AMD A10-5800K & A8-5600K Review: Trinity on the Desktop, Part 2

178 Comments

View All Comments

• CeriseCogburn - Friday, October 12, 2012 - link

  AMD's engineers can't seem to figure out pci-e 3.0
  
  They released their 7000 series with pci-e 3.0 uncertified (while nVidia waited and did a proper and offical implementation), then a bunch of amd card people had trouble in boards, but since the "press" kept their yappers shut except for a few, it wasn't widespread knowledge, so amd fanboys ( and others) suffered with their crap non certified cards, unable to chase down the plaguing glitches properly.

• rarson - Wednesday, October 3, 2012 - link

  "So as of today, in general - it costs more to get an AMD."
  
  ...unless you actually want decent gaming performance.
  
  The problem for Intel is that the things that Trinity doesn't do well aren't much of an issue to the average consumer. The average consumer doesn't have a clue how threaded their workloads are, and won't notice any significant differences between the i3 and the A10 other than how much faster the graphics are.
  
  If I were going to build an HTPC without discrete graphics, I'd be buying a Trinity. Intel doesn't make sense in that application (of course, I'd probably still go discrete, in which case Intel makes more sense).

• CeriseCogburn - Friday, October 12, 2012 - link

  That's great rarson, when amd is crap, it's ok because people need crap, and won't notice the crap they have.
  LOL
  Someone may be full of crap.

• g101 - Monday, October 22, 2012 - link

  Yeah, you. You lifeless little shit. Find something better to do than comment on every anandtech article with senseless garbage that never contains a shred of evidence or fact.

• rarson - Wednesday, October 3, 2012 - link

  "I think there is very little need for raw single-threaded performance increases in consumer-level "general computation" processors (e.g. few-core x86 processors)."
  
  Exactly. While AMD could stand to improve their single-threaded performance, the fact that Intel is so far ahead in that specific metric doesn't automatically mean that Trinity is "slow." It does other things quite well, including multi-threaded performance, which is obviously more of a concern at this point considering software is moving towards multi-threading anyway.

• CeriseCogburn - Tuesday, October 9, 2012 - link

  LOL - you are such a sad fanboy
  I hope amd showers you as fanboy of the month with their slow crap so you have to use it.

• amd4evernever - Sunday, October 14, 2012 - link

  http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/a10-5800k-trin...
  
  choke on that.... no matter how you troll the amd solution in the ends beats the core i3 both in price and in gaming read the full article at tomshardware.. you lunatic.

• g101 - Monday, October 22, 2012 - link

  You stupid little bitch, you comment on EVERY article with pro nvidia/intel comments and every single one is absolute rubbish.
  
  What I really want to know is: how the fuck can you have nothing better to do, yet still be so ignorant?

• rarson - Wednesday, October 3, 2012 - link

  "We need this for some real progression to be made in desktop CPU's and also drive prices down at the high end."
  
  Why? Is an i7 not fast enough for you? Are you being bogged down by your uber-user workload?
  
  The vast majority of people buy processors that are cheaper than the A10 here. Sure, it'd be nice to see AMD compete at the high end again, but the high end doesn't drive the market; the high end is barely a blip on the radar.

• Flunk - Tuesday, October 2, 2012 - link

  Exactly, why buy the kids a new A10 when I can just give them my old Q6600? AMD really needs to make a better case for themselves than this.