Video Transcoding Performance

x264 HD 3.03 Benchmark

Graysky's x264 HD test uses x264 to encode a 4Mbps 720p MPEG-2 source. The focus here is on quality rather than speed, thus the benchmark uses a 2-pass encode and reports the average frame rate in each pass.

x264 HD Benchmark - 1st pass - v3.03

x264 HD Benchmark - 2nd pass - v3.03

CPU based video transcode performance is as good as it can get from AMD here given the 2/4 module/core setup of these Trinity APUs. Intel's Core i3 3220 is a bit slower than the A10-5800K. We're switching to a much newer version of the x264 HD benchmark for our new test suite (5.0.1). Some early results are below if you want to see how things change under the new test:

x264 HD 5.0.1 Benchmark
  1st Pass 2nd Pass
AMD A10-5800K (3.8GHz) 33.5 fps 7.41 fps
AMD A8-5600K (3.6GHz) 32.2 fps 7.12 fps
Intel Core i3 3220 (3.3GHz) 35.2 fps 6.61 fps
Content Creation Performance Discrete GPU Gaming Performance
POST A COMMENT

177 Comments

View All Comments

  • eBombzor - Tuesday, October 02, 2012 - link

    Am I missing something in the benchmarks? Tom's did a CPU comparison with the 2100 and the 8120 (which isn't a whole lot different from the 8150) and the 8120 is near the Phenom CPU gaming wise.
    http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-fx-pent...
    Something is not right here, the 2100 dominated the 8120 in Tom's benchies, the 3220 should be better.
    Reply
  • Ryan Smith - Tuesday, October 02, 2012 - link

    Just thumbing through Tom's article, it looks like they're using 1920x1080 with high quality settings (GPU-limited settings) while we're mostly using 1024 and 1680 in order to ensure we're CPU-limited. Reply
  • Rezurecta - Wednesday, October 03, 2012 - link

    Who cares about CPU limiting? You're not going to play a game @ 1024. 1680 might be valid, but why not show benchmarks at 1920? It just doesn't make sense to show a benchmark that isn't at a major demographic point.

    It could be a very misleading benchmark for a substantial amount of readers.
    Reply
  • CeriseCogburn - Tuesday, October 09, 2012 - link

    But it makes amd look better, so it's awesome, and irresistible. Reply
  • Rand - Tuesday, October 02, 2012 - link

    Why was the overclocking test done on Windows 8 (Image shows Win8), while the performance testing was done on Windows 7 (Test setup lists Win7)? Reply
  • nofumble62 - Tuesday, October 02, 2012 - link

    This Trinity performance didn't beat i3, let alone i5.

    AMD statement " i5 performance at i3 price" is a total lie.
    Reply
  • ac2 - Tuesday, October 02, 2012 - link

    It's only true for heavily threaded integer work and AES...

    But yeah, disappointing...
    Reply
  • Taft12 - Tuesday, October 02, 2012 - link

    ... and gaming on the integrated GPU Reply
  • MySchizoBuddy - Tuesday, October 02, 2012 - link

    Legit reviews state that AMD advised them to disable turbo mode else it will throttle the overclock. They were able to overclock it to 4.6 with full stability using a larger cooler.

    http://www.legitreviews.com/article/2047/18/
    Reply
  • MySchizoBuddy - Tuesday, October 02, 2012 - link

    with Corsair H100 water cooler they were able to overclock it to 5GHz stable. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now