Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Rumors and Unconfirmed Articles › [Puget Systems] AMD A10-7850K Performance Review
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[Puget Systems] AMD A10-7850K Performance Review - Page 6

post #51 of 286
I know what hUMA and HSA are, I just don't see the point of making the CPU perform worse rolleyes.gif
Ravager
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX 8350 Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD3 R5 XFX R9 390 DD Black Edition Kingston HyperX Fury  
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Crucial BX100  WD Blue Corsair H100i GTX Windows 10 Insider Preview 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
AOC G2460PF 24" 144Hz Freesync Steelseries 6Gv2 EVGA Supernova 750 G2 Phanteks Enthoo Pro M 
MouseMouse PadAudioAudio
Logitech G303 Steelseries QcK Heavy Kingston HyperX Cloud ASUS Xonar U5 
  hide details  
Reply
Ravager
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX 8350 Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD3 R5 XFX R9 390 DD Black Edition Kingston HyperX Fury  
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Crucial BX100  WD Blue Corsair H100i GTX Windows 10 Insider Preview 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
AOC G2460PF 24" 144Hz Freesync Steelseries 6Gv2 EVGA Supernova 750 G2 Phanteks Enthoo Pro M 
MouseMouse PadAudioAudio
Logitech G303 Steelseries QcK Heavy Kingston HyperX Cloud ASUS Xonar U5 
  hide details  
Reply
post #52 of 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alatar View Post

So what tests actually showed that the bias in R11.5 affected AMD results by 10% or 20%? I'm not aware of any tests like that. Actually I'm not aware of any tests that showed anything about R11.5 performing differently on different instruction sets on AMD hardware. Mainly because as far as I'm aware no such test was ever made.

My conclusion on the bias not affecting the results all that much is mainly based on:

1) The results made sense (8350 very close to 3770K both at stock etc.)

And more importantly:

2) R15 results are relatively close to R11.5 ones when comparing intel and AMD CPUs. R11.5 has bias, R15 doesn't. Therefore it's a pretty reasonable assumption that R11.5 while biased, didn't skew the results all that much.

Not that it really matters in this case, all of us know that cine is perfectly fine for comparing AMD vs. AMD.

There are facts and there are opinions. CB 11.5 is biased, that's a fact. How much is the "value" of that bias is a matter of opinions and guesses. But from the moment we know it is biased, it automatically has to be rejected as a mean to judge relative performance between processors from different vendors, exactly because it artificially hampers non intel products. No way around this. I know it mirrors Matrox Cinema performance but even so it must be limited as a judge of performance for those that are interested in this particular piece of software, not as a general indicator. When we are talking about synthetic benching, we aren't looking for results that "make sense", but for results that represent true performance. FX-8350 trails 3770k on CB11.5 MT test, not by much but it does. Things would have looked very different on reviews If FX actually was faster there, even by a hair. And it wouldn't take a big boost for this to happen. So, yeah, bias plays a big role on impressions made.

CB 15, from what I see (looking at results that is) behaves more or less like CB11.5. I've seen people assuming it is fair now, and I am not saying it isn't, but I just don't quite understand where that notion comes from.

http://www.cbscores.com/

A stock FX-8350 scores 101 ST/643 MT on CB 15. A stock i7-3770k 143/708 (win7 results). The i7 has a ~43% lead for ST and ~10% for MT.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6396/the-vishera-review-amd-fx8350-fx8320-fx6300-and-fx4300-tested/4

A stock FX-8350 scores 1.1 ST/6.89MT on CB 11.5. A stock i7-3770k does 1.66/7.61. The i7 has a ~50% lead for ST and ~10% for MT. Same ballpark, really. My guess is that CB15 is still running some sort of SSE4 under intel (the gap would have widened if they have used AVX or something) and SSE2 for AMD still. If that is the case, and kaveri is tuned to have higher ipc under newer instructions vs richland, then CB is again a piss poor indicator of performance even when it is AMD vs AMD.
Edited by Kuivamaa - 1/8/14 at 6:19am
Mastodon Ryzen
(12 items)
 
HP Z220
(8 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
R7 1800X Asus Crosshair VI Hero Asus R9 Nano Gskill TridentZ 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Pny SSD 240GB Crucial MX100 CM Nepton 280L Win 10 
MonitorPowerCaseMouse
Acer Predator XG270HU Freesync XFX 750W Pro HAF XM Logitech G502 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsCooling
i7 3770 HP Quadro K2000 HP 
OSPowerCaseMouse
Win 7  HP 400W HP CMT RAT 7 
  hide details  
Reply
Mastodon Ryzen
(12 items)
 
HP Z220
(8 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
R7 1800X Asus Crosshair VI Hero Asus R9 Nano Gskill TridentZ 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Pny SSD 240GB Crucial MX100 CM Nepton 280L Win 10 
MonitorPowerCaseMouse
Acer Predator XG270HU Freesync XFX 750W Pro HAF XM Logitech G502 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsCooling
i7 3770 HP Quadro K2000 HP 
OSPowerCaseMouse
Win 7  HP 400W HP CMT RAT 7 
  hide details  
Reply
post #53 of 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlDyer View Post

I know what hUMA and HSA are, I just don't see the point of making the CPU perform worse rolleyes.gif

The CPU performanse is not worse Kaveri APU has higher IPC 15-20%, the difference is the default CPU frequency minus 400mhz on Top Kaveri APU model vs Top Richland APU model.

But on lower TDP 45W models Richland vs Kaveri, there is completely diferent story and this can not be ignored.
As i sad before this is very good for OEM manufactures and exellent for HTPC PC no doubt.wink.gif


Richland vs Kaveri Quad Core APU Top Models comparison

- Richland APU A10-6800K, 4.1ghz/4.4hz TurboCore/384 VLIW4 Radeon Cores 100 TDP

- Kaveri APU A10-7850, 3.7ghz/4ghz TurboCore/512 GCN Radeon Cores/ 95W TDP


Richland vs Kaveri Quad Core APU lower TDP models comparison

- Richland APU A10-6700T, 2.5ghz/3.5ghz TurboCore/384 VLIW4 Radeon Cores, 45W TDP

- Kaveri APU A8-7600, 3.1ghz/3.3ghz TurboCore/384 GCN Radeon Cores, 45W TDP


When all was counted related to the 45W TDP models, 600mhz higher CPU frequency + Higher IPC = big improvments at CPU multithrerad performance and aplications.smile.gif
Edited by Asterox - 1/8/14 at 7:36am
AMD Steam Engine
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Phenom II X6 1055T Asrock A770DE+ Powercolor Radeon HD 3650 Kingmax Mars ddr2 800mhz, 3GB 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung HD502JH 500GB LG GSA H-30N CPU Cooler Spire Coolgate 2011 Windows 7 Ultimate 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Benq GW2760HS Logitech Media Keyboard 600 Seasonic S12II 430W Gigabyte GZ-X2 Black 
Mouse
Trust Laser 
  hide details  
Reply
AMD Steam Engine
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Phenom II X6 1055T Asrock A770DE+ Powercolor Radeon HD 3650 Kingmax Mars ddr2 800mhz, 3GB 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Samsung HD502JH 500GB LG GSA H-30N CPU Cooler Spire Coolgate 2011 Windows 7 Ultimate 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Benq GW2760HS Logitech Media Keyboard 600 Seasonic S12II 430W Gigabyte GZ-X2 Black 
Mouse
Trust Laser 
  hide details  
Reply
post #54 of 286
Yeah I know it is the sake clock for clock, most people look at stock performance when they go shopping and when they see the perf increase is like this they will propably just say eff it and buy Richland
Ravager
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX 8350 Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD3 R5 XFX R9 390 DD Black Edition Kingston HyperX Fury  
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Crucial BX100  WD Blue Corsair H100i GTX Windows 10 Insider Preview 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
AOC G2460PF 24" 144Hz Freesync Steelseries 6Gv2 EVGA Supernova 750 G2 Phanteks Enthoo Pro M 
MouseMouse PadAudioAudio
Logitech G303 Steelseries QcK Heavy Kingston HyperX Cloud ASUS Xonar U5 
  hide details  
Reply
Ravager
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX 8350 Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD3 R5 XFX R9 390 DD Black Edition Kingston HyperX Fury  
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Crucial BX100  WD Blue Corsair H100i GTX Windows 10 Insider Preview 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
AOC G2460PF 24" 144Hz Freesync Steelseries 6Gv2 EVGA Supernova 750 G2 Phanteks Enthoo Pro M 
MouseMouse PadAudioAudio
Logitech G303 Steelseries QcK Heavy Kingston HyperX Cloud ASUS Xonar U5 
  hide details  
Reply
post #55 of 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlDyer View Post

Yeah I know it is the sake clock for clock, most people look at stock performance when they go shopping and when they see the perf increase is like this they will propably just say eff it and buy Richland

Why not Trinity?
post #56 of 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gadgety View Post

10% increase in graphics performance over Richland is disappointing... specially when the price difference is currently set at 42% in preliminary listings for the 7850k over the 6800k in my local European market (albeit with a likely inclusion of BF4). I really think AMD will have to do better to convince people to spend the money.
Gpu is almost 50% faster and cpu should also be 15/20% faster after they add the clock defecit.
post #57 of 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by JSTe View Post

Why not Trinity?

Well yeah Trinity too smile.gif
Ravager
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX 8350 Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD3 R5 XFX R9 390 DD Black Edition Kingston HyperX Fury  
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Crucial BX100  WD Blue Corsair H100i GTX Windows 10 Insider Preview 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
AOC G2460PF 24" 144Hz Freesync Steelseries 6Gv2 EVGA Supernova 750 G2 Phanteks Enthoo Pro M 
MouseMouse PadAudioAudio
Logitech G303 Steelseries QcK Heavy Kingston HyperX Cloud ASUS Xonar U5 
  hide details  
Reply
Ravager
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX 8350 Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD3 R5 XFX R9 390 DD Black Edition Kingston HyperX Fury  
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
Crucial BX100  WD Blue Corsair H100i GTX Windows 10 Insider Preview 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
AOC G2460PF 24" 144Hz Freesync Steelseries 6Gv2 EVGA Supernova 750 G2 Phanteks Enthoo Pro M 
MouseMouse PadAudioAudio
Logitech G303 Steelseries QcK Heavy Kingston HyperX Cloud ASUS Xonar U5 
  hide details  
Reply
post #58 of 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by maarten12100 View Post

Gpu is almost 50% faster and cpu should also be 15/20% faster after they add the clock defecit.

But will it clock as high? That's a big question with kaveri, o/c potential.
Mastodon Ryzen
(12 items)
 
HP Z220
(8 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
R7 1800X Asus Crosshair VI Hero Asus R9 Nano Gskill TridentZ 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Pny SSD 240GB Crucial MX100 CM Nepton 280L Win 10 
MonitorPowerCaseMouse
Acer Predator XG270HU Freesync XFX 750W Pro HAF XM Logitech G502 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsCooling
i7 3770 HP Quadro K2000 HP 
OSPowerCaseMouse
Win 7  HP 400W HP CMT RAT 7 
  hide details  
Reply
Mastodon Ryzen
(12 items)
 
HP Z220
(8 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
R7 1800X Asus Crosshair VI Hero Asus R9 Nano Gskill TridentZ 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Pny SSD 240GB Crucial MX100 CM Nepton 280L Win 10 
MonitorPowerCaseMouse
Acer Predator XG270HU Freesync XFX 750W Pro HAF XM Logitech G502 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsCooling
i7 3770 HP Quadro K2000 HP 
OSPowerCaseMouse
Win 7  HP 400W HP CMT RAT 7 
  hide details  
Reply
post #59 of 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlDyer View Post

Well yeah Trinity too smile.gif

How about Llano?
post #60 of 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kuivamaa View Post

But will it clock as high? That's a big question with kaveri, o/c potential.
No it most likely won't clock good.
What AMD however does seem to have achieved is making it scale extremely good on the laptop and low power desktop.

It is a bussines win or so it seems so far.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Rumors and Unconfirmed Articles
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Rumors and Unconfirmed Articles › [Puget Systems] AMD A10-7850K Performance Review