Carrizo Benchs As Fast As Mobile Haswell

[vm'N]

That would explain how it can match the i3 in single core scores. It sounds way too good to be true that AMD could match Intel in terms of IPC.

If it's the 35W SKU than that's even more bad news, since the i3 is a 15W TDP chip.

And it probably is.

I dont see this been the 15w SKU, not with a 512c iGP sitting with it. The iGP alone should be able to take up ~15w of the TDP.

[MEC-777]

Would like to point out a few things:

 

1. The assumption that AMD has to catch up with Intel needs to die. They don't need to catch up. AMD is an innovative company - this much has been clear throughout micro-processor history and they will continue to do so. IMO, they are smarter to concentrate on improving and solidifying their place in the CPU market - in the low to mid-range and in terms of value/performance per dollar. They also have their APUs which offer value that Intel can't touch (not yet anyways). Many of us may not see the value in APUs, but many people do. Don't forget, the majority of consumers aren't enthusiasts who are only interested in high-end performance.

 

2. AMD is very much competitive in the mobile market, contrary to what many would believe. With the latest Kaveri mobile chips, I've seen a surge in carriers picking up these parts for their low, mid and even some higher-end devices. Their respectable quad-core CPUs combined with much stronger than Intel's iGPUs make them an excellent fit for a large number of customers/users. I've had a chance to play around with one such device that has one of the higher-end Kaveri APUs as well as a mobile Radeon R7 265M dGPU on board. Why two GPUs? Well you can set it up to use the iGPU on battery power and the dGPU when plugged in. Tried running a few games on this device and performance was excellent, considering what this particular model costs. To find another device powered by Intel and mobile Nvidia dGPU with equivalent performance was not only hard to come by, but the cost was significantly higher.

[vm'N]

Would like to point out a few things:

 

1. The assumption that AMD has to catch up with Intel needs to die. They don't need to catch up. AMD is an innovative company - this much has been clear throughout micro-processor history and they will continue to do so. IMO, they are smarter to concentrate on improving and solidifying their place in the CPU market - in the low to mid-range and in terms of value/performance per dollar. They also have their APUs which offer value that Intel can't touch (not yet anyways). Many of us may not see the value in APUs, but many people do. Don't forget, the majority of consumers aren't enthusiasts who are only interested in high-end performance.

 

2. AMD is very much competitive in the mobile market, contrary to what many would believe. With the latest Kaveri mobile chips, I've seen a surge in carriers picking up these parts for their low, mid and even some higher-end devices. Their respectable quad-core CPUs combined with much stronger than Intel's iGPUs make them an excellent fit for a large number of customers/users. I've had a chance to play around with one such device that has one of the higher-end Kaveri APUs as well as a mobile Radeon R7 265M dGPU on board. Why two GPUs? Well you can set it up to use the iGPU on battery power and the dGPU when plugged in. Tried running a few games on this device and performance was excellent, considering what this particular model costs. To find another device powered by Intel and mobile Nvidia dGPU with equivalent performance was not only hard to come by, but the cost was significantly higher.

1. As AMD have stated multiple times, they have no interest to go head-to-head with Intel, and would rather focus on niche markets. It might not be as profitable, but its a much safer plan. We have seen AMD having much more focus on semi-custom and embedded systems.

2. AMDs processors can be competitive in the mobile market, but AMD is not. AMD just recently got into the mobile market, they do not have the samme relationships with OEMs as Intel do. Again, these relationships can be deadly important to get the product out to the users. Same can be said in regards to the server market.

[MEC-777]

2. AMDs processors can be competitive in the mobile market, but AMD is not. AMD just recently got into the mobile market, they do not have the samme relationships with OEMs as Intel do. Again, these relationships can be deadly important to get the product out to the users. Same can be said in regards to the server market.

 

Thanks for clearing that up. I should have explained that 2nd point a little better. You are totally right.

[duriel]

let's give it to amd, i'm surprised they're not much further behind.

 

sure it's not amazing but it's better than absolutely nothing.

[Opcode]

And it probably is.

I dont see this been the 15w SKU, not with a 512c iGP sitting with it. The iGP alone should be able to take up ~15w of the TDP.

These are 15w TDP skews as the 35w TDP brothers will come at a later date. What's interesting is they can exceed their rated TDP for a short period of time thanks to STAPM that was first introduced with Mullins. This explains why the FX-8800P is clocked so low as it's targeted for the 15w segment and hence why SiSoft is showing validations of Carrizo chips clocked much higher (~3.4 GHz).

 

Rated TDP = Maximum TDP

• 12w = 20w
• 15w = 25w
• 35w = 42w

[Crazy Ginger]

Call me back if it manages to beat out my overclocked i7 4790k.  Then ill be interested.  otherwise, this is not really that impressive

[Briggsy]

Well, its no secret that AMD are heavily targeting the embedded technology sector and SoC markets. For gaming CPU's no one cares about power draw or heat if it performs well (per say), but if you need to stamp a bunch of low-power SOC's into smart devices/appliances/vehicles then you need insane compute efficiency. 

 

*edit* that's cool, they are multi-threaded cores. First IBM, then Intel and finally AMD. better late than never.

[MoonSpot]

Any benchmarks that are more graphically focused available?  This is an AMD APU after-all, and there is more to all-in-one processors then their CPU performance.  Don't think it would be the end of the world if some people looked at AMDs strengths for once.

[MrDynamicMan]

They've gotten hype Carrizo up somehow.

When Carrizo starts beating Haswell i5s and i7s, we can start getting excited. Then maybe they can work up enough mojo to start comparing themselves to Broadwell and eventually Skylake!

I just think people were getting hyped that it might be able to compete with Intel. Still doesn't though.

[MrDynamicMan]

Call me back if it manages to beat out my overclocked i7 4790k. Then ill be interested. otherwise, this is not really that impressive

Unfortunately that's the problem, AND is dug too deep to have the Rd to compete with Intel.

[Opcode]

Any benchmarks that are more graphically focused available?  This is an AMD APU after-all, and there is more to all-in-one processors then their CPU performance.  Don't think it would be the end of the world if some people looked at AMDs strengths for once.

There was a validation on 3DMark 11 that showed mobile Carrizo being only 169 points behind the desktop A10-7850k in terms of graphics performance.

 

FX-8800p = http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/9453670

A10-7850k = http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/7888233

 

So it's safe to say you can expect near A10-7850k performance out of Carrizo 15w models and more than likely equal or faster performance out of the 35w models.

[ManWithBeard1990]

There was a validation on 3DMark 11 that showed mobile Carrizo being only 169 points behind the desktop A10-7850k in terms of graphics performance.

 

FX-8800p = http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/9453670

A10-7850k = http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/7888233

 

So it's safe to say you can expect near A10-7850k performance out of Carrizo 15w models and more than likely equal or faster performance out of the 35w models.

I'd quite like a laptop with that in it, then.

[GzeroD]

And then Intel rolls out i5s, i7s and things go back to where they were. 

 

AMD simply just doesn't have the money to give Intel any real competition anymore. Likely never will, they stagnated for way too long. Yes, they can give one or two lines the attention they need. Intel gives every single thing the attention they need. 

 

AMD had the crown. They never bothered to defend it. Intel took it, dusted off the corporate failure and started running the marathon years ago. 

 

Never defended it? Intel coerced the biggest PC makers and told them the price for components will increase greatly if you don't sell our processors 3 to 1 on theirs. They got sued for it and they lost.

but that didn't get discovered untill amd had been put in a situation where it couldn't sell larger volumes of a superior product for YEARS. So ya that hit them in the R&D department and has prevented them from offering real competition but don't make it seem like they got lazy. Intel was playing a rigged game for years while it bleed the AMD coffers.