Who Controls the User Experience? AMD’s Carrizo Thoroughly Tested
by Ian Cutress on February 4, 2016 8:00 AM ESTComparing AMD Carrizo to Intel Core
While generational updates are a crucial part of the examination, there has to be comparison with the competition. Intel has an overriding advantage in process node, meaning that performance per watt is difficult to compete against, but also OEMs seem unwilling to use Carrizo in the same device designs as they do with Core either due to partnerships or other issues (e.g. ASUS UX301/UX305 uses 15W Core i5). Nonetheless, Intel’s product line is a sequence of parts that intersect each other, with low end models equipped with dual core Pentiums and Celerons, stretching into some i3 and i5 territory while still south of $1000. In this mix is Core M, Intel’s 4.5W premium dual core parts found in devices north of $600.
| AMD Carrizo vs Intel Core | ||||||||
| SoC | A12-8800B | FX-8800P | i5-5200U | m3-6Y30 | i5-6300U | i7-6600U | ||
| CPU | Carrizo 2M/4T >3.4 GHz |
Carrizo 2M/4T >3.4 GHz |
Broadwell 2C/4T >2.7 GHz |
Skylake 2C/2T >2.2 GHz |
Skylake 2C/4T >3.0 GHz |
Skylake 2C/4T >3.2 GHz |
||
| CPU TDP | 15W | 15W | 15W | 4.5W | 15W | 15W | ||
| GPU | R7 GCN 1.2 512 SPs 800 MHz |
R7 GCN 1.2 512 SPs 800 MHz |
HD 5500 Gen8 24 EUs 900 MHz |
HD 515 Gen9 24 EUs 850 MHz |
HD 520 Gen 9 24 EUs 1 GHz |
HD 520 Gen 9 24 EUs 1.05 GHz |
||
| DRAM | 1x4GB DDR3 1600MHz |
1x8GB DDR3L 1600MHz |
2x8GB DDR3L 1600MHz |
2x4GB DDR3L 1600MHz |
2x4GB DDR3L 1600MHz |
2x8GB LPDDR3 1866MHz |
||
| Storage | 128GB SSD |
750GB HDD |
256GB SSD |
256GB SSD |
256GB SSD |
256GB PCIe |
||
| SoC Price | ~$150 | ~$150 | $281 | $281 | $281 | $393 | ||
As part of this comparison, we took our results from the 15W Carrizo laptops home and put them up against several Intel parts. The main comparison point is the i5-5200U, a 15W Broadwell part from Intel (in this case from the BRIX mini-HTPC I have at home) and the i5-6300U, a 15W Skylake part from the Surface Pro 4. Both Intel parts have a slightly lower frequency than the top-end Carrizo parts, but match Carrizo's 2MB L2 cache while also implementing a 3MB L3 cache, which gives them an advantage in cache-limited scenarios. The Skylake i5, compared to the Broadwell i5, uses a newer architecture and increased frequencies, and both are made on 14nm rather than 28nm, which gives Intel a significant process node (and by extension a perf/watt) advantage.
To add some more interesting points into the mix, we have also pulled in some results from the ASUS UX305, a Skylake-Y based Core M device at 4.5W. Our UX305 uses a lower-end m3-6Y30, but it gives us an idea of how very low power Core fares in comparison to 15W Carrizo. Meanwhile at the opposite end of the spectrum we also have thrown in an i7-6600U system, one of Intel's top 15W SKUs, allowing us to compare the best 15W part from AMD to the best 15W part from Intel. That said, given the current performance realities of the CPU market, it is worth noting here that the these parts are in two different segments to Carrizo based on price/performance and performance/watt ($393 for the i7-6600U alone can be as much as a full Carrizo laptop).
First up, a selection of CPU tests:
Most tests in this case favor the Intel 15W parts, with only POV-Ray being a fully multi-threaded integer workload pushing over the Broadwell i5-5200U. Ultimately this points to where Carrizo lies in performance: somewhere between Core M and Core i5, and it can sometimes lose to both in single threaded performance.
On the GPU and OpenCL tests:
One of AMD’s big pushes is with gaming, OpenCL, and their Heterogeneous System Architecture (HSA). With all three markets, AMD wants to beat Intel. But here we have an issue – both of the AMD parts we have tested here are by default equipped with single channel memory, and may not even be dual channel capable if they share a device design with Carrizo-L (more on this in the next couple of pages). The use of single channel memory when Carrizo systems are sold essentially chokes the key parts of AMD’s offering.
A number of users might think it's unfair to show the results of two single channel Carrizo systems against dual channel Broadwell/Skylake systems, and we totally get that. After speaking internally with other editors however, we came across the situation that many Intel laptops come with dual channel memory as standard or a fixed memory arrangement to begin with. Looking at it closer, there is somewhat of a pattern:
| AMD Carrizo vs Intel Core Current Laptop Designs on the Market |
|||||||
| Name | Lenovo Y700-15ACZ |
HP Elitebook 745 G3 | HP Elitebook 840 G3 | Dell XPS 13 |
ASUS Zenbook UX303 | HP Envy 13t |
|
| Size | 15.6" | 14" | 14" | 13.3" | 13.3" | 13.3" | |
| Resolution | 1080p | 1080p | 1080p | 1080p | 1080p | 1800p | |
| Touch | No | No | No | No | Yes | No | |
| SoC | FX-8800P | A12-8800B | i5-6200U | i5-6200U | i5-6200U | i7-6500U | |
| µArch | Carrizo | Carrizo | Skylake | Skylake | Skylake | Skylake | |
| Integrated GPU | R7 512 SPs |
R7 512 SPs |
HD 520 24 EUs |
HD 520 24 EUs |
HD 520 24 EUs |
HD 520 24 EUs |
|
| Discrete GPU | R9-M380 4GB | - | - | - | - | - | |
| TDP | 35W+? | 15W | 15W | 15W | 15W | 15W | |
| Memory | 1x8GB DDR3L 1600 |
1x4GB DDR3L 1600 |
2x4GB DDR4 2133 |
2x4GB LPDDR3 1866 |
2x4GB DDR3L 1600 |
2x4GB DDR3L 1600 |
|
| Memory Channels |
Single Only |
Single / Dual |
Dual | Dual | Dual | Dual | |
| Storage | 1TB 5400 RPM | 256GB SSD |
128GB SSD |
128GB PCIe | 256GB SSD |
512GB SSD |
|
| Battery Size | 60 Wh | 45.76 Wh > 8.5h |
45.76 Wh | 56 Wh | 50 Wh > 7h |
45.76 Wh > 7.5h |
|
| Weight | 5.72 lbs | 3.41 lb | 3.41 lb | 2.7 lbs | 3.2 lbs | 3 lbs | |
| OS | Win10 Home | Win10/7 Pro |
Win7 Pro |
Win10 Pro | Win10 Home |
Win10 Home | |
| Warranty | 1Yr Base | 3Yr Parts 3Yr Labor |
1Yr Parts 1Yr Labor |
1 Year | 1 Year | 1 Year | |
| Price | £799 / $972 | $1049 | $1149 | $1049 | $899 | $1050 | |
After doing research for that table, there’s a clear relationship between the nature and style of the device. In each circumstance, the default Carrizo arrangement had only single channel memory whereas each Intel device came with dual channel as standard. Part of this is down to cutting costs, while part of it comes to the Carrizo/Carrizo-L shared design in the case of the Lenovo Y700. In each case, the system is being un-necessarily cut off from available performance due to choices at the point of product inception.
With that being said, there are some Intel designs that specifications wise do knock it out of the park. If there’s willing to be compromise a bit on the styling or warranty around this price point, then at the same price as the Elitebook G3 there can be an i7-6500U and a QHD+ display through the HP Envy 13t. But in each other case where the Intel system gets dual channel memory there’s also either a smaller drive or a more restrictive warranty on the Intel system. Or in the case of the Carrizo based Lenovo Y700, under $1000 gets a discrete graphics card, the 35W version of the APU, but it’s still limited to single channel memory by design, which is frustrating.
The situation looks a bit worse if we do a direct comparison between two equivalent price Lenovo Y700 systems:
| AMD Carrizo vs Intel Core Lenovo Ideapad Y700 15.6-inch |
|||
| Name | Lenovo Y700-15ACZ | Lenovo Y700-15 | |
| Visual |
|
|
|
| Size | 15.6" 1080p IPS | 15.6" 1080p IPS | |
| Touch | No | No | |
| Processor | AMD FX-8800P (35W) 2M/4T, 2.1-3.4 GHz |
Core i5-6300HQ (45W) 4C/4T, 2.3-3.2 GHz |
|
| Graphics | R6 + R9-M380 4GB | HD 530 + GTX 960M | |
| TDP | 35W + ? | 45W + 65W | |
| Memory | 1 x 8GB DDR3L-1600 Single Channel |
2 x 4GB DDR4-2133 Dual Channel |
|
| Storage | 1 TB 5400 RPM | 500 GB 5400 RPM | |
| Battery | 60 Wh | 60 Wh | |
| WiFi | 'Lenovo AC' | Intel 3165 802.11ac 1x1 | |
| Dimensions | 15.24 x 10.91 x 1.02" | 15.24 x 10.91 x 1.02" | |
| Weight | 5.72 lbs | 5.72 lbs | |
| Webcam | 1280x720 | 1280x720 | |
| OS | Windows 10 Home | Windows 10 Home | |
| Warranty | 1 Year | 1 Year | |
| Price | £799 / $972 | $980 | |
Here are the two Lenovo Y700 models at the same price, one with AMD and the other with Intel. The Intel part has a quad core i5 with a 45W TDP, a GTX 960M for graphics (similar in GFLOPS to the R9 M380) and dual channel memory. The models should compete similarly in gaming at 1080p, but if the AMD system allowed dual channel and CrossFire between the integrated APU and the discrete card it would handily get a boost. DirectX 12 might help here, if it can use both cards depending on the firmware, but at this point the positive for AMD over Intel is the larger hard disk. The Intel model has single stream 802.11ac wireless, which can be upgraded for $20, whereas the AMD wireless is not specified.
There’s no sugar coating the fact that there is a deficit in performance per watt between AMD’s best and Intel’s best in this regard, due to both the architecture and the process node. The price/performance ratio is a little bit trickier to digest, especially when so few AMD designs are by default equipped with enough memory and it can limit the maximum platform performance. In the case of the Y700 above, it’s because the product shares a platform with Carrizo-L making it limited to single channel memory, although I can't exactly find a Carrizo-L APU in a Y700 on the market.
Additional February 10th:
Since the publication of the review, a couple of things have come to our attention. Our pre-production Lenovo Y700, with both memory slots populated, was performing in single channel mode although our source for this sample assumed it was dual channel. Our testing confirmed single channel. However, the full retail version of the Y700 has an updated motherboard design to enable dual channel operation when both memory slots are populated with compatible memory. As far as well can tell, all Carrizo Y700 units at retail should be able to support dual channel memory.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
175 Comments
View All Comments
ncsaephanh - Monday, February 8, 2016 - link
Can you guys do a podcast on this article? Would love to hear you guys discuss it and also answer questions/comments on the article.ET - Monday, February 8, 2016 - link
Nice to see a Carrizo article finally, although it's rather disappointing, for example because only single channel was tested.You talked about solutions, here's how I see what AMD and publications like Anandtech need to do (I'm using Carrizo as an example, but it's a lesson for the future):
AMD: When Carrizo is available in a laptop, send one to Anandtech. Immediately. If you have a prototype before that, send that. We want to learn about the chip as quickly as possible, not have to wait months looking for nuggets of information on the web.
Anandtech: Benchmark the hell out of the laptop. If there's single channel with a dual channel option, show a comparative benchmark, but concentrate on dual. We're enthusiasts, we'll install a second DIMM to get better performance. For benchmarks, basic system performance and a plethora of games, and comparison to Intel, plus battery life. Deep dives are nice, but I'd rather have a quick overview of what the system is suitable for, and what kind of gaming it can achieve.
AMD: Desktop first! I know that laptops are where the money is, but desktop is where the enthusiasts are, and if your chip is worth anything, fans and publications like Anandtech will pair it with the fastest memory, configure it with the best TDP, and see what it's really capable of. OEM limitations will not get in the way.
AMD: Fans first! That's pretty much a repeat of the previous point, but AMD, you still have fans, and they are your best customers, not the OEM's or the clueless general public. If you make something that you think is good and you let your fans learn of it and get hold of it, they will tell you what they think and they will tell others. If you leave them in the dark, they will end up losing their enthusiasm.
Anandtech: Follow up on AMD stuff. It may be hard to get the latest AMD chips if AMD isn't helping, but at least let us know you're on it. An occasional news item telling us that you've tried to get some laptops for testing or whatnot will tell us that you're on it, and hopefully shame AMD and the OEM's enough to get a move on.
Personally, I would likely have bought a Carrizo system if there was one of similar size to my old Thinkpad X120e (which I still use, even if I'm not that happy with its speed). I might have bought a Carrizo for my HTPC if I could and I knew it provided decent enough performance.
sofocle10000 - Monday, February 8, 2016 - link
I just signed in to state that Asus had nice business/multimedia notebooks (I used N60DP/N56DP and I actually use an N551ZU - all based on AMD), and although my actual N551ZU is only based on the top of the line Kaveri, it is an exceptional machine for normal use/light gaming...Customers play a big part in the AMD problem, but if there were more incentives (take my current N551ZU, which is a great notebook for ~750-850 $, and if configured with an SSD, you could hardly tell it apart most of the time from the Intel i5H/i7QH + GTX 950M variants), not only a great price, but a better build quality, display, sound system the the market average, some of them would actually pay more attention to the AMD.
The OEM's should have a more defined bottom line for the AMD notebooks - were dual channel memory and a better display, a hybrid SSHD or a SSD are a must, especially for the models in the upper part of the price range 400-700 $...
dragosmp - Monday, February 8, 2016 - link
@Ian - great article, really a good example of investigative journalism. I'm happy this kind of articles are being revived, but being a reader of Tom's I see where this may be coming from.As the "guy that says what laptop/phone to buy" to my family and friends I have to say your findings and conclusions speak to me very clearly - AMD has a system-problem, not so much a CPU-problem (though some may argue differently). AMD chips are fed into cheap looking/feeling PCs with far too many corners cut, but this is how under 700$ market looks like. Could AMD's OEMs sell a 600$ 13" PC to compete with the CoreM UX305? I think not, simply because AMD's CPUs (who consume more) need thicker chassis with stronger cooling and a beefier battery and that costs money - so there's less available for the UX; even if the OEM accepted lower margins on the AMD PC, or AMD to sell the CPU at bargain prices, that design compared to the UX305 would be thicker and likely noisier.
If Zen is good, I could see it in a Mac as Apple has a history of doing good software. Or AMD should build their own surface line and set an example of what can be done.
Gunbuster - Monday, February 8, 2016 - link
People buy the cheapest $300 laptop they can get or something premium. Who are they targeting with these mid-rangers?farmergann - Tuesday, February 9, 2016 - link
Wife uses her Y700 for school and a few hours of photo editing every week. Exactly what she wanted. This article did a worthless job of representing the actual Y700 w/fx8800p you can pick up at Best Buy for $665-830. Everything is fantastic about it save for the TB HDD which I immediately replaced with a Samsung 850 Pro I had laying around.Somehow, this "investigative" nonsense missed the fact the U.S. Y700 has a superb little IPS screen with Freesync to go along with a surprisingly (truly) good sound system and -despite the author's claim- dual channel ram. Just for grins I've played BF3 and a few other games - none of which had issues. Great low/mid-range laptop with plenty of chops.
every1hasaids - Tuesday, February 9, 2016 - link
Nope, the US model is absolute garbage. They skimped on the VRMs and the laptop subsequently throttles in moderately intensive CPU tasks. Example, try running Cities: Skylines with a decent sized city and tell me that it doesn't stutter after about 20 seconds of play and every 5 seconds or so after that. The stutters which coincide with the CPU being utilized near 100% and the frequency dropping per resource monitor and Afterburner all the way down to 1.6ghz... Also I don't know what you're talking about with the Freesync capability, I could not get it to work after reading elsewhere that it may be possible.The main issue with a product like the Y700 is that the intel variant is only a couple hundred bucks more and you get a genuine quad core with HT, dual channel DDR4-2133 and comparable discreet graphics. Oh, and it has no trouble with voltage supply. Not to mention that the m.2 interface is PCI-E as opposed to SATA on the AMD model. It just doesn't make sense to purchase a far inferior product for only $200 less at the price point these models occupy.
farmergann - Thursday, February 11, 2016 - link
Cities: Skylines? LOL, that's about as rich as whining about Starcraft 2 performance on an FX Octacore - what were you expecting exactly? For people not looking to shove a laughably CPU bound title down a 35W laptop's throat, the FX8800p with user installed SSD is a far better choice, sorry guy.Peichen - Monday, February 8, 2016 - link
Wow, that's wasting a lot of time and words reviewing a product no one will buy. AMD needs to exist to keep the cheap Intel stuff dirt cheap but I don't feel anyone should waste time reviewing AMD CPU products. 10 years of marketing hype and under-delivery means AMD is actually slower than ever compares with Intel.I bought 2 AMD CPU over the last 6/7 years and frankly I wish I spend more buying Intel because I wouldn't have to spend time and money as often upgrading the CPU.
Danvelopment - Monday, February 8, 2016 - link
The way I see it, AMD needs to stop comparing themselves with themselves and needs to compare themselves with the competition. People don't understand the improvements if they aren't involved with the predecessor.They produce a reasonable product that performs at 60-80% of the competition at 50% of the price.
Good designs are produced for the competition, that could fundamentally have their parts, and they're losing on the design front.
And strangely, for similar products the AMD machines are the same cost, even though the difference is the chip (at halfish the price).
Can they not work to develop an easier transition method for OEM's to produce this-or-that designs that allow end users to pick AMD or Intel during the selection process. Tier them like Dell does for the various Intel processors but have them consistently show up as the cheapest option $100 off a $500 laptop is a decent drop and if the chip and PCB is $150 cheaper to produce the OEM still wins).
Differentiating the product creates too many variables people don't understand, and creates the issue above, CPU brand aversion on entire product stacks with no common ground.
I'd say take a long, hard look at current machines, and develop a method of getting their chips into them as an option, without OEMs designing a product from the ground up.
I'd certainly consider AMD if I could just select it as an option that knocks $100 off on the low cost tier laptop in my workplace.