Corsair Xeneon 27QHD240 OLED monitor review
ASUS Radeon RX 7600 STRIX OC review
Corsair RM1200X SHIFT 1200W PSU Review
Intel NUC 13 Pro (Arena Canyon) review
Endorfy Arx 700 Air chassis review
Beelink SER5 Pro (Ryzen 7 5800H) mini PC review
Crucial T700 PCIe 5.0 NVMe SSD Review - 12GB/s
Sapphire Radeon RX 7600 PULSE review
Gainward GeForce RTX 4060 Ti GHOST review
Radeon RX 7600 review
AMD Kaveri FX-7600P Mobile APU Vs. ULV Haswell Benchmark mini-review
A little while ago specs on AMD's new mobile platform found its way onto the web. Basically the Kaveri APU linelup entails seven parts. Six quad cores APUS and one dual core APU. The leader of the pack is the FX-7600P and some benchmarks have reared. The lineup includes four ULV SKUs and three 35W parts. For the ULV segment the FX-7500 is a 19W quad-core clocked at 2.1/3.3GHz with 384 Radeon cores.
The R7 GPU is clocked at 496/553MHz and the APU supports DDR3 1600 memory. The A8-7100 is 19W part, quad-core clocked at 1.8GHz with an up to 3.0GHz Turbo. But next to the 17W/19W parts, AMD has also cooked up three mainstream 35W APUs.
The A8-7200P is clocked at 2.4/3.4GHz. It has R5 graphics with 256 shaders clocked at 553/626MHz. It supports DDR3 1866. The 10-7400P is slightyly faster at 2.5/3.4GHz, but it packs R6 graphics with 384 shaders clocked at 576/654MHz. Like its sibling it supports DDR 1866 memory.
| Model | CPU-cores | clokfreq./ turbo | L2-cache | GPU | CU's/GPU-cores | GPU-clok/turbo | Max. DDR3 | TDP |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FX-7600P | 4 | 2,7 / 3,6 GHz | 4 MB | R7 | 8 / 512 | 600 / 686 MHz | 2.133 MHz | 35 watt |
| A10-7400P | 4 | 2,5 / 3,4 GHz | 4 MB | R6 | 6 / 384 | 576 / 654 MHz | 1.866 MHz | 35 watt |
| A8-7200P | 4 | 2,4 / 3,3 GHz | 4 MB | R5 | 4 / 256 | 553 / 626 MHz | 1.866 MHz | 35 watt |
| FX-7500 | 4 | 2,1 / 3,3 GHz | 4 MB | R7 | 6 / 384 | 496 / 553 MHz | 1.600 MHz | 19 watt |
| A10-7300 | 4 | 1,9 / 3,2 GHz | 4 MB | R6 | 6 / 384 | 464 / 533 MHz | 1.600 MHz | 19 watt |
| A8-7100 | 4 | 1,8 / 3 GHz | 4 MB | R5 | 4 / 256 | 450 / 514 MHz | 1.600 MHz | 19 watt |
| A6-7000 | 2 | 2,2 / 3 GHz | 1 MB | R4 | 3 / 192 | 494 / 533 MHz | 1.600 MHz | 17 watt |
The Flagship FX-7600P then, it runs at 2.7GHz base and 3.6GHz turbo and features R7 graphics with 512 shaders processors. The GPU runs at 600/686MHz. Although the GPU clocks are somewhat lower than on desktop Kaveri APUs with all 512 shaders, the new FX appears to have the most powerful integrated GPU of any mobile part to date. It is also the only mobile Kaveri to support DDR3 2133 memory.
WCCFtech (check source link) has posted the first benchmark scores of this APU, and they are quite interesting, though both benchmarks are GPU assisted:
"Not only that but the very-much mainstream A10-7300 APU is comfortably ahead of the i7-4500U, i5-4200U and i3-4010U in terms of Gaming Performance. What it actually means is that APUs are finally exiting the territory of HTPC-only setups and entering the realm of true gaming power. While you would not be able to run any modern game at anywhere near the modern games, there should be quite a few games out there that run well at low-medium settings and considering the low power consumption. That is definitely a bargain."
AMD Kaveri Successor Carrizo to get DDR4 support and FCH - 03/19/2014 06:43 PM
Rumors on AMDs upcoming Carrizo APUs have surfaced. The Carrizo series should succeed Kaveri in 2015. The APU should be able to support both DDR3 and DDR4 memory according to a leaked slide. APUs fo...
Gigabyte AMD Kaveri APUs on A88X, A78 and A55 Based FM2+ Boards - 01/14/2014 10:05 AM
Gigabyte today announced official support for next generation AMD A-Series APUs based on the highly anticipated 'Kaveri' architecture. GIGABYTE 'Kaveri' support includes current AMD A88X and A55 ...
Official AMD Kaveri APU Details - 01/07/2014 05:25 PM
AMD is ready to announce two Kaveri Accelerated Processing Units, the A10-7700K and A10-7850K chips. AMD A10-7000 series processors have 4 "Steamroller" CPU cores, 4 MB L2 cache and 95 Wa...
Prices of upcoming AMD Kaveri and Richland APUs Surface - 12/09/2013 06:47 PM
AMD is getting ready to launch in January two Kaveri Accelerated Processing Units, that, by some reports, should boost both CPU and GPU performance by up to 20% - 30% compared to A10-6000 series APUs....
AMD Kaveri slide shows dedicated SSD interface - 11/27/2013 04:30 PM
The fellas at Tech Report found somew new details about AMD's upcoming Kaveri APU, a slide highlights that Kaveri will have a PCI Express interface dedicated to SSDs, but there's no word on the num...
Fox2232
Senior Member
Posts: 11808
Joined: 2012-07-20
Senior Member
Posts: 11808
Joined: 2012-07-20
#4815427 Posted on: 05/10/2014 07:23 AM
I'm slightly disappointed with AMD's APUs in general though, I have an A8-5600K in a living room PC and even though its nice to have a semi-competent iGPU, it really can't do all that much. It can't play SC2 at medium, nor BF3/4 smoothly on low @ 1080/60fps. That, plus the weak IPC (and wonky temperature sensors), makes me wishing I had bought a non-K i5 and just slapped something like a GTX750 or one of my 7950s onto it.
Well, you got 256 shaders with your 5600K. That's half of what you get now.
Back then you could have had 384 which is +50% bonus. It was your decision. And even those 256 should play a lot on low details 1080p. And yes, there are games which will not work good enough.
I agree that IPC on Trinity was not very good and it is not that much better now, but you could have opted for 5800K if you intended to use it for occasional gaming as price of entire mini pc would be like 5-10% higher only.
And in all honesty that FX-7600P can crush your HTPC in gaming and show many benefits in productivity.
Therefore surpassing in performance 1.5year old trinity and going from 100W desktop envelope to 35W notebook is quite a feat while bringing things like HSA.
I'm slightly disappointed with AMD's APUs in general though, I have an A8-5600K in a living room PC and even though its nice to have a semi-competent iGPU, it really can't do all that much. It can't play SC2 at medium, nor BF3/4 smoothly on low @ 1080/60fps. That, plus the weak IPC (and wonky temperature sensors), makes me wishing I had bought a non-K i5 and just slapped something like a GTX750 or one of my 7950s onto it.
Well, you got 256 shaders with your 5600K. That's half of what you get now.
Back then you could have had 384 which is +50% bonus. It was your decision. And even those 256 should play a lot on low details 1080p. And yes, there are games which will not work good enough.
I agree that IPC on Trinity was not very good and it is not that much better now, but you could have opted for 5800K if you intended to use it for occasional gaming as price of entire mini pc would be like 5-10% higher only.
And in all honesty that FX-7600P can crush your HTPC in gaming and show many benefits in productivity.
Therefore surpassing in performance 1.5year old trinity and going from 100W desktop envelope to 35W notebook is quite a feat while bringing things like HSA.
snip3r_3
Senior Member
Posts: 2981
Joined: 2004-12-17
Senior Member
Posts: 2981
Joined: 2004-12-17
#4816005 Posted on: 05/11/2014 06:53 PM
Well, you got 256 shaders with your 5600K. That's half of what you get now.
Back then you could have had 384 which is +50% bonus. It was your decision. And even those 256 should play a lot on low details 1080p. And yes, there are games which will not work good enough.
I agree that IPC on Trinity was not very good and it is not that much better now, but you could have opted for 5800K if you intended to use it for occasional gaming as price of entire mini pc would be like 5-10% higher only.
And in all honesty that FX-7600P can crush your HTPC in gaming and show many benefits in productivity.
Therefore surpassing in performance 1.5year old trinity and going from 100W desktop envelope to 35W notebook is quite a feat while bringing things like HSA.
Yeah, the HTPC wasn't meant for games, so I didn't think an A10 would be needed. I simply ran some games on it to test out how fast the integrated was as compared to say, my dedicated cards and my laptop. 256 vs 384 however, the A8 wasn't very fast to begin with, 50% may or may not help especially at 1080P (when for example BF3 ran at ~20-30FPS in 64p games, 50% still doesn't hit 60. I have 1866 RAM on it so I think that is probably the maximum performance I can get out of it.). I agree that it is slightly expecting too much from something that was only ~$100, but I mean, the entire concept of it is slightly botched due to the low IPC as well as only have 4 cores (With BF3/4 + a 7950, FPS is still low due to the CPU). If AMD releases it with 8/6 cores, then it'll be much more interesting as their FX6 series can compete fairly well with i5s and FX8s sometimes with i7s in multithreaded programs. As it stands now, I think the performance gained in GPU is largely too small to warrant the low IPC, low core count in the APUs.
Regarding the FX7600P though, most mobile APUs AMD released in the past were severely hindered by TDP and hence clock speeds. I wonder if these would still be, same process and all?
Well, you got 256 shaders with your 5600K. That's half of what you get now.
Back then you could have had 384 which is +50% bonus. It was your decision. And even those 256 should play a lot on low details 1080p. And yes, there are games which will not work good enough.
I agree that IPC on Trinity was not very good and it is not that much better now, but you could have opted for 5800K if you intended to use it for occasional gaming as price of entire mini pc would be like 5-10% higher only.
And in all honesty that FX-7600P can crush your HTPC in gaming and show many benefits in productivity.
Therefore surpassing in performance 1.5year old trinity and going from 100W desktop envelope to 35W notebook is quite a feat while bringing things like HSA.
Yeah, the HTPC wasn't meant for games, so I didn't think an A10 would be needed. I simply ran some games on it to test out how fast the integrated was as compared to say, my dedicated cards and my laptop. 256 vs 384 however, the A8 wasn't very fast to begin with, 50% may or may not help especially at 1080P (when for example BF3 ran at ~20-30FPS in 64p games, 50% still doesn't hit 60. I have 1866 RAM on it so I think that is probably the maximum performance I can get out of it.). I agree that it is slightly expecting too much from something that was only ~$100, but I mean, the entire concept of it is slightly botched due to the low IPC as well as only have 4 cores (With BF3/4 + a 7950, FPS is still low due to the CPU). If AMD releases it with 8/6 cores, then it'll be much more interesting as their FX6 series can compete fairly well with i5s and FX8s sometimes with i7s in multithreaded programs. As it stands now, I think the performance gained in GPU is largely too small to warrant the low IPC, low core count in the APUs.
Regarding the FX7600P though, most mobile APUs AMD released in the past were severely hindered by TDP and hence clock speeds. I wonder if these would still be, same process and all?
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 1261
Joined: 2013-02-22
the lano apu's were ok i came from an a6 3650 to and a10 5800k the 5800k can play sc2 max and d3 mid/high at decent frames. they are very dependant on memory cant wait till they get ddr4 on these.