Tried: AMD A6-3650 APU and A8-3850 APU - this is not the real article

Summary, opinion - A8-3850 APU

Once again, we have passed a terribly long test, the Llano platform and the AMD A8-3850 APU gave up the lesson properly, as we had to examine many things, which we tried to match with the available devices. With the release of this family, a long era at AMD has come to an end, and the Fusion era actually begins. In terms of processor cores, these APUs cannot be considered completely new, as they are reworked Stars cores, despite the K12 name. This was also shown in our processor power tests, but luckily the "revised" rating also appeared in the results. The A8-3850 is the top of the current range, it includes the most powerful graphics controller, the Radeon HD 6550D, with a clock speed of 2900 MHz, which cannot be increased with Turbo Core, because this model does not include this service.

To make a comparison with its predecessor, we used a Phenom II X4 970 Black Edition processor that was also measured at its original 3500 MHz clock speed as well as at 2900 MHz frequency, which is the same as the A8-3850 clock signal. In the vast majority of CPU measurements, we found that APU performance improved compared to Phenom II, sometimes to a greater extent, several times more modestly, but there was a clear improvement. This development can also be said for 3D applications and games, 1-2 FPS plus was able to present the novelty. Related to this is a further positive that overall consumption has also declined somewhat, with the A8-3850 making significant progress, especially when unloaded, and all of these changes can all contribute to success.

Sure, as a CPU, we didn’t expect too much from this model, as we knew it wasn’t yet representative of the new architecture, but it seems AMD did what it could. Llano’s real weapon, of course, is not this, but the use of an integrated, Redwood-based graphics core, which has proven to be a great pairing with the redesigned Stars cores. It is true that with the A8-3850 only the Radeon HD 6550D showed its capabilities, but everyone could see from the results that we have never encountered integrated graphics representing such power, and that this was finally achieved in a heterogeneously programmable chip, special joy and very encouraging for the future. We are living in an age of high degree of integration, and AMD has entered the market with an efficient product. The area of ​​discrete video cards is shrinking, and for a significant portion of customers, the computing power that an HD 6550D, for example, can provide is sufficient.

With the advent of APUs, there is no need to purchase a separate graphics card, if you don't need a lot of power, then with an APU, an FM1 socket motherboard and some memory, we've already laid the foundation for our computer. Of course, AMD also meant those who want to move beyond the HD 6550D level later. It goes without saying that a discrete card can be used on the motherboard with the help of the PCI Express bus, but with AMD Dual Graphics we can ensure that the GPU dormant in the APU does not lie flat, but the two hardware work together, thus increasing the combined power. 3D performance. All you need to do is buy an A-Series APU and the right type of discrete Radeon. The former can be an A8 model with an HD 6650D, or an A6 HD 6530, the point is to associate one of these with the Radeon HD 6670/6570/6450, and Dual Graphics can already be activated, which also gives birth to new model names, all in the the easiest way to illustrate this is with the table below.

The performance of IGP can therefore be significantly increased with little effort and a little caution. Of course, we can also use a much more powerful discrete card, such as a Radeon HD 6970, but then the IGP dormant in the APU faces long periods of inactivity, thus losing the real advantage of the APU over the traditional processor. So AMD has also dreamed up the details carefully, launching the Lynx and Sabine platforms following safe steps, and if not as a CPU, but with processor-integrated graphics, it is currently the biggest force in both markets, significantly ahead of Intel HD Graphics 2000 and HD Graphics 3000 models. Of course, success with good hardware is far from certain, a lot depends on the price. In recent years, we have become accustomed to AMD not being disappointed in terms of purchase prices.

The strongest unit is the A8-3850, which is also included in the test, its boxed version can be purchased for less than 30 HUF for a gross 000 HUF, for which, in addition to the four native CPU cores, we also get the performance of a discrete card of about 29 HUF in the form of IGP. That’s why for the money, we can get roughly a Core i000-15 on the Intel line. During the measurement, we tried to simulate this CPU with 000k by turning off the 3 cores and setting the clock to 2120 MHz and leaving HT on, so except for the tertiary cache and HD 2600 we were able to perform the measurements with the same parameters. From these, it can be concluded that a Core i2-3300 - as a processor - is generally slightly more powerful than the A3000-3, but it also depends to a large extent on the specific application.

And when you compare the graphics solutions of the two processors, the APU’s Radeon HD 6550D also washes the Intel HD Graphics 2000 and 3000 off the track. In terms of consumption, the Sandy Bridge is still better in loaded conditions, so we need to consider before buying. If we need a modern and strong IGP, let’s clearly put our vote in favor of Fusion and choose the A8-3850. If IGP isn’t important, but you need CPU power instead, you can do better with the Core i3-2120, but you can also choose from quad-core Phenoms. Unfortunately, the A6-3650 did not come to us, but based on the available information, the purchase price of ~ 24 HUF seems a bit exaggerated compared to the 000 HUF amount of the A8-3850, based on the performance difference between the two models, some correction by AMD if the strength of the novelty depends a bit.

We’re curious to see what sales will show in a few months, and AMD doesn’t even stop the machine now. The appearance of the Bulldozer is imminent, which many expect a lot from. Either way, it’s so certain that an upgrade to the platform, codenamed Trinity, will arrive next year. This will already rely on Bulldozer-based CPU cores (modules), and IGP is rumored to be a Barts and Cayman merger, so there can be no question that the CPU performance and graphics power of APUs will continue to grow. , which will be the result of a brand new, modern architecture.

In the meantime, a good piece of advice for those enrolling in one of the desktop APU models. Because IGP is powered by system memory and the hunger for Radeon bandwidth is very high, we can benefit a lot from building fast DDR3 modules into our system. Feel free to forget the 1333 MHz RAMs if you want to be good, you should not give it below 1600 MHz. However, if you have a frame, preferring to get 1866 MHz or even faster memories, you’ll appreciate the little Radeon dormant in the APU. Fortunately, given current memory prices, this is no longer a million-dollar investment.

We looked at a lot of things about the A8-3850 and Llano, but at least that many topics were left out of the article. The reason for this was that the APU could only spend 2,5 days with us, so the time available and the number of additional hardware was finite. Regardless, we are confident that we have been able to answer the most important questions, and after reading this article, everyone can form an opinion about the AMD APU as well as make a purchase decision.

Of course, this test would not have been possible without the help of our partners. Both the GIGABYTE GA-A75-UD4H and the ASUS F1A75-V Pro did their job stably and reliably throughout. If we salivate through the graphs, we can see that to a very minimal extent the F1A75-V Pro was faster, but the differences are just as small as for Intel boards, because like Intel's PCH, AMD's FCH it has little to say about performance, as almost everything is housed in the CPU or APU, respectively. The equipment of the two models is very similar, if we are looking for a Socket FM30 motherboard with a Fusion construction intention of around 000 HUF, then we can recommend any of them.

Update: Summary and Opinion - A6-3650 APU

Slowly two months have passed since our article on the A8-3850 was published. A lot has happened since then, a lot has changed. Unfortunately, the output of Llano processors is still not real, few APUs are coming to market, and you should now share production lines with Bulldozer models. In addition, in terms of domestic conditions, it can be said that the forint is again terribly weak. As a result of these circumstances, what we described two months ago in terms of judgment and prices is unfortunately not all true today, as both the A8-3850 and A6-3650 have undergone significant price increases. At that time, the top model A8-3850 could be purchased for around HUF 29-30 thousand gross, today this amount has already increased to HUF 38, ie the product has become at least 000 percent more expensive. Now we are there that practically the A30-6 costs as much as two months ago for the big brother, ie 3650-28 thousand forints. Needless to say, this is of no use to customers or AMD at all. Let's look at the prices of competing Intel models! The 30 GHz Core i3,1-3 is included in the price with the A2100-6, ie it can be taken home for about 3650 forints. The Core i28-000, which is 200 MHz faster than this, ie in the test, simulated with 2600k at 3,3 GHz, can be found at an altitude of 3 forints. The fastest member of the family is the 2120 GHz Core i31-000, which costs 3,4 forints, this 3 MHz is no longer sure to be worth this extra money.

Speaking specifically of the A6-3650, it can be said that in the nine tests that tested processor power, it could only be faster than the Core i3-2120 emulation, while in the 6790D tests that included the HD 3, it lost six out of seven cases. and at the same time reaches a tie. Plus, the difference is often so definite that we feel it would look very similar to the Core i3-2100 in the price with it. Although we couldn’t make a completely accurate measurement because of the emulation, the at least good news is that it can already compete with these Sandy Bridge models in consumption, at least for us the numbers have shown this despite the 35 W higher TDP class. Overall, we still have the same opinion we had before about the A8-3850. It’s only worth buying an APU if we really need the Radeon graphics core inherent in it, and we’ll really use it, either on its own or as a Dual Graphics solution. The K12 + Radeon IGP pair is competitive against the Sandy Bridge + HD 2000/3000 pair, and in 3D power, AMD’s solution is an absolute winner, as is the level of technological sophistication. However, if you don’t need IGP, it’s not the best choice to invest in an APU, as it is stronger both within the manufacturer and on the Intel line. central unit we can get it for the same money.

In addition, we would add that the drive battle of Catalyst 11.6b vs. 11.9 yielded less than expected, many times we couldn’t even report a difference. Hopefully, the next Catalysts will still speed up on units dormant in APUs. The experience was similar with the 1866 MHz memories, we could add a little plus to their account, but let's not forget that the basic measurement was not with 1333 MHz but with 1600 MHz RAM, so the extra operating frequency is only 266 MHz, in addition, the delay increased from CL8 to CL9. The lesson of this is that there is no big difference between 1600 and 1866 MHz, compared to 1333 MHz we could probably have recorded more significant differences. I liked the A6-3650 as an APU overall, and if you want to build an integrated graphics, all-in-one machine that can even be played with, you can like the A8-3850, the A6-3650 we can also recommend. Looking at the product as a processor, as well as seeing the current inventory and current prices, we would rather say that we liked it and look forward to how it will develop in the coming months. We’re sure the next generation next year codenamed Trinity will sound bigger than these first series models.

AMD Plain
AMD A8-3850 APU
Gigabyte ga-a75-ud4h
ASUS F1A75-V Pro 

AMD A8-3650 APU

I myself slowly put down the Llano lute and come to rest after the long test, but before that I have to thank med1on and Huskydog for their help in writing the article, and our partners can’t miss out on the thanks either:

The AMD A8-3850 APU and the GA-A75-UD4H motherboard a Domestic representation of GIGABYTE F1A75-V Pro, Maximus 4 Extreme, P8Z68-V Pro and M5A97 EVO motherboards Domestic representation of ASUS provided for our test, thank you!

The AMD A6-3650 APU is AMD provided us, thank you!

The article was written by: Zoltán Mihics (med1on) and Gábor Pintér (gabi123)

Thanks to the following sponsors for our permanent test components in this article:

• ASUS Maximus IV Extreme REV 3.0 - ASUS Representation in Hungary
• Kingston HyperX T1 DDR3 1600 MHz 2 x 2 GB Kit - Kingston Representation in Hungary
• Kingston SSD Now V Series 64 GB SATA2 (SNV425-S2 / 64) - Kingston Representation in Hungary
• Xigmatek NRP-HC1501 - PC Gear
• ASUS 24T1E TV Monitor - ASUS Representation in Hungary