Desktop Trinity APUs available at Newegg

Want to buy one of AMD’s new Trinity desktop APUs? Good news. Newegg has four different models in stock, and they all come with promotional $5 gift cards. The range-topping A10-5800K sells for $130, while its slower A8-5600K counterpart can be had for $110. Those quad-core models are complemented by a pair of duallies. The A6-5400K rings in at $75 and the A4-5300 costs just $60.

Newegg is charging a little more than the 1,000-unit prices quoted by AMD. The chip maker asks $122 and $101 for the A10-5800K and A8-5600K, respectively. The A6-5400K has a $67 list price, while the $A4-5300 is pegged at $53. Don’t think that Newegg is trying to take advantage of early Trinity adopters, though. The e-tailer charges similar premiums on Intel CPUs.

TigerDirect’s stock list mirrors Newegg’s, and the prices are almost identical between the two. However, the only Amazon listings are for third-party vendors, which are charging a little more than Newegg and TigerDirect. North of the border, NCIX’s website is devoid of listings for desktop Trinity processors.

Newegg’s $5 gift card promotion expires October 15, so there’s plenty of time to take advantage of the offer. I wouldn’t be surprised to see desktop Trinity APUs pop up in motherboard combo deals, as well. The chips plug into a new FM2 socket, so they won’t work with older boards.

Comments closed
    • Xenolith
    • 7 years ago

    Has an ITX FM2 board been released yet?

    • NeelyCam
    • 7 years ago

    The longer it takes for the TR Trinity review to go online, the less I think it’s necessary. Other sites have covered pretty much everything.. I’d be surprised if TR’s review shows anything particularly unexpected at this point.

      • sschaem
      • 7 years ago

      I think there is a bunch of refinement.

      Dont do gaming test with a discreet GPU at 1024×768
      Dont do IGP testing at 1920×1080
      What is the benefit of dual graphics with a HD 7750 ($90)
      GPU accelerated Web browser benchmarks & games
      HTPC, noise during video playback with stock cooler
      Multiple monitor ?
      Undervloting, how conservative is AMD ?
      etc…
      IPC analysis, power efficiency graph with IGP gaming, etc.. (This is a geek site right ?)
      And have those plot be done undervolted, stock and overclocked.

      BTW. I find it LAME when people get an 4.2ghz overclock at 1.3volt, but then raise the voltage to 1.5 volt just to reach 4.4 ghz… then show a power graph with the overvlocked result.
      Specially when the chip will do 4.1 ghz at 1.1 volt.
      number just for illustration.

        • NeelyCam
        • 7 years ago

        You know, it would be useful if some site combined all the critical review results from all the other sites… with all the power numbers for various cases, bunches of benchmarks etc. (with proper references, of course). In a grand scheme of things, it seems like wasted effort if TR repeats Metro, Skyrim and such benchmarks when other sites have already done that.

        To me, something like that would mean that I don’t have to search through multiple sites to find all the interesting info

    • ronch
    • 7 years ago

    Come on, TR, principles and values are one thing, and I know you guys are standing for what you believe in, but really, all the other reviews are up and TR’s is still MIA. I don’t really have a big problem with you guys not posting it last Sept. 26, but heck, the NDA has lifted and it’s already showtime. Post your review already.

      • sschaem
      • 7 years ago

      I haven’t found one really good Trinity review so far. So my hope is that TR is trying to break the mold.

      But I’m ok if they release the CPU review first and the GPU portion a few days later ๐Ÿ™‚

    • Derfer
    • 7 years ago

    So no A10-5700, and no mini-itx. Launch is way off mark.

    Not enough power to warrant a big board and not enough overclock benefit to justify a K with the higher TDP. Of course most don’t pay enough attention to the reviews to note those points so I’m sure it’ll sell well enough out of the gate.

      • Bauxite
      • 7 years ago

      No itx yet, but the 65w parts are actually available this time, surprised the hell out of me.

      • sschaem
      • 7 years ago

      ? Are you basing you conclusion TR review ?

      Try other site to come back to reality.

      matx need i7-3770k to be valid in your eyes ? whats does an atx board need ?

      Some post are delirious.

    • Airmantharp
    • 7 years ago

    Transcoding:

    People keep throwing this up as something that Trinity is good at, along with Photoshop, but seriously?

    Intel Quicksync is fast as hell, especially on a cheap i3. If you need faster or better quality, you aren’t using a low end system anyway, right?

    And what power ‘shopper is going to be using a Trinity/i3?

      • NeelyCam
      • 7 years ago

      I largely agree. I transcode during the night using CPU-only; I don’t think it really matters how fast the CPU is these days for transcoding (unless you’re doing it in a professional capacity).. even my lowly Clarkdale was able to do the job overnight.

      I don’t use Quicksync mainly because I haven’t found good software for it, but even if I do, I’m not sure I’d use it anyways. CPU -> better quality, and I have time.

        • Bensam123
        • 7 years ago

        I think transcoding is actually more useful in a realtime capacity. Such as realtime encoding for live streaming, such as gaming. As such the performance of it is extremely important so the system doesn’t tank, as it still is really punishing to run systems and encode at the same time even though technology is quite a ways ahead of games.

        I don’t know of any GPUs that do realtime transcoding for streaming. Xsplit, FFsplit, and Adobe encoder don’t support it. For various reasons, Xsplit listed a bunch of BS reasons (what I got out of it is they aren’t knowledgeable enough to take advantage of it). Being able to do this on the onboard GPU or buying a cheap budget card for encoding would be godsend.

          • Airmantharp
          • 7 years ago

          Without all-out software support it is tough to say, but I’m willing to bet this is why Intel created Quicksync in the first place. CPU’s are damned inefficient at such a task, even if they’re fast enough.

          • Deanjo
          • 7 years ago

          [quote<]I don't know of any GPUs that do realtime transcoding for streaming. Xsplit, FFsplit, and Adobe encoder don't support it.[/quote<] Wowza can use QuickSync as well as Cuda. Mainconcept's encoding products also allow use of QuickSync, Cuda or openCL which can be passed to a http stream server of your choice (Mediaconcept, QTSS, vls, etc). The nice thing about QuickSync is that it is freely open to develop for with intels SDK or alternatively start from scratch and use the wealth of information on QuickSync that is available under intels release of Ivy Bridge documentation. PS OS X 10.8 also uses QuickSync to do its AirPlay mirroring which is essentially streaming as well.

            • Bensam123
            • 7 years ago

            Twitch takes RTMP streams. I know of some other products that do encoding, but aren’t friendly to use for streaming at all. They don’t give you the flexibility you need to setup streams on the fly without making predetermined stages.

            Wowza I believe I looked at before… most of the big pieces of software like that function as a actual server for distributing streams, but what streamers need/use is a client that can encode the stream and send it to Twitch or such other website. Not offer a website for viewers to go to in order to view the stream (or need a special client to view it). Like Wowza is listed as the backend FOR Twitch TV. That isn’t what streamers use to encode their streams and send them to Twitch.

            Mainconcept is just a encoder, not a streaming software package. Like mainconcept is something you’d use as part of a transcoding package or as a plugin for another piece of software.

            I know Quicksync has information readily available for it, as do AMD/Nvidia in their respective ways, but none of them are being taken advantage of by software that I as a streamer would use.

            • Deanjo
            • 7 years ago

            [quote<]Wowza I believe I looked at before... most of the big pieces of software like that function as a actual server for distributing streams, but what streamers need/use is a client that can encode the stream and send it to Twitch or such other website. Not offer a website for viewers to go to in order to view the stream (or need a special client to view it). Like Wowza is listed as the backend FOR Twitch TV. That isn't what streamers use to encode their streams and send them to Twitch.[/quote<] Wowza actually can encode via QS or Cuda that you send to their service which then they user their server farm to deliver the media. [quote<]Mainconcept is just a encoder, not a streaming software package. Like mainconcept is something you'd use as part of a transcoding package or as a plugin for another piece of software.[/quote<] Mainconcept is not only an encoder. They have multiple products including a stream server and encapsulator that can accept the transcoder input for relaying on via http, rtp, rtsp etc. The big problem with utilizing a GPU encoder is actually a Windows issue. Since Vista and later (including server 2008+) Microsoft no longer allows the running of services in session 0 to have access to the video. This was done for security reasons meaning that only very limited gpu access can only be accessed by a service hosted drivers without having a logged in user. This isn't a worry in other OS's such as linux or OS X and they still can have access to those device capabilities. It is a concern as well for items like GPU computing and is why only certified devices and drivers that go under MS's scrutiny are allowed to run properly under session 0 (such as Nvidia's Tesla series). Typical igp/consumer end stuff is not usually given that kind of access as in the eyes of MS poses more of a security risk with little benefit for the average home user.

            • Bensam123
            • 7 years ago

            I don’t think there is any problem with accessing video… Screencap software already does that, xsplit does that at the screen level or DX level, dxtory does it at the DX level for pretty much everything… including flash videos. Even if it causes the stream to be delayed a bit it still doesn’t matter, GPU encoding doesn’t need access to the raw data either… it can be fed data through other means. Like using DXtory to cap the screen and then use the GPU just for encoding. Streaming isn’t the same as virtualization.

            Yeah, I don’t need Wowza to do distribution. I need a client that functions like Xsplit… Wowza is the backend. Twitch is actually one of their clients. It isn’t what streamers use.

            I don’t need a stream server. Like I said I don’t need the backend, I need the front end that delivers the stream to Twitch. Twitch is the backend… Encoding is currently done on the stream to send it to Twitch which then redistributes it to people actually watching the stream. I do encoding on my end to save bandwidth, but that comes at the price of processor usage (which is what GPU encoding would elevate). That of course makes my gaming experience a lot worse.

            A client with gpu acceleration that allows multiple stage setups. Xsplit does capture, stages, encoding, and rtmp delivery to Twitch. It’s not responsible for flash, html, or silverlight delivery like Wowza does. Wowza actually takes the streams from xsplit. I mean if I were to setup a company that does streaming Wowza would probably be what I would be using, but not as a streamer.

            I really dislike companies that try to obscure their product like Wowza does… They don’t have screenshots of the actual software or a video showing it’s use. It’s all marketing BS. Check out the cost of it too… Completely different ball game, but that’s beside the point.

        • sweatshopking
        • 7 years ago

        Y TRANSCODE WHEN YOU CAN TORRENT??!?!?!?! SRSLYBRO. EVEN IF YOU OWN THE FILM, IT’S USUALLY FASTER, OR AT LEAST EASIER

        plus i wanted a neely pirate rant.

          • NeelyCam
          • 7 years ago

          No dice – I’m busy

      • kc77
      • 7 years ago

      Yeah but the quality isn’t nearly as good as an x264 encoder. Most people want accuracy over speed. Speed works great if you just need to encode something real quick just to view it or if you are doing animation. But anything else will stick out in a very very big way.

      The CPU route is slower but it’s the more accurate for now.

        • Deanjo
        • 7 years ago

        [quote<]Most people want accuracy over speed.[/quote<] Citations needed. Most of the world has no problem watching crappy youtube or compressed to living hell digital cable. A select few want accuracy over speed. The rest of the world want's something that is watchable to them and most would be hard pressed to notice any difference unless it was explicitly pointed out to them.

          • kc77
          • 7 years ago

          No one wants to go backwards in fidelity except you. That’s the point. Most of the world isn’t watching full featured movies on YouTube either. Let me know how the next X-men Movie looks on YouTube. I’m sure it will be awesome for the 22 ms it’s available.

          Highlighting digital cable is probably the worst example since THEY CHARGE MORE FOR HD CHANNELS. Hmm I wonder why? Someone must want it. Oh I get it I’m the only one. :/ I can’t believe Comcast and Verizon would go through so much trouble for just me. I can only purchase service from one of them at a time.

          [quote<] A select few want accuracy over speed. The rest of the world want's something that is watchable to them and most would be hard pressed to notice any difference unless it was explicitly pointed out to them. [/quote<] Yes because what I want to do is go through the trouble of backing up my DVD's and BR's to absolutely crappy versions of the originals and then view the crappy copy at 1080p on my TV. I suppose the upside to doing it your way would be that every time I watched a DVD or BR I could pretend it was the remastered version by allowing me to see the colors as they were originally meant to be. If there's anyone who would need a citation I would think it would be person who doesn't care what the image looks like as long as it's done via QuickSync.

            • Deanjo
            • 7 years ago

            [quote<]No one wants to go backwards in fidelity except you. That's the point. Most of the world isn't watching full featured movies on YouTube either. Let me know how the next X-men Movie looks on YouTube. I'm sure it will be awesome for the 22 ms it's available. [/quote<] And I'm sure watching the next big blockbuster on a portable device is everybodyโ€™s idea of the complete cinema experience. Point is that most people care about the content of the media more then the quality especially when that quality is "good enough". The mere fact that you are already making sacrifices watching compressed video to begin with. [quote<]Highlighting digital cable is probably the worst example since THEY CHARGE MORE FOR HD CHANNELS. Hmm I wonder why? Someone must want it. Oh I get it I'm the only one. :/ I can't believe Comcast and Verizon would go through so much trouble for just me. I can only purchase service from one of them at a time. [/quote<] The reason that people are asking for more HD channels is because the cable companies compress the living hell out of the standard def. A typical standard def channel is broadcasted @ ~ 300-400 kbps. A highdef stream from a cable company is broadcast typically at around the 3 to max 5 mbit/s to save bandwidth. An OTA ATSC stream is typically much higher around the 16-18 mbit/s. Take a look at an old NTSC analog standard def stream vs a "standard def" cable digital stream and you will swear you are watching an old vp6 youtube stream on the digital channel. Take a look at any torrent site and when there is a 720p mkv and a standard def mp4 versions of the file, I guarantee you that the standard def gets downloaded more buy a HUGE margin. Why? Device compatibility and size and the content. They worry more about the content of the media then the technical merits of it's encoding. For most people those are "good enough" encodes. VOD is gaining in popularity as well, again not because of the quality but the matter of convenience. Quality is not the end all and be all of determination of what people watch. [quote<]Yes because what I want to do is go through the trouble of backing up my DVD's and BR's to absolutely crappy versions of the originals and then view the crappy copy at 1080p on my TV. I suppose the upside to doing it your way would be that every time I watched a DVD or BR I could pretend it was the remastered version by allowing me to see the colors as they were originally meant to be. [/quote<] Why are you watching DVD's in the first place? How could you stand it with the huge quality difference between DVD and BR? I hope you are doing 1:1 rips and not reencoding at all considering you are losing quality when you do. PS3 and XBoX, Trinity etc graphics are crappy compared to a high end gaming system but somehow their capabilities are perfectly fine for most people. The same thing applies for QuickSync encodes.

            • kc77
            • 7 years ago

            [quote<] And I'm sure watching the next big blockbuster on a portable device is everybodyโ€™s idea of the complete cinema experience. Point is that most people care about the content of the media more then the quality especially when that quality is "good enough". The mere fact that you are already making sacrifices watching compressed video to begin with. [/quote<] A bootleg video is probably also good enough for some. But I just don't think quality takes as much of a back seat as you think it does. [quote<] The reason that people are asking for more HD channels is because the cable companies compress the living hell out of the standard def. A typical standard def channel is broadcasted @ ~ 300-400 kbps. A highdef stream from a cable company is broadcast typically at around the 3 to max 5 mbit/s to save bandwidth. An OTA ATSC stream is typically much higher around the 16-18 mbit/s. Take a look at an old NTSC analog standard def stream vs a "standard def" cable digital stream and you will swear you are watching an old vp6 youtube stream on the digital channel. [/quote<] So because the standard definition signal is crappy people go to HD to get better quality. Isn't that what I've been saying? You pretty much proved the point that quality DOES matter and for a lot of people quality is preferred especially if you aren't the one doing the transcoding. [quote<] Take a look at any torrent site and when there is a 720p mkv and a standard def mp4 versions of the file, I guarantee you that the standard def gets downloaded more buy a HUGE margin. Why? [/quote<] Um 720 is high definition not standard. Sorry no one is going for the 480 over 720 the size differences are minimal. You are talking about 150MB vs 300MB (30 minutes) and 300MB vs 600MB (1 hour). 720 is the dominant resolution over standard. [quote<] Why are you watching DVD's in the first place? [/quote<] Because the Secret of NIMH was done in the early 80's and there are no high definition versions of it. Any DVD's I have rarely have high definition versions. And yes the really really good stuff stays as an iso 1:1. [quote<] PS3 and XBoX, Trinity etc graphics are crappy compared to a high end gaming system but somehow their capabilities are perfectly fine for most people. [/quote<] And how long have we been complaining about that? YEARS [quote<] The same thing applies for QuickSync encodes. [/quote<] Yup and I'm saying the quality isn't good enough.

          • jensend
          • 7 years ago

          So change it from “most people want accuracy” to “most people who are technical enough that they’re weighing evidence when making CPU purchase decisions want accuracy.” Fixed.

          • NeelyCam
          • 7 years ago

          I think most people, if comparing HD to standard, will prefer HD. The amount of people tolerating DVD is dwindling by the minute, as they see HD in best buys and targets and are wondering why their own TV doesn’t look like that

          • mikato
          • 7 years ago

          Just like with image editing, you want to start with the best quality possible. That way if you upload to different sites that use different methods, or you want to make your own derivative videos later, you can always go back to the best quality one and use that.

          If I made a video of one of my hiking trips or something I’d want to make it in 1080p and the highest quality for sure (or better even), even if most people were only going to see it in some compressed form. I’m pretty sure anybody that does this for a business would think the same way. You don’t want to send an NFL football game in compressed format that will be further compressed in digital cable.

          Most people I know can notice the terrible compression that occurs in cable broadcasts vs what you see watching a Bluray movie for example.

      • jensend
      • 7 years ago

      QuickSync’s quality isn’t just non-optimal, it’s terrible. You’re looking at XviD quality. You have to be kinda desperate to use that when vastly better options are available.

      It’s kinda like saying “those AMD fans brag about how quickly their kitchen taps fill their water bottles, but it’s NOTHING compared to how quickly my INTEL FIREHOSE CONNECTED TO A COMPRESSED SEWAGE TANK fills up mine!!”

        • Airmantharp
        • 7 years ago

        It’s quick, that’s for sure.

          • jensend
          • 7 years ago

          No matter how fast it is, that doesn’t change the fact that the results are crap. ๐Ÿ™‚

        • jensend
        • 7 years ago

        Ooh, looks like I must have ticked off an intel fanboy by disparaging their miracle firehose.

        BTW, if anyone doubts the “XviD quality” there’s more than plenty of places that have reviewed the quality, looked at various metrics, and come to that conclusion. For instance, you can look through the [url=http://compression.ru/video/codec_comparison/h264_2012/<]Moscow University comparison[/url<]. If you look in their detailed results, you'll see that x264's "superfast 1-pass" encoding mode beats QuickSync on both quality [b<]and encoding time[/b<]. But few people use that mode because they know they can get better results with different settings.

          • jensend
          • 7 years ago

          Ooh, somebody sure takes exception to seeing their precious headline-feature hardware acceleration losing out in both quality and encode time to a CPU-only solution in objective benchmarks. “Bury it! Bury it! Can’t have those facts coming out!”

            • jensend
            • 7 years ago

            You can’t win, Deanjo. If you thumb me down, I shall become more powerful than you can possibly imagine.

          • sschaem
          • 7 years ago

          x264 is state of the art, but I dont think superfast 1-pass is faster then quicksync on an i3 processor.

          One thing not detail is power efficiency. quicksync is the clear winner.

          I would use quicksync for video conferencing (if it was an option) and x264 for archival/production work.

            • jensend
            • 7 years ago

            Well, they were using an i7-3770, and you’re right that QuickSync would be faster than superfast 1-pass on an i3 (though by only a factor of 2 or less). But still, it shows that the speed of QuickSync just isn’t all that tremendously impressive when you consider the very low quality target. You might expect dedicated hardware to have more of an advantage here.

            And dedicated hardware will usually win out on power efficiency, though on desktop I have a harder time seeing why, if you’ve already done the setup to provide enough power and thermal headroom for a processor, it’s such a big deal to go ahead and use it when encoding video.

            Videoconferencing is quite often done at comparatively low resolutions and bitrates. This means any speed and power advantage of QuickSync will be less noticeable and that encoder quality will make more of a visible difference. Though there may be situations where you don’t mind about quality as long as your friend/colleague is vaguely recognizable, I still don’t think I would use QuickSync for videoconferencing.

      • ronch
      • 7 years ago

      Trinity was never meant to target power users. However, since AMD keeps talking about HSA it makes sense to investigate exactly what it brings to the table. Quicksync is a different matter but really does make an impact in real-world apps (i.e. it’s not just a theory), particularly transcoding apps, and I suppose comparisons to HSA are inevitable. Still, QS uses very specialized circuitry and probably can’t be used to accelerate many kinds of applications, and that’s where HSA takes over.

      • sschaem
      • 7 years ago

      Quicksync was design for video conferencing type app like iChat.
      Transcoding was a side benefit… that actually turned out to be used more and no app leverage quicksync.

      Any workload that is CPU intensive is most likely multi-threaded. (exeptions? yes)

      Show me a compelling case where an i3 system is better… gaming at 1024 with a 7970 ?

    • Bensam123
    • 7 years ago

    Weird how the NDA didn’t expire the moment the chips hit store shelves.

      • NeelyCam
      • 7 years ago

      What do you mean? Chip out -> public info.

        • Bensam123
        • 7 years ago

        Yup… but TR hasn’t published anything.

    • Sam125
    • 7 years ago

    At this point, the A10-5700 is the only Trinity desktop variant that’s even remotely interesting. That’s only due to being a pretty good HTPC candidate or the only AMD processor worth giving a silent PC treatment. [b<]That's[/b<] the processor to look out for IMO.

      • Airmantharp
      • 7 years ago

      They really need to lower the TDP first. I know it idles low, but it needs to have its load usage low enough for fan-less treatment. THAT would be worth building.

      Hell, I want to see how well it does at 1080p. I really don’t care how far I have to shove settings down if it can produce smooth overall performance.

        • Goty
        • 7 years ago

        For the record, the A10-5700’s TDP is only 65W. That’s plenty low enough for a silent HTPC. Heck, I run a Phenom II X3 720 (a 95W TDP CPU) in my HTPC with a passively cooled 4670 with one fan + the PSU.

          • Airmantharp
          • 7 years ago

          Oh, I’m with you- making something silent isn’t really that hard.

          My point was more about making it entirely fanless, without a discrete GPU or other cards (no need with HDMI handling audio). No moving parts at all, just stream from NAS.

            • NeelyCam
            • 7 years ago

            I have a Clarkdale rig that’s completely fanless, used as a HTPC. My 2600K system could also be fanless, but heavier transcoding makes it throttle.. not the end of the world, but slows it down a bit. Adding a very slow, ultraquiet case fan makes it run like a champ, but it’s no longer a “pure” fanless setup..

            • Sam125
            • 7 years ago

            Yeah, it’s never been easier to a silent, fanless PC. Back when they were popular in the early to mid 2000s but kind of faded into obscurity. Luckily PC parts have been quietly (pun intended) improving in both performance and in noise profile so building a silent or near silent PC that can also stay below ambient + 20C temperatures isn’t too difficult now.

            Now if only AMD would revive their low power e-series line (like from the Athlon64 era), a 35w or even a 45w TDP A10 Trinity would be a smashing success!

    • ronch
    • 7 years ago

    So Geoff, should we buy it?

      • anotherengineer
      • 7 years ago

      Depends on your needs. However some people buy stuff on their wants.

      I need a PC in the garage, I am considering trinity, and a small case, an ITX would be nice, if any were available.

        • ronch
        • 7 years ago

        Er, that comment was meant to push TR to publish their review.

    • ronch
    • 7 years ago

    Without a discrete graphics card, Trinity is obviously a better choice than an i3 Ivy which costs roughly the same. Yeah, I already read the reviews elsewhere. It’s the perfect processor for the wife.

      • theonespork
      • 7 years ago

      I root for AMD. I really do.

      Having said that, those “reviews” were lacking to say the least, and calls of”shenanigans” may well be warranted. AMD is playing games with credible sources, trying to stack the deck in their favor. There was a time when this would have registered outrage at true tech sites; now we just call that “business” and “the free market”. Kudos to TR for doing right by the reader.

        • ronch
        • 7 years ago

        I highly regard TR and its take on products. In this case, however, their review isn’t out yet so what’s a guy like me supposed to do to get educated about Trinity’s performance at this time?

          • NeelyCam
          • 7 years ago

          Go to Anandtech

            • anotherengineer
            • 7 years ago

            I read this one
            [url<]http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/FM2_APU_Review/[/url<]

            • NeelyCam
            • 7 years ago

            On that TechPowerUp review:

            [quote<]"I think performance is, once cost is considered, more than acceptable. I know that many are not going to agree with me, but I really hope that most would. [b<]Unfortunately, AMD has mentioned time and time again as of late that they are short on chip supply.[/b<]"[/quote<] What's the deal? Is GloFo 32nm [i<]still[/i<] having yield issues? Or is AMD doing crazy binning to get usable chips? Either way, this will inevitably increase cost and hurt profits

            • ronch
            • 7 years ago

            Already did, actually. I usually check in this order: TR, Tom’s, Anandtech, Fudzilla, others.

            • NeelyCam
            • 7 years ago

            Fudzilla has reviews..?

            • mikato
            • 7 years ago

            They have FUD.

            • ronch
            • 7 years ago

            No, I go their for rumors and FUD, as Mikato said. That’s why it’s one of my last resort go-to websites.

          • Sam125
          • 7 years ago

          You should check out the Toms Hardware review. That seems to have a good mix of software that should be wife-worthy. lol

          Or you could always wait for the TR version.

        • Airmantharp
        • 7 years ago

        I root for competition, and AMD is it for x86/desktop space. AMD re-invented their architecture to continue to compete with Intel, and others could have as well, like Cyrix. Having two entrenched competitors isn’t much different than having two entrenched political parties…

      • NeelyCam
      • 7 years ago

      [quote<]Trinity is obviously a better choice than an i3 Ivy which costs roughly the same[/quote<] "Obviously"? Compared to i3-3220, it consumes more power and loses in almost every benchmark that isn't heavily multithreaded (and even those it wins by only a very small margin). How is this perfect for your wife? Does she do video transcoding on a daily basis, or play games at crappy resolutions?

        • dpaus
        • 7 years ago

        [quote<]Does she.... play games at crappy resolutions?[/quote<] Dude, if I asked my wife to play her CoD at anything less than 2560x1600 full AA, I'd be single instantly. [/XtremeSarcasm]

          • mikato
          • 7 years ago

          My wife plays CoD on the HTPC, so it’s 1366×768 of our TV or whatever. Works great for 6 foot away. For her laptop or whatever I’m sure Trinity would be just fine ๐Ÿ™‚

        • ptsant
        • 7 years ago

        [quote<] "Obviously"? Compared to i3-3220, it consumes more power and loses in almost every benchmark that isn't heavily multithreaded (and even those it wins by only a very small margin). How is this perfect for your wife? Does she do video transcoding on a daily basis, or play games at crappy resolutions? [/quote<] It doesn't consume more power at idle, which is what computers do 99% of the time in home use scenarios. The benchmarks Trinity wins are quite pertinent in my opinion (for example, video encoding is something time-consuming, compression-decompression too, Photoshop is another favorite etc) so it is a valid alternative. As Anand said, the situation can be summarized as follows: For Gamers who are willing to buy a ~100$ discrete card: i3, otherwise Trinity For people who never game, look at the applications you use: multithreaded is usually in favor of Trinity, single-threaded is usually i3.

          • sschaem
          • 7 years ago

          That’s dead on target.

          Things that I haven’t seen much yet is dual graphic test.
          One test show 54 FPS IGP, 74fps 6670, 93fps dual. So almost a 30% boost in performance!

          Anand discreet GPU test where done at 1024 to make sure it was CPU bound.
          But then Trinity, for each game, was >60 fps…
          It seem to me Trinity + discreet at 1920 resolution might actually be better.
          So gaming on a A10 + 6670 might be better then an I3 + 6670 ??

          And when test are done correctly:
          [url<]http://vr-zone.com/articles/amd-trinity-a10-5800k-vs-intel-ivy-bridge-i5-3470--discrete-gpu-gaming-performance/17272.html[/url<] Even the i5 doesn't have a big advantage in gaming when we go from 1024 to 1920 resolution with a discreet card. I think we might see more of te balance tilt toward Trinity as times goes one. (from WebGL, OpenCL, HW accelerated web browser and apps, ...) Specially if you use an AMD discreet GPU card with a Trinity system. I also hear that AMD will release CPU updates for FM2 for the next 3 years. .. ok, I start to sound like an AMD salesman ๐Ÿ™‚ But man I just dont get the hate for Trinity when its a stellar product on all front. (when you consider the price, CPU benchmarks, and GPU compute potential)

            • Hattig
            • 7 years ago

            [quote<]And when test are done correctly: [url<]http://vr-zone.com/articles/amd-trinity-a10-5800k-vs-intel-ivy-bridge-i5-3470--discrete-gpu-gaming-performance/17272.html[/url<] Even the i5 doesn't have a big advantage in gaming when we go from 1024 to 1920 resolution with a discreet card.[/quote<] The flaw in that review is putting a $200 Intel CPU up against a $130 AMD APU (with GPU not in use). They should have taken $70 off the GPU budget on the Intel system :-p I think a lot of people are interested in the APU+GPU CrossFire benchmarks, because that could make a large difference for "not quite hard core gamers".

            • Rza79
            • 7 years ago

            [url<]http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/grafikkarten/2012/test-trinity-vs.-ivy-bridge-im-gpu-test/8/[/url<] But microstutter seems to be a big issue: [url<]http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/grafikkarten/2012/test-trinity-vs.-ivy-bridge-im-gpu-test/9/[/url<]

            • mikato
            • 7 years ago

            *discrete*
            Sorry to be a spelling stickler but I have seen the word “discreet” like 100 times in the last few days reading about the new Trinity chips and it’s a bit much now.

            • NeelyCam
            • 7 years ago

            -1. Grammar nazism is unnecessary. Even if some people don’t know how to spell discrete properly, you still understand what they mean when they say ‘discreet’

          • Deanjo
          • 7 years ago

          You might want to read the comments over at Tom’s about Trinity’s power consumption article.

          [quote<] cangelini So, it's probable that we're seeing a difference in configuration. It looks like Anand is using the Gigabyte A85X board and perhaps an older driver version. I'm on the MSI board and Cat 12.8, with a different Intel setup as well. On the Windows desktop, after 10 minutes on each config, I get 59 W for Intel and 67 W for AMD at idle. [/quote<]

            • NeelyCam
            • 7 years ago

            If you are really interested in idle power, you head out to SilentPCReview:

            [url<]http://www.silentpcreview.com/article1259-page3.html[/url<] Ivy i7-3770k system is idling at 27W. A8-3850 at 23W. SB 2500k at 16W. My guess is that Trinity beats IB at idle, but gets spanked by SB. I've been wondering why IB is idling so poorly.. This voltage list is the best explanation I've found so far: [url<]http://www.silentpcreview.com/article1259-page2.html[/url<] IB has a much much higher supply voltage at idle than SB. I don't know why (poor SRAM on IB), but that certainly hurts idle pretty bad.

            • Deanjo
            • 7 years ago

            I usually undervolt my systems but in your IB/SB comparison they really didn’t test it on the same platform (not to mention a far more capable graphics solution then the HD3000). Had they it would probably closer together in terms of a delta. The motherboards used vary quite a bit in terms of connectability which can skew the results quite badly.

            [url<]http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/motherboards/desktop-motherboards/desktop-board-dh67bl.html[/url<] [url<]http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/motherboards/desktop-motherboards/desktop-board-dz77ga-70k.html[/url<]

          • NeelyCam
          • 7 years ago

          [quote<]For Gamers who are willing to buy a ~100$ discrete card: i3, otherwise Trinity[/quote<] Gamers who aren't willing to spend $100 on a discrete card are either part of a niche, or fanbois who are trying to justify their love by moving goalposts where Trinity [i<]might[/i<] succeed. [quote<]For people who never game, look at the applications you use: multithreaded is usually in favor of Trinity, single-threaded is usually i3.[/quote<] If you want multithreaded performance and don't care about gaming, anything quadcore from PhenomII/SandyBridge era is a better value proposal. SBs even idle better than Trinity/IB. Desktop Trinity is trying to fill a niche. I consider it to be a useless product. Mobile is completely different - that's where Trinity's value proposal really makes sense.

            • ptsant
            • 7 years ago

            [quote<] Gamers who aren't willing to spend $100 on a discrete card are either part of a niche, or fanbois who are trying to justify their love by moving goalposts where Trinity might succeed. [/quote<] Well, I certainly consider $100 small change for a graphics card right now, but I used to spend $50-80 for GFX when I was a student and my income was much lower. My point is that the niche might be a little bit bigger than what we enthusiasts (with jobs?), living in western countries imagine. AMD has never been extremely succesful in making money, but I don't think the product is fundamentally bad.

          • ronch
          • 7 years ago

          +1 for Anand. Ok, I’ll give you +1 too for posting Anand’s words here. LOL.

        • jensend
        • 7 years ago

        With Trinity, most games are playable at 1680×1050 medium settings. Since when exactly is 1680×1050 a “crappy resolution”?

        Sure, you’re not going to be running a fancy triple-2560×1600 setup off integrated graphics, but not everybody’s in the market for that. Less than a third of the people in the Steam Hardware Survey have their primary monitor running at resolutions higher than 1680×1050. Roughly a quarter are at intermediate resolutions like 1440×900 or 1680×1050, and the other >5/12 are using 1366×768 or lower.

          • chuckula
          • 7 years ago

          [quote<]xWith Trinity, most games are playable at 1680x1050 medium settings. Since when exactly is 1680x1050 a "crappy resolution"? Sure, you're not going to be running a fancy triple-2560x1600 setup off integrated graphics, but not everybody's in the market for that. Less than a third of the people in the Steam Hardware Survey have their primary monitor running at resolutions higher than 1680x1050. Roughly a quarter are at intermediate resolutions like 1440x900 or 1680x1050, and the other >5/12 are using 1366x768 or lower.[/quote<] You know that TR has a link-directly-to-comment feature? It's that # tag in the upper-right hand corner of each comment. I just bookmarked your comment for posterity, and if you go back on it next year when Haswell comes out this will come back out of the memory hole.

        • anotherengineer
        • 7 years ago

        It would be too good for my wife since she is happy with her E-350 brazos laptop ๐Ÿ˜€

        • Airmantharp
        • 7 years ago

        I agree with your perspective, but I’ll also stand by ronch’s point- at a hard price point, Trinity is a better buy for the desktop. You’re more likely to need more GPU than CPU there.

          • NeelyCam
          • 7 years ago

          Yes; that’s the niche. Going slightly above or below that price point, there are better alternatives for most use models.

            • ronch
            • 7 years ago

            [quote<]Going slightly above or below that price point, there are better alternatives for most use models.[/quote<] Hmm, below the i3 SKUs you have Pentiumm DC's, which probably have even worse iGPU performance. For strictly office use (and no sneaky gaming sessions), I guess those are just fine. Above the i3, you quickly step into i5 territory, which are probably about $50 more and [i<]still[/i<] with Intel HD graphics (make that HD2500). Granted, we're talking strictly about processors here. But even when you factor in the price of a whole system that easily gets into the $500-$700 for this market segment, getting an i5 and a cheap discrete graphics card can probably still cost about $130 more. Hence, for users not looking to spend that extra $130, Trinity fits in nicely.

        • ronch
        • 7 years ago

        You have to realize that many folks just type Word documents, do spreadsheets, surf the Internet, watch movies, and play light games from Popcap, or if they fancy it, perhaps a more demanding game or two. In this case, Trinity is more well-balanced than i3. It lets you do pretty much [i<]everything[/i<] with acceptable performance at minimal cost. That's the thing.

      • willmore
      • 7 years ago

      Sheesh, a guy from Gearbox gets bashed to hell and back for making a comment like this and you get +3. Well done.

      My wifes laptop has an A6-3400M while mine has a Pentium B940. She’s got four cores and decent IGP while I have two cores and baseline IGP graphics. Of course, neither of us game on these. Well she does, but she’s a casaul gamer, but see jensends arguement there.

    • shank15217
    • 7 years ago

    There are also 12! FM2 boards available, this is a decent launch.

      • NeelyCam
      • 7 years ago

      [url<]http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/FM2_APU_Review/9.html[/url<] [quote<]"Unfortunately, AMD has mentioned time and time again as of late that they are short on chip supply."[/quote<]

      • Airmantharp
      • 7 years ago

      That’s hot. Beats the hell out of the P67/Z68 debacle.

      • Hattig
      • 7 years ago

      12! is a lot of motherboards.

        • dpaus
        • 7 years ago

        The nerd in me had to: 479,001,600 motherboards. Good thing it’s a low-cost platform.

    • derFunkenstein
    • 7 years ago

    Well it’s good to see an old-fashioned hard launch, rather than the paper launches that have haunted graphics releases last year.

    • jensend
    • 7 years ago

    Still no A10-5700 in stock, and that’s the most interesting one IMO. As others have said, one of the more interesting use cases for good integrated graphics on the desktop is for SFF and HTPC, due to the power and space constraints. I know TDP numbers aren’t necessarily all that indicative of power consumption in normal use, but still, a 65W TDP sounds like a better bet when you’re looking to put it in a small case and keep it quiet.

      • Goty
      • 7 years ago

      I’m hoping the 65W variants don’t simply disappear into the void like they did with Llano. I want to upgrade my HTPC, but I’m not going to stick a 100W CPU in it. My whole reasons for wanting to upgrade is the ability to ditch the 95W Phenom II already in it.

        • sschaem
        • 7 years ago

        Check the HTPC 5800k review.

        37 w at the wall, 55 watt playing HD.
        You wont get lower with a 5700 over the 5800k.

        BTW, some review show that you can drop power usage by 20% by undervolting.
        This come from AMD want to cover as much of the production variation.

        The higher TDP come from higher multipliers on the CPU/GPU
        Its just extra performance you get if you run software on the HTPC that needs it.
        You dont save any heat or watt by using a 5700 over a 5800k.
        Worse case, the 5800k is fully unlocked, so you can turn it into a 5700.

          • Goty
          • 7 years ago

          I’m not sure you really understand what TDP is. The ability to change the multiplier of the CPU isn’t going to cause AMD to change the TDP of the processor; I can make my 3770K draw nearly 200W when overclocked, but that doesn’t mean that Intel is going to rate it at a 200W TDP. The 65W processors will be binned for lower leakage and therefore lower clock headroom, but also lower power when averaged over all the chips of the same SKU. That’s not to say that you won’t get a CPU rated as 125W with the same power consumption as one rated for 65W, but you won’t get a CPU rated for 65W drawing power like some of the hotter running 125W chips.

          *EDIT* To be absolutely clear, I’m not trying to talk down to you (my first sentence kind of reads that way to me).

            • Bauxite
            • 7 years ago

            It also means you can use a cooler/case/psu/etc that are designed for a 65w cpu system and it won’t overheat or shut off. That stuff starts to matter with sff or htpc etc.

            • sschaem
            • 7 years ago

            But then again, you can set your 5800k to have a TDP of 65w, and even lower.

            Yes, the chip is rated / guarantied at upto 100W. but you can push it well below that.
            You have control over the TDP with a 5800k.
            Talking extreme, you can set a 5800k to max out at 1.4ghz and .9 volt.
            I cant tell you the TDP rating with those settings, but it would be well below 65w.

            • sschaem
            • 7 years ago

            Do you believe that a 5800k when running at .9v and 1.4ghz consume 100w,
            just because AMD said its a 100 TDP part?

            TDP is just a guaranty that the part wont put out more then 100w in its worse case senario.

            Here the TDP of 100w and 65w was picked by AMD based on the Trinity capabilities.
            100w allowed them to offer 3.8ghz clock with 4.2 turbo + 800mhz GPU.
            The 65w is not a lower leakage part, its a lower clock/voltage part.

            And,
            what happen when you lower the clock rate of a chip ? power draw falls
            what happen when you reduce voltage of a chip? power draw falls

            Do this in the 1.3v range at 4ghz and the power draw delta is massive.

            So it comes down to:

            The 5700 is a binned part with lower leakage then the 5800k (your argument)
            The 5700 a 5800k (that failed to be a 5800k) with lower clock rate & voltage (me)

            Anyone want to settle this with actual numbers ? ๐Ÿ™‚

            BTW, Its possible the 5800k can be pushed below 65w by just going to 3.2ghz.

      • sschaem
      • 7 years ago

      The 5800k is unlocked

        • jensend
        • 7 years ago

        Yes, we’re all quite aware of that. Are you saying “buy the 5800k and undervolt it”?

        I suppose the odds might be OK that you could pretty much replicate the a10-5700’s power/performance profile with a small underclock and a substantial undervolt to the 5800k.

        Personally, I’ve usually been one to be a little risk averse and trust the manufacturers’ binning process rather than mess with clocks and voltage, mostly because I usually go a long time between upgrades and don’t want instability or hardware failures because I did something stupid.

          • moshpit
          • 7 years ago

          Instability, yes. Hardware failure, no, not possible from undervolting.

          • sschaem
          • 7 years ago

          all CPU ‘undervolt and underclock’ by design.
          Check CPU-Z on any CPU made in the past 5+ years

          The Q6600 for example run as low as 1.6ghz 1.1 volt by default.
          The thermal design at this setting is a fraction of its rated TDP.

          So dont worry, you can set ALL 5800k to work at 1.4ghz and .9volt if you want to.
          This is that part of the dynamic multiplier/voltage profile of the chip so its guarantied to work.

          Now I understand that you might not want to make a choice and just get a part pre-configured.
          But trust me, check the chip dynamic multiplier configuration. any of them are safe to use.

          The question is, what make sense for an HTPC. This is where site like TR help.
          Personalty I feel that that 3.4ghz might be overkill, and 2.4ghz might be enought.

          This could indicate that the 5800k could be set to have a 45w TDP…
          If so, why do I want to get a 65w TDP 5700 ?

    • ronch
    • 7 years ago

    American gerbils are well advised to wait for Microcenter’s listings, as they often beat Newegg’s and Tigerdirect’s prices.

      • Deanjo
      • 7 years ago

      NCIX’s prices also are at times better as well.

        • dpaus
        • 7 years ago

        I’d love to give NCIX more business, but it usually only takes a minute or two on their website to get so frustrated trying to find something that I give up and go to TigerDirect.ca

          • cynan
          • 7 years ago

          NCIX can have good prices during their weekly/weekend sales. Otherwise, I find their normal prices lack-luster on average. Same for Tigerdirect.ca and Newegg.ca. I generally favor Directcanada.com (owned by NCIX, but generally has better prices and offers free ground shipping with some restrictions).

          I’m now shopping more and more at Memoryexpress.ca as they have a pretty awesome new price match guarantee (25% of the difference). Furthermore, they offer $5 flat-rate shipping for orders under 100 lbs to any province.

            • Prestige Worldwide
            • 7 years ago

            NCIX’s regular prices are a moot point though, since you can pricematch everything on their website with a link to a competing Canadian e-tailer. I haven’t paid regular price for a thing on that site in years.

            • cynan
            • 7 years ago

            Sure, but then why not just price match at Memory Express which, as I posted, usually has cheaper shipping and offers a further 25% of the difference off.

          • Deanjo
          • 7 years ago

          Depends what I’m shopping for. Items like motherboards and larger items I tend to go local even though the price maybe $10 or so higher. I’ve had too many DOA products in my life and the cost of shipping larger items is way to expensive (had to rma one board to NCIX the other day because of DOA. It wound up costing $45 to ship it the cheapest way possible on a $130 board.). Had I bought it locally, sure I would have paid $10 more but I also would have an over the counter replacement a few minutes after discovery.

      • ludi
      • 7 years ago

      My problem with Microcenter is that there aren’t very many of them. Denver has one, but it is located so far south and east of the city center that I would have to drive forty miles round-trip to get to it. Eight bucks’ worth of gas, about eight bucks’ worth of wear-and-tear on the vehicle, plus anywhere from 45 minutes to over an hour of commute time depending on traffic, and just like that, Newegg makes another sale.

        • vargis14
        • 7 years ago

        I am sure microcenter will include 50$ off for a fm2 motherboard to go with the cheaper price on the cpu in a combo deal. They usually have many MB’s to chose from with the special also.

        So it is worth the drive if they are offering 50$ off a motherboard with a cpu purchase.

        • ronch
        • 7 years ago

        Well, if you’re not too eager to grab a copy of Trinity, waiting for MC’s pricing info still lets you make an informed decision on whether MC’s (lower) prices are worth the added hassle of traveling to a Microcenter store in The Land of Far, Far Away.

      • Bensam123
      • 7 years ago

      If you’re going microcenter, you could just slip to Amazon. I think people order from Newegg for reasons completely different from price… like usability, level of service, general layout, ability to find what you’re looking for, helpful reviews. Basically everything else except price.

        • NeelyCam
        • 7 years ago

        Agreed 100%. Those are exactly the reasons why I buy from Newegg

          • Bensam123
          • 7 years ago

          Yeah… on certain items that are overpriced, I just use Newegg to find the item I’m looking for then search Amazon for it’s model number. Amazon really blows at finding what you want.

        • mikato
        • 7 years ago

        2 day shipping for the cheapest shipping option ๐Ÿ™‚ They are fast. Plus they often do actually have the best price or very similar.

        • Bauxite
        • 7 years ago

        1-2 days vs 15 minutes for me, and the major point is sometimes MC beats [b<]everyone[/b<] on price with cpu+board combos. That still doesn't mean newegg, amazon, et al. haven't burnt large holes in my amex from time to time.

          • Bensam123
          • 7 years ago

          Depending on what you’re buying Newegg has shell shockers which can be really good deals. Their daily newsletters with personal codes also dip below Amazons prices quite frequently, but you have to get lucky to get a email with something you’re looking for. That includes processor and motherboards, which are frequently discounted with special codes you have to be signed up to the newsletter to use.

          It seems occasionally they send out emails with ‘blanket’ codes. Like I’ve gotten a couple in the last month that pretty much discount EVERYTHING by like 10-20%. That brings it in line or below Amazon prices. Of course you actually need the stuff to buy it, but still… I suppose that’s why they’re sending me the codes. It appears the more you check the actual newsletters the more codes they send you too, like said blanket codes. Like I got a email I want to say a week ago that had 10-20% discounts for like 9 different categories that cover all products in those categories.

      • shaq_mobile
      • 7 years ago

      sweet mother, ive never been there but their prices are insane. 2500K for $160?? too bad its instore pickup only. there isnt a single location even relatively close to me… ๐Ÿ™

    • chuckula
    • 7 years ago

    This is kind of like that old Doctor Who episode where the Sontarans want to conquer earth, but then the Doctor defeats their scout. The general calls in for the report and the Doctor tells him that he can’t invade since he doesn’t have the report! (and the general agrees).

    That’s basically what this is: You can’t buy Trinity until you get the official TR review!

      • 5150
      • 7 years ago

      My nerd sensors are tingling.

      • NeelyCam
      • 7 years ago

      Anand’s been up since last night

        • dpaus
        • 7 years ago

        Cool; will go check it out.

      • Forge
      • 7 years ago

      “I can produce magnificent quantities of lactic fluid!”

      I will wait.

        • willmore
        • 7 years ago

        Please say you meant lacrimal.

    • Hattig
    • 7 years ago

    So after all that hoopla about previews, you’re not going to be reviewing the chip now that the final NDA is up?

      • Arclight
      • 7 years ago

      If you listen to the podcast he did say he will be late on the review.

        • Bensam123
        • 7 years ago

        ><;

        • rechicero
        • 7 years ago

        Wow. Somebody said all the outrage about the preview was because TR was going to be late anyway and I downvoted him. I supposed I owe somebody an apology :-(.

      • StashTheVampede
      • 7 years ago

      What do you really need to know? Core i3 is generally faster in single threaded performance. With many workloads that still favor single threaded performance, the latest AMD offerings aren’t that great. Generally speaking 12-15% faster than Llano parts, but it’s still slower than most Intel offerings at the same price point.

      GPU performance is good (Intel’s GPU is anemic, at best), but that’s not going to win over a lot of people since discreet cards are still very common.

      If I needed a relatively cheap system, that needed very light gaming and cost was a concern, then the latest Trinity offerings look decent.

        • sschaem
        • 7 years ago

        And many workload also favor multi-threaded.
        If you use tools like photoshop, premiere, etc.. the Ivy Bridge i3-3220 is not faster then the A10

        The i3 clear win is gaming with a discreet GPU.

        But then its doesn’t seem like as valuable as it might seem.
        Anand use the discreet GPU at 1024×768 resolution to be CPU limited and Trinity always delivered > 60 fps.
        Also, I haven’t test with multiple monitor / or ‘cross fire’. Is the i3 really better in those cases?

        Trinity seem to be prices right, unlike bulldozer.

        I wont replace my Q6600 with a Trinity build. But if my dad need a new PC or my HTPC need to be replaced, no way would I go with an i3.

          • StashTheVampede
          • 7 years ago

          “And many workload also favor multi-threaded.”

          How many people, on a daily basis, use the the applications you listed? Audio/video encoding/editing, databases and CAD are a few applications that use up all the cores you have available — it’s a really niche area. When you start needing all the cores available the Core i5 (with FEWER cores) starts to whopp on the A8/A10 by enough of a margin where AMD has no chance. You can even go back a few years to a Core i7 860 to still see better performance — from a chip released in Q3 2009!

          The only thing going for Trinity is cost for OEMs. This is not a BAD thing! Slap in a bunch of ram, Bluray writer and SSDs, that’s a “fast” machine even if the CPU/GPU combo isn’t the “best” around.

          • Deanjo
          • 7 years ago

          [quote<]If you use tools like photoshop, premiere, etc.. the Ivy Bridge i3-3220 is not faster then the A10[/quote<] *cough* [url<]http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/a10-5800k-trinity-efficiency,3315-5.html[/url<] *cough*

    • dpaus
    • 7 years ago

    If they’re available at both Newegg and TigerDirect, why is only Newegg mentioned in the headline?

      • chuckula
      • 7 years ago

      [quote<]If they're available at both Newegg and , why is only Newegg mentioned in the headline?[/quote<] I'm sorry where other than newegg? I have a filter for curse words on my browser.

      • TurtlePerson2
      • 7 years ago

      Are there really people who have tried both Newegg and Tigerdirect and prefer the latter?

        • dpaus
        • 7 years ago

        Well, anyone who wants to walk into a brick-n-mortar store before buying. I’m probably biased, too, as they’re only 1/2 block from our office, and I can usually have a product in-hand faster than I could fill out a newegg.ca order form.

          • NeelyCam
          • 7 years ago

          [quote<]Well, anyone who wants to walk into a brick-n-mortar store before buying.[/quote<] I thought those went extinct about 5 years ago

            • Bauxite
            • 7 years ago

            Glad I am not far from 2 microcenters, which usually price match and are capable of beating newegg (tax included) with frequent cpu/board combos.

            They also have some useful things newegg does not carry.

            Single source is a bad habit in the long run.

          • Ringofett
          • 7 years ago

          [quote<]Well, anyone who wants to walk into a brick-n-mortar store and [b<]pay sales tax and stop at the gas station on the way home.[/b<][/quote<] There, I fixed that! At least, thats the case for me, as TigerDirect's about a 20-30 minute drive in traffic, and NewEgg doesn't have a facility in Florida so no local sales tax.

            • NeelyCam
            • 7 years ago

            You do know that you are supposed to pay “use tax” on stuff you buy out-of-state, right…?

            [url<]http://dor.myflorida.com/dor/taxes/consumer.html[/url<]

            • jensend
            • 7 years ago

            You know, if the use tax were as easy to pay as normal sales tax, it might have a somewhat-reasonable compliance rate, even if it weren’t well enforced. But even among those who are actually aware of the tax, it takes some extreme feelings of duty and patriotism to keep track of every single purchase you make from out-of-state companies just so you can [i<]pay more taxes[/i<], esp. when everybody gets away with skipping it. States are just starting to try to address the problem, and more and more online stores are putting sales tax on my invoices. It's pretty farcical that they didn't get this sorted out long, long ago. [i<]Maybe[/i<] the "report your own use tax" model was workable from 1890-1940, when the Sears, Roebuck and Co. catalog was the only thing people were likely to be using to order from out of state. But even by the 50s it would have been absurd. It's not like it's only online stores that have made that model nonviable.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This