Gaming Benchmarks: 3DMark and Rocket League

Due to timing we were only able to run a couple of gaming tests, namely parts of the 3DMark suite and our Rocket League test. A reminder of our systems, including their graphics:

System Overview
  µArch APU + GPU Memory Channel
HP Elitebook 745 G2 Kaveri A10 PRO-7350B (19W)
R6, 384 SPs, 533 MHz
8 GB Dual
HP Elitebook 745 G3 Carrizo PRO A12-8800B (15W)
R7, 512 SPs, 800 MHz
4 GB Single
Toshiba Satellite
E45DW-C4210
Carrizo FX-8800P (15W)
R7, 512 SPs, 800 MHz
8 GB Single
HP Pavilion
17z-g100
Carrizo A10-8700P (15W)
R6, 384 SPs, 800 MHz
8 GB Single
Lenovo Y700 Carrizo FX-8800P (15W)
R7, 512 SPs, 800 MHz
R9 385MX, 512 SPs, 900-100 MHz
16 GB Single

   

One of the biggest issues we’ll see here is the effect of dual channel memory on gaming. The Kaveri system used has a chipset solution that supports dual graphics, but also two memory modules installed. The Carrizo systems either came pre-prepared with one module installed or do not support dual channel memory full stop. This latter point is the main kick in the teeth, especially for a company like AMD that prides itself on gaming – the issue here is down to pin compatibility between Carrizo and Carrizo-L. As the latter only supports single channel, an OEM will design one motherboard to support both platforms (whether they are used for both or not). If a motherboard supports Carrizo-L, then it will not ever support dual channel memory, and any Carrizo APU that is used will be crippled.

Technically the Lenovo Y700 gets around this (hands up if you ever see a Carrizo-L based Y700 please) by equipping the system with a discrete graphics card and disabling Crossfire, so this system will still ultimately win in our tests due to the discrete card. The downside of this augmentation is the higher power draw, which would matter if our Y700 sample had a battery (the retail units come with a 60 Wh battery).

3DMark

3DMark is Futuremark's premium software, developed to tax systems at various different performance levels. The software contains several benchmarks as a result, with some focusing more on smartphone use all the way up to 4K, quad-SLI systems with as many in-game and post processing effects as you can throw at it. The base test, Ice Storm, is actually a good indicator of GPU scaling performance, but we also test Cloud Gate, Sky Diver and Fire Strike to get a measure of all of our systems.

3DMark: Ice Storm Unlimited, CPU

3DMark: Ice Storm Unlimited, Graphics

3DMark: Ice Storm Unlimited, Overall

The easiest test, Ice Storm, shows the performance benefits of the Carrizo APUs in the CPU stage, although the dual channel memory for the Kaveri kicks in and gives it the graphics lead. The overall scores however benefit from that high CPU boost, so Carrizo at 15W on single channel wins this round.

3DMark: Cloud Gate

Moving up in difficulty to Cloud Gate puts dual channel Kaveri in the lead, although the Toshiba is holding on a bit with its higher thermal skin temperature limit.

3DMark: Sky Diver

3DMark: Fire Strike

The last two benchmarks fall square with the dual channel configuration. The GDDR5 of the discrete graphics card in the Y700 wins out on all of them.

Rocket League

Hilariously simple pick-up-and-play games are great fun. I'm a massive fan of the Katamari franchise for that reason — passing start on a controller and rolling around, picking up things to get bigger, is extremely simple. Until we get a PC version of Katamari that I can benchmark, we'll focus on Rocket League. Rocket League combines the elements of pick-up-and-play, allowing users to jump into a game with other people (or bots) to play football with cars with zero rules. The title is built on Unreal Engine 3 and it allows users to run the game on super-low-end systems while still taxing the big ones. Since the release earlier in 2015, it has sold over 5 million copies and seems to be a fixture at LANs and game shows.

With Rocket League, there is no benchmark mode, so we have to perform a series of automated actions. We take the following approach: Using Fraps to record the time taken to show each frame (and the overall frame rates), we use an automation tool to set up a consistent 4v4 bot match on easy, with the system applying a series of inputs throughout the run, such as switching camera angles and driving around. It turns out that this method is nicely indicative of a real bot match, driving up walls, boosting and even putting in the odd assist, save and/or goal, as weird as that sounds for an automated set of commands. To maintain consistency, the commands we apply are not random but time-fixed, and we also keep the map the same (Denham Park) and the car customization constant. We start recording just after a match starts, and record for 4 minutes of game time, with average frame rates, 99th percentile and frame times all provided. For these tests, we used the 1280x720 resolution at high settings. A bigger explanation of testing can be seen in our AMD A8-7670K APU review.

Rocket League, 720p High Average on IGP

Built on UE3 and DX9, the game relies heavily on single threaded performance and at this level of detail, memory bandwidth. The Kaveri takes the crown, showing that at this level adding another stick of memory (and making sure you have the right configuration) is more important than a more advanced (or perhaps expensive) APU.

We’ll go into temperatures on the next page.

Benchmark Results: Professional and OpenCL Comparing AMD Carrizo to Intel Core
Comments Locked

175 Comments

View All Comments

  • jakemonO - Wednesday, February 10, 2016 - link

    no A12 core parts for the test? I can't find the A10 part on the HP websiote, only A8 & A12
  • UtilityMax - Wednesday, February 10, 2016 - link

    After a decade of hype since the ATI acquisition, nothing has changed. AMD has a massive OEM problem. Moreover, laptops have been outselling desktops for like a decade, yet AMD if you look at the history of AMD, it's hard to believe they ever really cared about portables. The Kaveri parts didn't even show up, while the Carrizo notebooks are already botched technology as explained in the article..
  • gserli - Thursday, February 11, 2016 - link

    I have to say that the $400 to $700 notebooks on sale are garbage.
    The IGPs are not strong enough for casual gaming like LOL and CS GO.
    Crappy 5400RPM harddisk will make you want to throw the machine out of the window.
    If you really need that little bit more performance.
    Pay few hundred more. Or you can get a notebook that will hurt your arm if you carry it with one hand.

    AMD needs to be more aggressive. Talk to the OEMs and give them better offer.
    Convince them build a $700 notebook with 13 Inch 1080p IPS touch screen, 256GB SSD, 8GB RAM, A8 or A6 APU and below 1.5KG.
    A lower end $600 one would work with 1366*768 IPS touch screen, 128GB SSD, 4GB RAM and A6 APU, below 1.5KG.

    My $640 Asus TP300L is absolutely bullshit! I thought a mobile i5 would be enough for my daily use since I had a i5 desktop and was really satisfied with it.
    CPU performance is not a issue nowadays. The IGP is slow, but I didn't expect it to be fast(Although the one on desktop is way more powerful).
    The biggest problem is the GOD DAMN 5400RPM HARD DISK.
    Not only did it affect the boot up speed. Every action I performed is awfully slow when there are some OS things running in background.
    Only if I wait for 5 or 10 minutes after boot-up, then I can use it normally.

    Please, kill all the 5400RPM Hard disk. They should not be in 2016.
  • farmergann - Thursday, February 11, 2016 - link

    That's what I find so hilarious about all the Y700 6700hq lovers out there - all the CPU power in the world is relegated to potato status outside of b.s. benchmarks with that 5400rpm HDD. Save money with the FX8800p Y700 and buy an $80 250GB Samsung 850 Evo to slap in it...
  • wow&wow - Thursday, February 11, 2016 - link

    Will it be more appropriate to have "Additional" (Why not Update?) in the beginning, particularly the misleading pre-production stuff? Thanks for the article.
  • farmergann - Thursday, February 11, 2016 - link

    LOL, because the entire point of this article would be nullified. They didn't even bother comparing the FX8800p Y700 with the intels head to head outside of some DX9 garbage. Pitiful anandtech shills are pitiful. How many times did they mention Freesync? Yeah...
  • silverblue - Friday, February 12, 2016 - link

    To be fair, is there a point?
  • xrror - Thursday, February 11, 2016 - link

    "Some companies in the past have dealt with contra-revenue, selling processors at below cost or with deals on multiple parts when purchased together. Very few companies, typically ones with large market shares in other areas, have access to this. Some members of the industry also see it as not fighting fair, compared to actually just pricing the parts lower in the first place."

    I had to laugh so much as this. WHO COULD IT BE? MYSTERY!

    It must be... Cyrix ! no? hrm. I give up. =P
  • dustwalker13 - Saturday, February 13, 2016 - link

    still ... there is just no saving the bulldozer architecture, no matter how much they improve or iterate it.

    bulldozer and amd by proxy for normal users are synonyms for "just not as good as intel" and for a little more experienced users "that processor that cheated with its core count".

    the few people who actually read articles like the one above and compare performance/value represent literally no market share.

    the only way out for amd at this point is to create as much boom around their zen-cores as possible, get them out asap, hitch their little start to new buzzwords like hbm, old buzzwords like rage and hope they can actually deliver the performance figures needed in the first reviews to drive a wave of positive articles through the press. only then will they be able to get back into the market. i wish them the best, a surface 5 (non pro) with a low power zen apu on hbm sounds awsome ... i'd get one of those in a heartbeat.
  • yankeeDDL - Monday, February 15, 2016 - link

    I own a Toshiba P50D-C-104. I read with interest this article and, albeit extremely helpful and rich of information, left some questions open, at least as far a I'm concerned.
    First of all, the P50D-C-104 costs <$600 and has an A10-8700P. I find this price range more relevant for home-users and, in general, for somebody interested in AMD offering.
    1Kusd for a laptop with integrated GPU seems too expensive.
    The P50D-C-104 has 2 DIMM slots; couldn't find for sure whether it is dual channel or not.

    I am curios to know how it performs on some popular games against Intel's offering (at that price level, it would go against core i3, at best). In the page with comparison against Intel's offering there are almost only synthetic benchmarks: it would have been nice to compare on some actual games.

    My point is that in the $1K range, there are many features that could add cost while not necessarily improving performance.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now