Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [Anandtech] Who Controls the User Experience? AMD’s Carrizo Thoroughly Tested
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[Anandtech] Who Controls the User Experience? AMD’s Carrizo Thoroughly Tested - Page 5

post #41 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by umeng2002 View Post

What does one expect, really? Even with the improvements, Excavator is still bad compared to Intel.
Excavator is not bad compared with atom/coreM even on old 28nm. Puma isn't even bad compared with atom and carizzo > mullins
Summit Ridge
(16 items)
 
ASUS R510DP
(8 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Ryzen 1600X ASRock Fatal1ty AB350 Gaming K4 HIS Radeon HD7870 IceQ 2x8GB G.Skill TridentZ 3200 CL16 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Plextor M6S Plus 256GB SSD Toshiba X300 6TB Toshiba X300 6TB Toshiba 2TB 
CoolingOSMonitorMonitor
Deepcool BETA 400 ST Windows 8.1 Pro x64 HP S2031 20" Samsung SyncMaster 932BW 19" 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Seasonic S12G 750w Lian Li full tower Logitech MX310 SteelSeries 4HD 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
A10-5750m 3.5Ghz ASUStek A75M FCH HD 8650G + HD 8670M dual graphics 2x4GB Samsung 1600Mhz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Toshiba Q300 SSD 120GB Panasonic CD/DVD Windows 8.1 Pro 15.6" 1920x1080 
  hide details  
Reply
Summit Ridge
(16 items)
 
ASUS R510DP
(8 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD Ryzen 1600X ASRock Fatal1ty AB350 Gaming K4 HIS Radeon HD7870 IceQ 2x8GB G.Skill TridentZ 3200 CL16 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Plextor M6S Plus 256GB SSD Toshiba X300 6TB Toshiba X300 6TB Toshiba 2TB 
CoolingOSMonitorMonitor
Deepcool BETA 400 ST Windows 8.1 Pro x64 HP S2031 20" Samsung SyncMaster 932BW 19" 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Seasonic S12G 750w Lian Li full tower Logitech MX310 SteelSeries 4HD 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
A10-5750m 3.5Ghz ASUStek A75M FCH HD 8650G + HD 8670M dual graphics 2x4GB Samsung 1600Mhz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Toshiba Q300 SSD 120GB Panasonic CD/DVD Windows 8.1 Pro 15.6" 1920x1080 
  hide details  
Reply
post #42 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePath View Post

Core i5 6300U completely blows 15w Carrizo out of water . Even in iGPU performance, intel was much better (intel uses dual channel memory though)
http://www.anandtech.com/show/10000/who-controls-user-experience-amd-carrizo-thoroughly-tested/16

4.5w m3-6Y30 (weakest skylake core m) was able to compete with 15w Carrizo in a lot of those CPU benchmarks

Core U models are known to blow it's TDP worth of power consumption in short duration workloads until they reach certain temperatures (targetting conviniently benchmarks) by about 2x.
Core M models do the same, but by x3, but the duration of the boost clock is inconsistent with the OEM's cooling capabilities. No wonder they are nearer to the U models in performance than what their TDP would suggest.

AMD implemented this too with Carrizo, but the TDP worth of power consumption is only exceded by 1/2 to 1/3 of its nominal TDP, and it is time based in second and not temperature based. Moreover, you can lock the power target of these chips to avoid this behavior, resulting in more consistent results when benchmarking.

This obviously doesnt mean you wont be seeing posts like the one I quoted when uninformed people take Intel's TDP values as strict power consumption measurements and make such bizarre claims like Intel is "blowing" AMD 15W chips with their U and M lines. Those chips indeed are consuming 15-20W at most in benchmarks but Intel Core U ones are consuming roughly 30W and Core M ones 15W. So the poster that linked benchmarks of the same AMD chips but with power targets set at 35W make more of a fair comparisons againts the U line, while the 15W target results are useful to compare against the M line.

So without even knowing, the poster I quoted admitted that at same actual power consumption, AMD Carrizo and Intel's Core line are trading blows in overall performance (with Intel winning in ST and AMD making it up in MT, while on iGP department AMD comes on top when dual channel is used). The problem is, one company has their product in 14nm FF (second gen), while the other one is using Glofo 28SHP.

My take on this AMD should go full Intel and make their chips overblow their TDP values as aggresively as Core products do, after all people wont ever care as shown by the level of ignorance regarding Intel's own power consumption numbers.
post #43 of 46
So yeah.. when i bought my HP ProBook with A8-4500m dual graphics i was pretty much happy about everything, and then i run 3DMARK and thought .. oh that's terrible. Found out latter that it had 4GB single channel memory, bought second module couple of days latter and i had no issues with it ever again. AMD actually increased notebook market share with Carrizo, but people seem to buy them be cause of low price not features. And now they will introduce Bristol Ridge witch by all means can take on Skylake and can be configured with dual graphics. Just those OEMs....
post #44 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by PPBottle View Post

Core U models are known to blow it's TDP worth of power consumption in short duration workloads until they reach certain temperatures (targetting conviniently benchmarks) by about 2x.
Core M models do the same, but by x3, but the duration of the boost clock is inconsistent with the OEM's cooling capabilities. No wonder they are nearer to the U models in performance than what their TDP would suggest.

AMD implemented this too with Carrizo, but the TDP worth of power consumption is only exceded by 1/2 to 1/3 of its nominal TDP, and it is time based in second and not temperature based. Moreover, you can lock the power target of these chips to avoid this behavior, resulting in more consistent results when benchmarking.

This obviously doesnt mean you wont be seeing posts like the one I quoted when uninformed people take Intel's TDP values as strict power consumption measurements and make such bizarre claims like Intel is "blowing" AMD 15W chips with their U and M lines. Those chips indeed are consuming 15-20W at most in benchmarks but Intel Core U ones are consuming roughly 30W and Core M ones 15W. So the poster that linked benchmarks of the same AMD chips but with power targets set at 35W make more of a fair comparisons againts the U line, while the 15W target results are useful to compare against the M line.

So without even knowing, the poster I quoted admitted that at same actual power consumption, AMD Carrizo and Intel's Core line are trading blows in overall performance (with Intel winning in ST and AMD making it up in MT, while on iGP department AMD comes on top when dual channel is used). The problem is, one company has their product in 14nm FF (second gen), while the other one is using Glofo 28SHP.

My take on this AMD should go full Intel and make their chips overblow their TDP values as aggresively as Core products do, after all people wont ever care as shown by the level of ignorance regarding Intel's own power consumption numbers.

Then DELL and HP package it with a tiny battery. I really hate that.
Power Tower
(22 items)
 
SteamBox
(9 items)
 
Doge Miner
(7 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Ryzen 1700X AX370-Gaming 5 AMD Radeon R9 200 Series G.Skill DDR4-2400 
RAMRAMRAMHard Drive
G.Skill DDR4-2400 G.Skill DDR4-2400 G.Skill DDR4-2400 Samsung 840 Pro 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
CX300 Crucial 480GB Toshiba 4TB Toshbia 4TB Western Digital Black 1TB 
CoolingOSMonitorMonitor
h110i Windows 10 42" LG TV 20" Digitizer ASUS 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Corsair Vengeance Mechanical Keyboard  850watt Vampire Gold Rated NZXT S340 Elite Corsair RGB FPS Mouse 
Mouse PadAudio
Borderlands Mousepad Realtek HD 
  hide details  
Reply
Power Tower
(22 items)
 
SteamBox
(9 items)
 
Doge Miner
(7 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Ryzen 1700X AX370-Gaming 5 AMD Radeon R9 200 Series G.Skill DDR4-2400 
RAMRAMRAMHard Drive
G.Skill DDR4-2400 G.Skill DDR4-2400 G.Skill DDR4-2400 Samsung 840 Pro 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
CX300 Crucial 480GB Toshiba 4TB Toshbia 4TB Western Digital Black 1TB 
CoolingOSMonitorMonitor
h110i Windows 10 42" LG TV 20" Digitizer ASUS 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Corsair Vengeance Mechanical Keyboard  850watt Vampire Gold Rated NZXT S340 Elite Corsair RGB FPS Mouse 
Mouse PadAudio
Borderlands Mousepad Realtek HD 
  hide details  
Reply
post #45 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by PPBottle View Post

My take on this AMD should go full Intel and make their chips overblow their TDP values as aggresively as Core products do, after all people wont ever care as shown by the level of ignorance regarding Intel's own power consumption numbers.

Get your semiaccurate.com circlejerk out of here. Your entire post sounds like an edited spiel from Abwx.

TDP boosting is a legitimate way to increase responsiveness of a mobile system and an industry standard feature. AMD being late to the party doesn't make Intel evil. It makes AMD incompetent.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PPBottle View Post

Those chips indeed are consuming 15-20W at most in benchmarks but Intel Core U ones are consuming roughly 30W and Core M ones 15W. So the poster that linked benchmarks of the same AMD chips but with power targets set at 35W make more of a fair comparisons againts the U line, while the 15W target results are useful to compare against the M line.

Standard 15W TDP Core U boosts to 20W, not 30W.


Core U laptops typically are configured for 15W/20W base/boost. If the OEM splurge on the cooling or feel brave, they bump it to 15W/25W. Most Core U laptops top out at 30W for the entire platform. 35W configured Carrizo would be 45-50W platform power, assuming similar platform power consumption.

Here's a 15W TDP Carrizo:
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Carrizo-in-Review-How-does-AMD-s-A10-8700P-Perform.147654.0.html

30W long term load, 40W burst.

Here's a 15W TDP Core U:
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Dell-Latitude-14-E7450-Ultrabook-Review.135484.0.html

30W long term load, 40W burst.

Your assertion that a 15W TDP Carrizo is comparable to Core M in power profile is just laughable. Core M (4.5W/12W) goes into fanless tablets. Carrizo goes into full size laptops with fans... limiting it to 4.5W/12W would be a performance disaster.
post #46 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsc1973 View Post

It might make a difference on old Richland chips, but not on Kaveri and Godavari. There are other limitations at work there. There are well-built 6+2 phase boards that can push these pretty much as far as they can go. Almost all Steamroller APU's and Athlons hit a wall at some point between 4.3 and 4.6.
I can try 4.6 GHz, however the thermal threshold is unavoidable and I need a better cpu cooler until I can try anything extra. All in all, I think 6+2 is not necessary for this chip since the stock cooler cannot cope with elevating temperatures in P95 above 4.0 GHz at 3000 rpm anyway.
The Machine
(14 items)
 
Nexus 7 2013
(11 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
A10 6800K Asus F2A85-V MSI 6870 Hawx, VTX3D 5770, AMD HD6950(RIP), Sap... G.skill Ripjaws PC12800 6-8-6-24 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Seagate 7200.5 1TB NEC 3540 Dvd-Rom Windows 7 x32 Ultimate Samsung P2350 23" 1080p 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
Seasonic s12-600w CoolerMaster Centurion 5 Logitech G600 Auzen X-Fi Raider 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Quad Krait 300 at 1.5Ghz Qualcomm APQ8064-1AA SOC Adreno 320 at 400mhz 2GB DDR3L-1600 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
32GB Internal NAND Android 5.0 7" 1920X1200 103% sRGB & 572 cd/m2 LTPS IPS Microsoft Wedge Mobile Keyboard 
PowerAudio
3950mAh/15.01mAh Battery Stereo Speakers 
  hide details  
Reply
The Machine
(14 items)
 
Nexus 7 2013
(11 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
A10 6800K Asus F2A85-V MSI 6870 Hawx, VTX3D 5770, AMD HD6950(RIP), Sap... G.skill Ripjaws PC12800 6-8-6-24 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Seagate 7200.5 1TB NEC 3540 Dvd-Rom Windows 7 x32 Ultimate Samsung P2350 23" 1080p 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
Seasonic s12-600w CoolerMaster Centurion 5 Logitech G600 Auzen X-Fi Raider 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Quad Krait 300 at 1.5Ghz Qualcomm APQ8064-1AA SOC Adreno 320 at 400mhz 2GB DDR3L-1600 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
32GB Internal NAND Android 5.0 7" 1920X1200 103% sRGB & 572 cd/m2 LTPS IPS Microsoft Wedge Mobile Keyboard 
PowerAudio
3950mAh/15.01mAh Battery Stereo Speakers 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Hardware News
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [Anandtech] Who Controls the User Experience? AMD’s Carrizo Thoroughly Tested