AMD Kaveri Review: A8-7600 and A10-7850K Tested
by Ian Cutress & Rahul Garg on January 14, 2014 8:00 AM ESTCPU Performance
I often make a big song and dance about real world benchmarks being the main focus of a reviewer. Synthetics often stress parts of the CPU and distort advantages that a CPU might have and thus not affect you or me in the same manner when using the machine normally. For 2014 I have updated my usual benchmarking set, to include more video encoding and an image converter that takes 2D images and performs algorithms to convert the data into a 3D model. Some 2013 benchmarks are still here, showing what can be done, and to bring parity to previous CPU reviews, some synthetics are also included.
Agisoft Photoscan v1.0 - link
Our new main benchmark to AnandTech is provided by Agisoft. Their Photoscan software creates 3D models from 2D images, a process which is very computationally expensive. The algorithm is split into four distinct phases, and different phases of the model reconstruction require either fast memory, fast IPC, more cores, or even OpenCL compute devices to hand. Agisoft supplied us with a special version of the software to script the process, where we take 50 images of a stately home and convert it into a medium quality model. This benchmark typically takes around 15-20 minutes on a high end PC on the CPU alone, with GPUs reducing the time.
AMD suffers in overall time due to the lack of full-blooded cores and the reliance on single threaded performance in certain parts of the algorithm.
The second stage of the benchmark can be accelerated by the IGP of an APU, and as a result we can see the power of the high end APUs for this work can outshine any CPU we tested today. This is really the promise of HSA, it's just going to take a while to get there for most apps.
3D Particle Movement - link
3DPM is a self-penned benchmark, taking basic 3D movement algorithms used in Brownian Motion simulations and testing them for speed. High floating point performance, MHz and IPC wins in the single thread version, whereas the multithread version has to handle the threads and loves more cores.
AMD is still suffering a lack of FP performance in our 3DPM benchmark.
WinRAR 5.01 - link
Our WinRAR test from 2013 is updated to the latest version of WinRAR at the start of 2014. We compress a set of 2867 files across 320 folders totaling 1.52 GB in size – 95% of these files are small typical website files, and the rest (90% of the size) are small 30 second 720p videos.
WinRAR loves IPC from the high end Intel chips, but even against the older i5-2500K there is still a deficit. The 45W Kaveri APU however is within fighting distance of its main rival.
FastStone Image Viewer 4.9 - link
Similarly to WinRAR, the FastStone test us updated for 2014 to the latest version. FastStone is the program I use to perform quick or bulk actions on images, such as resizing, adjusting for color and cropping. In our test we take a series of 170 images in various sizes and formats and convert them all into 640x480 .gif files, maintaining the aspect ratio. FastStone does not use multithreading for this test, and thus single threaded performance is often the winner.
FastStone wants single threaded performance, so Intel wins here again.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
380 Comments
View All Comments
jaydee - Tuesday, January 14, 2014 - link
I just don't "get" adding three $300 Intel CPU's to a review of 3 sub $200 AMD CPU's. We all know, or can find out how i7 SB, IB, Haswell compare to each other. I can see adding one of these CPUs to show a baseline of how AMDs top-of-the-line compares against Intels (albiet at very different price points), but having all three of them gives the impression that you want to make sure everyone knows who's boss...Is there going to be an update on power draw? I'm really curious to see what the 45W Kaveri draws (idle and full power) considering it is so competitive with the 95W Kaveri.
jaydee - Tuesday, January 14, 2014 - link
I stand corrected, four $300+ Intel i7 CPUs in this comparison, not three. And two Intel CPU's that are actually in the price range of the AMDs. It feels as if to do this review, AT just cobbled together whatever was laying around instead of being intentional about putting together the best test bench possible to compare the review product against its real competitors.It's really a shame, because the commentary, the in-depth look at the architecture and the conclusions are outstanding; no website out there has tech writers as good and do as thorough of a job as Anandtech. The fact that the test benches are just after-thoughts in some of these reviews are really disappointing.
UtilityMax - Tuesday, January 14, 2014 - link
I think this was mentioned somewhere in the beginning of the review. Intel likes to have the i7 reviewed instead of other parts, so the send the i7 CPUs to everyone. This is kind of like what the car makers do. Most people just buy a reasonably priced, mid-spec car model. However, the journos always get to review these ridiculously over-optioned cars, that hardly sell, like the $35 Ford Fusions, even though the base car sells for 10 grand less.jaydee - Tuesday, January 14, 2014 - link
I am well aware that when having the choice, Intel would rather you review a $340 Intel CPU against a $179 AMD CPU. But is there not any way, given the ad revenue of Anandtech, to obtain a $190-200 mid-range Intel i5 CPU (such as the i5-4440) in order to have a relevant test bench for an eagerly anticipated AMD mid-range CPU launch?srkelley - Tuesday, January 14, 2014 - link
"...do any AnandTech readers have an interest in an even higher end APU with substantially more graphics horsepower?"Yes, oh yes! I'm letting the APU be the core of my system build in a few months and plan to upgrade as needed. I'd like a simple solution like an APU instead of having to go with a discrete card right away. If it lets me spend more on ram and other things, keep the psu and power draw low I'm happy. The most demanding game that I play right now is the Witcher 2. Eventually I will have to go discrete for Star Citizen and the Witcher 3 but if I can get solid enough results with a high powered apu then I'll simply jump to that instead.
Conduit - Tuesday, January 14, 2014 - link
This has been a long time coming thanks to Always Major Delays (AMD). Even know they can't get their sh!t together.nissangtr786 - Tuesday, January 14, 2014 - link
http://techreport.com/review/25908/amd-a8-7600-kav...The fpu still not improved miles still behind intel.
http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench3/326781
http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench3/321256
A5 - Tuesday, January 14, 2014 - link
"do any AnandTech readers have an interest in an even higher end APU with substantially more graphics horsepower? "Maybe in the context of a Steam Machine? But for my main gaming PC, no way. Maybe something they can try out after the next die shrink if SteamOS really takes off.
Xajel - Tuesday, January 14, 2014 - link
I believe the main reason for AMD to not have a new FX is SOI process.. it was okay in it's glory days, but it can't keep it up with bulk silicon...They want to increase the clock at least but they're trapped with 32nm SOI, and why not moving toward 28nm or lower SOI because I think that AMD is already working to convert it's entire CPU's to Bulk Silicon, so it's not logical to make a new design for still not ready yet 28nm or lower SOI while they are already designing the new core for bulk silicon.. knowing that both SOI and bulk require a complete redesign of the silicon just to convert from one to another... so it's not even logical to convert Pilediver or maybe even Steamroller to bulk silicon for only one year while they're working on the next architecture which will be Bulk Silicon...
jimjamjamie - Thursday, January 16, 2014 - link
That makes sense, I was very confused as to why AMD were not going to refresh the FX line - even if HSA is the future for AMD, I presumed new FX sales throughout this year would have helped things along.Perhaps it wasn't worth the cost, but at the same time AMD could really do with keeping the fanboys on side.