AMD Kaveri Review: A8-7600 and A10-7850K Tested
by Ian Cutress & Rahul Garg on January 14, 2014 8:00 AM ESTFinal Words
As with all previous AMD APU launches, we're going to have to break this one down into three parts: CPU, the promise of HSA and GPU.
In a vacuum where all that's available are other AMD parts, Kaveri and its Steamroller cores actually look pretty good. At identical frequencies there's a healthy increase in IPC, and AMD has worked very hard to move its Bulldozer family down to a substantially lower TDP. While Trinity/Richland were happy shipping at 100W, Kaveri is clearly optimized for a much more modern TDP. Performance gains at lower TDPs (45/65W) are significant. In nearly all of our GPU tests, a 45W Kaveri ends up delivering very similar gaming performance to a 100W Richland. The mainstream desktop market has clearly moved to smaller form factors and it's very important that AMD move there as well. Kaveri does just that.
In the broader sense however, Kaveri doesn't really change the CPU story for AMD. Steamroller comes with a good increase in IPC, but without a corresponding increase in frequency AMD fails to move the single threaded CPU performance needle. To make matters worse, Intel's dual-core Haswell parts are priced very aggressively and actually match Kaveri's CPU clocks. With a substantial advantage in IPC and shipping at similar frequencies, a dual-core Core i3 Haswell will deliver much better CPU performance than even the fastest Kaveri at a lower price.
The reality is quite clear by now: AMD isn't going to solve its CPU performance issues with anything from the Bulldozer family. What we need is a replacement architecture, one that I suspect we'll get after Excavator concludes the line in 2015.
In the past AMD has argued that for the majority of users, the CPU performance it delivers today is good enough. While true, it's a dangerous argument to make (one that eventually ends up with you recommending an iPad or Nexus 7). I have to applaud AMD's PR this time around as no one tried to make the argument that CPU performance was somehow irrelevant. Although we tend to keep PR critique off of AnandTech, the fact of the matter is that for every previous APU launch AMD tried its best to convince the press that the problem wasn't with its CPU performance but rather with how we benchmark. With Kaveri, the arguments more or less stopped. AMD has accepted its CPU performance is what it is and seems content to ride this one out. It's a tough position to be in, but it's really the only course of action until Bulldozer goes away.
It's a shame that the CPU story is what it is, because Kaveri finally delivers on the promise of the ATI acquisition from 2006. AMD has finally put forth a truly integrated APU/SoC, treating both CPU and GPU as first class citizens and allowing developers to harness both processors, cooperatively, to work on solving difficult problems and enabling new experiences. In tests where both the CPU and GPU are used, Kaveri looks great as this is exactly the promise of HSA. The clock starts now. It'll still be a matter of years before we see widespread adoption of heterogeneous programming and software, but we finally have the necessary hardware and priced at below $200.
Until then, outside of specific applications and GPU compute workloads, the killer app for Kaveri remains gaming. Here the story really isn't very different than it was with Trinity and Richland. With Haswell Intel went soft on (socketed) desktop graphics, and Kaveri continues to prey on that weakness. If you are building an entry level desktop PC where gaming is a focus, there really isn't a better option. I do wonder how AMD will address memory bandwidth requirements going forward. A dual-channel DDR3 memory interface works surprisingly well for Kaveri. We still see 10 - 30% GPU performance increases over Richland despite not having any increase in memory bandwidth. It's clear that AMD will have to look at something more exotic going forward though.
For casual gaming, AMD is hitting the nail square on the head in its quest for 1080p gaming at 30 frames per second, albeit generally at lower quality settings. There are still a few titles that are starting to stretch the legs of a decent APU (Company of Heroes is practically brutal), but it all comes down to perspective. Let me introduce you to my Granddad. He’s an ex-aerospace engineer, and likes fiddling with stuff. He got onboard the ‘build-your-own’ PC train in about 2002 and stopped there – show him a processor more than a Pentium 4 and he’ll shrug it off as something new-fangled. My grandfather has one amazing geeky quality that shines through though – he has played and completed every Tomb Raider game on the PC he can get his hands on.
It all came to a head this holiday season when he was playing the latest Tomb Raider game. He was running the game on a Pentium D with an NVIDIA 7200GT graphics card. His reactions are not the sharpest, and he did not seem to mind running at sub-5 FPS at a 640x480 resolution. I can imagine many of our readers recoiling at the thought of playing a modern game at 480p with 5 FPS. In the true spirit of the season, I sent him a HD 6750, an identical model to the one in the review today. Despite some issues he had finding drivers (his Google-fu needs a refresher), he loves his new card and can now play reasonably well at 1280x1024 on his old monitor.
The point I am making with this heart-warming/wrenching family story is that the Kaveri APU is probably the ideal fit for what he needs. Strap him up with an A8-7600 and away he goes. It will be faster than anything he has used before, it will play his games as well as that new HD 6750, and when my grandmother wants to surf the web or edit some older images, she will not have to wait around for them to happen. It should all come in with a budget they would like as well.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
380 Comments
View All Comments
Fox5 - Wednesday, January 15, 2014 - link
There's also the issue of the Iris Pro's 128MB edram. At a certain point, it probably is insufficient for the settings and resolution.BSMonitor - Wednesday, January 15, 2014 - link
Power consumption numbers?? Interesting to see what adding that many transistors (particularly 128 GPU cores did to those)Da W - Wednesday, January 15, 2014 - link
242 comments so far. Whatever people say, AMD still interests a lot of people and they have a future ahead of them.thomascheng - Wednesday, January 15, 2014 - link
Lets hope they do well, or we will be stuck with buying $1000 Intel CPUs and Nvidia GPUs.TheJian - Wednesday, January 15, 2014 - link
"For casual gaming, AMD is hitting the nail square on the head in its quest for 1080p gaming at 30 frames per second, albeit generally at lower quality settings."Maybe if they'd said for 1280x1024 gaming your comment would be true. Most of the games have mins at 1080p well below 20, and some even avg below 30. This resolution is NOT playable on these crap chips. Buy a vid card and Intel. Period. I really thought these would be faster, but then the downclock due to process happened. Gains in games where you are STILL unplayable isn't a gain. It is a waste of space to benchmark things you can't actually play at. I would rather have seen a dozen games benched at 1280x1024 and a few you KNOW you could run above 30fps at 1680x1050. 1080p here was pointless. AMD should be derided for even mentioning this res with so many games not even playable at avg fps never mind what happens when you click the MIN button in your charts.
Discrete clearly has long legs, as anyone building one of these machines with the new APUs will quickly realize they need to buy discrete to enhance their gaming. I really don't think the dire situation here at 1080p will change until 20nm or more, where you may at that point have MORE games that CAN run 1080p ok, vs what you see here where it's just a joke today.
The games don't even look the same when turning off every feature possible in the game just to hit 30fps. Do you want your games to look like a nintendo 64, or a PC? They should have grown the die a bit for more gpu, so at least 1680x1050 would be pretty good. I don't see AMD making money on cpus for 2yrs :( That means consoles + gpus have to hold the company up and that won't be enough to keep up with R&D in mobile, gpu, cpu. Consoles sold 7mil so far, so at $10-15 per chip ($100 price? per console assuming 15% margin? if they even get that) we're talking about a max of 105mil profits from consoles for the quarter. If they don't keep selling like it's launch month for the next 12 months I see them slowly getting weaker. They owe GF 200mil, so 4 of these console quarters would be ~400mil which is 1/2 blown on GF fines, and the other 200mil goes to interest on their huge debt each year. They need to make some REAL money on cpu/gpu/mobile or this never gets better right? We know cpu is basically out for 2yrs as they say in this article. OUCH. So gpu/mobile has to make something in those two years or this just gets worse and drivers etc will see more phase 1, 2, 3 fixing crap for ages.
The only impressive thing I saw here was Mantle perf claimed by AMD in BF4. But how many times can you afford $8mil to get this done? I'm sure they amped things up for the first time showcase BF4, but how many times can you even afford $2-4mil for this stuff? And then do you get what the dev said in the AMD APU show (only one BTW), a 20% not being unreasonable for your efforts? Far below $8mil for apparently 45% in BF4 right? Devs will opt for the 2weeks to transfer a game to MOBILE first as NV showed can be done with any openGL game (all ps3, ps4 games, many pc games etc) like Serious Sam3 and Trine2 (most of the time according to anandtech was spent on controls, NOT the porting). Unreal 3 engine ported in 4 (yes...FOUR) days by epic/mozilla and it only took 10 people or so. Dice said 2-3 months on mantle. Devs might do 2 weeks just for more sales to a 1.2B unit market on mobile, they will need PAYMENT to do it for Mantle which gets ZERO extra profits (only makes people happy they bought AMD, no extra cash right?). I really hope ARM takes off on desktops, because we currently have an Intel only race and need someone with CASH to fight them. Bring on K1 (and all it's enemies) and all the games for mobile this will create (ported or new, I don't own a ps3 so I'd buy some of those ported that I can't get now). Since we have no real x86 competition any more we need ARM to pick up AMD's slack.
Novaguy - Wednesday, January 15, 2014 - link
Its going to depend on the settings; other reviewers who did 1080p + low to medium settings demonstrated playable frame rates for the a8 but not the intel igps.mikato - Wednesday, January 15, 2014 - link
Ian/Ryan - This seems wrong - "For the 100W APUs at 1280x1024, there is almost no movement between the Richland and the Trinity APUs, except for Company of Heroes" under "IGP Gaming, 1280x1024". In this particular graph, it shows an improvement from Trinity to Richland and then not much improvement from there to Kaveri, except for Company of Heroes.Ryan Smith - Wednesday, January 15, 2014 - link
Noted and fixed. Thank you.tekphnx - Wednesday, January 15, 2014 - link
Looks like a pretty nice improvement for its intended market, namely the HTPC and casual gaming crowd. Calling the onboard GPU decent at 1080p is a laugh though, as other people have said. For 720p, sure, but not 1080p.Prices have shot up from the previous generation, which is unwelcome. And I very much lament the omission of Steamroller from the FX roadmap as an FX owner myself. AMD shouldn't abandon FX... the least they could have done if they're abandoning FX is to include a 6-core Kaveri part at the top end, but it looks like that's not materializing either.
zodiacsoulmate - Wednesday, January 15, 2014 - link
first 4 pages are way better than the last 4 pages :) anyway a great article i read like half an hour