AMD Launches Mobile Kaveri APUs
by Jarred Walton on June 4, 2014 12:01 AM ESTAMD Kaveri FX-7600P GPU Performance Preview
Given the 3DMark results we just showed as well as the increase in CPU performance, I was very interested to see what Kaveri could do in terms of gaming performance. Here I have to temper my comments somewhat by simply noting that the graphics drivers on the prototype laptops did not appear to be fully optimized. One game in particular that I tested (Batman: Arkham Origins) seemed to struggle more than I expected, and there are other games (Metro: Last Light and Company of Heroes 2) that will bring anything short of a mainstream dGPU to its knees. I've posted the Kaveri Mainstream and Enthusiast scores in Mobile Bench, but they're not particularly useful as most of the scores are below 30 FPS. Here, I'll focus on our "Value" settings, which are actually still quite nice looking (Medium detail in most games).
As expected, in most of the tests the Kaveri APU is able to surpass the gaming performance of every other iGPU, and in some cases it even comes moderately close to a discrete mainstream dGPU. There's a sizeable gap between the Trinity/Richland APUs and Kaveri in most of the games I tested, which is great news for those looking for a laptop that won't break the bank but can still run most modern games.
Getting into the particulars, Skyrim seems to be hitting some bottleneck (possibly CPU, though even then I'd expect Kaveri to be faster than Richland), but the vast majority of games should run at more than 30 FPS. There was one system with a pre-release Mantle driver installed that was running Battlefield 4 reasonably well at low/medium details, and with shipping laptops and drivers (and perhaps DDR3-2133 RAM) I suspect even Metro might get close to 30 FPS. Of course, we're only looking at the top performance FX-7600P here, so we'll have to see what the various 19W APUs are able to manage in similar tests.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
125 Comments
View All Comments
beggerking@yahoo.com - Wednesday, June 4, 2014 - link
icrap and affordable? what a joke! loldon't forget outdated low res screen, no pen input, no touch screen, and still more expensive.
Surface Pro is much better and much more affordable.
Galatian - Wednesday, June 4, 2014 - link
Exactly how is the 13" and 15" rMBP screen outdated and low res?Oh and: not everybody shopping for a notebook needs a touch display nor pen input. I even give you a reason why the 12" Surface 3 will not replace either notebooks or tablets: 750g.
nerd1 - Wednesday, June 4, 2014 - link
1st gen iPad 3G weighed 730gr and everyone said it's as light as a feather.Oh, and macbook still looks and weighs exactly same since then.
Galatian - Wednesday, June 4, 2014 - link
Your point? They are light now. I owned the 1st gen iPad and it was way to heavy to comfortably hold in my hands to read. I since switched to the iPad mini for its lightness and small form factor, nothing the Surface can provide me with. So I still tuck along my notebook to write stuff and use the iPad for media consumption. The surface simply doesn't work for me, but your mileage might vary. Just don't make it sound it's the holy grail that truly combines both tablets and notebooks, because it isn't. At least not for all.Morawka - Wednesday, June 4, 2014 - link
well for one it's not a IPS Screen, and 2, it's a low res panelGalatian - Wednesday, June 4, 2014 - link
The iPad mini with retina? You need to check your facts.ShieTar - Wednesday, June 4, 2014 - link
The 35W AMD APU is giving you about 75% of the mobile gaming performance that you get with a 15W Intel CPU + 50W nVidia GPU; but over 200% of the 15W Intel APU performance. That's a very decent result in my opinion. Sure it's slower as a pure CPU, but I don't think it will hit its 35W TDP limit when the GPU part is dormant, either.Another interesting comparison might have been to see how FX-7600P fairs against something like an i7-4558U, i.e. an Intel APU with a ~30W TDP and an Iris GPU.
Roland00Address - Wednesday, June 4, 2014 - link
While I agree with you perfectly on what you said, I want to bring up another point. The gt750m is a kepler part with 384 stream processors (2 SMX). We now have maxwell on the market and maxwell is very good. With maxwell you get 640 stream processors (5 SMM, 1 SMM is roughly 90% of an SMX) in roughly the same tdp that as the gt750m. Thus nvidia+intel is able to get a large increase in number of calculation units in roughly the same form factor.So in sum AMD is able compete with intel and intel+nvidia only on price and/or time to market. Intel and Intel+Nvidia can meet AMD on graphic efficiency, form factors, and Intel is faster in cpu tasks. Sadly I wish AMD was doing better than they are, not because AMD is bad but I want more competition and more competition is always good for the end user. Problem is AMD may bring their B+ game often but when you have Intel and Nvidia as competitors you need to bring your A+ game to win for your competitors are just as talented as you are and they have far more design resources due to greater revenue and cash on hand which means more money spent on engineers.
Krysto - Wednesday, June 4, 2014 - link
Intel cheats with Turbo-Boost, though, being able to win 5-minute benchmarks because of Turbo-Boost, while also claiming long battery life because Turbo-Boost barely gets any use, so the chip is actually running at lower performance than advertised in the long term.Galatian - Wednesday, June 4, 2014 - link
And AMD doesn't turbo? o.O