AMD A10-7800 Review: Testing the A10 65W Kaveri
by Ian Cutress on July 31, 2014 8:00 AM ESTGaming and Synthetics on Processor Graphics
The faster processor graphics become, the more of the low end graphics market is consumed - if the integrated graphics are better than a $50 discrete GPU, there ends up being no reason to buy a discrete GPU. This might seem a little odd for AMD, who also have a discrete GPU business. The counter argument is that integrated graphics is only comparable to low-end GPUs, which are historically low margin parts and thus might encourage users to invest in larger GPUs, especially as demands in resolution and graphical eye-candy increase. The compute side is also important, and the homologation of discrete to integrated graphics architectures helps software optimised for one also be accelerated on the other.
F1 2013
Bioshock Infinite
Tomb Raider
Sleeping Dogs
Company of Heroes 2
CompuBench 1.5
CompuBench is a new addition to our CPU benchmark suite, and as such we have only tested it on the following processors. The software uses OpenCL commands to process parallel information for a range of tests, and we use the flow management and particle simulation benchmarks here.
3DMark Fire Strike
The simple answer is this: for anything related to processor graphics, AMD's Kaveri wins hands down and by a large margin in the same power envelope for cheaper.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
147 Comments
View All Comments
tomsworkshop - Thursday, July 31, 2014 - link
the 25% extra cost u paid only give u 2.5% performance increase in realityGuspaz - Friday, August 1, 2014 - link
Depends on what you're doing. Want to encode a video? Then the 25% extra cost will cut render times in half (or better).bigboxes - Sunday, August 3, 2014 - link
Seriously, WTF? People that are encoding are not going to buy an APU. Stop with the fanboi nonsense. I have a quad core i7 processor in my main rig. I do whatever I want. However, I don't give a crap about gaming so I just have an $200 card just so I could do whatever I wanted without the machine hiccuping.My wife doesn't encode, game, video edit or just about anything cpu intensive. So I got her an AMD APU recently after Athlon 64 X2 finally crapped out. Paired with a SSD and 8gb of ram it flies for her all important tasks of surfing the internet, typing Word documents, streaming Hulu/YouTube videos and the occasional online survey. Tell me why she needs a Pentium/i3/i5 or whatever super premium cpu you nerds can come up with? Tell me how she would even notice the difference? She doesn't even know what WinRAR is let alone understand how she could save a couple of seconds in packing/unpacking such a file. Yeah, it could be such a bitchin' machine if only... duh. All I care about is reliable and quick for her purposes. She'll be able to do anything she wants to do and it will breeze through any of those tasks. We had the internet go down yesterday and she couldn't figure out how to unplug the cable modem for the Time Warner rep and you're worried that she will take too long to convert her videos? Face it. She waits for me to come home and do it all for her. Of course, she sounds like a techie when it comes to her mother. Yeah, there's no place for an AMD apu. </sarcasm>
Guspaz - Sunday, August 3, 2014 - link
Wowzers, you're really missing the point. You think people don't need the cost/performance of the i5, which offers 100%+ more performance for 25% more money? Fine, that's a perfectly valid argument.Except the i3-4330 included in this very review was significantly faster than the a10-7800, used less power... and costs at least $15 less.
In terms of accusing me of "fanboi nonsense", I've owned multiple AMD processors, and multiple AMD GPUs, stretching all the way back to the K6-2. But their current CPU product lineup is simply not competitive, except possibly at the very low end... and the a10-7800 is *NOT* at the very low end. It gets outperformed by cheaper and cooler Intel processors.
bigboxes - Sunday, August 3, 2014 - link
I forgot she checks her email too. She desperately needs more processing power. :eyeroll: I think I'll stick with the superior on board video. Thanks.Andrew Lin - Tuesday, August 5, 2014 - link
sounds to me like she doesn't even need the integrated GPU either. the integrated graphics of and core i3 sound more than suited to what you're wife is doing, from the sound of it. so what is she using the "superior on board video" of the more power hungry amd apu for again?bigboxes - Tuesday, August 5, 2014 - link
Look, I buy Intel chips for my high end rig. I use the horsepower. The price difference is negligible between the competing processors. The power usage doesn't matter to me in the slightest. To me the Kaveri will be sipping on the juice. I keep my boxes on 24/7 and I just don't have that high of an electrical bill. I only have my wife turn off her pc at night because of the fan controller's bright blue lights (her pc in in our bedroom). My wife likes to stream shows from the computer to an HD television while surfing the net on her monitor. I figure the extra headroom on the AMD APU would drive that without issue. Whatever the case, I just don't think the purchase is a waste like many are making it out to be.eanazag - Thursday, July 31, 2014 - link
Where's the 45W performance numbers?Where's the power consumption numbers in 65W and 45W?
How well does it work in the low power mode? Is there not speculation that it took so long because there were issues with the product?
What are the clocks in 45W mode?
Most of the commenters below are remarking about dGPUs, Crossfire, and budget PCs.
johnny_boy - Friday, August 1, 2014 - link
Check out Anand's review. You want someone to reproduce it in full here in the comments?johnny_boy - Friday, August 1, 2014 - link
The price difference is significant. If you add a "decent" GPU then plan to spend around $200-300 more (including taxes) than the AMD system. That covers the costier i5 and a half-decent GPU like an R9 270.