AMD APU A8 3870K

[ARchamps]

Hey guys,

I was doing some research recommending an i3 build to someone and I came across these APUs. I'm pretty familiar with the A6, as I used for my Dad's build. They just released the 3870K, which has an unlocked multiplier. For users who are non-gamers/HTPC/budget builders, I think these are great value with performance where it matters (GPU). Keep in mind, for CPU-intensive uses, Intel will still win. Take a look at some of these links.

AMD A8-3850

Look specifically at the benchmarks. For the same price, you get better on-board video performance than the i3.

AMD A8 3870K

Another review of the "k" version. The main advantage over the i3 is the IGP performance (no dedicated GPU). This seems like what you are planning, so very relevant.

AMD A8 3850 - $129.99

AMD A6 3670K - $119.99

The only potential downside that I see is FM1 chipset might be a dead upgrade path. However, they did recently release the 'K' processors. I believe these have an unlocked multiplier which gives you the ability to OC the processor. I build a PC for Dad with the A6-3650 and it performs well and it only cost me about ~$500 in total.

Just thought I'd share and hear your thoughts!

[tsupersonic]

At this point, I can't even recommend AMD anymore to my friends. I also recommend a cheap dedicated GPU, as they will most likely be much better than an integrated GPU. Even for CPU, Intel just wipes AMD's offerings for the price. I want AMD to stay alive in the business, but they are slipping far behind (in desktop business - sad because Intel needs competition for innovation). I can definitely see AMD shining in the mobile industry, which I know they want to focus more on.

[ViperAFK]

At this point, I can't even recommend AMD anymore to my friends. I also recommend a cheap dedicated GPU, as they will most likely be much better than an integrated GPU. Even for CPU, Intel just wipes AMD's offerings for the price. I want AMD to stay alive in the business, but they are slipping far behind (in desktop business - sad because Intel needs competition for innovation). I can definitely see AMD shining in the mobile industry, which I know they want to focus more on.

AMD's integrated graphics do generally beat intels though. AMD APU's aren't as bad as you are making them out to be, especially for say a low power HTPC system or a laptop.

I do tend to stick with intel now though.

[tsupersonic]

AMD's integrated graphics do generally beat intels though. AMD APU's aren't as bad as you are making them out to be, especially for say a low power HTPC system or a laptop.

I do tend to stick with intel now though.

Yeah, Intel can NOT make a decent integrated GPU. It's just not their business. The preliminary Ivy Bridge GPU looks to be a somewhat decent improvement over the current offerings.. While integrated Intel GPU's aren't great for gaming (compared to ATI), they are more than capable for HTPC's.

[AbandonedTrolley]

I've picked up an A4 for my XBMC HTPC, runs quicker than the Atom/ION combo I had previously, but I have run in to problems with some video playback. Seems that the fusion chipset doesn't play nicely in Linux. Looks like some reading up and possibly a switch to Win7 for my OS

[Open Minded]

The reason I'd go with an i3 is because if you want to add a video card later, you can. You'd also have a MUCH better CPU. You'd be surprised if you looked at benchmarks and see what the little 2100 can do.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-cpu-review-overclock,3106-5.html

Second to top-tier. Beats everything in AMD's lineup. Granted that is a gaming chart...

[AbandonedTrolley]

The reason I'd go with an i3 is because if you want to add a video card later, you can. You'd also have a MUCH better CPU. You'd be surprised if you looked at benchmarks and see what the little 2100 can do.

http://www.tomshardw...ock,3106-5.html

Second to top-tier. Beats everything in AMD's lineup. Granted that is a gaming chart...

My main problem at the time with not going i3 route was the cost, my CPU and Mobo were under ?100, you're looking at twice that for the i3 before the graphics card.

[HyBry]

Indeed, AMD has the cost going for it, but unfortunatly not much more. :(

Sure Intel has much better CPU part, but for the cost AMD offers a decent product with better GPU. On a flip side for the average user CPU will be more important, so i3 (even with integrated) would be a better option then 3870K which IIRC cost about the same.

For a more serious gamer there are dedicated cards and if a dedicated GPU goes in system irregardles than i3 is likely a better option as well.

So we are left with people that need more then Intel inegrated graphics, but not great amount or can't afford a better dedicated GPU. I would say that is a small market, so AMD really need to their CPU game going. Or make their APU extremly energy efficient.

[SionicIon]

My main problem at the time with not going i3 route was the cost, my CPU and Mobo were under ?100, you're looking at twice that for the i3 before the graphics card.

Sigh... Have you considered a Sandy Bridge CPU below a Core i3? Such as the Pentiums or even the Celerons? My system runs butter-smooth on a Intel Celeron G530 and it was only about 55 dollars total here in the United States. The Intel Core i3-2100 sells for about 125 dollars and it is the low-end Core i3. Now I'm not saying go Celeron, get Celeron! I'm just saying to consider Intel's options below the Core i3. Personally I think you should either go small or go big, get a Celeron or Pentium, or else get the Core i7. I really don't see the point in getting a Core i3 or a Core i5.

My system runs fantastic with a Celeron G530, I'm saving up for an Ivy Bridge high-end Core i7 CPU. But my boot times are fantastic, installing programs like Visual Studio 2010 take 3-5 minutes, I can run a hypervisor with complete stability. Yes of course, my Celeron G530 is assisted by the 8GBs of RAM in my system and the SSD I have also. But I think the true test of a CPU is when it has nothing holding it down, my old Core 2 Quad Q6600 was in a system that achieved installing programs like Visual Studio 2010 in about a half hour to 45 minutes...ridiculous and when I put in my SSD, the system flied like this one. Of course I did not want to hurt my SSD being in a system with just 2GBs of RAM, and I had plans to put it in my new system, and now every component helps out every component do it's job with minimal effort.

As far as graphics are concerned, HTPC-quality graphics, nothing less, nothing better. More specifically, my Celeron G530 has Intel HD Graphics 1000. Not 2000 like the Core i3-2100. That's not to say you can't get Intel HD Graphics 2000 on the low-end Sandy Bridge models, the Intel Pentium G840 features the Intel HD Graphics 2000. But personally, I'd rather go small or go big, I'm waiting on the next revision of Intel HD Graphics with Ivy Bridge, since I'm getting an Ivy Bridge Core i7.

Hope this helped you. Regards. :)

[HoochieMamma]

Last time I checked the AMD APUs had much better integrated gfx then the intel offerings?

[AbandonedTrolley]

Last time I checked the AMD APUs had much better integrated gfx then the intel offerings?

They do, however they don't play nicely with Linux right now. Certainly not without a lot of fiddling about, which it seems I will be reading up and doing tonight.

[Open Minded]

My main problem at the time with not going i3 route was the cost, my CPU and Mobo were under ?100, you're looking at twice that for the i3 before the graphics card.

Yeah, cost is a major facor. I feel that.

[giantpotato]

The reason I'd go with an i3 is because if you want to add a video card later, you can. You'd also have a MUCH better CPU. You'd be surprised if you looked at benchmarks and see what the little 2100 can do.

http://www.tomshardw...ock,3106-5.html

Second to top-tier. Beats everything in AMD's lineup. Granted that is a gaming chart...

With the AMD setup you could add a AMD 6670 GPU later and benefit from crossfire between the APU and GPU.

[Open Minded]

With the AMD setup you could add a AMD 6670 GPU later and benefit from crossfire between the APU and GPU.

Sure, but if you're talking raw CPU power the i3 wins hands down. Even the Pentiums in the 50-60 dollar range beat everything (yes, everything) AMD has to offer as far as single threaded processes go...

I was hoping BD was going to be a great CPU so I can use one for crunching along side of my i7. So it's not like I hate AMD, far from it. It's just that they're really behind right now.

[ARchamps]

I agree that i3 sure does beat the APU for CPU tasks, but lets say I was building a budget HTPC exclusively for movies, streaming etc. APU would work well and even has the capability to run some games better than the Intel HD according to benchmarks. IMO, that's great value for a ~$100 chip (A6). You could easily put together a great build at a low cost, considering AMD motherboards are generally cheaper as well.

[Arceles]

At this point, I can't even recommend AMD anymore to my friends. I also recommend a cheap dedicated GPU, as they will most likely be much better than an integrated GPU. Even for CPU, Intel just wipes AMD's offerings for the price. I want AMD to stay alive in the business, but they are slipping far behind (in desktop business - sad because Intel needs competition for innovation). I can definitely see AMD shining in the mobile industry, which I know they want to focus more on.

Look and my sig, I easily beat any i5 with my specs (mobile) having much better GPU (2 to be precise).

[tsupersonic]

Look and my sig, I easily beat any i5 with my specs (mobile) having much better GPU (2 to be precise).

A mobile i5 will beat your laptop in CPU related tasks, and any i5 with a higher end dedicated graphics card will be better than your laptop overall. Just look at passmark CPU benchmarks as a reference:

AMD A6-3410MX APU 2980 267

Intel Core i5-2520M @ 2.50GHz 3605 201

Intel Core i5-2540M @ 2.60GHz 3877 173

[Open Minded]

I agree that i3 sure does beat the APU for CPU taks, but lets say I was building a budget HTPC exclusively for movies, streaming etc. APU would work well and even has the capability to run some games better than the Intel HD according to benchmarks. IMO, that's great value for a ~$100 chip (A6). You could easily put together a great build at a low cost, considering AMD motherboards are generally cheaper as well.

For an HTPC that's not going to be doing any heavy gaming, that would be a great setup. I was talking about the desktop where size, noise, and power consumption have greater range. So for a full-size desktop is when I'd strongly recomend any Sandy Bridge CPU in any given price range. That with the Z68 chipset, even if no discrete GPU was going to be used.

Look and my sig, I easily beat any i5 with my specs (mobile) having much better GPU (2 to be precise).

Moble is the area where I'd pick the AMD GPU/CPU over anything with Intel's GPU. The CPU is "good enough" but the video power is way better than Intel's offerings at this point.

[LaP]

At this point, I can't even recommend AMD anymore to my friends. I also recommend a cheap dedicated GPU, as they will most likely be much better than an integrated GPU. Even for CPU, Intel just wipes AMD's offerings for the price. I want AMD to stay alive in the business, but they are slipping far behind (in desktop business - sad because Intel needs competition for innovation). I can definitely see AMD shining in the mobile industry, which I know they want to focus more on.

The point of buying a low cost APU with an IGPU is to use it without a dedicated GPU. Most of the time in a HTPC or for a desktop pc/laptop not requiring video processing power. If you add a dedicated GPU then you are probably wasting money for those type of systems.

The fact is the IGPU in AMD APU is far better than the one in Intel APU. And this is not really a surprise.

If you gonna build a HTPC and plan to use it here and there casually to play some games then the unlocked AMD A8 3870k is actually a very good option and can easily be recommened over a Core I3. If you gonna build a desktop pc not requiring video processing power then Sandy bridge is a better option.

Some people talk about more serious gamers but honestly what's the point spending lot of money on a dedicated gpu and pair it with a Core I3 instead of a Core i5 ? Don't know about USA but here in canada the i3 is around 160$ and the i5 is around 230$. 70$ is a lot of money but for a more serious gaming system it's imo better save for a couple of months and buy a cpu that will last longer.

I really see the core i3 as an APU. If everyone buy a dedicated GPU to go with it then what's the point actually Intel should scrap all this and make CPU only. You buy it for the cpu and gpu part too. For a desktop pc that is not used to play games then the Core i3 is definitively the winner. For a low cost system casually used to play games and watch video and where no work beside word is being done then AMD offering actually makes sense. But that's a really niche market for sure.

[Arceles]

A mobile i5 will beat your laptop in CPU related tasks, and any i5 with a higher end dedicated graphics card will be better than your laptop overall. Just look at passmark CPU benchmarks as a reference:

AMD A6-3410MX APU 2980 267

Intel Core i5-2520M @ 2.50GHz 3605 201

Intel Core i5-2540M @ 2.60GHz 3877 173

That's not overclocked guy, this is my score in 3dmark11 http://3dmark.com/3dm11/2304498 it easily surpasses any I5, true, I have a cooling mod, but anything around 2.4+ GHz with no cooling mod (and no heat issues) supasses the i5 as stated in this whole threat: http://forum.noteboo...ers-lounge.html and this: http://forum.noteboo...tion-guide.html

[woodromw]

pfft newbie here so.....go easy on me..

[chrisj1968]

my current laptop has an AMD Vision A8 graphic processor...a Toshiba Satellite P775D-S7144 good processor

[woodromw]

Interesting.

I had an i5 2310 on an Intel Z68 board..and my benchmarks were quite surprising.I actually enjoyed that combo,for about 1 week.

I could actually play BF3 on low/medium settings with a very little,but noticeable lag.I could get decent FPS..low mind you,but fluid gameplay.During Americas Army 3.2 on the Bridge map with high settings i was able to pull in around 30/40 fps...nothing compared to my previous rig..(AMD 455/Nvidia GTX 265...80+ Fps)...i was going to get another Dedicated VidCard..but i got so aggrivated with the lack of over clock ability in that CPU..i sold the whole package and purchased

AMD APU 3870K and an ASRock A75M-HVS...for less than the previous combo package.

Interestingly enuff ..My Fps on the above games are nearly identical,at stock speeds.

My PassMark scores were also nearly identical,as were my 3dMark scores.

But than the overclock comes in...Big Time...currently running at 3.7 Ghz with 1.41V

h**p://*malware domain*/show_oc.php?id=2269459

i am never going back to the Intel series,until they can drop the outrageous pricing.

The 3870 /FM1 combo is equal in all my benchmarks to the i5-2310/Intel Z68 combo..at roughly $100.00 U.S cheaper.

Now,i not only Game but can consistantly Rip/or Convert a DVD into MP4 format and download with my UTorrent and Game..all at the same time,never skipping a beat...after watching this Youtube Review of the AMD 3870..coupled with a Radeon 6670 Vid

*** youtube.com/watch?v=nJqNByn2wjc&feature=related **

I purchased my HIS Radeon HD 6770 1 GB from Amazon only hours ago..and cannot wait to get back into my Game..this will easily bring me back to/if not Surpass my FPS in my previous 455/265 combo...with out all the power Robbing features of the previous.

All the comments on this thread are quite good,and i can see the validation in each of them...I hope only that ,my opinion is just as adequate.

O' and i just found this...Very Nice MW3 with dual Vid same setup as above...i think you might find interesting.

h**p://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1coB3QrYcf4&feature=related **

[Arceles]

Interesting. I had an i5 2310 on an Intel Z68 board..and my benchmarks were quite surprising.I actually enjoyed that combo,for about 1 week. I could actually play BF3 on low/medium settings with a very little,but noticeable lag.I could get decent FPS..low mind you,but fluid gameplay.During Americas Army 3.2 on the Bridge map with high settings i was able to pull in around 30/40 fps...nothing compared to my previous rig..(AMD 455/Nvidia GTX 265...80+ Fps)...i was going to get another Dedicated VidCard..but i got so aggrivated with the lack of over clock ability in that CPU..i sold the whole package and purchased AMD APU 3870K and an ASRock A75M-HVS...for less than the previous combo package. Interestingly enuff ..My Fps on the above games are nearly identical,at stock speeds. My PassMark scores were also nearly identical,as were my 3dMark scores. But than the overclock comes in...Big Time...currently running at 3.7 Ghz with 1.41V h**p://*malware domain*/show_oc.php?id=2269459 i am never going back to the Intel series,until they can drop the outrageous pricing. The 3870 /FM1 combo is equal in all my benchmarks to the i5-2310/Intel Z68 combo..at roughly $100.00 U.S cheaper. Now,i not only Game but can consistantly Rip/or Convert a DVD into MP4 format and download with my UTorrent and Game..all at the same time,never skipping a beat...after watching this Youtube Review of the AMD 3870..coupled with a Radeon 6670 Vid *** youtube.com/watch?v=nJqNByn2wjc&feature=related ** I purchased my HIS Radeon HD 6770 1 GB from Amazon only hours ago..and cannot wait to get back into my Game..this will easily bring me back to/if not Surpass my FPS in my previous 455/265 combo...with out all the power Robbing features of the previous. All the comments on this thread are quite good,and i can see the validation in each of them...I hope only that ,my opinion is just as adequate. O' and i just found this...Very Nice MW3 with dual Vid same setup as above...i think you might find interesting. h**p://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1coB3QrYcf4&feature=related **

The AMD APUs in laptops also offer that big overclock capability, something I had never seen before, this, coupled with an overclocable GPU gave me a very smooth battlefield experience, because there is nothing like 4 cores @ 2.9 Ghz plus dual GPU for it, again, in a notebook :D (i5s were way past left behind with this)

[woodromw]

The AMD APUs in laptops also offer that big overclock capability, something I had never seen before, this, coupled with an overclocable GPU gave me a very smooth battlefield experience, because there is nothing like 4 cores @ 2.9 Ghz plus dual GPU for it, again, in a notebook :D (i5s were way past left behind with this)

i would O'So love to have a Quad laptop...ooooo ican only imagine....