AMD A10-6800K Review | Expert Reviews
The AMD-6800K is one of the first processor in AMD’s 2013 APU range to be released. Nicknamed Richland, the new APUs improve upon the outgoing Trinity processors, although not in a radical fashion. The new processors still use Socket FM2, for instance, and are compatible with existing motherboards and the A55, a75 and A85X chipsets. This means you can buy and install an A10-6800K today.
One difference is that the A10-6800K has a built-in Radeon HD 8670D graphics processor rather than the AMD A10-5800K’s Radeon HD 7660D graphics processor, but the difference in performance isn’t phenomenal. The A10-5800K delivered an average frame rate of 45.5fps in Dirt Showdown at a resolution of 1,280×720 with 4x anti-aliasing and graphics quality set to High, while the A10-6800K delivered an average frame rate of 48.9fps under the same conditions. Raising the clock speed of our memory to 1866MHz increased the A10-6800K’s performance a little further, with our system delivering 50. 3fps under the same test conditions. Although not a huge increase on the graphics performance of the A10-5800K, we’re not too concerned, as the high-end A-series chips have always delivered fantastic graphics performance. Indeed the top-of-the-range Intel Core i7-4770K only scored 32.4fps in the same task.
The A10-6800K is the successor to the A10-5800K, and it has the same TDP of 100W, same amount of level 2 cache memory and is a 32nm process. However, the A10-6800K runs at a higher clock speed of 4.1GHz and has a higher boost speed of 4.4GHz. It performed better than the A10-5800K in our benchmark tests, scoring a very impressive 83 in the image editing segment, 69 in video editing, 68 in the multitasking segment and 71 overall. This compares well with the A10-5800K, which scored 67 in the image-editing segment, 61 in video, 66 in the multitasking segment and 65 overall.
We can see that the biggest increases were seen in the image- and video-editing segments, with the A10-6800K having nearly the same multitasking score.
Overall, the A10-6800K is around 9.2 per cent faster than the A10-5800K in our benchmark tests. This is a healthy and welcome increase, but it isn’t astounding considering the rise in clock speed and the fifteen per cent rise in price.
When overclocked to 4.4GHz, the A10-6800K scored 88 in image-editing, 72 in video editing and 71 in the multitasking segment, giving it a score of 74 overall. That’s a performance increase of 15 per cent over the A10-5800K at default clock settings and an increase of around four per cent over the A10-6800K at its default clock settings.
Its closest rival processor is the Intel Core i3-3220, as we’ve still to see 4th-generation Haswell Core i3 processors. The Core i3-3220 is cheaper, but it’s also a dual-core CPU that can’t be overclocked. The A10-6800K consistently beat the Core i3-3220 in all segments of our benchmark suite, with the Core i3-3220 scoring 60 overall. It also trounced the Core i3-3220 in our Dirt Showdown laptop test, scoring a very smooth 48.
9fps. The Core i3-3220 failed the same test. The Core i3-3220 is a good processor if you need a low TDP Intel-based system, but we think the A10-6800K is a better general-purpose processor, especially if you tend to play more games or watch videos.
AMD Richland A10-6800K Review — Introduction
Article NavigationPage 1: IntroductionPage 2: Specifications & FeaturesPage 3: Test SetupPage 4: OverclockingPage 5: Power ConsumptionPage 6: Synthetic Benchmarks: AIDA64Page 7: Synthetic Benchmarks: x264 HDPage 8: Synthetic Benchmarks: Cinebench 11.5Page 9: Synthetic Benchmarks: SiSoftware SANDRAPage 10: Synthetic Benchmarks: 3DMark 11 & 3DMark — Fire StrikePage 11: Synthetic Benchmarks: UNIGINE Heaven 4.0 & Valley 1.0Page 12: Game Benchmarks: AVP, Deus Ex:HR, TESV, DiRT SD, DOTA 2Page 13: Conclusion
AMD Richland A10-6800K Review
?by Tony Le Bourne
Comments
?27-08-13
Introduction
Product on Review:AMD Elite A10-6800K APU
Manufacturer and Sponsor:AMD
Current Street Price: 120 inc.
VAT (GBP)
AMD have taken the gaming world more seriously of late, evident with the ‘Gaming Evolved’ campaign being ever present in many recent PC titles as well as now having their APU technology being utilised in the coming next generation gaming consoles from Sony and Microsoft. Though these are earmarks for the success of the APU, the continually increasing demand in desktop performance gives rise to the latest 6000 series refresh for the FM2 platform. Though the names (or numbers) have changed as well as the new ‘Elite’ branding for their top tier products, the A10-6800K is essentially a higher clocked, cherry picked, ‘Trinity’ chip. The core speed is up to 4.1GHz/ 4.4GHz compared to the 3.8GHz — 4.1GHz of the A10-5800K and the GPU core clock has been increased to 844MHz from 800MHz. Another noticeable change is that 2133MHz memory is now ‘officially’ supported.
AMD’s Overview of the APU
Do more in less time with energy-efficient desktops.
With AMDs APU, a multicore CPU and discrete-level GPU on a single power-efficient chip, you get the visual performance you need for the best choice for digital entertainment and gaming. With even more compute performance, graphics are crisp, bright and smooth, and content is easy to share.
13 pages
1
2
3
4
>
»
Page 1: IntroductionPage 2: Specifications & FeaturesPage 3: Test SetupPage 4: OverclockingPage 5: Power ConsumptionPage 6: Synthetic Benchmarks: AIDA64Page 7: Synthetic Benchmarks: x264 HDPage 8: Synthetic Benchmarks: Cinebench 11.5Page 9: Synthetic Benchmarks: SiSoftware SANDRAPage 10: Synthetic Benchmarks: 3DMark 11 & 3DMark — Fire StrikePage 11: Synthetic Benchmarks: UNIGINE Heaven 4.
0 & Valley 1.0Page 12: Game Benchmarks: AVP, Deus Ex:HR, TESV, DiRT SD, DOTA 2Page 13: Conclusion
Subscribe to Vortez
Latest News
Cooler Master Launches Caliber E1, Caliber R3 and Caliber X2 Gaming Chairs
TEAMGROUP Introduces T-FORCE CARDEA Z540 M.2 PCIe 5.0 SSD
Silicon Power Unveils New High Endurance microSD Card
Alphacool Core Distro Plates with VPP Pump Launched
G.SKILL Zeta R5 Overclocked DDR5 R-DIMM Memory Kits for New Intel HEDT CPUs Launched
ASRock Intel 700 and 600 Series Motherboards Now Support Memory Capacity up to 192GB
COUGAR Introduces POLAR X2 and GEX V2 Power Supply Units
Advertisement
Categories
- CPUs and Motherboards
- Memory
- Graphics
- Cooling
- Cases & PSUs
- Storage
- Peripherals
- Audio
- Full Systems
- Misc.
- Games
- Guides
Vortez TV
Latest Reviews
-
GIGABYTE X670E AORUS MASTER Review
-
ASUS TUF Gaming RTX 4090 OC Review
-
AORUS RTX 4080 MASTER Review
-
MSI MPG X670E CARBON WiFi Review
-
GIGABYTE X670E AORUS XTREME Review
Affiliate News
-
Tech Round Up 15-02-2023
-
Tech Round-Up 31-01-2023
-
Tech Round-Up 15-01-2023
Online Users
There are currently 176 user(s) online:
Google
AMD A10-6800K processor
Richland as a Trinity update: examining the performance of the processor part
It has been known for a long time that AMD will release APUs of the Richland family over time — as if not before everyone had time to «try out» Trinity , which new devices were designed to replace.
Accordingly, at first, the rumor endowed this line with attractive features — up to the use of the 28 nm process technology and graphics based on GCN. In general, things are interconnected — just such a technical process was used for discrete GPUs of this architecture, which is “thick” for the already familiar 32 nm, but since the graphics component in the APU has long been the most significant in terms of area (more than 40%) since the days of Llano, it is on it that you have to focus when designing all other components. Later, however, it turned out that the “popular aspirations” would be realized in a product with a slightly different name, namely Kaveri, but Richland is an APU manufactured using 32 nm technology, containing one or two Piledriver processor modules and a GPU based on the VLIW4 architecture . Doesn’t it remind you of anything? Yes — Trinity in its purest form. Moreover, the contact compatibility of these two products is complete. Accordingly, the question arose — what’s new in the new APU? And due to what it should be faster than the old one? And will it? In general, there are more questions than answers 🙂 As it often happens on the eve of the appearance of a new product on the market.
Now the waiting period is over (for mobile models, however, it ended quite a long time ago, but in their case it is not easy to directly compare two processors under the same conditions), so you can deal with the questions that have arisen by searching for answers to them. What are we going to do today. Traditionally, starting with the processor part, the graphics require a separate study.
3 As for Intel processors, the assortment of this company in the price range we are interested in today, on the contrary, is extremely scarce. In fact, we are talking about only three Core i3 models, which differ from each other only in clock speed (plus the Core i3-3225, which is identical to 3220 when using a discrete graphics card). Here we will take the average of them, since it is closest to our main characters in terms of price.
| System board | RAM | |
| FM2 | MSI FM2-A85XA-G65 (A85) | Corsair Dominator Platinum CMD16GX3M4A2666C10(2×1866; 9-10-9-28) |
| AM3+ | ASUS Crosshair V Formula (990FX) | Corsair Dominator Platinum CMD16GX3M4A2666C10(2×1866; 9-10-9-28) |
| LGA1155 | Biostar TH67XE (H67) | Corsair Dominator Platinum CMD16GX3M4A2666C10 (2×1333; 9-9-9-24) |
Testing
Traditionally, we divide all tests into a certain number of groups, and show the average result for a group of tests/applications on the diagrams (details on the testing methodology can be found in a separate article).
The results on the diagrams are given in points, the performance of the iXBT.com reference test system of the 2011 sample is taken as 100 points. It is based on the AMD Athlon II X4 620 processor, but the amount of memory (8 GB) and the video card (NVIDIA GeForce GTX 570 1280 MB by Palit) are standard for all tests of the «main line» and can only be changed as part of special studies. Those who are interested in more detailed information are again traditionally invited to download a table in Microsoft Excel format, in which all the results are shown both in converted points and in «natural» form.
Interactive work in 3D packages
All professional applications in interactive work manage with a couple of computation threads, but the main load falls on one at all (by the way, newer versions behave similarly: apparently, active parallelism in this part of the work is impossible), but they treat the increase in cache memory capacity well, so the results are quite predictable.
First of all, the breakaway of one of the younger Core i3 from the entire group of pursuers is enough to get ahead of them with such a load and the Pentium G870. But the arrangement of AMD processors in terms of ranking is very curious. First, the proximity of the results. Secondly, the second place is taken by the A10-6800K — the FX-6300 is a little faster thanks to the capacious L3, but its presence does not help the FX-4300.
Final rendering of 3D scenes
The first place of the FX-6300 can not be commented on — it rightfully deserved it, performing six computation threads, not four, and having three FPUs, against two for all other processors. That is, the obvious initially quantitative superiority. With more or less equal initial data, it is interesting that the A10-6800K is already practically catching up with the Core i3-3220 and overtaking the FX-4300, which makes it the fastest dual-module AMD processor. Except, perhaps, for the recently announced FX-4350, but this model cannot be seriously considered, if only because of TDP at the level of four-module processors 🙂 Yes, and the retail prices of this processor will most likely be higher than not only for FX- 4300, but also the FX-6300 for reasons that can be explained by human greed (right now, at least, this is the case).
Packing and unpacking
The superiority of the FX-6300 over all is obvious from the outset. As you can see, the FX-4300 continues to hold up well here, even outperforming the Core i3 — sometimes the third-level cache memory (albeit in relatively small quantities, and slow) affects. More importantly, from a practical point of view, however, the A10-6800K almost catches up with the Core i3-3220 even under this load. It’s confusing, however, that its advantage over the former flagship for FM2 becomes ephemeral — comparing the performance of the A10-5800K and A8-5600K, we counted on more. Well, it is possible that the memory subsystem is already becoming a bottleneck, the importance of which, given the low cache-to-weight ratio, is difficult to overestimate. So, if we take the officially supported DDR3-2133, everything would fall into place. On the other hand, we recall that we tested the Core i3-3220 with DDR3-1333 in general and it doesn’t interfere with it that much 🙂
Audio encoding
In this group of tests, the A8-5600K already overtook the Core i3-3220, and the A10-5800K also managed to cope with the 3240, for which there are already two possible explanations.
First, simple algorithms that are weakly dependent on architectural features vote for the high frequency of AMD processors. Secondly, the company claims that its SMT implementation handles multi-threaded loading better than Intel’s Hyper-Threading. Well, a combination of these two hypotheses is also, of course, possible. In any case, today we are more interested not in this, but in the noticeable breakthrough of the A10-6800K — more than one might expect, looking at the increase in clock frequency. That is, there are no improvements in the new kernel, and some applications “notice” them.
Compilation
Here the increase in performance is already better combined with the increase in frequency, but the result is interesting not because of this, but because in the end the A10-6800K managed to overtake the FX-4300, which the previous APUs lagged behind at least a little. The Core i3 has lagged behind before, and the results of the FX-6300 are just an indicator of what you should strive for in the budget sector.
Alas, the three modules, L3 and the video core are not yet combined in any way, so you have to choose one thing.
Mathematical and engineering calculations
Limited number of computational threads, so Core i3 again breaks out into first place by a wide margin, but this was initially predictable. More interestingly, the A10-6800K has once again invaded the FX «habitat», although previous APUs were at least slightly slower.
Bitmap graphics
And again a similar situation — the A10-6800K overtook the FX-4300 and only slightly lagged behind the FX-6300. However, in those tests that are well perceived by an increase in the number of computational threads (first of all, RAW batch processing by ACDsee), the advantage of the latter processor is still great, but this is not surprising — in such conditions it outperforms some old Core i7 🙂
Vector graphics
In terms of quality (meaning low quality, of course) optimization for modern multi-threaded processors, these processors behave like audio encoding (which we parallelized manually) .
.. adjusted for the great «love» for the Core 2 Duo and its heirs, of course. Ultimately, this leads to the fact that the A10-6800K is the fastest AMD processor in this segment, already surpassing the FX-6300.
Video encoding
The revolution did not happen, but the evolution is curious — in terms of processor performance, the A10-6800K has already caught up with the Core i3-3220. Well, the FX-4300 was already lagging behind the A10-5800K.
Office software
The state of affairs is identical to what we saw in tests using vector graphics programs. And to the new APU, it is rather benevolent than vice versa.
Java
The increase in performance is proportional to the increase in clock frequency, however, even such a small step already leads to serious consequences: the new APU is not only faster than the dual-module FX, but also outperforms the Core i3 (generally speaking, everything is already — not only 3220/3225, but and 3240).
Games
The failure of the FX-6300, as noted earlier, is due to the peculiarities of the EGO 1.
5 engine used in F1 2010: it pathologically does not digest six-threaded processors (at least FX-6000, at least Phenom II X6). If not for this, the processor would have every chance to compete with the Core i3. Well, in general, it is obvious that the main limiting factor is the video card, even if there is some difference among the budget segment processors. On the other hand, as we have already written more than once, for the APU the only correct option is to operate in conjunction with the integrated video core, and it is much weaker than the GTX 570, so the results are only theoretical. But from this point of view, it is interesting that the A10-6800K still managed to catch up with the FX-4300 — the superiority in clock frequency made it possible to compensate for the lack of L3.
Multitasking environment
Nothing new, except that this is the second case in testing where the performance gain cannot be attributed only to an increase in clock frequency. On the other hand, it is possible that this is the case, albeit indirectly: according to AMD, Richland has improved Turbo Core performance compared to Trinity, i. e. real frequencies, even with the same nominal / maximum, may turn out to be higher.
Total
Is Richland a new core or not? Yes and no. In the mobile segment, improvements in Turbo Core should have a stronger effect, and there this technology is also used for the integrated graphics core, and this is very important — unlike desktop computers, it is somewhat more difficult to “increase” graphics performance by installing a discrete GPU in a laptop. Plus, mobile solutions also received an updated platform, which increases the attractiveness of APU-based laptops, since their functionality is “pulled up” to Intel solutions — as they say, not even a few years after the advent of WiDi, AMD also started talking about wireless connection of TVs 🙂 Thus , the company’s mobile platform has improved markedly, with the performance of the APUs used being just one of the improvements.
However, in the desktop segment, it is the only change — the platform has remained the same, since the new APUs run on the same boards as their predecessors. Moreover, two of the three chipsets were originally developed for FM1 altogether, and migrated to FM2 without changes. Thus, everything new is only the processors themselves. In which, in turn, there is nothing fundamentally new. In any case, if we talk about the processor part (which we tested today), the situation painfully resembles the release of the A8-3870K, A6-3670K and other similar solutions last spring. The updated Llano stepping made it possible to slightly increase the clock frequencies of the computing cores with the same thermal package, but no one called it a new core and did not call 3870K — «4850K», but now we are seeing exactly this. It’s just that now the company needed an informational occasion (as it is fashionable to call it) — the opportunity to make a loud announcement along with the announcements of really new Kabini and Temash, as well as slightly blur the impression of the release of Intel Haswell. Which, it should be noted, was succeeded to some extent: in old applications, the new generation of Core is only slightly better than the previous one (again, if we talk only about the “processor” component), and you also have to “change” the motherboard.
But the work of Richland on the same boards as Trinity is considered by some as an advantage, although … If someone comes across a living person who is seriously going to change the APU of the 5000th family to the 6000th — bring us to us: it will be interesting to see 🙂
There were no global changes in the market. As before, APUs look more attractive than Core i3 in cases where the user is interested in graphics performance — Haswell will not come to this segment soon, so AMD has a good time head start. However, for gamers, integrated solutions are neither suitable nor suitable, and for the rest, in most cases, iHDG will be enough, so the companies remain in their positions. The performance of the processor part of the new APUs «pulled up» to the Core, which in this segment has not been updated for a long time. However, again, there is no radical reassessment of values, especially since the direct competitors of the same Core i3 are APUs with a TDP of 65 W, and they are somewhat slower. Yes, and it’s possible to rest too much on prices in recent years only on principle — the difference between the same Core i3 and Core i5 in absolute terms is comparable to the cost of dinner in a decent cafe 🙂 Actually, the FX-8000 is also inexpensive, so if the processor performance really important, there is not much point in saving on matches. But if you stick to specific prices and look for a cheaper solution (without fanaticism, of course, which can quickly lead to Celeron and lower :)), then A10 and FX-6000 look extremely attractive. For different purposes: the first — if needed is a good graphic part, and the second — if you need , a very good graphic part, so you still plan to buy a discrete video card. In this capacity, the A10-6800K and its younger «relatives» just strengthened the company’s position a little — that’s all.
That’s what they «kill on the spot» is the FX-4000. This line of processors looked unconvincing both against the backdrop of APUs and in comparison with the budget Athlon X4 for FM2, but now the situation is only getting worse. That is, the «cannibalization» of the classic AM3 platform by the integrated FM2 continues — without high-profile releases, curtailing the production of junior FX, etc. In general, the natural process of abandoning «ordinary» processors in favor of integrated solutions continues in the AMD range . Although slowing down by the fact that so far the company cannot combine powerful graphics, more than two modules, and cache memory in one device, however, the “main direction” of progress can be traced very well 🙂
We would like to thank Corsair and Palit
for their help in setting up the test benches.
Overview of AMD A10-6700 and A10-6800K Processors
AMD continues to release new processors based on the old architecture. Thus, the corporation postpones the release of fresh solutions on a modern technical process. In graphic segment the situation is identical. But autumn is coming, and we have hope for the long-awaited announcements, because users want to see more productive devices on the market.
The A10-6700 and A10-6800K CPUs cannot compete with Intel when it comes to physical core performance.
The chips reviewed in this article (the «Richland» family) are a logical continuation of the AMD A10 hybrid lineup. These models are practically no different from previous 5000-series CPUs (eg A10-5800K).
Specifications
gems AMD A10-6700 and A10-6800K are compatible with Socket FM2. The first microprocessor is equipped with four physical cores (nominal frequency — 3700 MHz, L2 cache — 4 MB). The maximum supported memory standard is DDR3-1866. Surprisingly, the TDP of the A10-6700 does not exceed 65 W (not bad, considering that in mode turbo this CPU operates at 4300 MHz).
AMD A10-6700 and A10-6800K have the same HD 8670D graphics. The assets include adapter 384 computing units , the nominal clock frequency of the core is 844 MHz.
| A6-5400K | A10-5800K | A10-6700 | A10-6800K | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Socket | FM2 | FM2 | FM2 | FM2 |
| Process | 32 nm | 32 nm | 32 nm | 32 nm |
| Cores/Threads | 2/2 | 4/4 | 4/4 | 4/4 |
| Clock frequency | 3600/3800 MHz | 3800/4200 MHz | 3700/4300 MHz | 4100/4400 MHz |
| L3 cache | 1 MB | 4 MB | 4 MB | 4 MB |
| TDP | 65W | 100W | 65W | 100W |
| Graphics | Radeon HD 7540D | Radeon HD 7660D | Radeon HD 8670D | Radeon HD 8670D |
| Memory support | DDR3-1866 2 channels |
DDR3-1866 2 channels |
DDR3-1866 2 channels |
The A10-6800K variant boasts support for faster RAM (DDR3-2133), an unlocked multiplier (don’t forget the K in the name), and an impressive clock speed of 4100/4400 MHz.