Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 24

Thread: AMD A10-6800K Richland APU On Linux

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    France
    Posts
    458

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by liamdawe View Post
    As I thought, no need to "upgrade" from my 5800k yet then! Maybe the next revision will be a reason! Still 5800k gives decent performance for me!

    Liam of GamingOnLinux.com
    A 6800K is a 5800K rebrand with slightly higher frequencies and much higher price, that's all.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Arctic circle, Finland
    Posts
    260

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by phoronix View Post
    Phoronix: AMD A10-6800K Richland APU On Linux

    Earlier this month AMD unveiled their Richland desktop APUs as an upgraded version of Trinity. While still based upon Piledriver CPU cores, the AMD A10-6800K APU under Linux is a modest upgrade until the arrival of the Jaguar-based APUs. For starting off our Linux testing of the A10-6800K are Ubuntu Linux benchmarks of this high-end Richland APU compared against the A10-5800K Trinity APU.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=18837
    " until the arrival of the Jaguar-based APUs." Ahem Jaguar based apus are for mobile platform(kabini), and not upgrade for Richland. That update is called kaveri and cpu cores are called steamroller.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    96

    Default

    I'm not even suprised anymore. It's a classical Phoronix benchmark
    If it's an nVidia benchmark, there are no ATi Cards, if it's an Intel
    integrated graphics, they're not compared to ATi's APU's, and if it's
    an AMD CPU you can be damn sure there won't be any Intel processor
    thrown in for a good measure.

    What's the point of this? If there is any inherent value in benchmarking
    it's so that customers can evaluate performance/price/wattage ratios.
    Why is it so hard for Phoronix to get this right is beyond me. Pshaw!

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    563

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by clavko View Post
    I'm not even suprised anymore. It's a classical Phoronix benchmark
    If it's an nVidia benchmark, there are no ATi Cards, if it's an Intel
    integrated graphics, they're not compared to ATi's APU's, and if it's
    an AMD CPU you can be damn sure there won't be any Intel processor
    thrown in for a good measure.

    What's the point of this? If there is any inherent value in benchmarking
    it's so that customers can evaluate performance/price/wattage ratios.
    Why is it so hard for Phoronix to get this right is beyond me. Pshaw!
    Ads revenues.

    You will find Intel CPU benchmarks soon. And You will be able to compare them directly... You just wont find them on same graph. (Untill Michael do some bigger benchmark...)

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    359

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Calinou View Post
    A 6800K is a 5800K rebrand with slightly higher frequencies and much higher price, that's all.
    No it's not. There were some die optimizations done. At the same clock speeds (overclocked 5800k), the a10-6800k draws less power. Comparing stock for stock, you get (slightly) better performance with the same power usage. Do a google search and you can confirm this via various tests.

    That said, it's probably not worth the upgrade from the a10-5800k. If you don't already own a 5800k however, the a10-6800k is a damn solid performer.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    295

    Default Wrong graph and conclusion

    As someone wrote in the wrong thread, there is a bug in the final “performance per watt” graph: the overclocked perf per watt should be lower than the other two.
    http://phoronix.com/forums/showthrea...678#post339678

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    944

    Default

    Yep, it seems that the "performance-per-watt" code is still wrong. Otherwise how could the overclocked chip have such good performance-per-watt values beating the stock chip by such a large difference? It consumes 45% more power than at stock speeds for a small 12% increase in performance. It should have much worse performance-per-watt. How can an article this wrong be published? No wonder no one takes phoronix seriously...

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Arctic circle, Finland
    Posts
    260

    Default

    Uhh yeah performance per watt, wth is that anyways. Pure energy consumptions(Wh) in cray:
    Code:
    octave:5> 160.5*33.05/3600
    ans =  1.4735
    octave:6> 114.4*39.92/3600
    ans =  1.2686
    octave:7> 112*36.89/3600
    ans =  1.1477
    So A10-6800K get the job done with least consumed energy, next is A10-5800K and the last is that overclocked 6800K.

  9. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chris200x9 View Post
    what about iGPU?
    I take it you have never seen this site without Adblock...

    This is Phoronix, Larabel has to ad whore himself out with about a dozen say nothing articles a day. If you think the masturbatory linkback soup that is the standard Phoronix news piece is bad, try it without Adblock, they are so prevalent that the entire article is nothing but links.

    Most of the benchmark software seems to be about as useful as that crap SuperPI. The gaming benchmarks are a total joke, since he can't even be bothered to even use something like the HL2:Lost Coast benchmark, which at least was for many years a decent GPU test on Windows. That the latest Unigine benchmark runs at 6FPS no matter the GPU doesn't say much, you need something closer to real world expectations.

    Quote Originally Posted by clavko View Post
    What's the point of this? If there is any inherent value in benchmarking
    it's so that customers can evaluate performance/price/wattage ratios.
    Why is it so hard for Phoronix to get this right is beyond me. Pshaw!
    You do realize that once he does do a comparison he'll use the i7 4770K as the CPU to compete against and when he compares the GPU he'll pair it against the Iris Pro 5200, because it's so fair to expect a $150 part to beat parts in the $350 range.

    Quote Originally Posted by Calinou View Post
    A 6800K is a 5800K rebrand with slightly higher frequencies and much higher price, that's all.
    Wrong. Thats like saying the HD4890 was just an overclocked HD4870. Maybe the prices are more then $20 difference in the shitty shops in you country but around here is $130 for A10-5800K and $150 for the A10-6800K, $20 is a decent tradeoff for a solid across the board 10% increase in CPU and GPU performance, $25-30 if you are building new and make full use of the 6800K's ability to use DDR3 2133 without having to overclock, as well as if you do want to overclock you will see the GPU performance scale linearly with DDR3 speed. Though your best gaming performance is going to be from manually controlling the system's ability to downclock, you want to force the CPU to stay on full blast while gaming.

    http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Bulldo...A10-5800K.html
    http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Bulldo...A10-6800K.html

  10. #20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by benmoran View Post
    If you don't already own a 5800k however, the a10-6800k is a damn solid performer.
    Exactly, if you already have the 5800K wait for the fall and upgrade to the Kaveri equivalent to the top end APU is. They will require a new CPU socket anyways since they are the tech that the PS4 and XboxOne are based on, all info I've seen so far says that the GPU will be on par with the HD7750, that the CPU and GPU will both be able to access both the DDR3 system ram and new with this series dedicated GDDR5 ram directly. Hope like hell that all the Gallium3D OpenCL work gets hammered out over the summer.
    http://www.cpu-world.com/news_2013/2...ap_leaked.html
    http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/dis...ry_Report.html
    http://www.extremetech.com/computing...en-cpu-and-gpu
    http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Shows-a...de-Sea-Islands
    http://wccftech.com/amd-launching-28...er-cores-2013/



    The possibility of GDDR5 DIMMs to pair with the Kaveri? Hows some info from some reputable sources?
    http://www.jedec.org/standards-documents/results/GDDR5M
    http://www.hynix.com/inc/pdfDownload...hicsMemory.pdf

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •