TechSpot: AMD A4-5000 review, the affordable ultraportable APU

In 2006 AMD announced 'Fusion', a project aimed to develop a system on a chip that combined a CPU and GPU on a single die. Making the dream a reality for AMD was their acquisition of graphics chipset manufacturer ATI that same year.

Fast forward to this day, AMD has taken things a step further with Kabini, the first ever quad-core x86-based SoC. AMD are releasing their first Kabini based processors today with the launch of the A6-5200 and the A4-5000. The A4-5000 that we are reviewing features four Jaguar cores clocked at 1.5GHz and a total L2 cache of 2MB, while the on-die GPU is the Radeon HD 8330. With the Kabini platform AMD is aiming to compete in the subnotebook, ultra-thin and small form factor markets.

Read: AMD A4-5000 Review: the affordable ultraportable APU

These articles are brought to you in partnership with TechSpot.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Full ITC panel prevents Microsoft's Xbox 360 from being hit with import ban

Next Story

More details on how the Xbox One will use cloud computing

8 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Awesome graphics, to be commended and so on. I'm not so sure about the necessity of four underperforming cores in mobile environments. Pure single-threaded power will always be important. Does Turbo really eat away power like that?

AMD focusses on multithreaded power, Win8 takes very good advantage of this for example.
Although Win7 does too after a patch/update. To a lesser extend then Win8 still though.
Software is slowly changing to multithreaded CPU's.

AMD might have less powerfull chips then Intel, but they exceed well in the APU's and Multithreading sections. Where Intel just tries to shove more power down a single thread.

If you keep power usage identical and the same chipset, multithreaded 2 1.5ghz cores will always be faster then 1 single 3ghz core. Especially in a multitask environment. Even though the raw power is identical.

I'm not saying it's wrong, but there's still tasks which simply cannot be multi-threaded due to way they work - stream ciphers, hashing, compression and encoding (which could very well be split, but rarely anyone bothers).

Didn't ARM work on something along the lines of putting a single beefy core that would turn on only when necessary among the rest working at their usual pace? I might be confusing things, but if so, I wonder how did that go... I can't really describe it good enough for google to help me.

We are talking AMD Graphics (formerly ATi) agains intel HD integrated graphics man.... Intel may run games now, but AMD surely does improve the experience.

Arceles said,
We are talking AMD Graphics (formerly ATi) agains intel HD integrated graphics man.... Intel may run games now, but AMD surely does improve the experience.
Thanks. I thought I read somewhere that Haswell's graphics were going to comparable to an Nvidia 650 or 640. I believe it was Anandtech. Now I have to go search for the article.

At this moment in time AMD APUs are quite a lot faster though in general I wouldn't recommend gaming on an IGP. Still, should run some older games reasonably well. I don't know what performance Haswell is going to offer but at the moment AMD definitely have the edge on that front. However this review does also note that the CPU has some serious shortcomings on the processing front so it's a matter of what your needs are really

JHBrown said,
Thanks. I thought I read somewhere that Haswell's graphics were going to comparable to an Nvidia 650 or 640. I believe it was Anandtech. Now I have to go search for the article.
Yeah they had a demo running Dirt 3 on GT 640M and it was comparable to what the Haswell IGP was doing. Haswell will be a necessary step forward for Intel but will still be far behind Richland, and AMD has all the driver experience to make their stuff do actually well in games. AMD finds itself in a really nice spot all of a sudden.