster than a 785/whatever it was rebranded into (and it had a lot).

>GT 740 can beat the R7 370
GT 740 specs:
384 shaders @ 993MHz with DDR3
R7 370 specs:
1024 shaders @ 975 MHZ with GDDR5

Oh man which one better, so hard to guess.

GT 740 of course!

>A GT 740 can beat the R7 370
Are Nvidia fanboys this deluded? That crapfest card is only used by OEM's on shitty poorfag prebuilds for the sole purpose of having the Nvidia branding
I wonder how many Nvidiots are like this
Aren't there GDDR5 models of the GT 740? With Nvidia's fuckyou branding on the low end you never know, but DDR3 would seriously bottleneck most GPU's

>I wonder how many Nvidiots are like this

All of them.

Why is it okay to post benchmarks of AMD hardware by AMD yet if you do the same for nvidia you're a shill and it's totally fake?

>im so edgy right now
>look at how much attention im getting
>all the grils will like me at school now
>reward myself with chicken tendies and anime and also emo musix!

Because one of these two companies has a long-standing record of lying or misrepresenting their products.

HAHAHAAH

AMD has basically trademarked the term "up to" to scam their benchmark results.

So quite literally it's okay when AMD does it.

Nice to know, Pajeet.

No, the point is that AMD claims tend to be significantly more reliable than Nvidia's. Take the 3.5GB fiasco for example. Name one event where AMD did something of this magnitude.

Claiming their dual GPU card had twice as much usable RAM as it acutally does.

But as well all know, it's okay when AMD does it and you will defend this.

Oh, you're clinically retarded.
Wow, this changes everything!

Every Dual GPU ever said that

sucks for the 0 people who run APU setups with m.2 SSDs in them

So you think a 730 matches a 7790?