| AMD A10-6800K APU Richland Processor |  |
| Reviews - Featured Reviews: Processors | |
| Written by Hank Tolman | |
| Tuesday, 04 June 2013 | |
|
Page 1 of 14
AMD A10-6800K Richland APU Review
Manufacturer: Advanced Micro Devices
Product Name: Desktop Processor
Model Number: A10-6800K Part Number: AD680KW0A44HL / AD680KWOHLBOX Price As Tested: $149.99 (Newegg | Amazon) Full Disclosure: The product sample used in this article has been provided by AMD. So far, it seems that the early summer of 2013 is destined to be full of Intel Haswell coverage. Rather than consigning themselves to the shadows, AMD is quietly releasing two new members of their APU family. The next generation of APUs is being represented at the top by the A10-6800K and the A10-6700 Accelerated Processing Units, codenamed Richland. It has been about eight months since AMD released the last generation, Trinity APUs. When that happened, AMD took back the performance lead from Ivy Bridge in the sub-$150 CPU price range. This has been AMD's bread and butter for a while now, especially with their ability to pair discrete level graphics with their CPUs that totally decimate the onboard capabilities of their opponent. Haswell may change things, but for now, we'll see where AMD is setting the bar for entry-level performance. In this article, Benchmark Reviews takes a hard look at the third generation of AMD APUs with the top end AMD A10-6800K Richland Processor. 
From the recent tech news, it seems like both AMD and Intel are starting to move more development money towards the inevitable expansion of mobility processing and away from the old-hat and worn out desktop market. Can you blame them? Laptops are getting smaller and faster, but even they can't keep up with the publicity of tablets and smartphones. Intel has experienced a few design wins in the tablet market, especially where Windows 8 Pro tablets are concerned. The Atom processors are in a lot of designs, but the i5 tablets are what gets me salivating. AMD isn't far behind either. If Intel can throw an Ivy Bridge CPU into a tablet with its sub-par graphics performance, what's to stop AMD from putting an APU in a tablet and giving the mobility world a small taste of the power of desktop graphics? Well, power, actually, is exactly what has been stopping them. But that won't last for long. With all the profits tied up in the mobility space, desktop enthusiasts are looking for a cookie. A little token of appreciation for the years of toiling and dollars spent upgrading. The summer of 2013 promises a little for everyone with both Intel and AMD pushing out something for us desktop fools. Where their plans lie for the future of desktop computing is anyone's guess. Both companies have come out and said they are not giving up on it. While that may not mean much, let's take a quick look at what AMD is releasing for us.
|
|
Comments
this was proven false with APUs which can gain as much as a 20-25% boost from 1866 RAM over 1600 and the same with 1600 over 1333 which means which means if used bishock infinite would most likely have come in at a low but very much playable 25 FPS.
i only felt the need to point this out because anyone who is considering these new APU should be aware that RAM speed makes a much bigger difference than it does with any other setup.
2133Mhz 1866Mhz 1600Mhz
Devil May Cry
1080p, Ultra, all settings max 41.351 38.051 35.691
Far Cry 3 Blood Dragon
1080p, DX11, med, low post fx, low shadows 30 26 24.932
Bioshock Infinite
1080p, low preset 31.2 27.9 25.56
Tomb Raider
1080p, low preset, texture quality normal 42.9 38.7 36
Sometimes the FPS gains are up to 4 or 5 FPS. So I should have said a few FPS difference rather than a couple. Either way, I didn't have any 2133MHz RAM on hand to test with.
#hothardware.com/Reviews/AMD-A106800K-and-A106700-Richland-APUs-Tested/?page=11
Those numbers I posted above were from AMD's own testing and not one of those tests shows a performance increase of more than 6.9 FPS between the DDR3-1600MHz RAM and the DDR3-2133MHz RAM.
If there are any lingering doubts, the answer is yes, 2133MHz RAM will increase performance for the A10-6800K, but not dramatically enough to call testing with DDR3-1600MHz RAM a waste of time.
2. What is the performance of matching the APU + discrete GPU against an i3 or i5 + with the same discrete GPU? The iGPU is great, but most gamers are going to wonder if they can recommend the A10-6800K as a viable alternative to the i3-3225/i5-3570K/4670K as a gaming CPU with single GPU. With the ability to run two GPUs in x8/x8, it would be nice to see Crossfire tests with two discrete GPUs, if that is possible...
Thanks,
Kris
As for your second question, I would have loved to run some CrossfireX tests. Unfortunately, the Richland APUs only support CFX up to Radeon HD 6670. I didn't have a 6670, 6570, or 6470 on hand to test with. I tried to use a 7790 and a 7850, but they don't work. As for using two discrete GPUs, those results aren't going to factor in the APU in any measurable way. You'd get close to the same results regardless of the setup with two discrete GPUs in CFX. I think I showed pretty well that, when paired with a Radeon HD 7850 or a GTX 660Ti, the A10-6800K is more than viable as a gaming CPU. Those scores will be consistent with any CPU.
Firstly, thank you for the getback!
So if I understand you correctly, even though they support x8/x8 configs, APUs do not support disabling the iGPU and running, say, two 7850s or 660 Ti's?
I am wondering how the APU compares directly to the i3-3225 and i5-3570K/4670K as *just* a gaming CPU, where a discrete card will be present and the iGPU will not be utilized for gaming.
A game like Supreme Commander, with lots of units on screen, would be a great way to test the CPU's capability in the game.
You can definitely use two video cards in CF or SLI configuration in an FM2 motherboard and bypass using the IGP altogether. My point was that, for nearly all high-end games, the CPU wouldn't make a significant difference in that case. The FPS using an A10-6800K would be about the same as if you were using an i5-4670K or even an i7-4770K. With CPU intensive games, of which there are a few, the faster CPU would obviously provide better performance. I ran tests using the GTX 660Ti as the sole GPU and the on both the i3-3220 machine and the A10-6800K machine, the actual gaming performance was always within 3%, generally considered to be the margin of error.
I have little experience with the desktop APU's, as most of my customers rarely ask for those. I can however comment on the A10 in laptops. I bought a Trinity (A10-4600m) based laptop for school around this time last year and I was floored at the graphics performance. AMD is a clear winner if your shopping for a laptop on a budget and dont want or cant afford one with a discrete GPU in it. I am partial to Intel/Nvidia in the desktop market, but next time Im on the market for a Laptop without a discrete GPU, I know what I will be getting.
This is around 10-30fps slower than the 6800k in most games. And almost twice the price!!
Youtube link:
#youtu.be/k7Yo2A__1Xw
#hexus.net/tech/reviews/cpu/46073-amd-a10-5800k-trinity-needs-faster-ram/?page=3
and many more
See no reason why the 6800 shouldn't also