AMD Kaveri Review: A8-7600 and A10-7850K Tested
by Ian Cutress & Rahul Garg on January 14, 2014 8:00 AM ESTKaveri: Aiming for 1080p30 and Compute
The numerical differences between Kaveri and Richland are easy enough to rattle off – later in the review we will be discussing these in depth – but at a high level AMD is aiming for a middle ground between the desktop model (CPU + discrete graphics) and Apple’s Mac Pro dream (offloading compute onto different discrete graphics cards) by doing the dream on a single processor. At AMD’s Kaveri tech day the following graph was thrown in front of journalists worldwide:
With Intel now on board, processor graphics is a big deal. You can argue whether or not AMD should continue to use the acronym APU instead of SoC, but the fact remains that it's tough to buy a CPU without an integrated GPU.
In the absence of vertical integration, software optimization always trails hardware availability. If you look at 2011 as the crossover year when APUs/SoCs took over the market, it's not much of a surprise that we haven't seen aggressive moves by software developers to truly leverage GPU compute. Part of the problem has been programming model, which AMD hopes to address with Kaveri and HSA. Kaveri enables a full heterogeneous unified memory architecture (hUMA), such that the integrated graphics topology can access the full breadth of memory that the CPU can, putting a 32GB enabled compute device into the hands of developers.
One of the complexities of compute is also time: getting the CPU and GPU to communicate to each other without HSA and hUMA requires an amount of overhead that is not trivial. For compute, this comes in the form of allowing the CPU and GPU to work on the same data set at the same time, effectively opening up all the compute to the same task without asynchronous calls to memory copies and expensive memory checks for coherency.
The issue AMD has with their HSA ecosystem is the need for developers to jump on board. The analogy oft cited is that on Day 1, iOS had very few apps, yet today has millions. Perhaps a small equivocation fallacy comes in here – Apple is able to manage their OS and system in its entirety, whereas AMD has to compete in the same space as non-HSA enabled products and lacks the control. Nevertheless, AMD is attempting to integrate programming tools for HSA (and OpenCL 2.0) as seamlessly as possible to all modern platforms via a HSA Instruction Layer (HSAIL). The goal is for programming languages like Java, C++ and C++ AMP, as well as common acceleration API libraries and toolkits to provide these features at little or no coding cost. This is something our resident compute guru Rahul will be looking at in further detail later on in the review.
On the gaming side, 30 FPS has been a goal for AMD’s integrated graphics solutions for a couple of generations now.
Arguably we could say that any game should be able to do 30 FPS if we turn down the settings far enough, but AMD has put at least one restriction on that: resolution. 1080p is a lofty goal to hold at 30 FPS with some of the more challenging titles of today. In our testing in this review, it was clear that users had a choice – start with a high resolution and turn the settings down, or keep the settings on medium-high and adjust the resolution. Games like BF4 and Crysis 3 are going to tax any graphics card, especially when additional DirectX 11 features come in to play (ambient occlusion, depth of field, global illumination, and bilateral filtering are some that AMD mention).
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
380 Comments
View All Comments
Fox5 - Tuesday, January 14, 2014 - link
Where are the Iris Pro results in CLBenchmark? Where are the CPU results of CLBenchmark; is the GPU faster than Haswell's AVX2? Where's the rest of the compute benchmarks, the area that Kaveri is supposed to shine in?JDG1980 - Tuesday, January 14, 2014 - link
Incidentally, will HTPC be covered in a different review? MadVR could be a good use case for Kaveri, as it requires quite a bit of shader power but isn't that memory bandwidth intensive.beomagi - Tuesday, January 14, 2014 - link
Per charts, Why are 100W APUs slower in 1280x1024 than at higher resolutions??beomagi - Tuesday, January 14, 2014 - link
Also, 45W APUs are faster? Are the benchmarks different? The charts only mention resolution.beomagi - Tuesday, January 14, 2014 - link
Nevermind - I now see this is as a percent difference compared to the slower chip - the title said FPS and that threw me off.Ignore! :D
Dribble - Tuesday, January 14, 2014 - link
Call me cynical but it's just the same as the previous gen. If you want a small form factor extreme budget gaming box these will be pretty good. For the rest of the world if you don't care about games you'd do better going Intel, and if you do intel + a proper graphics card.As with previous gen it comes with a load of marketing slide advantages, which if previous gen are anything to go by will come to nothing - I don't see the current range of AMD machines blowing away intel machines with opencl/stream/fusion/whatever - and that was what was on the previous set of marketing slides.
I always thought their best bet was mobile - but these days that markets getting really tough now for AMD as Intel have just spent the last few years optimising power usage.
UtilityMax - Tuesday, January 14, 2014 - link
The biggest elephant in the room is that very few average people (those who don't visit this web site) care for playing games on laptops (or even desktops, considering the consoles). Once you ignore the gaming performance, the A10 APU effectively has the performance of Core i3, but at a high price. A Fry's or Best Buy "special" laptop with Core i3 can cost as low as $400 or less. But the A10 laptops cost around $500. Intel's pricing is pretty aggressive on the low end IMHO.jimjamjamie - Thursday, January 16, 2014 - link
Not just in laptops, the price/performance ratio of the dual-core Pentiums is extremely good - the Haswell-based Pentium G3220 (3GHz dual core, 3.5MB cache) is available in the UK for just over £40, which is excellent value.Nagorak - Wednesday, January 15, 2014 - link
Yes, the issue is that the hybridization of CPU/GPU really provides no advantages. For someone actually playing games the GPU is still too weak and they'd be better off with a discrete card. For someone not playing games the quality of the integrated GPU doesn't matter.Maybe I'm wrong and there are tons of people out there playing games at ~30 FPS with low settings. I just don't see why someone who wants to play games wouldn't try to cough up an extra $100 for a discrete GPU, and if you don't play games then even Intel's older HD GPUs are fine.
mikato - Wednesday, January 15, 2014 - link
*For someone actually playing [newer 3D intensive] games the GPU is still too weak and they'd be better off with a discrete card. Yep*For someone actually playing [older or lighter] games the GPU is good enough and you end up with a cheaper overall package without needing a discrete card.
*For someone not playing games, they will benefit big time from HSA eventually. Not there yet and depends on the software.
There are probably more people in the last two categories if you think about it. AMD isn't for us gamers right now unfortunately. And it's going to take a while for adoption for HSA to bring in the third category of people.