AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2950X review
AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2990WX review
ASUS ROG SWIFT PG27UQ Monitor review
MSI B450i Gaming PLUS AC review
MSI Radeon RX 570 and 580 MECH 2 8G OC review
Preview: Unboxing Threadripper 2950X & 2990WX
Corsair SPEC Omega RGB review
Gigabyte B450 Aorus Pro review
MSI B450 Tomahawk review
Guru3D PC Buyers Guide Summer 2018
AMD Athlon X4 845 Processor Review
Posted by: on: 07/08/2016 07:41 AM [
41 comment(s) ]
We review the AMD Athlon 845, a quad-core processor that can be seated into FM2/FM2+ compatible motherboards. It is the first processor from AMD that we test that is based on the Carrizo architecture, which was announced for their mobile platform exactly a year ago at Computex.
Read article
Advertisement
pages 1 2
Fox2232
Senior Member
Posts: 6968
Senior Member
Posts: 6968
Posted on: 07/08/2016 08:27 AM
Good. I liked this CPU from moment I saw it in geekbench results.
It is worth noting that while it does not have unlocked multiplier, it fan be overclocked through fsb OC.
Good. I liked this CPU from moment I saw it in geekbench results.
It is worth noting that while it does not have unlocked multiplier, it fan be overclocked through fsb OC.
alanm
Senior Member
Posts: 7899
Senior Member
Posts: 7899
Posted on: 07/08/2016 08:43 AM
Sounds like a great CPU... for browsing the internet.
Sounds like a great CPU... for browsing the internet.
vazup
Senior Member
Posts: 273
Senior Member
Posts: 273
Posted on: 07/08/2016 08:43 AM
I wish Hilbert also included at least one i5 benchmark and not just a huge selection of super high end i7 processors.
I wish Hilbert also included at least one i5 benchmark and not just a huge selection of super high end i7 processors.
Fox2232
Senior Member
Posts: 6968
Senior Member
Posts: 6968
Posted on: 07/08/2016 08:53 AM
You can give it deserved credit. Cost oriented, casual 60Hz gamers are buying GPU which would be bottleneck gaming instead of this CPU anyway (in many scenarios). So, it is OK to be sometimes CPU, sometimes GPU limited.
(Alternative would be big overshoot in either GPU or CPU and that's no longer very cost efficient.)
Even with RX-480 out and RX-470/460 coming.
I think RX-470/460 would be optimal for this CPU.
Sounds like a great CPU... for browsing the internet.
You can give it deserved credit. Cost oriented, casual 60Hz gamers are buying GPU which would be bottleneck gaming instead of this CPU anyway (in many scenarios). So, it is OK to be sometimes CPU, sometimes GPU limited.
(Alternative would be big overshoot in either GPU or CPU and that's no longer very cost efficient.)
Even with RX-480 out and RX-470/460 coming.
I think RX-470/460 would be optimal for this CPU.
Ryu5uzaku
Senior Member
Posts: 6689
Senior Member
Posts: 6689
Posted on: 07/08/2016 09:41 AM
It seems to be a decent jump from 7870 in terms of core performance considering 3.5/3.8 clocks vs 3.9/4.1
It seems to be a decent jump from 7870 in terms of core performance considering 3.5/3.8 clocks vs 3.9/4.1
Kaarme
Senior Member
Posts: 1167
Senior Member
Posts: 1167
Posted on: 07/08/2016 12:59 PM
AMD needs to get Zen out as soon as possible so that we would have the first interesting AMD CPU review in a good long while. No, it would actually be the first interesting CPU review at all for years, since Intel is only producing more of the same with pitiful gains in this no competition situation.
AMD needs to get Zen out as soon as possible so that we would have the first interesting AMD CPU review in a good long while. No, it would actually be the first interesting CPU review at all for years, since Intel is only producing more of the same with pitiful gains in this no competition situation.
Undying
Senior Member
Posts: 9664
Senior Member
Posts: 9664
Posted on: 07/08/2016 01:03 PM
Looks like it would bottleneck even those cards.
Sadly in this times for people who game i would recommend even some Pentium cpu before this.
Come on Zen...
I think RX-470/460 would be optimal for this CPU.
Looks like it would bottleneck even those cards.
Sadly in this times for people who game i would recommend even some Pentium cpu before this.
Come on Zen...
vbetts
Posts: 13789
Posts: 13789
Posted on: 07/08/2016 01:25 PM
For a budget machine for gaming, this could be an awesome CPU. It can overclock on average about 4.1-4.3 BLK clocking from what reviews have shown of it.
For a cpu under $80 that's not bad.
Sounds like a great CPU... for browsing the internet.
For a budget machine for gaming, this could be an awesome CPU. It can overclock on average about 4.1-4.3 BLK clocking from what reviews have shown of it.
For a cpu under $80 that's not bad.
Fox2232
Senior Member
Posts: 6968
Senior Member
Posts: 6968
Posted on: 07/08/2016 01:33 PM
Looks like it would bottleneck even those cards.
Sadly in this times for people who game i would recommend even some Pentium cpu before this.
Come on Zen...
But those choke on multi threaded workloads. Anything below i5 is not that great. But for 60Hz gamers, even that Pentium is mostly OK.
I would call i3-6100 as king of low cost gaming if OC was a guaranteed thing.
But even then it can't be reasonably compared. CPU costs nearly double. You want to pair it with DDR4 and that means decent MB
Looks like it would bottleneck even those cards.
Sadly in this times for people who game i would recommend even some Pentium cpu before this.
Come on Zen...
But those choke on multi threaded workloads. Anything below i5 is not that great. But for 60Hz gamers, even that Pentium is mostly OK.
I would call i3-6100 as king of low cost gaming if OC was a guaranteed thing.
But even then it can't be reasonably compared. CPU costs nearly double. You want to pair it with DDR4 and that means decent MB
Twiddles
Senior Member
Posts: 1145
Senior Member
Posts: 1145
Posted on: 07/08/2016 03:31 PM
But those choke on multi threaded workloads. Anything below i5 is not that great. But for 60Hz gamers, even that Pentium is mostly OK.
I would call i3-6100 as king of low cost gaming if OC was a guaranteed thing.
But even then it can't be reasonably compared. CPU costs nearly double. You want to pair it with DDR4 and that means decent MB
This. The i3 is just perfect for around GTX 960/RX 470 and below. If you buy an i3 with a decent board you can use the IGP and save another two months for a half decent card. They aren't that expensive and will last you some time. Even second hand they have some decent resale value.
CPU: €115
Motherboard: ASUS H110M-PLUS D3 for €64
RAM: €36 for 8GB 2x4 1600
But those choke on multi threaded workloads. Anything below i5 is not that great. But for 60Hz gamers, even that Pentium is mostly OK.
I would call i3-6100 as king of low cost gaming if OC was a guaranteed thing.
But even then it can't be reasonably compared. CPU costs nearly double. You want to pair it with DDR4 and that means decent MB
This. The i3 is just perfect for around GTX 960/RX 470 and below. If you buy an i3 with a decent board you can use the IGP and save another two months for a half decent card. They aren't that expensive and will last you some time. Even second hand they have some decent resale value.
CPU: €115
Motherboard: ASUS H110M-PLUS D3 for €64
RAM: €36 for 8GB 2x4 1600
schmidtbag
Senior Member
Posts: 3086
Senior Member
Posts: 3086
Posted on: 07/08/2016 03:59 PM
Weird, hasn't this CPU been out for a while now?
I'm not expecting this to happen, but I'd be really interested in tests against the 7860K where it has the same base and turbo frequency as the 845. Even though the 845 is clocked lower, it still had a noticeable performance difference. Overall though, I'm a bit disappointed about how minimal the performance improvement is. Regardless, Excavator is roughly what Bulldozer should have been. It seems to be modestly competitive with Sandy Bridge (when you also account for wattage and price point). Just to think how much better AMD's financial situation would be if this is what they released back in 2011.
Good. I liked this CPU from moment I saw it in geekbench results.
It is worth noting that while it does not have unlocked multiplier, it fan be overclocked through fsb OC.
By how much, though? I understand the lack of IGP ought to make that a bit easier to do, but I figure it's still tough.
Weird, hasn't this CPU been out for a while now?
I'm not expecting this to happen, but I'd be really interested in tests against the 7860K where it has the same base and turbo frequency as the 845. Even though the 845 is clocked lower, it still had a noticeable performance difference. Overall though, I'm a bit disappointed about how minimal the performance improvement is. Regardless, Excavator is roughly what Bulldozer should have been. It seems to be modestly competitive with Sandy Bridge (when you also account for wattage and price point). Just to think how much better AMD's financial situation would be if this is what they released back in 2011.
Good. I liked this CPU from moment I saw it in geekbench results.
It is worth noting that while it does not have unlocked multiplier, it fan be overclocked through fsb OC.
By how much, though? I understand the lack of IGP ought to make that a bit easier to do, but I figure it's still tough.
SplashDown
Senior Member
Posts: 473
Senior Member
Posts: 473
Posted on: 07/08/2016 04:12 PM
Couldn't agree more...
AMD needs to get Zen out as soon as possible so that we would have the first interesting AMD CPU review in a good long while. No, it would actually be the first interesting CPU review at all for years, since Intel is only producing more of the same with pitiful gains in this no competition situation.
Couldn't agree more...
PrMinisterGR
Senior Member
Posts: 6867
Senior Member
Posts: 6867
Posted on: 07/08/2016 04:57 PM
I was one of the few that probably found the Bristol Ridge reveal more interesting than the Polaris reveal, at the event on June.
What they have managed to squeeze out of 28nm is impressive. On total, since Bulldozer was out, they have improved IPC almost 50% and power efficiency another 50% almost. All while staying at GloFo 28nm. I honestly hope that some of this amazing work somehow translates to Zen at 14nm.
I was one of the few that probably found the Bristol Ridge reveal more interesting than the Polaris reveal, at the event on June.
What they have managed to squeeze out of 28nm is impressive. On total, since Bulldozer was out, they have improved IPC almost 50% and power efficiency another 50% almost. All while staying at GloFo 28nm. I honestly hope that some of this amazing work somehow translates to Zen at 14nm.
Fox2232
Senior Member
Posts: 6968
Senior Member
Posts: 6968
Posted on: 07/08/2016 05:00 PM
It does not overclock much, but even then it is pretty comparable to A10-7870k which can tick much higher.
http://hwbot.org/hardware/processor/athlon_x4_845/
http://hwbot.org/hardware/processor/a10_7870k/
So it delivers about same end-user-value for around 1/2 of price of chip. (Just no iGPU.)
By how much, though? I understand the lack of IGP ought to make that a bit easier to do, but I figure it's still tough.
It does not overclock much, but even then it is pretty comparable to A10-7870k which can tick much higher.
http://hwbot.org/hardware/processor/athlon_x4_845/
http://hwbot.org/hardware/processor/a10_7870k/
So it delivers about same end-user-value for around 1/2 of price of chip. (Just no iGPU.)
chispy
Senior Member
Posts: 8225
Senior Member
Posts: 8225
Posted on: 07/08/2016 05:30 PM
Nice review Hilbert thank you , great to see very low end CPUs reviews again here on Guru3D. For what it is i believe it could be at a bit lower price since i remember when i bought my one and only , old AMD APU A6-3650 FM1 in 2011 it cost me only $89.99 and it was bundle with a free cheap Biostar motherboard and one free cheap stick of G.Skill ddr3-1600Mhz memory , it was sold as a bundle with a massive discount at check out
at newegg.com. I end it up paying exactly $89.99 for a complete system back then in 2011 hence why i believe this very low end CPU should cost around ~$59 US or less on this year 2016 as it compares to that very low end APU 3650 system i built in 2011 in CPU performance( minus the integrated Graphics Card on this 845 cpu that my A6-3650 APU has ).
This CPU will bottleneck even an nvidia 750Ti , i know it did on my APU 3650 , best pair this up with a GTX 950 or lesser nvidia card or / and R9-380 or lesser AMD video card as anything more it is a waist for a low budget gaming machine like this. this is my own personal opinion based on experiences with very similar CPUs.
Nice review Hilbert thank you , great to see very low end CPUs reviews again here on Guru3D. For what it is i believe it could be at a bit lower price since i remember when i bought my one and only , old AMD APU A6-3650 FM1 in 2011 it cost me only $89.99 and it was bundle with a free cheap Biostar motherboard and one free cheap stick of G.Skill ddr3-1600Mhz memory , it was sold as a bundle with a massive discount at check out
at newegg.com. I end it up paying exactly $89.99 for a complete system back then in 2011 hence why i believe this very low end CPU should cost around ~$59 US or less on this year 2016 as it compares to that very low end APU 3650 system i built in 2011 in CPU performance( minus the integrated Graphics Card on this 845 cpu that my A6-3650 APU has ).
This CPU will bottleneck even an nvidia 750Ti , i know it did on my APU 3650 , best pair this up with a GTX 950 or lesser nvidia card or / and R9-380 or lesser AMD video card as anything more it is a waist for a low budget gaming machine like this. this is my own personal opinion based on experiences with very similar CPUs.
schmidtbag
Senior Member
Posts: 3086
Senior Member
Posts: 3086
Posted on: 07/08/2016 05:38 PM
I doubt that very much, unless you're running a 32-bit OS. The A6-3650 uses PCIe 2.0, and to my knowledge only had 4 lanes available to external slots (probably more if you disable the IGP in BIOS). Meanwhile, the 845 has PCIe 3.0 and 8 lanes available. The 750Ti, to my knowledge, is PCIe 3.0. Obviously PCIe is backward compatible, but you'll still probably lose some performance using a newer card on an older socket. Lastly, the A6 is almost a full GHz slower.
This CPU will bottleneck even an nvidia 750Ti , i know it did on my APU 3650 , best pair this up with a GTX 950 or and old R9-380 video card as anything more it is a waist for a low budget gaming machine like this. this is my own personal opinion based on experiences with very similar CPUs.
I doubt that very much, unless you're running a 32-bit OS. The A6-3650 uses PCIe 2.0, and to my knowledge only had 4 lanes available to external slots (probably more if you disable the IGP in BIOS). Meanwhile, the 845 has PCIe 3.0 and 8 lanes available. The 750Ti, to my knowledge, is PCIe 3.0. Obviously PCIe is backward compatible, but you'll still probably lose some performance using a newer card on an older socket. Lastly, the A6 is almost a full GHz slower.
PrMinisterGR
Senior Member
Posts: 6867
Senior Member
Posts: 6867
Posted on: 07/08/2016 05:43 PM
Nice review Hilbert thank you , great to see very low end CPUs reviews again here on Guru3D. For what it is i believe it could be at a bit lower price since i remember when i bought my one and only , old AMD APU A6-3650 FM1 in 2011 it cost me only $89.99 and it was bundle with a free cheap Biostar motherboard and one free cheap stick of G.Skill ddr3-1600Mhz memory , it was sold as a bundle with a massive discount at check out at newegg.com. I end it up paying exactly $89.99 for a complete system back then in 2011 hence why i believe this very low end CPU should cost around ~$59 US or less on this year 2016 as it compares to that very low end APU 3650 system i built in 2011 in CPU performance( minus the integrated Graphics Card on this 845 cpu that my A6-3650 APU has ).
This CPU will bottleneck even an nvidia 750Ti , i know it did on my APU 3650 , best pair this up with a GTX 950 or lesser nvidia card or / and R9-380 or lesser AMD video card as anything more it is a waist for a low budget gaming machine like this. this is my own personal opinion based on experiences with very similar CPUs.
It doesn't seem like any crazy bottleneck. Anything with 1/3 the power of the 1080 could probably put this CPU to good use. NVIDIA cards will probably work better with it under DX11, AMD cards under DX12.
Nice review Hilbert thank you , great to see very low end CPUs reviews again here on Guru3D. For what it is i believe it could be at a bit lower price since i remember when i bought my one and only , old AMD APU A6-3650 FM1 in 2011 it cost me only $89.99 and it was bundle with a free cheap Biostar motherboard and one free cheap stick of G.Skill ddr3-1600Mhz memory , it was sold as a bundle with a massive discount at check out
at newegg.com. I end it up paying exactly $89.99 for a complete system back then in 2011 hence why i believe this very low end CPU should cost around ~$59 US or less on this year 2016 as it compares to that very low end APU 3650 system i built in 2011 in CPU performance( minus the integrated Graphics Card on this 845 cpu that my A6-3650 APU has ).
This CPU will bottleneck even an nvidia 750Ti , i know it did on my APU 3650 , best pair this up with a GTX 950 or lesser nvidia card or / and R9-380 or lesser AMD video card as anything more it is a waist for a low budget gaming machine like this. this is my own personal opinion based on experiences with very similar CPUs.
It doesn't seem like any crazy bottleneck. Anything with 1/3 the power of the 1080 could probably put this CPU to good use. NVIDIA cards will probably work better with it under DX11, AMD cards under DX12.
chispy
Senior Member
Posts: 8225
Senior Member
Posts: 8225
Posted on: 07/08/2016 06:31 PM
Dude at this very low end rock bottom of the spectrum of CPUs it does not matter PCIe 3.0 x 16 or PCie 2.0 x 16 as it does not make a lick of difference in the the total FPS and you should know this already , PCIe 3.0 not needed at all on this cpu as its is too slow to make use of it. My now old A6-3650 can run 16x 2.0 on the only PCIe available on the motherboard i use with it. Also running windows 7 x64 bit NOT 32bit here. I have it overclock to 3.8Ghz via bclk @ 146 and yes is running the same as this new 845 CPU clocks , at this clocks 3.8Ghz it did not made any difference if at all , it still did bottleneck my 750Ti. Also you are totally wrong thinking this cpu A6-3650 has 4 lanes available and 16 for the GPU = 20 lanes , it has in fact 24 lanes and that is with the IGP enable.
If you have hands on experience with A6-3650 APUs or this 845 CPU please prove me wrong , i doubt you can
, i know my hardware insight out.
It's an ok cpu for web browsing , social media but not for gaming , not at all
http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/amd-a6-3650-apu-review,2.html
http://www.legitreviews.com/amd-a6-3650-2-6ghz-llano-apu-review_1655/17
http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/K10/AMD-A-Series%20A6-3650%20AD3650WNZ43GX%20(AD3650WNGXBOX).html
http://hwbot.org/submission/2395219_chispy_cinebench___r11.5_a6_3650_3.12_points
I doubt that very much, unless you're running a 32-bit OS. The A6-3650 uses PCIe 2.0, and to my knowledge only had 4 lanes available to external slots (probably more if you disable the IGP in BIOS). Meanwhile, the 845 has PCIe 3.0 and 8 lanes available. The 750Ti, to my knowledge, is PCIe 3.0. Obviously PCIe is backward compatible, but you'll still probably lose some performance using a newer card on an older socket. Lastly, the A6 is almost a full GHz slower.
Dude at this very low end rock bottom of the spectrum of CPUs it does not matter PCIe 3.0 x 16 or PCie 2.0 x 16 as it does not make a lick of difference in the the total FPS and you should know this already , PCIe 3.0 not needed at all on this cpu as its is too slow to make use of it. My now old A6-3650 can run 16x 2.0 on the only PCIe available on the motherboard i use with it. Also running windows 7 x64 bit NOT 32bit here. I have it overclock to 3.8Ghz via bclk @ 146 and yes is running the same as this new 845 CPU clocks , at this clocks 3.8Ghz it did not made any difference if at all , it still did bottleneck my 750Ti. Also you are totally wrong thinking this cpu A6-3650 has 4 lanes available and 16 for the GPU = 20 lanes , it has in fact 24 lanes and that is with the IGP enable.
If you have hands on experience with A6-3650 APUs or this 845 CPU please prove me wrong , i doubt you can
, i know my hardware insight out.
It's an ok cpu for web browsing , social media but not for gaming , not at all
http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/amd-a6-3650-apu-review,2.html
http://www.legitreviews.com/amd-a6-3650-2-6ghz-llano-apu-review_1655/17
http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/K10/AMD-A-Series%20A6-3650%20AD3650WNZ43GX%20(AD3650WNGXBOX).html
http://hwbot.org/submission/2395219_chispy_cinebench___r11.5_a6_3650_3.12_points
AsiJu
Senior Member
Posts: 4962
Senior Member
Posts: 4962
Posted on: 07/08/2016 10:17 PM
Had the same thought. Given this is a quad core CPU comparison against i5's would be more meaningful I think.
I wish Hilbert also included at least one i5 benchmark and not just a huge selection of super high end i7 processors.
Had the same thought. Given this is a quad core CPU comparison against i5's would be more meaningful I think.
Twiddles
Senior Member
Posts: 1145
Senior Member
Posts: 1145
Posted on: 07/09/2016 12:00 AM
Dude at this very low end rock bottom of the spectrum of CPUs it does not matter PCIe 3.0 x 16 or PCie 2.0 x 16 as it does not make a lick of difference in the the total FPS and you should know this already , PCIe 3.0 not needed at all on this cpu as its is too slow to make use of it. My now old A6-3650 can run 16x 2.0 on the only PCIe available on the motherboard i use with it. Also running windows 7 x64 bit NOT 32bit here. I have it overclock to 3.8Ghz via bclk @ 146 and yes is running the same as this new 845 CPU clocks , at this clocks 3.8Ghz it did not made any difference if at all , it still did bottleneck my 750Ti. Also you are totally wrong thinking this cpu A6-3650 has 4 lanes available and 16 for the GPU = 20 lanes , it has in fact 24 lanes and that is with the IGP enable.
If you have hands on experience with A6-3650 APUs or this 845 CPU please prove me wrong , i doubt you can , i know my hardware insight out.
It's an ok cpu for web browsing , social media but not for gaming , not at all
http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/amd-a6-3650-apu-review,2.html
http://www.legitreviews.com/amd-a6-3650-2-6ghz-llano-apu-review_1655/17
http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/K10/AMD-A-Series%20A6-3650%20AD3650WNZ43GX%20(AD3650WNGXBOX).html
http://hwbot.org/submission/2395219_chispy_cinebench___r11.5_a6_3650_3.12_points
Absolutely right. People still seem to underestimate the need for CPU grunt, especially when it comes to pairing with semi high-end cards. Just like the idiots on the Linus Tech Tips forum recommending a GTX 970 to people with G3258's because they could be overclocked
That seriously makes me want to split some heads. For a semi high-end or high-end card you need the cores AND the frequency/IPC, they don't compensate for each other (excluding some games that is, especially older games).
Dude at this very low end rock bottom of the spectrum of CPUs it does not matter PCIe 3.0 x 16 or PCie 2.0 x 16 as it does not make a lick of difference in the the total FPS and you should know this already , PCIe 3.0 not needed at all on this cpu as its is too slow to make use of it. My now old A6-3650 can run 16x 2.0 on the only PCIe available on the motherboard i use with it. Also running windows 7 x64 bit NOT 32bit here. I have it overclock to 3.8Ghz via bclk @ 146 and yes is running the same as this new 845 CPU clocks , at this clocks 3.8Ghz it did not made any difference if at all , it still did bottleneck my 750Ti. Also you are totally wrong thinking this cpu A6-3650 has 4 lanes available and 16 for the GPU = 20 lanes , it has in fact 24 lanes and that is with the IGP enable.
If you have hands on experience with A6-3650 APUs or this 845 CPU please prove me wrong , i doubt you can
, i know my hardware insight out.
It's an ok cpu for web browsing , social media but not for gaming , not at all
http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/amd-a6-3650-apu-review,2.html
http://www.legitreviews.com/amd-a6-3650-2-6ghz-llano-apu-review_1655/17
http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/K10/AMD-A-Series%20A6-3650%20AD3650WNZ43GX%20(AD3650WNGXBOX).html
http://hwbot.org/submission/2395219_chispy_cinebench___r11.5_a6_3650_3.12_points
Absolutely right. People still seem to underestimate the need for CPU grunt, especially when it comes to pairing with semi high-end cards. Just like the idiots on the Linus Tech Tips forum recommending a GTX 970 to people with G3258's because they could be overclocked
That seriously makes me want to split some heads. For a semi high-end or high-end card you need the cores AND the frequency/IPC, they don't compensate for each other (excluding some games that is, especially older games).
PrMinisterGR
Senior Member
Posts: 6867
Senior Member
Posts: 6867
Posted on: 07/09/2016 02:01 AM
It's a two module CPU, where each module contains two ALUs and a single FPU. It's not exactly quad core, but it's much more than a dual core.
Had the same thought. Given this is a quad core CPU comparison against i5's would be more meaningful I think.
It's a two module CPU, where each module contains two ALUs and a single FPU. It's not exactly quad core, but it's much more than a dual core.
thatguy91
Senior Member
Posts: 6651
Senior Member
Posts: 6651
Posted on: 07/09/2016 07:53 AM
Why is the graphics tests based on using a discrete GTX1080? That is completely unrealistic. A much more realistic comparison would have been using a R9-480, since it's considerably cheaper and a much more likely candidate if someone were to use a discrete card.
Also, can the APU be crossfired like older APU's, and if so, with what cards? I know that with earlier APU's it was limited, but I believe it was still greater performance than either the integrated graphics or the APU alone. Maybe that won't be available until the lower end Polaris cards are released? Remembering that this APU is purely budget focused.
Maybe you could do a comparison of an i7-6700K with a GTX950? It's along similar lines as pairing an Athlon X4 with a GTX1080, and probably a little unfair since the i7-6700K and a GTX950 is probably more closely matched than an Athlon X4 and a GTX1080.
Why is the graphics tests based on using a discrete GTX1080? That is completely unrealistic. A much more realistic comparison would have been using a R9-480, since it's considerably cheaper and a much more likely candidate if someone were to use a discrete card.
Also, can the APU be crossfired like older APU's, and if so, with what cards? I know that with earlier APU's it was limited, but I believe it was still greater performance than either the integrated graphics or the APU alone. Maybe that won't be available until the lower end Polaris cards are released? Remembering that this APU is purely budget focused.
Maybe you could do a comparison of an i7-6700K with a GTX950? It's along similar lines as pairing an Athlon X4 with a GTX1080
, and probably a little unfair since the i7-6700K and a GTX950 is probably more closely matched than an Athlon X4 and a GTX1080.
Dazz
Senior Member
Posts: 671
Senior Member
Posts: 671
Posted on: 07/09/2016 08:36 AM
Weird, hasn't this CPU been out for a while now?
In Laptops yes but the laptops was all gimbed to hell being locked at 15w TDP by almost everyone, think Lonovo was the only one that didn't gimb theirs.
Over all i think this processor is pretty good, well performance was meh but temps max 45C, with a tiny aluminium and no coper at all heatsink running at 3.5GHz
Weird, hasn't this CPU been out for a while now?
In Laptops yes but the laptops was all gimbed to hell being locked at 15w TDP by almost everyone, think Lonovo was the only one that didn't gimb theirs.
Over all i think this processor is pretty good, well performance was meh but temps max 45C, with a tiny aluminium and no coper at all heatsink running at 3.5GHz
icedman
Senior Member
Posts: 751
Senior Member
Posts: 751
Posted on: 07/10/2016 07:40 AM
Is there anything really internally different in these cpu's because on paper they just look like better binned chips with lower voltages.
Is there anything really internally different in these cpu's because on paper they just look like better binned chips with lower voltages.
pages 1 2
Click here to post a comment for this article on the message forum.
Junior Member
Posts: 7
On 1st page its says MSI AM1 (which is different socket motherboard). Overall, a great little processor and review!