AMD makes Godavari a family with the A8-7670K

AMD has added a new processor to its Godavari APU lineup this morning. The A8-7670K packs four Steamroller CPU cores clocked at 3.6GHz with Turbo speeds up to 3.9GHz. The graphics side of the die holds six GCN Radeon "cores" clocked at 757 MHz. Those numbers are a modest bump over the Kaveri A8-7650K, which features similar CPU and GPU resources at lower clock speeds.

The A8-7670K is the second Godavari APU to hit the market, after the A10-7870K back in May. According to the PR briefing distributed to a variety of sites, including Hexus, AMD believes the 7670K is a better performer in games than a combo like Intel's Pentium G3258 and a GeForce GT 730 discrete graphics card. The company also claims that the 7670K performs better in tasks like applying Photoshop's Smart Sharpen filter and running 3DMark versus Intel's Core i3-4160, though the numbers are a lot tighter in general performance benchmarks like PCMark.

The A8-7670K carries a suggested price of $117.99, and the PR briefing claims "immediate availability."

Comments closed
    • ronch
    • 4 years ago

    If you’re into games sold at GOG.com these APUs will do just fine. Heck, maybe even Kabini would be fine too. I’m sure it is for Leisure Suit Larry 7.

    Speaking of Kabini, it seems AMD has totally lost interest in Kabini, AM1, and small cores in general. I thought they said AM1 is here to stay? Where’s Carrizo-L? Is it still go?

      • raddude9
      • 4 years ago

      WTF are you talking about, the A10 7670K will play any modern game out there, it’ll even manage 1080p at low settings in the most games.

        • ronch
        • 4 years ago

        I’m sure it would… just not at very good framerates.

      • TopHatKiller
      • 4 years ago

      Who knows? AMD ain’t telling. From what I can gather:…. AM1 dead. Small ‘cat cores…dead. To be replaced in 2016+? with K12??
      Cairzooo-L is a ‘cat apu [soc?] and that is coming out. On embedded only. I think.
      But I don’t know! I only hope AMD does, but these days…

      • chuckula
      • 4 years ago

      [quote<]Speaking of Kabini, it seems AMD has totally lost interest in Kabini, AM1, and small cores in general. [/quote<] Considering that the entire design team that designed the "cat" cores is no longer employed at AMD, you might not be surprised to find that the kittehs aren't growling there anymore.

    • ronch
    • 4 years ago

    Here comes the God[s<]averi[/s<][u<]zilla[/u<] of APUs!

    • killadark
    • 4 years ago

    Godavari 😀 are Indians naming this after a river in India XD

    • rootheday3
    • 4 years ago

    @nevermind – re $150 vs £150 vs €150. You are correct that, due to currency conversions these aren’t the same amount of money.

    But it is not uncommon at all for things to not be priced “in equal value terms” across borders. This is true in electronics, clothing, food …

    Shopping in the U.S. on Newegg or Frys or Microcenter for a CPU you may find the price $150. You might assume you could buy it in UK for £100 based on exchange rates.. But you would be mistaken. The price might well be £150.

    I know this was true for PCs for $US vs € – even tho exchange rate was ~$1.20 = €1, the actual digits on the sticker (eg 800 currency units for a laptop) was actually the same.

    I have seen similar cases with things like blue jeans, shoes, food.

    So why don’t people always buy where the price is “cheapest”? The short answer is that the market is not perfectly frictionless – convenience, shipping, return policy, import duties, which credit cards are accepted, etc play a role.

      • Mr Bill
      • 4 years ago

      Don’t forget “regions”. DVD’s being a prime example.

      • Nevermind
      • 4 years ago

      +1 absolutely. I tried to make an exception for tariff/import/retail markups, I know not everybody is going to get “access” to the same lowest price depending on where they are.

      But there’s a big difference between claiming the “launch price” of something as the current price, and then another difference between that and the “lowest” price found or MSRP, and a third difference when he was just making up numbers, lol.

      After the currency exchange, the taxes, the tariffs, I refuse to believe there was that much markup from a legitimate vender unless they’re including next day overseas shipping on launch day, lol.

      If people only bought from the lowest price vendor, there wouldn’t be any others around.
      I don’t think that’s realistic and I didn’t mean to imply that was what I “expected”.

      If I can find a link that offers a full 1/3 off someone’s quote, and that 1/3 price difference just “HAPPENS” to be the exchange rate difference in the currency, that’s a fair bet that they made a mistake. (or intentional deception, say for intel fanboyism.. I can’t prove intent)

      It’s worth $0 to me in any currency, it’s no skin off my teeth. Just trying to make an accurate comparison between “value” perceptions versus “performance” perceptions in absolute versus anecdotal terms, using realtime pricing… can be tricky all by itself, right?

      So I have a lot of respect for the reviewers who show their math when they dive into it, and talk about which benchmarks specifically they’re aggregating and how a few outliers omitted can really skew the result to say things either way, when it’s close. Points for that.

      But at the end of the day, these things are pretty close in performance and pretty close in price too.

      If you’re paying 33-50% more than the “starting” value, that makes the entire value proposition completely out of school. So I was trying to address that when… things got a bit out of hand, lol. Live and learn. It didn’t have to get nasty, I didn’t insult his mother lol.

    • chuckula
    • 4 years ago

    OK, Ima pretty sure that this launch of rather insignificant consequence has now generated more posts than Skylake will next month.

    In the totally misquoted words of Winston Churchill, “Never was so much flamed for so many by so few!”

      • Nevermind
      • 4 years ago

      “We will misquote them in the streets, we will misquote them in the sewers…”

      • TopHatKiller
      • 4 years ago

      To you: I could correct your terrible grammar, and far worse, your horrendous misappropriation of a venerated quote.
      But, as I make grammatical errors myself, and are now, trying to rise above the gutter, I will not.

        • Beelzebubba9
        • 4 years ago

        [quote=”TopHatKiller”<]But, as I make grammatical errors myself, and are now, trying to rise above the gutter, I will not.[/quote<] [url<]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comma_splice[/url<]

          • TopHatKiller
          • 4 years ago

          Technically dear Devil, it isn’t… and anyway, [i<]he[/i<] started it.

    • Mr Bill
    • 4 years ago

    The combination of a quick low power intel cpu plus cheap graphics card does not draw less power than one of these late model AMD APU’s no matter how you slice it.
    Yes that combination will play games faster for more power.
    Yes that combination will play games faster for a higher combined price.
    Give AMD some small credit for its combined performance at this cost and within this power window.

    I went with the cheapest graphics card in the budget catagory. Memory etc is identical in both builds As you can see, you can save a bit and have not too bad graphics for occasional gaming with just an APU or you can pay more and use more power to build an Intel build. Its that simple. The GTX 980 will cost more but then, one might add the radeon to the APU build and still be under the other budget and have very acceptable gaming.

    Total Price $537…………………………………………………..$606

    MB+CPU+GPU $217…………………………………………….$286
    CPU/APU $147 AMD A10 7870 BE……………………..$70 Pentium G3258 Anniversary Edition
    Motherboard $70 Gigabyte F2A88XM-D3H………$101 Asus H97 Plus
    Graphics Card $-0 MSI Radeon R7 260X 2GB…….$115
    Graphics Card $-0 or $197 Gigabyte GeForce GTX 960

    Memory $50 Crucial Ballistix Sport 8GB (2x4GB) DDR3-1600
    Case $70 Corsair Carbide Series 200R
    PSU $60 SeaSonic S12 II Bronze 430W
    SSD $85 Crucial BX100 250GB
    DVD $20 Asus DRW-24B1ST DVD burner
    CPU cooler $35 Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO

      • Mr Bill
      • 4 years ago

      pasted above

        • f0d
        • 4 years ago

        you can get h81 motherboards for that cpu – h97 is overkill for a budget cpu
        g3258 isnt the cheapest dual core
        dont need a cpu cooler

        $45 h81
        [url<]http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157483[/url<] and depending on if you wanted to go for price or better performance i3 4170 $119.99 [url<]http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117543[/url<] celeron g1820 $44 [url<]http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819116974[/url<] or similar to the 3258 is the 3250 $57 [url<]http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117449[/url<] imo i would go an i3 and not get a cooler - these cpu's run just fine on the standard cooler so i3 + h81 = $165 vs your $147 quoted apu + $70 quoted motherboard = $217 with the price difference of $52 you can get close to getting this $89 gtx750 gpu [url<]http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814500350[/url<] i3 + h81 + gtx750 = $254 or A10 + A88 = $217 another option would be to get the cheaper pentium 3250 for $57 3250 + h81 + gtx750 = $191 vs A10 + A88 = $217 and even if you used the cheapest fm2+ motherboard i could find at $42 [url<]http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128736[/url<] it ends up being A10+A58 = $189 its not looking like the best budget option anymore for a cheap gaming system when you can get a cheap pentium/i3 + motherboard + gpu for similar price as the apu + motherboard

          • Mr Bill
          • 4 years ago

          Valid alternate choices. I was drawing from the July 2015 system guide using their prices. I would probably just use their build and add the Core i3-4160 or your i3-4170 rather than the G3258 if I wanted more Intel punch.

          All of your suggestions almost certainly use more power which was half of my main original point. I’ll grant you can find cheaper system builds but are they so cheap as to be worthless for features such as sound, USB3, etc? Not sure I would be comfortable going cheaper than that H97 Plus motherboard. And, you can still drop in a video card (also more power use) to an APU later if you want improved gaming.

          The July 2015 system guide lets you build a budget Intel system for ~$683 (I liked the other case better but, meh). You could build the APU system for $200 less ($482 using that $92 A8-7600) and still be able to drop in a $100 or $200 video card later if you wanted.

            • f0d
            • 4 years ago

            there isnt much difference in power at all really
            and the sound/usb3 in the h81 are just fine

            the A10-7870 used 117W in anandtechs test
            [url<]http://www.anandtech.com/show/9307/the-kaveri-refresh-godavari-review-testing-amds-a10-7870k[/url<] where the 3258 used 33w in that same chart the A10 is on the gtx 750 is around 100W as the difference in idle to max load is around 100W (new gpu's are very efficient at idle barely using a few watts) [url<]http://www.anandtech.com/show/7764/the-nvidia-geforce-gtx-750-ti-and-gtx-750-review-maxwell/22[/url<] so around 133W vs 117W not much at all i used anandtech because i wanted to keep the numbers from the same site with similar testing procedures - if i could have got these numbers from TR i would have

            • Mr Bill
            • 4 years ago

            Agreed, its a small difference but I perceive that folks are simply not taking into account that the APU solution needs to be strictly compared to a CPU + a graphics card to be fair in both power usage and cost. The power matters not much for desktop solutions but matters a lot if you are travelling with a laptop and want to game or watch movies. The cost can matter if you just want to build an office PC that has surprisingly good graphics and sound.

            That said, these APU systems make a good enough office PC (I’m on mine now) and a pretty decent laptop solution for ~30fps gaming. But for real gamers you are going to have to add a graphics card.

            • f0d
            • 4 years ago

            [quote<]Agreed, its a small difference but I perceive that folks are simply not taking into account that the APU solution needs to be strictly compared to a CPU + a graphics card to be fair in both power usage and cost.[/quote<] and as you can see the power usage and cost are similar with an intel + nvidia solution as it is for an amd apu 16w is nothing imo if its someone is just playing facebook games etc you can just use the pentium/i3's integrated graphics with much lower power usage or if they need more grunt the added 750 is an excellent solution all while keeping around the same power/price as the apu but with better performance

            • Mr Bill
            • 4 years ago

            I played WOW for months on my HP DV6-6140US Llano A8-3500M Laptop. I don’t think an i3 would have given me as good an experience.

            • Mr Bill
            • 4 years ago

            That said, I’ll never buy another 1080P screened laptop again. I hate how few lines of spreadsheet you can display on them.

      • BobbinThreadbare
      • 4 years ago

      You could save money on both builds grabbing a case that includes a powersupply.

      Antec + 350W power supply (should be fine for an APU), for $54.

      [url<]http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIA1N82807128[/url<]

        • Nevermind
        • 4 years ago

        But then you can’t really add a discrete GPU. I’d never skimp on the PSU now, that has caused me more gremlin instability than overclocking ever did in my life.

          • BobbinThreadbare
          • 4 years ago

          If you aren’t going bottom of the barrel, might as well save up and not get an APU in the first place.

    • geekl33tgamer
    • 4 years ago

    Somebody pass the memo onto Nevermind about AMD’s weak IPC over Intel, thanks in advance.

      • Nevermind
      • 4 years ago

      And explain using units that are -33% of their actual value, that should be a good one.

      I thought you were tired of this, why did you start back up?

        • geekl33tgamer
        • 4 years ago

        I posted that some 2 hours ago. Please do try and keep up, or is the butt hurt too much for you?

          • Nevermind
          • 4 years ago

          And about 10-15 mins ago, you said you were tired of me and didn’t want to argue, called me all sorts of names and ironically tried to cap it with “grow up” and the like.

          You just referenced me by name, starting it up again… So which is it?

      • Nevermind
      • 4 years ago

      Also, why do you have such an angry hardon for AMD anyway?

      They’re probably the ONLY reason Intel isn’t raping you over the coals harder on the prices.

      EDIT : *raking, RAKING over the coals… Freudian I guess, talking about Intel pricing..

        • Stonebender
        • 4 years ago

        Intel’s pricing hasn’t been influenced by AMD in any shape or form for years. Intel’s own product segmentation has kept the prices reasonable.

          • chuckula
          • 4 years ago

          That’s not entirely true: Intel likely prices some of the core i3 parts [b<]higher[/b<] that it otherwise would in order to give AMD more breathing room. Intel's own fears about out of control antitrust regulators actually mean that lower-end Intel parts cost more than they should to help keep AMD on life support.

            • Stonebender
            • 4 years ago

            That’s quite possible.

            • TopHatKiller
            • 4 years ago

            Now: that comment is a really good joke.
            #Note to advertisers and such: Re-circulate this comment : Utilize for marketing purposes.
            Intel’s board are peeing in their Snowball’s in laughter… dont circulate that…#

    • tbone8ty
    • 4 years ago

    Where is Carrizo?

    Wish they would update am1 chips!

      • atari030
      • 4 years ago

      I thought I had heard that they were going to be released to coincide with the Windows 10 launch. Whether that’s purely speculation or rumor, or rooted in fact, I couldn’t say. Just what I’d heard….

      • wimpishsundew
      • 4 years ago

      Carrizo is only for laptops because at higher frequencies like desktop CPUs, it will actually consume more energy. It won’t be able to clock as high so the IPC improvement wouldn’t help them overall.

        • Concupiscence
        • 4 years ago

        Yep. They’d already started to run into that with Steamroller, which is why the big selling point for APUs based on it was the jump to GCN-based graphics parts. That also (handily, sadly) explains why there were never any Steamroller-based AM3+ chips: IPC improvements would be hobbled by lower clock speeds, and the observable difference to the end user wouldn’t have amounted to much.

    • Shouefref
    • 4 years ago

    The odd thing is, that if AMD combines CPU’s and GPU’s, they usually have more GPU’s then CPU’s.
    But what’s the use of having 4 CPU’s and 8 GPU’s? It’s not as if you’re gonna connect 8 screens to your pc, or is it?

      • BobbinThreadbare
      • 4 years ago

      What?

      • geekl33tgamer
      • 4 years ago

      Please tell me you’re not serious?

        • Nevermind
        • 4 years ago

        At least he wasn’t 35% off on his figures anyway.

          • geekl33tgamer
          • 4 years ago

          Now you’re just trolling. Go away.

            • Nevermind
            • 4 years ago

            Pay me 150 pounds and I’ll think about it. $150 is ~33% less, no sale.

      • Shouefref
      • 4 years ago

      Example
      AMD A-Series Accelerated Processor Model
      Model ​A10-7870K
      Compute Cores ​12 (4 CPU + 8GPU)

        • ronch
        • 4 years ago

        8 GPU ‘cores’. You can thank AMD’s marketing department for that.

          • Shouefref
          • 4 years ago

          So, you say it doesn’t have much to do with “graphical” (core or discrete) ?

            • ronch
            • 4 years ago

            It’s just how AMD groups the ALUs. AMD seems to define 1 GPU ‘core’ = 64 ALUs with Kaveri. So, if you take the 7850K as an example, 8 GPU ‘cores’ x 64 ALUs per ‘core’ = 512 ALUs. Heck, they even define an ALU as a ‘stream processor’, so discrete cards like, say, my HD7770 has 640 stream processors, or 10 GPU ‘cores’ if you want to put it alongside Kaveri’s GPUs. How misleading is that? To be fair, even Nvidia is guilty of such marketing hype. An ALU is not a (stream) processor in the traditional sense that a complete CPU is a processor.

    • Shouefref
    • 4 years ago

    “Immediate availability” ! That’s not possible! This must be a press release from the future!

    • Geonerd
    • 4 years ago

    AMD, you woke me for this?
    Yawn……
    Don’t bug me again until you integrate HBM into your APUs.
    Zzzz……

    T.R. Dudes, some questions for Kanter.
    1) How much re-spinning would it take to add HBM support to existing APU cores?
    2) How much HBM memory would be required to produce a significant performance boost?
    TY

      • chuckula
      • 4 years ago

      [quote<]1) How much re-spinning would it take to add HBM support to existing APU cores?[/quote<] "respinning" isn't the right word. "Complete ground-up redesign of the memory interface" is the right term. In other words: AMD's own roadmap shows that 2016 APUs are just a moderate retread of what you can buy right now. Maybe (emphasis on MAYBE) in 2017 we see the first HBM APUs that will coincidentally also be the first Zen-core APUs. [quote<]2) How much HBM memory would be required to produce a significant performance boost?[/quote<] I'd estimate that even a single 1GB stack of HBM could have a major positive impact if AMD can get the memory control logic done properly. Remember, these parts ain't intended to take on a high-price high-power consumption GPU at 4K resolutions.

        • Nevermind
        • 4 years ago

        Putting all of that on a chip would be a feat.

    • sweatshopking
    • 4 years ago

    BEST CPU EVER MADE!!!!

      • ronch
      • 4 years ago

      Are we sure this isn’t a paper launch?

    • chuckula
    • 4 years ago

    [quote<] The A8-7670K carries a suggested price of $117.99, and the PR briefing claims "immediate availability."[/quote<] OK, AMD, time to put up or shutup.... and the results are leaning towards shutup. Amazon: [quote<]1 result for "A8-7670K" Video shorts related to "a8-7670k" Audi Allroad Shooting Brake and 2015 A8 and S8 Debut... Audi Allroad Shooting Brake and 2015 A8 and S8 Debut... Watch the Audi allroad shooting brake concept and 2015 A8 and S8 make thier debut at the North American International Auto Show 2014 in Detroit[/quote<] Newegg apparently disagrees with AMD's optimism too: [quote<]Search Terms: "A8-7670K" DID YOU FIND IT? We have found 0 items that match "A8-7670K". Search Tips Reduce the number of keywords used, or use more general words. Remember to use the full name, not just an acronym. Try one of the keyword suggestions that are displayed as you type in the main search input and then use the filters to narrow the results. You could also try browsing by: Category Listing Brand Listing[/quote<]

      • BobbinThreadbare
      • 4 years ago

      Retail availability is not the same as availability. This is clearly for OEMs.

      • Deanjo
      • 4 years ago

      Well if it is any consolation, around town here at the mom and pop shops, they have pretty much stopped carrying AMD CPU’s and motherboards. Out of 7 shops, there are exactly 3 AMD cpu’s available combined (1 each of 3 different sku’s).

      Why? Because NOBODY buys them until they are so steeply discounted to get rid of the stock they have.

    • raddude9
    • 4 years ago

    $118… hmm, that’s $31 more than the A8 7600, which is going for $87 at the moment on amazon (or $92 on newegg). I know which one I’d buy.

      • geekl33tgamer
      • 4 years ago

      None of them. Both socketed Broadwell CPU’s run rings round any of AMD’s APU’s at the moment, if you really need an APU.

        • Nevermind
        • 4 years ago

        The money difference is not noted in your “analysis”

        If money is no limitation, yes, AMD is not your chipmaker.

          • geekl33tgamer
          • 4 years ago

          Nevermind… 😛

          (Seriously, anyone looking for an APU should spend the extra or get a basic i3 and a cheap discrete card over these AMD parts)

            • Nevermind
            • 4 years ago

            Except that’s more money, and the i3 is not faster. It’s simply not.

            You can take these APU’s out of the box, put a $20 fan on them, and get 4ghz stable at stock volt

            Save intel cpu money for a mid-range GPU from the 290 series, you have a mid range gaming box that can spit 120hz @ 1080, all day, for $400-500 depending on details.

            You can’t get something comparable at all for that money from intel/nvidia.

            That’s ok, you want to pay more so you can, but AMD owns intel’s offerings at this price point.

            If you want “only the best” by all means, spend $1000 on an unlocked i7.

            • geekl33tgamer
            • 4 years ago

            The cheapest i3 in most applications beats even AMD’s FX-8 processors, let alone those APU’s. This site and countless others have benchmarked the stuffing out of them – go take a look.

            I also wasn’t recommending £1k processors. If you look carefully at my recommendation again, the £170 i5-57xx is a much better buy over the £150 top end AMD APU processor.

            • Nevermind
            • 4 years ago

            There is no £150 British pound sterling APU offered by AMD, first off. Top chip is $150 USD.
            So either you’re not familiar or you’re allowing for robbery by a vendor.

            “The cheapest i3 in most applications beats even AMD’s FX-8 processors”

            That’s an interesting way of massaging fiction into plausible bullshit.
            “Most applications” is a useless metric claim. Say single threaded performance.

            You’re also removing the overclock capability, because the i3 has none.

            “AMD used productivity benchmarks including PCMark 8 to test the A8-7670K APU against both the Intel Core i3-4160 and the Pentium G3258 + GT 730 setup used in its 1080p gaming tests. Taken at face value the Kaveri refresh results show the good all round nature of the A8-7670K in ‘everyday tasks’. Comparing the AMD A8 against the Intel Core i3 using specialist, compute-heavy apps like 3D Mark and Adobe Photoshop showed AMD’s processor in an even better light, as seen below.”

            [url<]http://hexus.net/media/uploaded/2015/7/eb60da7a-d1fd-4f1f-ba17-fec8969702a4.jpg[/url<] "Despite aiming at the affordable market, AMD's $117.99 processor is unlocked and users can probably squeeze a good bit more performance from these APUs using AMD Overdrive and efficient cooling." Sorry, the i3 lost, says the graph. And it's still more money.

            • geekl33tgamer
            • 4 years ago

            Your getting fucking annoying, ngl. The i3 is £90 and the fastest APU from AMD is £120 at OcUK right now. I’ve not cherry pick results, and yes I mean single thread performance. Your argument still falls flat on its face because the i3 can execute 4 threads very quickly.

            I’ve not cherry pick anything – stock clocks for stock clocks the FX-8350 gets destroyed by an i3 on this sites benchmarks tests. Fact. Overclocking AMD’s fastest CPU to the stratosphere north of 5Ghz barely gets it tied with an i5 from the Sandy Bridge era. It’s a joke. I had one. Go check out my forum threads on it.

            I’ll bet my bottom dollar on AMD defiantly cherry picking their performance metrics for that press release. When they stop paying you, you’ll see what I mean.

            Do your research.

            /thread

            • Nevermind
            • 4 years ago

            [url<]http://hexus.net/tech/news/cpu/84806-amds-latest-kaveri-refresh-apu-affordable-a8-7670k/[/url<] Read the linked to article above, in the OP's header. The performance difference isn't as much as you're claiming, and in fact it contradicts you. [url<]http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113393[/url<] Top AMD APU. NOTE : $150 DOLLARS is not 150 BRITISH POUNDS.

            • geekl33tgamer
            • 4 years ago

            Those performance numbers come from AMD in the slides.

            For the last time, look at the benchmarks site like THIS one does. That APU will get it ass handed to it on a plate. If anyone is cherry picking performance data, it’s certainly not me.

            • Nevermind
            • 4 years ago

            What’s annoying is you trying to claim paying more money for no overclockability and very modest and in fact negligible performance considerations is somehow smarter.

            You didn’t want to bring price into any of your considerations, I had to force you to do that.

            Then you lied about the cost of the AMD APUs, and lied about the performance difference.

            The benchmarks are very similar at this price point, and you want to avoid acknowledging that.

            The funny thing is you accusing me of being on AMD’s payroll simply for refuting your lies.

            [url<]http://www.cpu-world.com/Compare/358/AMD_A8-Series_A8-3870K_vs_Intel_Core_i3_i3-2120.html[/url<] Need more refuting?

            • geekl33tgamer
            • 4 years ago

            Intel performs faster and your calling me a liar? Your defiantly on AMD payroll or just stupid.

            • Nevermind
            • 4 years ago

            You’re claiming under no benchmark the APU beats the i3 – because you are a liar.

            Are you calling Hexus a liar also?

            [url<]http://hexus.net/tech/news/cpu/84806-amds-latest-kaveri-refresh-apu-affordable-a8-7670k/[/url<]

            • geekl33tgamer
            • 4 years ago

            I’m dealing with a child. Even in all that bullshit you linked too, the really old i3 used had a 51% Core advantage and was only loosing out by 11% in just one test that suited 4 real cores. It also used a lot less power to be faster overall.

            Do you still have a point, or are you just dumb? This is getting boring repeating myself with facts rather than accepting your rose tinted view on things.

            • Nevermind
            • 4 years ago

            So, you admit the benchmarks back me up as referenced? Thanks.

            • geekl33tgamer
            • 4 years ago

            Intel wins 7 tests, AMD just 1 – so it must be better?

            Are you for real???

            • Nevermind
            • 4 years ago

            I never claimed the AMD was “better”, that’s a value proposition.

            YOU claimed “ALL” i3’s beat the APU in ALL BENCHMARKS, that it was “better” and NOT including price considerations or the possibility of overclocking, in “any” build or application.

            Obviously a flawed assertion, but you can’t seem to admit that.

            You want to call names instead.

            • Nevermind
            • 4 years ago

            I didn’t need to lie though. You needed to. Remember that.

            Next time you get all bent out of shape in an intel versus amd argument, lol, which will no doubt be within minutes, try not to lie or make vague, sweeping but easily disproven assertions.

            • geekl33tgamer
            • 4 years ago

            Post deleted

            • Nevermind
            • 4 years ago

            Ah, so you say I’m childish then you start cursing because I proved you wrong.

            BTW, it’s “you’re” not “your”.

            And $150 is not £149.99.

          • yuhong
          • 4 years ago

          Yea, Skylake isn’t that far away anyway. I think the full line should be launched by September.

            • Nevermind
            • 4 years ago

            It won’t be $110 bucks though.

        • raddude9
        • 4 years ago

        The cheapest socketed Broadwell is listed at $244, almost 3x the AMD A8 7600. The vast majority of people would be better off buying the cheaper chip and saving their money.

      • maxxcool
      • 4 years ago

      Neither, Throttle under load .. very close to FA..

        • raddude9
        • 4 years ago

        What throttles under load, under what conditions, the A8 7600, at 45W or 65W TDP? Also have you got links on the 95W A8 7670K throttling? I haven’t seen any reviews of it yet so I can’t say.
        also what do you mean by FA?

          • maxxcool
          • 4 years ago

          Bottom line. load the igpu to 100% and the cpu to 100% and neither will run at rated top speed to keep within the thermal envelope on default settings with the default cooler.

          there are tons of google threads on the issue. some from good sites other from forum posts. ity is not surprising to me honestly since I have built customers rigs based on the 7600k and ”testing” them.

          [url<]https://www.google.com/search?q=amd+apu+throttling&num=100&espv=2&source=lnt&tbs=qdr:y&sa=X&ved=0CBUQpwVqFQoTCOaC7rTb7MYCFRKiiAodiDIEuA&biw=1618&bih=989[/url<]

            • raddude9
            • 4 years ago

            Sure AMD APU sometimes throttle and I can think of two good reasons why they might tend to throttle more than their intel brethren. Firstly, the AMD stock coolers then tend to be a bit worse than intel (I wouldn’t describe either as good). Secondly, AMD chips usually have much larger and more powerful iGPUs (certainly much bigger than their similarly priced intel counterparts).

            And sure, there are lots of google links on AMD APU throttling, (and many of them show how it can be fixed in a lot of cases) but if you bother to look up intel throttling you will find many more links! So if it happens to intel chips as well, how is that a reason not to buy an AMD chip?

            And be honest, very little software loads both the CPU and iGPU to 100%. Assuming that you don’t have a BIOS problem or a problem with your CPU cooler then it is something that is usually only done by benchmarks, so it’s not something that all users run into. And in the cases where it does happen in the real world (some games, running with stock coolers), the AMD APUs clock down their CPU parts first, which gives the user a better experience than clocking the iGPU down first.

          • Nevermind
          • 4 years ago

          Yeah I’ve never seen what he describes either.

    • Srsly_Bro
    • 4 years ago

    I read that as $17.99…still too much.

      • wimpishsundew
      • 4 years ago

      $18 for an APU that you can use for everything besides gaming on high settings? if that’s too much I want to know what you’re smoking.

      Hell, I can make a pretty good small foot print computer for about $200 if it’s priced $18.

        • auxy
        • 4 years ago

        I assure you one of these APUs will even run most games on high settings, albeit at a lower resolution. The graphics chips inside these are really very powerful! (´▽`) They just lack memory bandwidth to push large framebuffers around.

          • sweatshopking
          • 4 years ago

          nobody wants to play at 480p. chip is useless.

            • BobbinThreadbare
            • 4 years ago

            I’m sure the retro hipsters are gonna be there in 5 years. It looks just like my anamophic progressive scan DVDs from when I was a kid!

            • sweatshopking
            • 4 years ago

            LET’S DRINK SOME FRESH GROUND COFFEE FROM THIS FAIR TRADE COMMUNE IN THE MOUNTAINS

            • auxy
            • 4 years ago

            HD 4600 can run DX11 games on high settings flawlessly in 1366×768. Your argument is invalid. (*‘∀‘)

          • Nevermind
          • 4 years ago

          You can hybrid crossfire them with discrete cards, the benefit is dubious but the chip does draw a lot less power than a discrete card, any card, so for 2d mode (most stuff outside of gaming) not having to power up that stuff can is kind of a niche-feature.

          For $200, you can build a barebones gaming box that rivals all but the newest consoles.

          You can then plunk down another $200~ for a 290+ and blow the latest console away completely.

          There’s nothing wrong with this level of performance for the price, not at all.

        • Srsly_Bro
        • 4 years ago

        I have an A6 3650 APU lol. you guys are old and cranky.

          • Mr Bill
          • 4 years ago

          Well, if you have the socket for it, I’d be tempted to upgrade. I had an A8-3500 in a laptop and played WOW for several months. These newer versions have more GPU punch.

            • Srsly_Bro
            • 4 years ago

            The A6 3650 is on the FM1 socket, and the next gen was FM2. The first gen adopters got the hose.

      • albundy
      • 4 years ago

      lol, agreed. thought I’d see them in the dollar store last call bin.

        • Srsly_Bro
        • 4 years ago

        lol

    • Alexko
    • 4 years ago

    “The A8-7670K packs four Excavator CPU cores”

    Godavari is supposed to be a mild refresh of Kaveri and use Steamroller cores, not Excavator.

      • Jeff Kampman
      • 4 years ago

      Whoops, fixed.

    • ronch
    • 4 years ago

    You just gotta LOOOOVVEEEE AMD marketers and how they called last year’s Kaveri chips ’12-core’ processors. That’s 4 CPU cores + 8 GPU cores. Haha. I wonder who cooked that up.

    Things like that make people lose respect for a company. Enough BS, more product, please. And fire a few more people from the marketing department. They do more harm than good at AMD.

      • wimpishsundew
      • 4 years ago

      The point of the APUs, or fusion project, is to make it simpler packing more things on the chip like an SoC. Instead of advertising how great that is, AMD choose to confuse customers with Compute Cores. Most people will look at it and think it’s a 12 core chip but perform slower than Intel’s 4 core chips. AMD’s marketing continues to give me face palms.

        • Nevermind
        • 4 years ago

        It’s GOING to be confusing if you’re going by marketing alone between two companies, lol.

    • Hattig
    • 4 years ago

    Are you not on AMD’s PR mailing lists anymore?

    Although knowing AMD, those mailing lists are post-it notes on the company fridge door.

    • Deanjo
    • 4 years ago

    [quote<]AMD believes the 7670K is a better performer in games than a combo like Intel's Pentium G3258 and a GeForce GT 730 discrete graphics card. [/quote<] Sneaky, guaranteed they are comparing it to the GT-730 model that is GF 108 based (aka GT-520, GT-630)

      • nanoflower
      • 4 years ago

      I have to wonder if they are also including the overclocking ability of the G3258 vs their 7670K. It’s easy to get a G3258 over 4GHz on air with the stock cooler and do even better with a replacement cooler.

        • dragontamer5788
        • 4 years ago

        Games aren’t typically CPU limited these days… especially console ports designed on an AMD Bobcat core.

        Its all about GPU performance, so the 7670K beating discrete cards is important.

          • swaaye
          • 4 years ago

          Games aren’t necessarily CPU limited if your GPU is really slow. But Windows games definitely have a CPU bottleneck problem, which is a big part of what the new APIs are trying to improve.

          Though I have a feeling the AMD APUs and that Pentium (if not overclocked) cause problems with frame rate drops at times. And they probably aren’t so great if you like modern strategy games.

          • Ninjitsu
          • 4 years ago

          [quote<] Games aren't typically CPU limited these days [/quote<] That's very untrue.

            • dragontamer5788
            • 4 years ago

            Its almost certainly true if you’ve only got a GT-730.

            [url<]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nJACZ5iStWw[/url<] The Pentium 3258 fails to bottleneck even a GTX 970. If you're looking at GT-730 or other crap GPUs, then... yeah, you almost _certainly_ have a GPU-bottlenecked system. The exception is basically Civ5 (not so much FPS, but wait times between turns) and RTS games like Company of Heroes 2.

            • auxy
            • 4 years ago

            You guys are both dumb. Stop talking about CPU/GPU bottlenecks without referencing specific titles, because you aren’t going to see a CPU bottleneck in, say, Titanfall (until you get down into the really crap CPUs), and yet I can make my wife’s machine drop frames in TERRARIA all day long (which is CPU-limited.) (*‘∀‘)

            • Nevermind
            • 4 years ago

            Correct. The game matters.

          • Westbrook348
          • 4 years ago

          I have a i5-4690K OC to 4.4Ghz and a 980Ti playing at 1440p. I’m definitely CPU limited more than GPU limited, though most of all I’m free time limited.

            • geekl33tgamer
            • 4 years ago

            No you’re not in almost every game out today. Your CPU’s at the boost clock of my CPU – the 4790K – and at that speed you have the highest IPC of any Intel CPU out there. The multi-core 6/12 8/16 thread CPU’s on 2011-3 are slower in games.

            Unless you can magically get the 2011-3 processors to the same 4.4 Ghz or beyond (or games start using more than 4 threads) then there’s nothing faster right now.

            • Nevermind
            • 4 years ago

            The performance difference at that level is negligible for frame rates on single gpu setups.

          • DrDominodog51
          • 4 years ago
        • Firestarter
        • 4 years ago

        overclockers aren’t the target audience

        • wimpishsundew
        • 4 years ago

        Most people that buy a G3258 and GT 730 won’t overclock because it’s probably for something like a small HTPC or just a cheap PC that’s not for hardcore gaming. However, the 7670K is made and specifically stated to be unlocked.

        AMD should really market how their APU is more like an All-in-one solution and better for HTPC, general purpose, and light gaming. People can have a tiny itx case without worrying about an extra videocard. That’s more appealing at these performance levels than slightly higher frame rates. They should also include different profiles for different modes. Like a profile to underclock to save power and overclock for max performance.

        I just feel like AMD is trying desperate to churn out better products and completely forget about refinements that make their products more useful for the potential consumers.

        • Nevermind
        • 4 years ago

        You can do that with the APU’s all day also, 4ghz is not difficult. Which setup would overclocking help more? I don’t know that.

          • geekl33tgamer
          • 4 years ago

          AMD at 4Ghz is nothing like Intel 4Ghz in terms of performance, sorry…

            • Nevermind
            • 4 years ago

            Actually it is something like it, sorry. It’s not 100% of it, quad vs quad core…

            But intel doesn’t have a $110 quad core that does 4ghz. AMD does.

            In single threaded, the i3 wins. In multi-threaded, the APU wins. In graphics, the APU wins.

            In price, the APU wins. In overclocking, the APU wins. In power use, the i3 wins.

            Saying one of these is more important than the rest of the others combined is just odd, as is your assertion that 150 pounds sterling has the same value as $150 USD.

            • geekl33tgamer
            • 4 years ago

            Are you on AMD payroll?

            • Nevermind
            • 4 years ago

            You’re the one caught lying about the price now… not me.

            • geekl33tgamer
            • 4 years ago

            Totally ignored what I said. That figures.

            • Nevermind
            • 4 years ago

            Actually, you ignored me. $150 DOLLARS is not 150 POUNDS as you claimed.

            • geekl33tgamer
            • 4 years ago

            Oh, I’m sorry – Kaveri launched here at £149.99. Sorry for not keeping up with pricing data on a product I don’t want.

            • Nevermind
            • 4 years ago

            So… do you finally admit $150 is not £149.99? Or are you just not going to?

            • geekl33tgamer
            • 4 years ago

            I quoted all my prices in GBP. Learn to read, as its you who assumed I meant USD.

            • Nevermind
            • 4 years ago

            No, you said the top APU from AMD was 150 POUNDS, that was the cheapest price you claimed.

            And that’s false. It’s $150 DOLLARS, which is more than 1/3 less money.

            Then you said basically under no circumstances did APU’s outperform i3’s, which is also false and I linked to a few examples, one of which was the OP’s header example.

            And you got all flustered and started cursing lol.

            • geekl33tgamer
            • 4 years ago

            Your impossible…

            • Nevermind
            • 4 years ago

            You + are = you’re. Not your.

            • geekl33tgamer
            • 4 years ago

            I don’t care.

            • Nevermind
            • 4 years ago

            About getting the details right?

            • geekl33tgamer
            • 4 years ago

            I got them right. Move along and grow up.

            • Nevermind
            • 4 years ago

            “Your?” $150 is not £150 nomatter how many times stated.

            • geekl33tgamer
            • 4 years ago

            [url=https://31.media.tumblr.com/2c6924422bbac16daa2f329c60bc5fc7/tumblr_inline_npjwc9witS1r31crk_500.gif<]This is too much[/url<]...

            • Nevermind
            • 4 years ago

            Calling people “assholes” in one breath and “grow up” the next, lol.

            But the math is still the math, and 150$ is still not 150 pounds.

            And the i3 was beaten by the APU in some metrics, not single threaded performance obviously, but some metrics, and you can’t make that go away by lying or shouting insults.

            There is no 150 British pound APU from AMD. It doesn’t exist.

            • geekl33tgamer
            • 4 years ago

            Right you dumb shit, let me spell it out to you:

            1) You ignored the little £ symbol in front of all of my prices. That’s not my problem if you assumed it was $. They look pretty different to me. Get glasses.

            2) Intel CPU wins 7 performance tests, and the AMD took 1. Overall the i3 is a better product. Only people who have “AMD” running through them like a stick of rock will tell you different.

            3) It was £150, and is on sale now down to £120 which I mentioned earlier and you swiftly ignored it.

            • Nevermind
            • 4 years ago

            “Right you dumb” No, that would be “you’re” dumb again.

            This shouldn’t be so tricky… take a deep breath and try not to call names.

            Since we’re all grown up right?

            • geekl33tgamer
            • 4 years ago

            • Nevermind
            • 4 years ago

            Better?

            • geekl33tgamer
            • 4 years ago

            I’ll be feeling a lot better once you GTFO this thread and stop spamming my inbox with replies? 🙂

            • Nevermind
            • 4 years ago

            Great, now that we’ve settled that they don’t cost $240, they cost $140.

            And that you + are = you’re.

            And that i3’s have been beaten by APU’s in some benchmarks.

            Having established all that, (and without needing to call any names really), let me say that I’m genuinely glad that you’re feeling better now.

            • geekl33tgamer
            • 4 years ago

            It looks like nobody is agreeing with you, call it a day.

            I had the word use correct that time by the way. “Right you dumb shit ” is correct – say it out loud to be sure. “Right you’re dumb shit ” isn’t right.

            Thought I would correct you there, seeing as you’re hell-bent on grammar and punctuation.

            • Nevermind
            • 4 years ago

            Intel has fanboys, and by market share alone they should outnumber any other fanboy group.

            So really your appeal to them is unsurprising, if dishonest in the metrics and vague assertions..

            I can see why you didn’t want to be honest about the pricing either, ouch.

            By the way, appeal to popularity is a logical fallacy.

            • Nevermind
            • 4 years ago

            ****s aren’t grammatical features, so I was correcting the word choices.

            To make no mention of the fact that this is the 5th insult since you told me to “grow up”…

            • Nevermind
            • 4 years ago

            “It was £150, and is on sale now down to £120”

            No, it’s literally $140 right now. That’s dollars.

            120 POUNDS is 186 dollars. There’s no APU at that price, it doesn’t exist.

            It simply doesn’t cost 186-240 dollars for A-8/A-10 series APUs.

            [url<]http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113359[/url<] AND it's on sale for $129, 10% off $140. So yeah. Details do matter to some people.

            • geekl33tgamer
            • 4 years ago

            I can’t comprehend your stupidity any longer. Go away.

            • Nevermind
            • 4 years ago

            You used “your” correctly this time. I’m glad to see that.

            Details sticking, good to see. I’ll be here.

            • maxxcool
            • 4 years ago

            Now yUo’r’e being silly ..

            • DrDominodog51
            • 4 years ago

            What did I just read?

            • Nevermind
            • 4 years ago

            Silly > angry, IMO.

            • Nevermind
            • 4 years ago

            Honestly, you don’t have to get so mad, it’s not personal for me. It’s just benchmarks.

            You simply made false assertions and I proved that they were false. No big deal.

            I think they’re pretty comparable products in a lot of ways, you want to pretend that no, there’s simply no comparison and the APU always loses – patently false.

            And they don’t cost 150 pounds either. That’s $230 dollars, that’s the top-end FX with the integrated cooler. The APU is $140. So I didn’t fuck that up, you did.

            It’s easy to admit you said something that wasn’t quite true, just takes some sack.

          • Mr Bill
          • 4 years ago

          4GHz is not difficult unless you are doing anything graphics related. These APU’s throttle heavily when running graphics. Not to say they don’t still perform better than an Intel APU absent an discrete graphics card.

            • Mr Bill
            • 4 years ago

            Perhaps I should say they throttle by 23% rather than heavily. My own A10-7850 runs fine at 3.9GHz but drops to 3GHz during graphics benchmarks.

            • Nevermind
            • 4 years ago

            Wait, what? It drops to 3ghz during benchmarking? Thermal issue? Do you have C&Q on?

            • Mr Bill
            • 4 years ago

            I am investigating it right now…
            [url<]https://techreport.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=115946[/url<] But my best guess is that this is a power envelope limitation. Waiting on better thermal paste at the moment.

            • Nevermind
            • 4 years ago

            Turn off Cool and Quiet and all those C-functions in the BIOS, run your cpu fan up 100%.
            See if it still does it.

            It could be your PSU also if you’ve got voltage jitters sometimes it will do that on pegging.

            BIOS settings first though.

            • Mr Bill
            • 4 years ago

            will do.

        • Mr Bill
        • 4 years ago

        As mentioned over in the July 2015 system build article. I doubt there is much headroom in the 7670K because of the power envelope of sharing the CPU and GPU in the same package.

          • Nevermind
          • 4 years ago

          They don’t run very hot, really it’s more about board stability @ timings and good fast ram.

          All these APU’s get more graphics benefit from fast ram than overclock, but you can get the to 4ghz without really trying too hard even with a $20 arctic fan and stock volts.

          Of course if you’re an overclocker, you’re not content with an APU’s graphics though.

      • Topinio
      • 4 years ago

      If that’s true, then this is on Nvidia for trying to con consumers by retailing 3 completely different versions of the GeForce GT 730 at the same price despite radically different performance levels.

      And well done AMD for exploiting that.

        • Deanjo
        • 4 years ago

        [quote<]And well done AMD for exploiting that.[/quote<] Lol, does anyone really still believe AMD claims in the first place now days?

          • nanoflower
          • 4 years ago

          I’m sure people that don’t follow GPUs may believe them. Certainly Nvidia is trying to take advantage of people by offering multiple GPUs with the same name but vastly different configurations. Other than wanting to take advantage of the naivete of consumers I can’t see why they would have 3 different products called the GT 730 but with very different performance characteristics.

            • Deanjo
            • 4 years ago

            People that don’t follow GPU’s are just as unlikely to follow CPUs or look at marketing slides.

    • chuckula
    • 4 years ago

    [quote<]AMD makes Godavari a family with the A8-7670K[/quote<] So apparently that's what happened when Lisa Su bought a bottle of tequila for the 7850K and 7650K.

      • Ninjitsu
      • 4 years ago

      This way Intel will only have a 6700K!

        • chuckula
        • 4 years ago

        Oh yeah, I mean, the 7670K is a full [s<]1670 moar [/s<] [u<] let's make that 970 moar[/u<] than a 6700K! That sounds like an unstoppable advantage even if Intel manages to get Skylake to overclock.

          • Pzenarch
          • 4 years ago

          Math fail.

            • chuckula
            • 4 years ago

            You’re right. I was assuming that Intel marketing was overstating the power of the 6700K there.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This