Archive Home arrow Reviews: arrow Processors arrow AMD A10-5800K Trinity Desktop Processor
AMD A10-5800K Trinity Desktop Processor E-mail
Reviews - Featured Reviews: Processors
Written by Hank Tolman   
Tuesday, 02 October 2012
Table of Contents: Page Index
AMD A10-5800K Trinity Desktop Processor
AMD FM2 Chipsets - A85X, A75, A55
Processor Testing Methodology
AIDA64 Extreme Edition v1.1 Benchmark Tests
Passmark PerformanceTest
PCMark Vantage Benchmark Tests
Cinebench R11.5 Benchmarks
DX10 Gaming Benchmarks
DX11 Gaming Benchmarks
Video Transcoding Tests
A8-3850 Power and Temperature
AMD A8-3850 APU Final Thoughts
AMD A-Series A10-5800K Conclusion

AMD A10-5800K Desktop Processor Review

Manufacturer: Advanced Micro Devices, INC. (AMD)
Product Name: A10-5800K
Model Number: AD580KWOHJBOX
Price as Tested: $129.99 (Newegg)

Full Disclosure: The product sample used in this article has been provided by AMD.

Right on track, well after Ivy Bridge, AMD has released their second generation of Accelerated Processing Units in the form of the Trinity series A10-5800k and the A8-5600k. Last week, we brought you a preview of these two APUs just to give you a taste of their gaming performance and some of their specifications. Today, at Benchmark Reviews, we are going in detail for a full work-over of the A10-5800 APU.

Unfortunately, six months is a long time. A lot can happen in six months, and a lot of processors can be sold. Based on the performance that we have seen up to this point, the second generation AMD APUs are set to beat their equivalently priced Ivy Bridge counterparts quite handily. The problem is finding the group of customers who waited patiently for their appearance and held off from buying an Intel system.

AMD_A10_5800_Top.jpg

Last week we saw some details about the new Trinity APUs, including some of the impressive GPU numbers they put up. Today we can get into more of the details, including what they cost and a more robust selection of benchmarks. With the A10-5800 retailing at Newegg.com for $129.99 today, that puts it right in the market of the i3-3220. We have comparison tests ready to go for those two processors, as well as a slew of benchmarks comparing graphics in all their varieties. For reference, I've listed a chart below with all of the Trinity series FM2 APUs and their respective specifications.

Processor

A10-5800K

A10-5700

A8-5600K

A8-5500

A6-5400

A4-5300

Modules/Cores

2/4

2/4

2/4

2/4

1/2

1/2

CPU Clock Base/Turbo

3.8 / 4.2

3.4 / 4.0

3.6 / 3.9

3.2 / 3.7

3.6 / 3.8

3.4 / 3.6

Cache

4MB

4MB

4MB

4MB

1MB

1MB

Graphics Cores

384 @ 800MHz

384 @ 760MHz

256 @ 760MHz

256 @ 760MHz

192 @ 760MHz

128 @ 760MHz

TDP

100 watts

65 watts

100 watts

65 watts

65 watts

65 watts

Socket

FM2

FM2

FM2

FM2

FM2

FM2

MSRP

$122

$122

$101

$101

$67

$53



 

Comments 

 
# PCI-exCaring1 2012-10-03 00:02
From my understanding of this article, the FM2 based motherboards are only Gen2 Pci-ex, while Intel has moved on to Gen3 in a lot of cases. Will this put the new Processors from AMD behind the 8 ball as far as casual gamers are concerned?
Is it capable of running in hybrid, APU and discrete graphics in order to boost graphic performance?
Report Comment
 
 
# PCI-E 2.0RealNeil 2012-10-03 07:38
No, the best video cards that abound these days cannot saturate the PCI-E 2.0 bus yet. (even a pair of them) So PCI-E 3.0 isn't such a huge deal yet. Games are not programed to take advantage of the extra bandwidth either.
These new APUs are indeed capable of Hybrid Crossfire, and that has improved with this platform having a more powerful on die GPU. Crossfire always scales to the lowest common denominator, so this Hybrid Crossfire works better than the last generation does.

Overall, this batch of APUs is an improvement over my A8-3850 with the HD6670 in Hybrid Crossfire. (a system that I use daily)
Report Comment
 
 
# PCI-E 3.0Hank Tolman 2012-10-04 16:07
Is AMD behind the power curve on PCI-E 3.0? Definitely, but am more concerned about the ramifications of no AM3+ native support for PCI-E 3.0 than FM2 support for it. As RealNeil says, right now it isn't a big deal either way, since you won't notice a difference, even with the highest end graphics cards. That being said, if you are someone who wants a PCI-E 3.0 video card, you probably aren't in the market for an FM2 anyway.

Interestingly enough, it was AMD that came out with the first PCI-E 3.0 GPUs, although none of their current chipsets support it.
Report Comment
 
 
# RE: PCI-expeterc 2012-10-09 12:40
as i recall - u get a 70% boost from some amd discrete cards working w/ the gpu

silly tho

yep - u can have way more fun than intel

but gpu is not for gaming
Report Comment
 
 
# i3-3220 better cpu?Jimbo 2012-10-04 10:24
From the bottom of the "Final Thoughts" page ... " ... the i3-3220 offers better CPU capabilities. "

Looking at these graphs I couldn't really see that. It looked to me like the A10 slightly edged it out here too. It was at least close enough to render the author's statement as perceived bias.
Report Comment
 
 
# CinebenchHank Tolman 2012-10-04 15:12
Cinebench is easily one of the best indicators of pure CPU performance. That benchmark is able to isolate the CPU better than any other one I know of. If you look at the Cinebench scores, the i3-3220 outpaces the A10-5800K and the A8-5600K pretty handily.

Keep in mind, too, that the final thoughts and the ratings are solely my opinion. The charts show the actual performance. It is just my opinion that I would use the i3-3220 over the A10-5800K if I didn't need the graphics capability of the APU.

That being said, I probably wouldn't be using either of those processors if I needed CPU intensive processing.
Report Comment
 
 
# cinebenchjimbo 2012-10-05 13:39
Fair enough assessment; I'll remind readers that the actual score deficit in multi threaded Cinebench for the a10-5800k vs i3-3220 was 0.07 or about 2% . The single thread score deficit was a fair bit higher, so I suppose it would be fair to say that if you only had to choose between these two processors and needed to do 3D rendering on one core, then the i3-3220 would be the choice to make. But that's a bit like saying, "if you need to do some serious 4x4 off roading, a Civic is better than a Focus because it comes with better all terrain tires." -- which seems to be an assessment in favour of of the Civic, when in reality no-one would do 4x4 ing in their compact and thus it is a useless statement and to even make it indicates something. Would you not agree? I'm just not sure how you felt compelled to make that comment, that's all.
Report Comment
 
 
# PassmarkJake 2012-10-07 17:19
Anyone know why this CPU shows a score of over 8,000 on passmark.com? That would make this CPU the deal of the century considering it's only $130, but according to this article and others I've read, the score posted on passmark.com is just too good to be true. WTF happened?

##passmark.com/cpubenchmark/cpu.php?cpu=AMD+A10-5800K+APU
Report Comment
 
 
# RE: PassmarkOlin Coles 2012-10-07 17:24
There are so many factors that influence benchmarks, it's a bad idea to put stock into one random result like this one. We did our own Passmark testing where the memory and other components were kept identical (except for the CPU of course), and even despite this I would still tell you to look at all of the results for a better perspective in your comparison.
Report Comment
 
 
# RE: RE: PassmarkJake 2012-10-12 19:47
Interestingly, the passmark.com number is now down under 6,000. I also noticed that (even now) it's only based on 3 samples (they apparently average user-submitted scores on the site), so the earlier high score appears to be a fluke that should get corrected over time (i.e. the score will eventually show something similar to the one from this article).

Passmark.com is usually a decent way to get a quick "snapshot" of a CPU's general performance, just beware with brand new models, since the small sample size brings about skewed results.
Report Comment
 
 
# RE: RE: RE: PassmarkDunaduna 2012-10-19 13:18
I selling computers in my shop, today I built one with A10-5800k on Gigabyte F2A75M-D3H with Kingston 128GB SSD. Firstly I tested with Kingston KVR 1333 2GB DDR3 memory and have in Passmark CPU 7230, GPU 323 points. Than I changed memory to Kingston Hyper 1866 cl9 2x4GB with the motherboard default recognition, clocked automaticly to 1333 speed: Passmark showed CPU 7810 GPU 767 points, and I finally changed BIOS memory setting from automatic to AMD profile 1, this resulted in a memory speed of 1866 with 9 11 9 27 timings and a passmark result of CPU 7950 GPU 976 points. The byer was amazed, and so do I, especially when I red so low reviews for GPU performances. Also I noticed that in Passmark GPU test in full screen airplane flying the texture of water was badly stitched (maybe a driver problem from Gigabyte original CD). So what is happening with Passmark? Or I sold the best processor of the year for penauts.
Report Comment
 
 
# RE: AMD A10-5800K Trinity Desktop Processorusrev2 2012-10-10 20:10
I can't see this being worth it in most situations. The i3-3225 is only $20 more and probably better then this in everything but some games, the intel HD 4000 is just fine for lots of games to begin with on lower settings, and even then for just $60 or so you can be on par or better then this APU.
I don't see this being worth the money in anything except maybe laptops which cannot be upgraded anyway.
Report Comment
 
 
# SummaryJimbo 2012-10-13 17:17
Let's review this:

Actually the 5800k if faster than the i3-3225 in ALL games, and if you look here at these charts - most of the CPU tasks as well (did you look at the charts?) the CPU only deficit in Cinebench to the i3-3220 was a mere 2%.

Yes you can pair the i3 with a discrete card and get the same graphics performance and more heat/consumption for more money if you want to pay yet more.

It's easily worth it, think HTPCs that can game most all games at ~ console quality, small compact computers, businesses that don't need discrete GPUs, Laptops, netbooks, tablets -- any places where any discrete GPU is not desired and 3D rendering or superpi isn't the daily tasks, then there are no better options out there for the price ... none.
Report Comment
 
 
# RE: Summarypeterc 2012-10-13 21:16
Good post

sums it nicely

If u want decent graphics, & we all do, AMDs boards hit a sweet spot

Oh wait, as u say, an igp on a separate chip from a dying company & runs hotter (as u say) & I doubt is better - right - we agree - sorry for the turgid text

If cine bench is such a big deal, Open CL? - it will stomp on intel

32nm s not bad

if itel have a node/cpu advantage? - having an on die decent gpu trumps it by a country mile for most. open cl seems a happening thing - as u needs grow - so will u power
Report Comment
 
 
# RE: AMD A10-5800K Trinity Desktop Processorpeterc 2012-10-12 21:44
dunno

If u look at the basic numbers of pcie

last i heard

a top end card on an 8 channel vs a 16 channel - nothing in it

even a 4 channel wasnt far behind

am talking amd 7850/90 etc
Report Comment
 
 
# RE: RE: AMD A10-5800K Trinity Desktop Processorpeterc 2012-10-13 21:24
PS

we have 2 b right

else

why do dual cards
Report Comment
 
 
# Virtu MVPraypozas 2012-10-14 05:58
How about a 7770 and Lucid's Virtu MVP on an Asrock FM2A85X Extreme6 motherboard or any 85 series motherboard with Lucid's Virtu MVP. How would the frame rates at 1080P be?
Report Comment
 
 
# RE: AMD A10-5800K Trinity Desktop ProcessorP Stanich 2013-04-04 19:20
Did you run this A10 and MB with an HD 7750 Radeon card?
Report Comment
 

Comments have been disabled by the administrator.

Search Benchmark Reviews
QNAP Network Storage Servers

Follow Benchmark Reviews on FacebookReceive Tweets from Benchmark Reviews on Twitter