7.38 GHz AMD APU on MSI FM2-A85XA-G65

#4427219

PhazeDelta1

2012-10-09 13:57

Oh snap. :banana:

#4427261

Lane

2012-10-09 15:27

In addition, Massman have got some fun with Trinity ( Ln2 cooled ) Look like this is the first IGP to hit 10K in 3Dmark vantage: APU details

Model: A10-5800K 'Trinity' Cooling: Liquid Nitrogen [-185 °C under load] °C -185 (load) -185 (idle) 20 (ambient) Batch: GA 1216PNT 0063 Speed: 3,800 @ 5,242MHz (ref/imc/qpi: 124/3,495/MHz)

Integrated GPU details..

Model: GIGABYTE Radeon HD 7660D (Devastator) Cooling: Liquid Nitrogen [-185 °C under load] Temperature ( °C ): -185 (load) -185 (idle) Batch: GA 1216PNT 0063 Clockspeed: 667/0 (stock) @ 1,591/1,331 MHz

http://imageshack.us/a/img836/3240/imageid844018.png http://hwbot.org/submission/2316144_hwbot_testlab_3dmark_vantage___performance_radeon_hd_7660d_10002_marks http://imageshack.us/a/img231/3867/844014.jpg More infos, screen, photos, video and settings here http://hwbot.org/news/8180_hwbot_testlab_1_gigabyte_f2a85x_up4_p10000_3dmark_vantage

#4428631

heffeque

2012-10-11 05:08

I know I'm being quite of an ass here but... at that frequency can it even beat a non-overclocked 3rd gen Intel i7 ? Don't get me wrong, I bought an AMD solely because I want to contribute to AMD not going bankrupt, but their CPU performance vs Intel is still extremely sub-par.

#4428645

sykozis

2012-10-11 06:07

I know I'm being quite of an ass here but... at that frequency can it even beat a non-overclocked 3rd gen Intel i7 ?

You're comparing an entry-level/budget processor....to a High-end processor....but yes, at 7.38ghz, it would outperform a stock clocked Ivy Bridge i7

#4428658

heffeque

2012-10-11 06:23

You're comparing an entry-level/budget processor....to a High-end processor....

My point exactly: if you take out ATi from the equation, AMD right now is just an entry-level/budget processor brand. I remember that the first AMD to get to the 1 GHz mark was very very competitive, but right now AMD doesn't have any CPUs that can compete with Intel on the high-end.

but yes, at 7.38ghz, it would outperform a stock clocked Ivy Bridge i7

That would be nice to check. Are there any numbers to confirm that allegation?

#4428915

Lane

2012-10-11 14:32

My point exactly: if you take out ATi from the equation, AMD right now is just an entry-level/budget processor brand. I remember that the first AMD to get to the 1 GHz mark was very very competitive, but right now AMD doesn't have any CPUs that can compete with Intel on the high-end. That would be nice to check. Are there any numbers to confirm that allegation?

Its not a question of AMD vs Intel here.. compare what is comparable, you will not compare this with an I7 3770K.... there's the FX series for that.. ( lets hope the new FX second generation will be better .)

#4428958

StewieTech

2012-10-11 16:09

I want it over nine thousand.

#4428961

heffeque

2012-10-11 16:15

Its not a question of AMD vs Intel here.. compare what is comparable, you will not compare this with an I7 3770K.... there's the FX series for that.. ( lets hope the new FX second generation will be better .)

The FX series isn't much better than the CPU of the A10 so... what's your point?

#4428967

CPC_RedDawn

2012-10-11 16:19

Nice clocks but still its pointless seen as these chip are entry level and are aimed at people with low income or people wanting to build a small quiet HTPC not a massively overclocked beast with LN2 pooring out the top... But I suppose the old saying "because we can..." motto comes to mind :P

#4429040

scoter man1

2012-10-11 18:08

Yawn...

#4429059

Lane

2012-10-11 18:34

The FX series isn't much better than the CPU of the A10 so... what's your point?

The point is not if the FX is better, but at least they are in the same category .. The A10 or this type of APU are more comparable to an dual core with 4 threads.. ( 2 modules who each contain 2 cores ).... + a good 65% is in reality the gpu. The A10 replace the A8 "Lianno", something will come for replace the FX 8000 series then. But you are right, they are not High end parts, but have never intended to be.

Nice clocks but still its pointless seen as these chip are entry level and are aimed at people with low income or people wanting to build a small quiet HTPC not a massively overclocked beast with LN2 pooring out the top... But I suppose the old saying "because we can..." motto comes to mind :P

Just cause it is a lot fun, who can remind easely the good old time with A64 ... pushing 1500mhz on this integrated GPU + find all the good timing, adjust frequencies, NB bus, memory etc ..

#4429250

Rich_Guy

2012-10-11 23:29

but can it run Crysis ? Sorry 🙁

#4429262

tsunami231

2012-10-11 23:47

but can it run Crysis ? Sorry 🙁

I have noticed the quote is always can it run cyrsis, Did Crytech really drop the ball that bad with 2? makes me wonder about 3 lol

#4429281

DSparil

2012-10-12 00:14

My point exactly: if you take out ATi from the equation, AMD right now is just an entry-level/budget processor brand. I remember that the first AMD to get to the 1 GHz mark was very very competitive, but right now AMD doesn't have any CPUs that can compete with Intel on the high-end.

This isn't an Intel vs AMD thread, and that couldn't be more off topic. Not only was this feat (from the actual thread topic) impressive, AMD also holds the world record for the worlds fastest CPU http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-501465_162-20105636-501465.html I don't care what anyone says, that is impressive!

#4429287

heffeque

2012-10-12 00:31

This isn't an Intel vs AMD thread, and that couldn't be more off topic. Not only was this feat (from the actual thread topic) impressive, AMD also holds the world record for the worlds fastest CPU http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-501465_162-20105636-501465.html I don't care what anyone says, that is impressive!

Well... I'm just stating that I'm somewhat disappointed with AMD. There's really no point on meaningless overclock numbers when IRL the performance is sub-par even when over-clocked or even super-clocked. How fast is that super-clocked 8.4 GHz Bulldozer? There are no benchmarks to show that it's actually the fastest CPU on earth.

#4429339

mitzi76

2012-10-12 01:51

Well... I'm just stating that I'm somewhat disappointed with AMD. There's really no point on meaningless overclock numbers when IRL the performance is sub-par even when over-clocked or even super-clocked. How fast is that super-clocked 8.4 GHz Bulldozer? There are no benchmarks to show that it's actually the fastest CPU on earth.

well arent you missing the point? it's about what is the fastest speed a certain cpu can reach not about comparisons with other cpus. if it runs @8.4ghz no need to analyse it further...y esta!

#4429376

DSparil

2012-10-12 02:55

well arent you missing the point? it's about what is the fastest speed a certain cpu can reach not about comparisons with other cpus. if it runs @8.4ghz no need to analyse it further...y esta!

exactly 🙂

#4429378

HamsterCrispy

2012-10-12 03:00

but can it run crysis? - is an epic and forever will be funny comment. 😀 but can Chuck Norris run crysis? 😱

#4429381

heffeque

2012-10-12 03:01

Then it's the commercial CPU with the highest achieved frequency. Not sure if it's the fastest. ¡Y ya está!

#4429385

CPC_RedDawn

2012-10-12 03:15

but can it run crysis? - is an epic and forever will be funny comment. 😀 but can Chuck Norris run crysis? 😱

Chuck Norris is Crysis!! :P Remember Chuck Norris does not flush the toilet, he scares the sh*t out of it.