AMD A10-7850K vs AMD A8-7680: What is the difference?
46points
AMD A10-7850K
50points
AMD A8-7680
Comparison winner
vs
63 facts in comparison
AMD A10-7850K
AMD A8-7680
Why is AMD A10-7850K better than AMD A8-7680?
- 5.71% faster CPU speed?
4 x 3.7GHzvs4 x 3.5GHz - 0.2GHz higher turbo clock speed?
4GHzvs3.8GHz - 1.59x higher PassMark result?
5676vs3568 - Has FMA4?
- 128 more shading units?
512vs384
Why is AMD A8-7680 better than AMD A10-7850K?
- 30W lower TDP?
65Wvs95W - 256KB bigger L1 cache?
512KBvs256KB - Uses multithreading?
Which are the most popular comparisons?
AMD A10-7850K
vs
Intel Core i5-7400
AMD A8-7680
vs
AMD A8-7600
AMD A10-7850K
vs
Intel Core i7-4770K
AMD A8-7680
vs
AMD A8-9600
AMD A10-7850K
vs
AMD A10-7860K
AMD A8-7680
vs
AMD A6-7480
AMD A10-7850K
vs
Intel Core i5-3470
AMD A8-7680
vs
Intel Core i5-3470
AMD A10-7850K
vs
AMD Ryzen 5 1600X
AMD A8-7680
vs
Intel Core i5-7400
AMD A10-7850K
vs
AMD FX-8350
AMD A8-7680
vs
Intel Core i5-4570
AMD A10-7850K
vs
AMD Pro A10-8850B
AMD A8-7680
vs
AMD Ryzen 3 3200G
AMD A10-7850K
vs
AMD A8-7600
AMD A8-7680
vs
Intel Core i5-8550
AMD A10-7850K
vs
Intel Core i5-4670K
AMD A8-7680
vs
AMD A10-7860K
AMD A10-7850K
vs
AMD Athlon X4 880K
AMD A8-7680
vs
AMD Athlon X4 880K
Price comparison
User reviews
Overall Rating
AMD A10-7850K
1 User reviews
AMD A10-7850K
10. 0/10
1 User reviews
AMD A8-7680
2 User reviews
AMD A8-7680
6.5/10
2 User reviews
Features
Value for money
10.0/10
1 votes
6.0/10
2 votes
Gaming
10.0/10
1 votes
5.5/10
2 votes
Performance
10.0/10
1 votes
5.5/10
2 votes
Reliability
10.0/10
1 votes
8.0/10
2 votes
Energy efficiency
10.0/10
1 votes
5.5/10
2 votes
Performance
CPU speed
4 x 3.7GHz
4 x 3.5GHz
The CPU speed indicates how many processing cycles per second can be executed by a CPU, considering all of its cores (processing units). It is calculated by adding the clock rates of each core or, in the case of multi-core processors employing different microarchitectures, of each group of cores.
CPU threads
More threads result in faster performance and better multitasking.
turbo clock speed
3.8GHz
When the CPU is running below its limitations, it can boost to a higher clock speed in order to give increased performance.
Has an unlocked multiplier
✔AMD A10-7850K
✔AMD A8-7680
Some processors come with an unlocked multiplier which makes them easy to overclock, allowing you to gain increased performance in games and other apps.
L2 cache
A larger L2 cache results in faster CPU and system-wide performance.
L3 cache
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD A10-7850K)
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD A8-7680)
A larger L3 cache results in faster CPU and system-wide performance.
L1 cache
A larger L1 cache results in faster CPU and system-wide performance.
L2 core
1MB/core
1MB/core
More data can be stored in the L2 cache for access by each core of the CPU.
L3 core
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD A10-7850K)
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD A8-7680)
More data can be stored in the L3 cache for access by each core of the CPU.
Benchmarks
PassMark result
This benchmark measures the performance of the CPU using multiple threads.
PassMark result (single)
This benchmark measures the performance of the CPU using a single thread.
Geekbench 5 result (multi)
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD A10-7850K)
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD A8-7680)
Geekbench 5 is a cross-platform benchmark that measures a processor’s multi-core performance. (Source: Primate Labs, 2022)
Cinebench R20 (multi) result
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD A10-7850K)
Unknown.
Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD A8-7680)
Cinebench R20 is a benchmark tool that measures a CPU’s multi-core performance by rendering a 3D scene.
Cinebench R20 (single) result
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD A10-7850K)
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD A8-7680)
Cinebench R20 is a benchmark tool that measures a CPU’s single-core performance by rendering a 3D scene.
Geekbench 5 result (single)
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD A10-7850K)
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD A8-7680)
Geekbench 5 is a cross-platform benchmark that measures a processor’s single-core performance. (Source: Primate Labs, 2022)
Blender (bmw27) result
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD A10-7850K)
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD A8-7680)
The Blender (bmw27) benchmark measures the performance of a processor by rendering a 3D scene.
More powerful processors can render the scene in less time.
Blender (classroom) result
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD A10-7850K)
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD A8-7680)
The Blender (classroom) benchmark measures the performance of a processor by rendering a 3D scene. More powerful processors can render the scene in less time.
performance per watt
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD A10-7850K)
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD A8-7680)
This means the CPU is more efficient, giving a greater amount of performance for each watt of power used.
Integrated graphics
GPU clock speed
720MHz
720MHz
The graphics processing unit (GPU) has a higher clock speed.
GPU turbo
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD A10-7850K)
720MHz
When the GPU is running below its limitations, it can boost to a higher clock speed in order to give increased performance.
GPU execution units
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD A10-7850K)
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD A8-7680)
A graphics processing unit (GPU) with a greater number of execution units can deliver better graphics.
supported displays
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD A10-7850K)
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD A8-7680)
Using multiple displays you can create a larger workspace, making it easier to work across multiple apps.
DirectX version
DirectX is used in games, with newer versions supporting better graphics.
OpenGL version
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD A10-7850K)
OpenGL is used in games, with newer versions supporting better graphics.
OpenCL version
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value.
(AMD A10-7850K)
Some apps use OpenCL to apply the power of the graphics processing unit (GPU) for non-graphical computing. Newer versions introduce more functionality and better performance.
texture mapping units (TMUs)
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD A10-7850K)
TMUs take textures and map them to the geometry of a 3D scene. More TMUs will typically mean that texture information is processed faster.
render output units (ROPs)
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD A10-7850K)
The ROPs are responsible for some of the final steps of the rendering process, writing the final pixel data to memory and carrying out other tasks such as anti-aliasing to improve the look of graphics.
Memory
RAM speed
2133MHz
2133MHz
It can support faster memory, which will give quicker system performance.
maximum memory bandwidth
Unknown.
Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD A10-7850K)
13.91GB/s
This is the maximum rate that data can be read from or stored into memory.
DDR memory version
DDR (Double Data Rate) memory is the most common type of RAM. Newer versions of DDR memory support higher maximum speeds and are more energy-efficient.
memory channels
More memory channels increases the speed of data transfer between the memory and the CPU.
maximum memory amount
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD A10-7850K)
The maximum amount of memory (RAM) supported.
bus transfer rate
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD A10-7850K)
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD A8-7680)
The bus is responsible for transferring data between different components of a computer or device.
Supports ECC memory
✖AMD A10-7850K
✖AMD A8-7680
Error-correcting code memory can detect and correct data corruption.
It is used when is it essential to avoid corruption, such as scientific computing or when running a server.
eMMC version
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD A10-7850K)
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD A8-7680)
A higher version of eMMC allows faster memory interfaces, having a positive effect on the performance of a device. For example, when transferring files from your computer to the internal storage over USB.
bus speed
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD A10-7850K)
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD A8-7680)
The bus is responsible for transferring data between different components of a computer or device.
Features
uses multithreading
✖AMD A10-7850K
✔AMD A8-7680
Multithreading technology (such as Intel’s Hyperthreading or AMD’s Simultaneous Multithreading) provides increased performance by splitting each of the processor’s physical cores into virtual cores, also known as threads.
This way, each core can run two instruction streams at once.
Has AES
✔AMD A10-7850K
✔AMD A8-7680
AES is used to speed up encryption and decryption.
Has AVX
✔AMD A10-7850K
✔AMD A8-7680
AVX is used to help speed up calculations in multimedia, scientific and financial apps, as well as improving Linux RAID software performance.
SSE version
SSE is used to speed up multimedia tasks such as editing an image or adjusting audio volume. Each new version contains new instructions and improvements.
Has F16C
✔AMD A10-7850K
✔AMD A8-7680
F16C is used to speed up tasks such as adjusting the contrast of an image or adjusting volume.
bits executed at a time
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD A10-7850K)
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value.
(AMD A8-7680)
NEON provides acceleration for media processing, such as listening to MP3s.
Has MMX
✔AMD A10-7850K
✔AMD A8-7680
MMX is used to speed up tasks such as adjusting the contrast of an image or adjusting volume.
Has TrustZone
✖AMD A10-7850K
✖AMD A8-7680
A technology integrated into the processor to secure the device for use with features such as mobile payments and streaming video using digital rights management (DRM).
front-end width
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD A10-7850K)
Unknown. Help us by suggesting a value. (AMD A8-7680)
The CPU can decode more instructions per clock (IPC), meaning that the CPU performs better
Price comparison
Cancel
Which are the best CPUs?
AMD A10-7850K And A8-7600 Kaveri Review — APU — Tom’s Hardware
Steamroller, GCN, HSA, 28 nm: Oh My!
This year’s CES was my most insane to date.
I showed up in Vegas two days earlier, stayed a day later, and managed to fit close to 50 different meetings into a schedule that started early in the morning and didn’t end until late at night. But by the end, I had a solid grasp on the technologies we’ll be seeing in 2014. Some of them are decidedly evolutionary. Others, like Oculus’ Crystal Cove prototype, will fundamentally change PC gaming for the better.
For AMD’s part, it spent CES talking about Kaveri—a design that, on paper, should be interesting stuff for enthusiasts. There are the Steamroller-based x86 cores, giving us a new processor architecture to talk about. This is also the first time AMD’s vaunted Graphics Core Next design finds its way into an APU. The company did a ton of work enabling Heterogeneous System Architecture features for better interplay between computing resources and software developers. And it’s using a new 28 nm manufacturing process from GlobalFoundries.
But although this week’s introduction focused on the top-end 95 W A10-7850K, the real emphasis of Kaveri is down in the lower-power segments.
Company representatives say engineers designed for the 35 to 45 W range, scaling as high as 95 and as low as 15 W. AMD wants to see APUs in desktops, notebooks, embedded environments, and servers. So, it took the middle road in order to better optimize for those targets. AMD also had to make some compromises on the manufacturing side, better balancing transistor density to enable a 512-shader Radeon graphics core, while ultimately sacrificing CPU speed.
Of course, at the end of the day, once we’ve carefully carved through the architecture and AMD’s vision for Kaveri, what matters most is how this APU family compares to what came before and Intel’s best effort in the same space.
Building A Better Computing Device
Integration is a word that gets thrown around a lot, and often with negative connotation. Ew, integrated graphics, right? But integration is an important part of making complex technologies more affordable. In many cases, it’s very, very good for performance.
And there’s typically a positive correlation with power, too. By now we all know that AMD’s APUs combine multiple subsystems to allow the fast movement of data between programmable and fixed-function logic, maximizing flexibility and, ideally, making it possible to run demanding workloads on affordable hardware.
That Kaveri includes multiple x86 cores, graphics processing, memory control, cache, hardware-based accelerators, and PCI Express connectivity on a single piece of silicon is no surprise; its predecessor offered a similarly-thorough list of capabilities as well. But if you think of Kaveri as a puzzle, AMD took each piece and tweaked it in such a way that the finished product would reflect the latest technologies, more advanced manufacturing, and another step toward the company’s vision of utilizing the most appropriate resources for any workload.
One component of this approach involved re-thinking lithography. In partnership with GlobalFoundries, AMD is shifting from 32 nm SOI to a 28 nm bulk silicon process.
Now, there are associated advantages and disadvantages. Previously, AMD was building its APUs using technology optimized for CPUs. That allowed chips like the A10-6800K to hit clock rates as high as 4.4 GHz through Turbo Core. But tuning for low density, low resistance, and ultimately higher frequencies negatively affected the number of transistors that AMD could fit on a die, limiting the complexity of its GPU. In a world where x86 cores are considered “fast enough” in workloads that wait for user input, the decision was made to slide the scale toward density. AMD calls this APU-optimized, but the bottom line is that it’s using slower, higher-resistance transistors in order to facilitate better area utilization.
The consequence is lower-frequency x86 cores, which you’ll see reflected in a comparison of Kaveri and Richland. AMD says it compensates with a transition from the Piledriver architecture to Steamroller. A focus on improving IPC—or the amount of work each core does per cycle—purportedly yields up to 20% gains, leaving Kaveri net-positive in most x86 workloads.
On the other hand, the APU sports a more potent graphics subsystem, wielding up to 512 shaders based on the GCN architecture. Richland topped out at 384 of the previous-gen VLIW4 ALUs. This clear re-distribution of transistor wealth in favor of the GPU better-addresses the performance-sensitive workloads AMD is targeting (gaming, multimedia, and content creation), while maintaining a status quo in more general-purpose tasks.
All told, Kaveri is a 2.41 billion-transistor SoC crammed into 245 square millimeters. Richland was nearly the same size (246 mm²), but comprising just 1.3 billion transistors. Do you like that? We’re now dismissing billion-plus-transistor processors as pedestrian. This all goes to show the impact of AMD’s shift to 28 nm bulk silicon, optimized for a more GPU-focused die, though.
The Kaveri Family, As It Exists Today
Two models (A10-7850K and A10-7700K) are expected to ship immediately, with a third (A8-7600) surfacing in the first quarter of 2014.
The flagship is priced at $173. So, you get a lot of additional goodness, but pay an additional 22% compared to A10-6800K. Even the -7700K is pricier than last-gen’s fastest offering at $152. Ahead of its official debut, the -7600 is expected to sell for $119.
Swipe to scroll horizontally
| Header Cell — Column 0 | A10-7850K | A10-7700K | A8-7600 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Graphics Level | Radeon R7 | Radeon R7 | Radeon R7 |
| TDP | 95 W | 95 W | 65/45 W |
| CPU Cores | 4 | 4 | 4 |
| CPU Base Clock Rate | 3.7 GHz | 3.4 GHz | 3.3 / 3.1 GHz |
Max. Turbo Core Clock Rate |
4 GHz | 3.8 GHz | 3.8 / 3.3 GHz |
| GPU Shaders | 512 | 384 | 384 |
| GPU Clock Rate | 720 MHz | 720 MHz | 720 MHz |
| «Compute Cores» | 12 | 10 | 10 |
| Price | $173 | $152 | $119 |
Both of the just-launched Kaveri-based APUs are 95 W parts (ironically, the thermal ceiling AMD appears least concerned with).
A10-7850K sports two Steamroller modules and 512 shaders. The processor’s base clock rate is 3.7 GHz, though it can reach up to 4 GHz in lightly threaded apps. Meanwhile, the R7 graphics engine operates at 720 MHz.
In fact, all three Kaveri models sport GPUs at 720 MHz.
The biggest difference between A10-7850K and the other two SKUs is shader count. A10-7700K and A8-7600 both come with 384. The -7700 operates at a 3.4 GHz base clock that ramps up as high as 3.8 GHz under the right thermal conditions.
The A8-7600 is unique in that it offers a TDP that can be manually configured to 65 or 45 W. A higher thermal ceiling allows for a 3.3 GHz base clock and 3.8 GHz peak, while the 45 W setting keeps the APU cycling between 3.1 and 3.3 GHz.
Kaveri-based APUs drop into a new interface called Socket FM2+. We’ve already seen compatible motherboards employing AMD’s A88X, A78, A75, and A55 Fusion Controller Hubs; it’s really up to each board vendor to hit the right price points with Socket FM2+. You can use Socket FM2-based APUs on FM2+-equipped boards, but not vice versa. A block diagram of the Kaveri die also reveals a PCI Express 3.0 controller (presumably with 16 lanes of connectivity, given the motherboards we have in the lab so far), support for up to four display outputs, and the same XDMA engines found in AMD’s Hawaii GPU for CrossFire (in this case, enabling Dual Graphics functionality).
We’ll go into multi-GPU rendering in greater depth later in today’s story.
- 1
Current page:
Steamroller, GCN, HSA, 28 nm: Oh My!
Next Page Meet The Compute Core
Chris Angelini is an Editor Emeritus at Tom’s Hardware US. He edits hardware reviews and covers high-profile CPU and GPU launches.
AMD A8-7650K, A8-7670K, A10-7800 and A10-7850K processors
Testing the old in a new way: including power consumption
Testing methodology for computer systems
sample of 2016
retest a large number of already known solutions, which at first have nothing to compare with. Unless with older results, which is necessary to assess the degree of «continuity» of methods. And since today we have only the second article of this year’s cycle, everything that has been said applies to it in full. Therefore, to create a base, we decided to focus on AMD APUs for the FM2+ platform.
Firstly, because we still have to “live” with these solutions for quite a long time — this year there are no significant modifications to the most massive (from AMD solutions) platform. Secondly, it has been on the market for a long time, so it is well studied and understood. In general, for testing the «initialization» period is the best fit.
192/64
Actually, that is why we considered and still consider processors of the A8 family to be more interesting for the buyer — in fact, they are almost the same, but cheaper. And today there will also be two of these — the older 7650K and the 7670K that replaced it, which formally belongs not to the Kaveri family, but Godavari.
The new line, by the way, brought to life such an interesting processor as the A10-7860K. Here it is — indeed more interesting than 7890K or even 7670K. How? Since it is a kind of hybrid of 7800 and 7850K, inheriting from the first TDP 45/65 W (as befits such AMD solutions, user-selectable — on some boards even with an accuracy of up to a watt), and from the second — unlocked multipliers. In fact, it is the dream of any buyer who wants to buy a universal processor that can be used in any way: even in a large box with fine tuning, even in a small one in economy mode (which can also be tuned). It’s a pity, of course, that such a solution appeared already “at the end” of the platform’s life cycle — a year ago it would have been more interesting.
And it’s doubly a pity that we haven’t had time to “reach” yet, but we will definitely return to it.
In the meantime, let’s test the solutions that we have — in the amount of four, which gives six configurations. Why six? Everything is clear with the A10-7800 — it needs to be tested both “at” 65 W and “at” 45 W, since this year we have the opportunity to evaluate how not only performance, but also power consumption behaves in this case. And two more configurations were provided by the top (of those present) A10-7850K — we tested it with both DDR3-2133 and DDR3-1333, which will also allow us to evaluate the degree of memory impact on performance (and, by the way, power consumption — yes, yes ).
900-24-RUBLEARICA
At the “timeless stage” there is no one to compare our participants with, so we took the results of the Core i5-6260U from the previous article.
By the way, last year they used the Core i7-5500U in a similar situation, and then it turned out that in terms of the performance of the processor part itself, AMD desktop products are inferior to this ultrabook processor, but in games they outperform it by a head. But the GT3e 6260U equipped with a video core is a completely different “song”, and how it compares with older APUs is already very interesting in itself.
Test methodology
The methodology is described in detail in a separate article. Here we briefly recall that it is based on the following four pillars:
- iXBT.com performance measurement method based on real applications of the 2016 sample
- Power consumption measurement method when testing processors
- Method for monitoring power, temperature and processor load during testing
- 2016 iXBT.com Game Performance Measurement Method
And detailed results of all tests are available in the form of a complete table with results (in Microsoft Excel 97-2003 format).
Directly in the articles, we use already processed data. In particular, this applies to application tests, where everything is normalized relative to the reference system (as last year, a laptop based on Core i5-3317U with 4 GB of memory and a 128 GB SSD) and grouped by the areas of application of the computer.
iXBT Application Benchmark 2016
Since all the desktop A8 and A10 are very similar to each other, the only interesting thing here is that they are also comparable to the ultrabook Core i5. At the same time, the limitation of the heat pack «hit» the APU, already at 45 W reducing performance by about 20%, so the prospects for AMD laptop models in this context look very dreary. Slow memory, of course, also reduces performance, but not so sharply — 7850K outperforms 7800 even in this case. But «on its own», of course, lags behind. And from the A8-7670K, too, and in the “normal” mode it overtakes it so slightly that the difference in price cannot be justified by this.
There is no question of any parity even with mobile Intel processors in image processing tasks, but the alignment within the group has largely remained the same. Except for the fact that here already 7850K with DDR3-1333 turned out to be the second from the end, overtaking only the «strangled» A10-7800 in terms of TDP. Cause? Most likely, the same Photoshop, as already established, is highly dependent on the performance of the GPU, which contributes. Well, in general, the absence in these processors of a cache memory common to the computational cores, of course, increases the role of RAM performance. You can, of course, squeeze more out of the «slow» DDR, but not with this controller.
In essence, almost the same as the previous case, although the applications are completely different: Illustrator is essentially single-threaded and has not yet mastered any «new-fangled» technologies, despite the regular change in version numbers. And the result has changed only in absolute numbers.
At first glance, it looks like it, but if you look closely… Audition also actively (relatively, of course, but this applies to all today’s mass programs) also uses OpenCL. And in this case, all A10s are already faster than A8s of the same class (the extreme version of a two-fold reduction in TDP is, nevertheless, just a transition to another class) — just as one would expect based on the fact that the first two «Compute Cores» (in AMD terminology) is bigger. True, the size of the increase, frankly, does not inspire.
Once again, repetition of the past. In fact, the group is tight and only «realigns» a bit on special occasions (like the previous one). And moving relative to the «reference» Intel processor, of course.
If FineReader practically did not depend on the speed of working with memory, then WinRar did the opposite, but this is just quite predictable. And the rest — without significant changes.
With file operations, all subjects cope almost equally well, since their speed depends, in fact, on far from the slowest SSD.
But no one doubted this — these tests are most relevant for surrogate systems or when comparing computers as finished products — with initially noticeably different drives. Nevertheless, we will also use them in tests of «processors»: firstly, just because we will meet surrogates (and anything is already possible there), and secondly, because the load is relevant for all computer users.
In this case, only the fact that SolidWorks is very susceptible to memory deserves attention, so it makes sense (if necessary) to test the “processor-memory” connection with this program as well (which is good, since at least something that goes beyond the “standard » archivers, yes toys). As for the rest, everything has already been said above.
Thus, we come to a logical overall result, which is similar to what has been seen above repeatedly. Stability. Not too encouraging, since the ultrabook Intel turned out to be the fastest, but they already “do not fit” in such operating conditions.
At best, somewhere in the «liter» system, but then the performance will be even lower. A8 in general-purpose applications, as a rule, lags behind A10 only because the frequencies for these processors are artificially «clamped» at a lower level: in terms of the processor part, they are the same, and the graphics above «shot» literally once. Slow memory in mass applications reduces performance, but in a generally gentle way: no more than the thermal package limits by one step. In games, of course, everything should be different, but we will move on to them a little later — there is still a question: how much energy should be spent on such performance.
Power Consumption and Energy Efficiency
Since it is currently not possible to connect a mini PC to a test stand, we had to limit ourselves to monitoring data for the Core i5-6260U last time, so there will be no comparison on this parameter between AMD and Intel yet. Unfortunately. But for now. But processors within the same platform (and on the same board) are easy to compare.
And it’s useless.
What is interesting here? Firstly, there is a 5-7 W difference between DDR3-1333 and 2133, which is quite a lot. It is clear why — in addition to its own consumption of memory, more energy is required for the processor. Both to ensure work with it, and because the delays due to the fault of the memory are reduced. The second leads to an increase in performance, but far from free. In principle, this was clear even on the example of video cards (where it is necessary to increase memory bandwidth from the nose, and in parallel with this, the power consumption of top models “flies” somewhere beyond the horizon), but on the basis of indirect “evidence”. Now we can clearly say that in the case of processors, increasing performance by overclocking memory is an extensive (in terms of power consumption) way — similar to increasing the clock frequencies of the processors themselves. Intensive ones (such as multi-level caches, multi-channels, etc.) are more useful.
The bad news is that Godavari slightly changed power management compared to Kaveri, which led to the need to update motherboard software (as a result, some models with FM2 +, and not so old, do not support new processors).
We hoped that, as a result, energy consumption would also decrease. In practice, it has grown. However, we could also get an “unsuccessful” copy of the processor. Or, even more likely, all A8s will be so «failed» as the best crystals go into A10 production. Therefore, we will postpone the final decision of the issue until the A10-7870K and A10-7860K appear in the laboratory. In the meantime, let’s just remember that the junior processors in the line, which are generally similar to the older ones, do not add any “efficiency” at all. They may even turn out to be “more voracious”.
But the results correlate well with the declared TDP. That they are higher — you should not be afraid: after all, these are measurements not only of the processor, but of the entire system (without drives and discrete expansion cards, of course). However, taking this into account, the highest thermal class is explicitly specified with a margin, i.e. processor models faster than 7850K, most likely, could appear right away (moreover, compared to devices for FM2, AMD also reduced the TDP value from 100 to 95 W).
And, accordingly, it is impossible to “save” as much as 30 W when moving to a lower class. As well as «go down twice», leaving 95 to 45 — in practice, the difference is more modest. But, nevertheless, it is noticeable. And how it compares with Intel solutions — we’ll see later. In the meantime, we note that a system based on the Core i7-6700K, for example, has a higher maximum power consumption than on the A10-7850K, although from a head-to-head comparison of TDP (91 and 95 W, respectively), one could assume the opposite 🙂
Saving energy is, of course, a good thing. And how justified is it not in a spherical vacuum, but with reference to performance? As you can see, it is very justified — the A10-7800 turned out to be the leader in the 45 W mode, which “gives out” more than two points of integrated performance for every Watt of energy. And in second place is the same, but with a more «sparing» heat pack. And then there is a group of outsiders, and a very dense one at that. And no matter how some conditional “Pisgreen” tries to prohibit the use of fast memory, by the way, it turns out that the slow one is “more energy efficient” in the coordinate system we have chosen 🙂
iXBT Game Benchmark 2016
Games have been a strong point for AMD APUs for a long time — from their very appearance until .
.. perhaps the first bells rang out after the release of Haswell with GT3e: such processors turned out to be faster. But they were very exotic and expensive. Similar Broadwells appeared only last year, but not in a very successful way — they fell right under the platform change. Now Intel is threatening to increase the GPU power again (on the GT4e horizon), and the GT3e of the updated sample is also “registered” in dual-core low-voltage processors, so in principle the release of such relatively inexpensive conditionally desktop models is also possible. But it is not there yet, but you can already buy a mini-PC on the Core i5-6260U that amazed us so much. So let’s compare — how it looks not against the background of its predecessors (which the thugs last time easily and without straining, but in a fight with more serious opponents.
«Tanks» — a warm-up: on Intel processors, due to the single-threaded engine, they always worked faster, and the graphics in the game are so simple that the A8 / A10 managed to bypass even mass processors under LGA1150 only in Full HD mode.
Now here is the «full Prokhorovka» and came out in the end. Especially taking into account the fact that it is possible to «drive» Kaveri into a narrow heat pack only with a radical drop in performance — one and a half times. And this was driven into 45 watts, and not at all into 15!
Everything is less sad in World of Warship. More precisely, in the FHD mode, there is no need to talk about full-fledged competition, but at least it is not inaccessible to the A8 / A10 either, so given the lower price of these solutions (and this advantage still remains), they can be a good choice for an economical user. Remarkably, the decrease in performance following TDP is more gentle here. Memory speed, for example, is more critical.
In high resolution (and low resolution does not make sense with such absolute performance), the A10-7800/7850K is still the winner. Of course, when they perform in normal conditions — with a TDP of 65 W and fast memory. However, 45 W is quite tolerable.
Yes, slower. But not essential. Although, in order to save money, if you have a “regular” (rather than compact) computer case, the older A8s are better.
The engine is similar, but more modern, so there is already an A10 in FHD without a margin, and the best A8s are completely on the verge. Want to play on a small computer? Alas, not with an AMD processor. And you can’t forget about memory either.
Previously, we were glad that older APUs at least let you play this game, now this is no longer a reason, since the same 6260U is capable of this even without lowering the resolution, but there are no other comments. The main thing, again, is not to forget about memory.
As in this case, when the use of DDR3-1333 drops the frame rate to the threshold of playability. But at least not lower — in contrast to the limitation of the processors of this family with a 45 W TDP.
And in Hitman, on the contrary, it’s better to fight for efficiency than slow memory. Under normal conditions, you can try and not lower the resolution.
Or choose a compromise option — like 1600 × 900 for example.
Here is an example of a «heavy» game, where Skylake-GT3e, nevertheless, can already do something, and AMD APUs have remained in the same positions they occupied a year ago.
In a «normal» environment, you can also play in Full HD. The only bad thing is that the result is lower than on the Core i5-6260U, but these are already quantitative, not qualitative differences. In «abnormal» theoretically it is also possible, but it’s better not to.
Once again, the parity of AMD desktop solutions with Intel notebook solutions. However, do not forget that far from all and, moreover, at the moment more expensive.
Nothing new. The only interesting thing is that in this case, the frame rate of the A10-7850K with DDR3-1333 in HD almost exactly matched the result of the Core i5-6260U, but in Full HD.
And we leave a couple of diagrams without comments, since they are no longer required.
Let’s take a look at the summary result.
Recall that the maximum value of this integral index is 100: it means that the system copes (in the sense it demonstrates a frame rate of more than 30) with all the games in the set in both resolutions. It is rather rough, but visual — from the point of view of games, the older A8 and A10 are approximately equivalent. Slow memory, as well as attempts to greatly save energy, greatly spoil the situation, but if the second can sometimes be necessary, then the first can (and should!) be avoided.
Total
In fact, we see another confirmation: in the computer market, even in order to stay in place, you need to run, but in order to get somewhere, you need to run very fast. Unfortunately, AMD not only did not run for a couple of years, but generally stood still. Except that the processors of the Carrizo family appeared last year, but only in the mobile segment (where things seemed to be very bad) and in very limited quantities.
And in desktop computers, constant degradation was observed. The processors themselves have not become worse over this time — just competing developments have become better. Ever since the advent of not even FM2 “without a plus”, but FM1, a kind of division of labor has developed on the market: older APUs (as AMD called their processors with an integrated video core) have prices at the level of Core i3, the processor part is slightly weaker than Core i3, but they allow you to play with greater comfort than any Intel processor, regardless of price and performance. At first, the strategy worked, and updates to the Intel model line caused similar processes in AMD. But in 2014, everything “broke down”.
Firstly, Intel increased the performance of the processor part little by little, as a result of which AMD solutions that stopped at the same place began to compete only with junior desktop Pentiums, or even with Intel laptop processors. Secondly, solutions with a more powerful video part began to appear in the Intel assortment.
At first, there were few of them, and they were very expensive, but over time, Intel increased the mass character of such solutions and mastered an increasing number of segments. As a result, we came to the conclusion that now some inconspicuous NUC 6i5SYH on the table is able to provide the buyer with the same performance (both in “regular” applications and in games) as a “full-size” computer based on the top AMD solution.
What is left for the company and its fans? Rejoice in the fact that is cheaper than ? There is no doubt — this is also an important factor, but when it turns out to be the only advantage of a product, it usually does not lead to anything good. In this case, it becomes difficult to find enough resources to modernize their products, and the further, the more difficult. And, as we see, a radical modernization is needed, since everything will have to be redone at once — cosmetic repairs or extensive methods will not be able to achieve a “great turning point”.
AMD A10-7850K vs AMD A8-7600: What is the difference?
46 Ballla
AMD A10-7850K
45 BALLLA
AMD A8-7600
Winner when comparing
VS
63 Facts compared to
AMD A10-7850K
AMD A8-7600
9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 Is 7850K better than AMD A8-7600?
- 19.35% higher CPU speed?
4 x 3.7GHz vs 4 x 3.1GHz - 0.2GHz higher turbo clock speed?
4GHz vs 3.8GHz - 12.04% higher PassMark score?
5676 vs 5066 - Has an unlocked multiplier?
Why is AMD A8-7600 better than AMD A10-7850K?
- 30W below TDP?
65W vs 95W
Which comparisons are the most popular?
AMD A10-7850K
vs
Intel Core i5-7400
AMD A8-7600
vs
Intel Core i5-3470
AMD A10-7850K
VS
Intel Core i7-4770k
A8-7600
VS
Intel Core i5-4570
AMD AMD AMD AMD AMD AMD AMD AMD AMD AMD AMD AMD AMD AMD AMD AMD AMD AMD AMD AMD AMD AMD AMD AMD AMD AMD AMD AMD AMD AMD AMD AMD AMD AMD AMD A10-7860K
AMD A8-7600
VS
Intel Core i5-6500
AMD A10-7850K
VS
Intel Core i5-3470
AMD A8-7600
VS
AMD A6-74
AMD A10-7850K
vs
AMD RYZEN 5 1600X
AMD A8-7600
VS
AMD RYZEN 3 2200G
A10-7850K
VS
AMD FX-8350
AMD A8-7600
9000 VS
9000) -3450S
AMD A10-7850K
VS
AMD A10-8850b
AMD A8-7600
AMD A8-7680
AMD A10-7850K
VS
9000 INTEL Core INTEL CORE INTEL CORE INTEL CORE INTEL Core
AMD A8-7600
vs
AMD A10-5700
AMD A10-7850K
VS
AMD Athlon X4 880K
AMD A8-7600
VS
Intel Core i5-10600K
AMD A8-7600
9000 3 i5-2400
Complexation prices
Users
Reviews
AMD A10-7850K
1 Reviews of users
AMD A10-7850K
9000 /10 9000
1 Reviews of Users
AMD A8-7600
1 Reviews of users
AMD A8-7600
10.
07 /10
1 Reviews of Users
Cost ratio
/10 9000
1 VOTES
10.0 /10
1 Votes
Games
10.07 /10
1 VOTES
10.07 /10
1 VOTES
performance
10.0 /10
1 Votes
8.07 /10
1 Votes
Reliability
10.07 /10
1 Votes
10.0 9000/10
1 VOTES
9000 10.0 /10
1 Votes
8.0 /10
1 Votes
Production
Central processor speed
4 x 3.7GHZ
4 x 3.1GHZ
The speed of the central processor shows how many processing cycles per second the processor can perform, taking into account all its cores (processors). It is calculated by adding the clock speeds of each core or, in the case of multi-core processors, each group of cores.
processor thread
More threads result in better performance and better multitasking.
turbo clock speed
3.8GHz
When the processor is running below its limits, it can jump to a higher clock speed to increase performance.
Unlocked
✔AMD A10-7850K
✖AMD A8-7600
Some processors come with an unlocked multiplier and can be easily overclocked for better performance in games and other applications.
L2 Cache
More L2 scratchpad memory results in faster results in CPU and system performance tuning.
L3 cache
Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD A10-7850K)
Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD A8-7600)
More L3 scratchpad memory results in faster results in CPU and system performance tuning.
L1 cache
More L1 cache results in faster results in CPU and system performance tuning.
L2 core
1MB/core
1MB/core
More data can be stored in L2 scratchpad for access by each processor core.
L3 core
Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD A10-7850K)
Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD A8-7600)
More data can be stored in L3 scratchpad for access by each processor core.
Geotagging
PassMark 9 result0003
This test measures processor performance using multithreading.
PassMark result (single)
This benchmark measures processor performance using a thread of execution.
Geekbench 5 result (multi-core)
Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD A10-7850K)
Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD A8-7600)
Geekbench 5 is a cross-platform benchmark that measures multi-core processor performance. (Source: Primate Labs, 2022)
Cinebench R20 result (multi-core)
Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD A10-7850K)
Unknown.
Help us offer a price. (AMD A8-7600)
Cinebench R20 is a benchmark that measures the performance of a multi-core processor by rendering a 3D scene.
Cinebench R20 result (single core)
Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD A10-7850K)
Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD A8-7600)
Cinebench R20 is a test to evaluate the performance of a single core processor when rendering a 3D scene.
Geekbench 5 result (single core)
Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD A10-7850K)
Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD A8-7600)
Geekbench 5 is a cross-platform benchmark that measures the single-core performance of a processor. (Source: Primate Labs, 2022)
Blender test result (bmw27)
Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD A10-7850K)
Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD A8-7600)
The Blender benchmark (bmw27) measures CPU performance by rendering a 3D scene.
More powerful processors can render a scene in a shorter time.
Blender (classroom) result
Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD A10-7850K)
Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD A8-7600)
The Blender (classroom) benchmark measures CPU performance by rendering a 3D scene. More powerful processors can render a scene in a shorter time.
performance per watt
Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD A10-7850K)
Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD A8-7600)
This means that the processor is more efficient, giving more performance per watt of power used.
Integrated graphics
GPU clock speed
720MHz
720MHz
The graphics processing unit (GPU) has a higher clock speed.
Turbo GPU
Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD A10-7850K)
Unknown. Help us offer a price.
(AMD A8-7600)
When the GPU is running below its limits, it can jump to a higher clock speed to increase performance.
GPU Executors
Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD A10-7850K)
Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD A8-7600)
A graphics processing unit (GPU) with more execution units can provide better graphics.
monitor support
Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD A10-7850K)
By using multiple displays, you can expand your workspace, making it easier to work across multiple applications.
DirectX version
DirectX is used in games with a new version that supports better graphics.
OpenGL version
Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD A10-7850K)
Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD A8-7600)
The newer version of OpenGL, the better graphics quality in games.
OpenCL version
Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD A10-7850K)
Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD A8-7600)
Some applications use OpenCL to use the graphics processing unit (GPU) for non-graphical computing. Newer versions are more functional and better quality.
texture units (TMUs)
Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD A10-7850K)
Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD A8-7600)
TMUs take texture units and map them to the geometric layout of the 3D scene. More TMUs generally means texture information is processed faster.
ROPs imaging units
Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD A10-7850K)
Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD A8-7600)
ROPs are responsible for some of the final steps of the rendering process, such as writing the final pixel data to memory and for performing other tasks such as anti-aliasing to improve the appearance of graphics.
Memory
RAM speed
2133MHz
2133MHz
Can support faster memory which speeds up system performance.
maximum memory bandwidth
Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD A10-7850K)
34.1GB/s
This is the maximum rate at which data can be read from or stored in memory.
DDR memory version
Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD A8-7600)
DDR (Double Data Rate Synchronous Dynamic Random Access Memory) is the most common type of RAM. New versions of DDR memory support higher maximum speeds and are more energy efficient.
memory channels
More memory channels increase the speed of data transfer between memory and processor.
maximum memory
Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD A10-7850K)
Unknown. Help us offer a price.
(AMD A8-7600)
Maximum amount of memory (RAM).
bus baud rate
Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD A10-7850K)
Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD A8-7600)
The bus is responsible for transferring data between various components of a computer or device.
Supports memory recovery code
✖AMD A10-7850K
✖AMD A8-7600
Memory error recovery code can detect and repair data corruption. It is used when necessary to avoid distortion, such as in scientific computing or when starting a server.
eMMC version
Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD A10-7850K)
Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD A8-7600)
A newer version of eMMC — built-in flash memory card — speeds up the memory interface, has a positive effect on device performance, for example, when transferring files from a computer to internal memory via USB.
bus frequency
Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD A10-7850K)
Unknown. Help us offer a price. (AMD A8-7600)
The bus is responsible for transferring data between various components of a computer or device
Functions
uses multithreading
Intel or AMD’s Simultaneous Multithreading) delivers faster performance by dividing each physical processor core into logical cores, also known as threads. Thus, each core can run two instruction streams at the same time.
Has AES
✔AMD A10-7850K
✔AMD A8-7600
AES is used to speed up encryption and decryption.
Has AVX
✔AMD A10-7850K
✔AMD A8-7600
AVX is used to help speed up calculations in multimedia, scientific and financial applications, and to improve the performance of the Linux RAID program.
version of SSE
SSE is used to speed up multimedia tasks such as editing images or adjusting audio volume.