AMD Launches Mobile Kaveri APUs
by Jarred Walton on June 4, 2014 12:01 AM ESTInitial Thoughts
I really wish Kaveri could have launched on laptops earlier in the year. While Trinity was a decent solution, Richland didn't really offer much in the way of real improvements, and then seeing Kaveri on desktops first and laptops second was more than a little disappointing. The good news is that Kaveri laptops should start shipping in the near future, and overall they offer a good blend of performance and features that should help AMD be more competitive in the growing world of laptop computing.
Our initial performance results look about right, perhaps even a little lower than we'll see from final shipping hardware. There's also plenty of potential for improved performance as more applications start to leverage OpenCL, but AMD has been beating that drum for a while and it's been a relatively slow process. Yes, there are applications that can perform much faster with an APU than with an Intel CPU, but we still need more. It's fine to talk about HSA and Compute Cores, but until they make a tangible difference in every day applications they're mostly talking points. For people that truly need compute performance, I suspect they're looking at much higher performance parts than an APU.
One interesting example AMD discussed was using an optimized JPEG decoder to process images and generate thumbnails in a Windows folder. This is actually something I can see as being useful to a lot of people, and AMD was able to speed up the process by 80% compared to an Intel laptop running the stock Windows JPEG decoder. However, it's not clear how much of that performance increase is AMD being faster than Intel as opposed to the default Windows JPEG decoder simply being slow.
Kaveri's Die Up Close
There are some notable omissions in our performance data right now as well. We were only able to test the highest performance Kaveri laptop APU, the FX-7600P, and even that was essentially in "beta" form. I think the 19W FX-7500 will be potentially more interesting, and if AMD is really able to hit close to max turbo speeds most of the time it could prove a potent alternative to Intel's 15W ULV processors. Something else I'm very interested in seeing is what sort of battery life AMD is able to coax out of these APUs, as Llano and Trinity both did quite well – or at least, they did well when the laptop OEM took time to get things right. And that is perhaps the biggest obstacle AMD faces right now: getting their APUs into laptops that don't cut corners in all the wrong places.
As I noted earlier, storage performance (i.e. having a pure SSD solution for the OS and primary applications) is now far more critical for most use cases than the choice of CPU. However, we can't even get $1000+ laptops to universally switch to SSDs, and it's going to be a long row to hoe getting anything priced under $800 to include one. You can just picture the bean counters: "Why are we using a $100 SSD that only holds 256GB instead of a $50 HDD that holds 1TB!? That's a terrible component choice!" On a similar note, getting a laptop with a good keyboard, trackpad, and screen is more difficult than it needs to be even on midrange laptops, and I've seen many an AMD-equipped laptop fall flat on its face thanks to penny pinching and cut corners in these areas. Finally, it's important to note that all batteries are not created equal; while it would be nice if a 56Wh battery was always a 56Wh battery, I know from experience that there's still a wide range of quality, including the ability to store a charge for more than a few weeks without going dead.
But these things cost money, and when you're saving $50-$100 by using an AMD APU instead of an Intel CPU, the mindset often becomes, "Where else can we save money?" The result is a race to the bottom, and if laptop OEMs aren't careful they'll lose more and more market share to alternative devices. (There's a thought: someone make a Kaveri-based Chromebook. That could be interesting!)
Bottom line: AMD's Kaveri APUs show plenty of promise. Now I want someone to build a nice AMD-equipped laptop for under $800 (with or without a ULV APU). Take the core elements of a good Ultrabook, swap out the Intel CPU/platform for an AMD Kaveri APU/platform, and keep the SSD, form factor, and screen. If one of the major OEMs can deliver that sort of product at a lower price than the Intel equivalent, it would be an easy recommendation.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
125 Comments
View All Comments
Flunk - Wednesday, June 4, 2014 - link
Under clocking the CPU and overclocking the GPU. that would be helpful. I've actually done this in a laptop that shares coolers between a discrete GPU and CPU but I imagine it would be useful in an APU laptop too.E.G. Note that the CPU is not underclocked in this test but I do normally underclock it to reduce the volume of the fan.
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/6039951
Meaker10 - Friday, June 6, 2014 - link
The GS60 with M290x, with an a10-5750 it's a questionably balanced system, with an ad 5550m at 3.6-3.7ghz it offers a great deal of value.Meaker10 - Friday, June 6, 2014 - link
Damn auto correct, gx60 not gs60.vladx - Wednesday, June 4, 2014 - link
There's a mistake on the 3rd page, it should be i5-4200U not 5200U afaik.texasti89 - Wednesday, June 4, 2014 - link
I looked straight for the single-threaded performance and I see the 15w 4500u gets >50% higher score than the 35W 7600P. Yes, graphics is good at that high TDP, but without a competitive CPU performance I think it's hard to justify these SKUs for the target market. AMD really needs to stop this disastrous adoption of bulldozer-based CPUs for good.
TrackSmart - Wednesday, June 4, 2014 - link
Three thoughts:1) I'm not defending AMD's single core performance, but the single-threaded cinebench test shows a 33% lead for the Intel Core-i5, which is not "greater than 50%". That said, I agree that AMD needs to close the gap on single-threaded CPU performance (and CPU performance-per-watt). This is as close as they've been in a long time, but the gap is still large. Their grand strategy has supposedly been to leverage the interaction of CPU+GPU to provide better performance, but when you are the minority player in the chip market, that's a tough hill to climb. How can you get software makers to write code for your APUS when they are only a fraction of the market *and* mostly found in the lowest-end consumer laptops?
2) Sure, multi-threaded CPU performance looks competitive here since AMD has thrown in more "cores" (purposeful use of quotation marks) for the same price as Intel, but that strategy can only go so far. At any time, Intel can choose to lower the price on its chips to match AMDs performance-per-dollar because Intel's chips use less silicon to produce the same CPU performance.
3) Anand is right that AMD needs to get these chips into nice laptops -- with lower-than-Intel prices -- and emphasize the gaming performance advantage. And those laptops had better have good battery life under normal usage. The presumed niche would be for an AMD laptop with reasonable gaming chops at several hundred dollars less than an Intel laptop with a discrete GPU.
That said, 35 watts is too high for the ultrabook form factor. Will AMDs graphics advantage remain this large when you move down to a 15 Watt APU? If the answer is no, then Anand's ideal doesn't really work. All you would get is a $50 cheaper AMD laptop with slower CPU performance and similar GPU performance!
[Note: I'm really rooting for AMD, but I'm going to remain cautious in my enthusiasm for these new chips until I see them in actual laptops. As they say, the proof is in the pudding.]
Natfly - Wednesday, June 4, 2014 - link
> I'm not defending AMD's single core performance, but the single-threaded cinebench test shows a 33% lead for the Intel Core-i5, which is not "greater than 50%".1.33 / .87 = 1.53. 53% faster.
TrackSmart - Thursday, June 5, 2014 - link
Yes, but the core i5 I specifically refer to is only a 33% difference. I'm guessing you were looking at the i7. So we are both wrong and both right. And in agreement about the need for better single threaded performance.piroroadkill - Wednesday, June 4, 2014 - link
Nice chip. But that said, without battery life results, this review does fall flat, I understand that they couldn't be done, though.Other than that, you've touched on the main issue with AMD based laptops: nobody wants to make a good one.
Give me something like my old Sony Vaio Z12 with that FX-7600P in it, at a decent price, and you have a compelling product. I don't want ridiculous resolutions. I want one that will work well for games and desktop use at a nice size. The Z12 @ 13.1" 1600×900 offers that absolutely perfectly in my opinion.
Homeles - Wednesday, June 4, 2014 - link
"From what I could gather, AMD used "V" transistors in Trinity/Richland but has switched to "T" transistors for Kaveri, which explains the drop in maximum clock speed."Perhaps, but the most important reason was the regression from PD-SOI to bulk.
Interesting claim there about the transistor "shapes." I've not heard of T and V shaped transistors... it appears to be the shape of the gate.