I5 with Sli or I7

[Transcendent]

Im using it, not tried Tomb Raider but that game is optimized to play better on AMD 7850k like Battlefield 4 too, so I doubt the veracity of that article.

 

Im playing SWTOR all maxed out, did I say Battlefield 4 plays smootly enough in AMD to actually make a difference in the results you get in that game considering is a first person shooter a milisec can make a difference.

 

Both Tomb Raider and Battlefield 4 are heavily optimized for an AMD based system.

 

Tomb Raider - http://community.amd.com/community/amd-blogs/amd-gaming/blog/2013/03/05/tomb-raider-launches-with-revolutionary-tressfx-hair

Battlefield 4 - http://battlelog.battlefield.com/bf4/news/view/bf4-mantle-live/

 

Note that only relates to the GPU side of things, afaik. The original question was about an I5 or I7 based system. Depends on budget, it really is that simple. I'd be happy with either, but i'd be more inclined to go for a system with an I7 and a good single gpu.

 

I've always found this site a good source of information when looking at laptop / mobile gpu information -

 

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-Graphics-Cards-Benchmark-List.844.0.html

 

Aside from the usual Anandtech / Guru3D / XtremeSystems information gathering, the one above is pretty useful when looking at laptops.

[yoyodar]

Wow you guys thanks for all the advice and for scaring away that troll. Right I have decided to go for the I7 but now I can't decide between the y410p and the y510p, the y410p is has the same specs as the y510p but it is 14' so I can't decide because the added mobility would be helpful and the screen size wouldn't be a huge downside since I would be gaming on an external monitor, but it's still iffy since the last time I saw a 14 alienware it looked small and awkward (but it was a while ago so it might have been the 11' lol). Anyways thanks for all the feedback.

[Smuglebunny]

No, go AMD its aimed at gaming

 

Example:

 

AMD 7850k (4 core), has a powerful card inside the chip.

 

I7 and i5 are industry standard FOR ALMOST EVERYTHING EXCEPT GAMING.

 

The clock doesnt matter anymore, Intel is more energy efficient but that it, for gaming the speed is almost solely on graphics card you use.

 

 

Im sorry. But every word of this post is false.

Intel is more energy efficient and have higher individual core speeds outputting less heat.

i7 and i5 ARE the industry standard for gaming

"has a powerful card inside the chip" im not even sure what that means

DO you mean chip inside the card?

And are you talking about an APU? lol

AMD is aimed at cheap

 

I am A+ Network+ and Security+ certified. I work as remote tech support for 2 major companies. I build PCs and built the one im using now. Im past 30 but not yet 40 and have experience.

 

AMD is inferior in EVERY single way other than price. Not that there is anything bad or wrong with their products, but intel and nVidia have them beat on every single marker but price.

 

In fact AMD was right about to go out of business before they released the new 270-290 cards.

 

IF you are short on cash, yes you can build an AMD system that will run this game perfectly, I have a 7870 in the PC im typing on now. Because I got it for 110$ last year But I would never buy an AMD processor or Mobo. I just wont. Based on 15 years of experience.

 

I like that AMD exsists and tries hard so that intel and nVidias prices at least have competition. But I wouldnt build a PC with AMD parts for anyone I cared about. Only to sell. Or for myself cuz I can accept that risk.

 

AMD fanboying is kinda funny. How do you justify a hotter louder product that consumes more energy for less output to be better? Other than price?

 

But McDonalds gets lots of business so, I get it.

[ZahirS]

Im sorry. But every word of this post is false.

Intel is more energy efficient and have higher individual core speeds outputting less heat.

i7 and i5 ARE the industry standard for gaming

"has a powerful card inside the chip" im not even sure what that means

DO you mean chip inside the card?

And are you talking about an APU? lol

AMD is aimed at cheap

 

I doubt you are a PC analyst, for starters APU is HSA technology hence core speed is double or triple than anything intel has and that tech will be the future is already happening now.

 

AMD is inferior in EVERY single way other than price. Not that there is anything bad or wrong with their products, but intel and nVidia have them beat on every single marker but price.

 

In fact AMD was right about to go out of business before they released the new 270-290 cards.

 

Nvidia is right now the only competition AMD has on video cards, and AMD sells more video cards than NVIDIA, as for AMD vs Intel in next quote:

IF you are short on cash, yes you can build an AMD system that will run this game perfectly, I have a 7870 in the PC im typing on now. Because I got it for 110$ last year But I would never buy an AMD processor or Mobo. I just wont. Based on 15 years of experience.

 

I like that AMD exsists and tries hard so that intel and nVidias prices at least have competition. But I wouldnt build a PC with AMD parts for anyone I cared about. Only to sell. Or for myself cuz I can accept that risk.

 

AMD fanboying is kinda funny. How do you justify a hotter louder product that consumes more energy for less output to be better? Other than price?

 

But McDonalds gets lots of business so, I get it.

 

AMD is not just cheap its quality processors, and its using new technologies than make them more efficient than intel without overcloaking the chip, so if you have an inch of brain you would buy an AMD chip.

[ZahirS]

Both Tomb Raider and Battlefield 4 are heavily optimized for an AMD based system.

 

Tomb Raider - http://community.amd.com/community/amd-blogs/amd-gaming/blog/2013/03/05/tomb-raider-launches-with-revolutionary-tressfx-hair

Battlefield 4 - http://battlelog.battlefield.com/bf4/news/view/bf4-mantle-live/

 

Note that only relates to the GPU side of things, afaik. The original question was about an I5 or I7 based system. Depends on budget, it really is that simple. I'd be happy with either, but i'd be more inclined to go for a system with an I7 and a good single gpu.

 

I've always found this site a good source of information when looking at laptop / mobile gpu information -

 

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-Graphics-Cards-Benchmark-List.844.0.html

 

Aside from the usual Anandtech / Guru3D / XtremeSystems information gathering, the one above is pretty useful when looking at laptops.

 

Not a problem, like Guru3D site me too check this:

 

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/amd_a10_7850k_apu_review,10.html

 

and this:

 

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/amd_a10_7850k_apu_review,13.html

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/amd_a10_7850k_apu_review,16.html

AMD 7850k is superior in gaming to I7 because the margin is so low, you dont even notice it and AMD is a lot cheaper.

 

Note if you can buy an i7 top of the line and a monster GPU go for that, that still the best gaming rig, but AMD has the casual/hardcore mid rig option for everyone that cant afford a i7, if its laptop OP go i7.

Edited May 28, 2014 by ZahirS

[Pistols]

But every word of this post is false. Intel is more energy efficient

 

Obviously, not every word...

 

The clock doesnt matter anymore, Intel is more energy efficient

 

Just sayin.

[Bugattiboy]

If you had and AMD chip, with the card your using now it would be 2x faster even for i7.

Oh the ignorance. Intel has been pummeling AMD for years in every aspect except price. You get what you pay for though so, in a way, they are still beating AMD in price.

 

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html

 

The first AMD CPU is rank 33. The second AMD CPU is rank 51. The third AMD CPU is rank 73 and that's not even a desktop CPU. It's a server CPU. If you want the third desktop CPU you need to go down another 2 ranks.

 

I've always wondered if AMD is even trying anymore.

Edited May 28, 2014 by Bugattiboy

[BuriDogshin]

Oh the ignorance. Intel and Nvidia have been pummeling AMD for years in every aspect except price. You get what you pay for though so, in a way, they are still beating AMD in price.

 

Actually, in terms of add-in vid cards, AMD and NVidia are pretty close right now. For a while AMD cards were very pricey because the bitcoin miners were using them, but that seems to be over now. Good to see.

[Malastare]

Note if you can buy an i7 top of the line and a monster GPU go for that, that still the best gaming rig, but AMD has the casual/hardcore mid rig option for everyone that cant afford a i7, if its laptop OP go i7.

 

You've been missing the point. You seem to only care about IGP performance. IGPs should be considered budget gaming GPUs.

 

Yes, with a A10-7850k, you can play Tomb Raider in 1080p with medium settings at ~30fps. That's as high as you go. If you want to play at High settings, your framerate will drop to ~18fps. If you want a higher framerate, no AMD APU can give you that. The only way to get to high quality settings at a higher framerate is to use a dedicated GPU, and the moment we start talking about that, the price advantage of the 7850K disappears. The i3-4330 is $40 cheaper, and delivers a slight increase in performance.

 

Let's emphasize that: If you want to play Tomb Raider (and many other recent games) at standard resolutions and maximum quality, you will need a dedicated GPU. No AMD APU can do it. Once you are using a dedicated GPU, CPU comparisons get much easier. We can compare them straight up.

 

Now for the kicker:

 

In a game which stresses both CPU and GPU --like SWTOR-- no AMD APU is going to be able to give you 60fps on High settings. I'm not even sure about Medium settings wth AA. If you want to play SWTOR on High settings, you're going to need a dedicated GPU and a decent CPU. The i3-4330 is a better CPU for SWTOR and costs less than the 7850k. See here.

 

Thus: Even if you are looking for the cheapest way to run SWTOR at high quality settings, the i3-4330 and a dedicated GPU will give you better performance and cost less than the 7850K and a dedicated GPU. Using the 7850K alone will not be capable of running the game at high settings with a respectable frame rate.

 

If you are okay running games at medium quality at low framerates (and many people are perfectly happy to do so), then the 7850K can save you some cash. If you want the higher quality, AMD isn't going to help you get it, and Intel will likely be a more cost-effective route.

[Malastare]

Actually, in terms of add-in vid cards, AMD and NVidia are pretty close right now. For a while AMD cards were very pricey because the bitcoin miners were using them, but that seems to be over now. Good to see.

 

Agree. AMD and nVidia have been pretty close in performance for a while now. Even back at the start of the GeForce line when they sort of took the GPU market by storm, the Radeons weren't far off in performance. They often trade the "best performance" crown, and alternate between various other optimums like power draw, noise, AA performance, etc.

 

While almost all of my cards have been nVidia, that is mostly due to coincidence. I just happened to be building at times when nVidia was putting out cards with particularly good value (6800, 8800GTS-G92, 560Ti, 770). Before those, I was limited to nVidia because ATi refused to play nice on Linux. Currently, I have no preference between nVidia and AMD video cards and advise people to buy the card they can get a better deal on.

[ZahirS]

You've been missing the point. You seem to only care about IGP performance. IGPs should be considered budget gaming GPUs.

 

Now for the kicker:

 

In a game which stresses both CPU and GPU --like SWTOR-- no AMD APU is going to be able to give you 60fps on High settings. I'm not even sure about Medium settings wth AA. If you want to play SWTOR on High settings, you're going to need a dedicated GPU and a decent CPU. The i3-4330 is a better CPU for SWTOR and costs less than the 7850k. See here.

 

.

 

You dont get it, an APU is a chip a quad processor you can have any card NVIDIA OR AMD with it and it will outperform i7, i5, i3, now thats reality AMD does make good chips.

 

HTC computer is now offcially AMD's, if you want to play games in your computer at max buy an AMD chip and a Videocard and keep updating, intel is a thing of the past.

Edited May 28, 2014 by ZahirS

[BuriDogshin]

You dont get it, an APU is a chip a quad processor you can have any card NVIDIA OR AMD with it and it will outperform i7, i5, i3, now thats reality AMD does make good chips.

 

HTC computer is now offcially AMD's, if you want to play games in your computer at max buy an AMD chip and a Videocard and keep updating, intel is a thing of the past.

 

 

As of May 15, 2014, TechReport disagrees with you:

AMD still isn't in a terribly competitive position, though. Its Socket AM3+ platform is growing long in the tooth, with relatively slow processors, excessive power consumption, and chipsets that date back from 2011. AMD's new Kaveri chips come with a newer platform and lower power use, but the retail-boxed versions of Kaveri are either unavailable or marked up excessively for how they perform. ...

 

In the end, we're still left with a limited selection of chips worth recommending—and an inevitable bias toward Intel, which continues to offer the best overall CPU performance, the smallest power envelopes, and the best upgrade path. ... If you care the least bit about gaming performance, you ought to be buying a discrete graphics card. Sadly, that means there's not much point in us recommending an AMD processor right now.

(emphasis added) Edited May 28, 2014 by BuriDogshin

[ZahirS]

As of May 15, 2014, TechReport disagrees with you:

(emphasis added)

 

I should bold the part: "Biased intel" as it is now AMD is best for gaming, future games will be optimized for AMD so besides been cheaper it will let you play the games you like longer, smoother and graphically impressive.

[Malastare]

You dont get it, an APU is a chip a quad processor you can have any card NVIDIA OR AMD with it and it will outperform i7, i5, i3,

 

No. I sense that you're not even reading the information and links supplied to you.

 

An i3-4330 outperforms a 7850K. All i5s and i7s from the Sandy Bridge generation and later will outperform the 7850K. A i3-4330 with an R9-270 (dedicated GPU) will outperform a 7850K with a R9-270, and will cost less. In performance, the 7850K isn't even in the same class as the 4770K, and the new Devil's Canyon chips are going to widen the gap even more.

 

Let's make a chart:

 

Gaming Performance: (some guesswork involved)

Best

i7-4790K w/ gaming GPU

i7-4770 w/ gaming GPU

i5-4670 w/ gaming GPU

i7-3770 w/ gaming GPU

i5-3570 w/ gaming GPU

i7-2600 w/ gaming GPU

i5-2500 w/ gaming GPU

i3-4330 w/ gaming GPU

A10-7850K w/ gaming GPU

i5-4670 w/ budget GPU

A10-7850K (IGP)

i7-4770 (IGP)

i3-4330 (IGP)

Not Best

 

NOTE: Fixed typo on the AMD model number. The rankings still stand.

 

Let's toss out some raw numbers, too. Benchmarks aren't a great way of measuring game performance, but the numbers are a bit beyond the level where we'd be worried about accuracy:

 

PassMark scores:

 

AMD A10-7850K: 5,723

Intel i3-4330: 5,101 (Nearly matches the 7850K with half the cores)

Intel i5-2500K: 6,500

Intel i5-3670: 7,175 (25% higher than 7850K)

Intel i7-3770: 9,650

Intel i7-4770K: 10,319

Intel i7-4930K: 13,226 (More than 2.3 times the score of the 7850K)

 

The 4850K is about the best APU AMD has for now (and one of the best CPUs in AMDs consumer lineup). It cannot match Intel performance even for chips that are one generation old. It is worse. It is slower in processing almost every workload. I'm sorry if that makes you sad. It's not my intention to upset you. I am simply trying to help you understand where your CPU lies in the range of CPU performance.

 

Now, most people have no need for a chip like the 4930K, but to claim that AMD has more powerful CPUs.... it just doesn't make sense.

 

now thats reality AMD does make good chips.

 

AMD does make good chips. They just don't have the performance of Intel chips. The only market where they are better is in the low-end, integrated graphics market. For gaming or other high-performance tasks, Intel is going to perform better.

 

if you want to play games in your computer at max buy an AMD chip and a Videocard and keep updating, intel is a thing of the past.

 

No. No matter how many times you repeat it, it doesn't change the actual results. AMD cannot match the performance of Intel chips. That's the way its been for a good six years now. Consoles have chosen AMD chips because they are cheaper and offer unified hardware that is easier and cheaper to manufacture, not because they are more powerful. No reputable PC builder honestly believes that AMD is the leader in the CPU market. It's so far from the truth that it's laughable. I can't come to any other conclusion except that you are playing some joke on others.

 

Nonetheless, I'll stick around, correcting your posts so that someone doesn't mistake your text for actual information.

 

If you want maximum performance in games, you should aim for an i5 chip from Intel and a gaming-quality dedicated video card.

Edited May 28, 2014 by Malastare

[ZahirS]

No. I sense that you're not even reading the information and links supplied to you.

 

An i3-4330 outperforms a 7850K. All i5s and i7s from the Sandy Bridge generation and later will outperform the 7850K. A i3-4330 with an R9-270 (dedicated GPU) will outperform a 7850K with a R9-270, and will cost less. In performance, the 7850K isn't even in the same class as the 4770K, and the new Devil's Canyon chips are going to widen the gap even more.

 

Actually I read every page before posting the links, you are decieving people AMD 7850k is best processor pairs with a card over 7850 line or Nvidia Titan for example.

 

Let's make a chart:

 

Gaming Performance: (some guesswork involved)

Best

i7-4790K w/ gaming GPU

i7-4770 w/ gaming GPU

i5-4670 w/ gaming GPU

i7-3770 w/ gaming GPU

i5-3570 w/ gaming GPU

i7-2600 w/ gaming GPU

i5-2500 w/ gaming GPU

i3-4330 w/ gaming GPU

A10-4850K w/ gaming GPU

i5-4670 w/ budget GPU

A10-4850K (IGP)

i7-4770 (IGP)

i3-4330 (IGP)

Not Best

 

Its 7850k, wrong table no info.

 

Let's toss out some raw numbers, too. Benchmarks aren't a great way of measuring game performance, but the numbers are a bit beyond the level where we'd be worried about accuracy:

 

PassMark scores:

 

AMD A10-7850K: 5,723

Intel i3-4330: 5,101 (Nearly matches the 7850K with half the cores)

Intel i5-2500K: 6,500

Intel i5-3670: 7,175 (25% higher than 7850K)

Intel i7-3770: 9,650

Intel i7-4770K: 10,319

Intel i7-4930K: 13,226 (More than 2.3 times the score of the 7850K)

 

The 4850K is about the best APU AMD has for now (and one of the best CPUs in AMDs consumer lineup). It cannot match Intel performance even for chips that are one generation old. It is worse. It is slower in processing almost every workload. I'm sorry if that makes you sad. It's not my intention to upset you. I am simply trying to help you understand where your CPU lies in the range of CPU performance.

 

You probably dont know but most sites are intel biased, all the tables used 7850k and it outperformed i5, i7 in some tests they cant hide, so if you pair 7850k with another card lets say R9 or GFX line will definetly outperform any intel, because AMD chips use GPU as extra power for any task.

 

Now, most people have no need for a chip like the 4930K, but to claim that AMD has more powerful CPUs.... it just doesn't make sense.

 

It does make sense if you try it, give it a shot its blazing fast.

 

AMD does make good chips. They just don't have the performance of Intel chips. The only market where they are better is in the low-end, integrated graphics market. For gaming or other high-performance tasks, Intel is going to perform better.

 

Intel right now is good at tests that use "3D rendering" or that use marks to tests performance, games are becoming everytime less CPU depandant. for example Intel is good at playing Star Craft 2 and very bad at playing Star Swarm (New Game)

 

No. No matter how many times you repeat it, it doesn't change the actual results. AMD cannot match the performance of Intel chips. That's the way its been for a good six years now. Consoles have chosen AMD chips because they are cheaper and offer unified hardware that is easier and cheaper to manufacture, not because they are more powerful. No reputable PC builder honestly believes that AMD is the leader in the CPU market. It's so far from the truth that it's laughable. I can't come to any other conclusion except that you are playing some joke on others.

 

Nonetheless, I'll stick around, correcting your posts so that someone doesn't mistake your text for actual information.

 

If you want maximum performance in games, you should aim for an i5 chip from Intel and a gaming-quality dedicated video card.

 

i5 is a thing of the past, keep your card if its a R9 and buy AMD chips they are better at gaming.

Edited May 28, 2014 by ZahirS

[Dokar]

Actually I read every page before posting the links, you are decieving people AMD 7850k is best processor pairs with a card over 7850 line or Nvidia Titan for example.

 

 

 

Its 7850k, wrong table no info.

 

 

 

You probably dont know but most sites are intel biased, all the tables used 7850k and it outperformed i5, i7 in some tests they cant hide, so if you pair 7850k with another card lets say R9 or GFX line will definetly outperform any intel, because AMD chips use GPU as extra power for any task.

 

 

 

It does make sense if you try it, give it a shot its blazing fast.

 

 

 

Intel right now is good at tests that use "3D rendering" or that use marks to tests performance, games are becoming everytime less CPU depandant. for example Intel is good at playing Star Craft 2 and very bad at playing Star Swarm (New Game)

 

 

 

i5 is a thing of the past, keep your card if its a R9 and buy AMD chips they are better at gaming.

 

He has provided data to back his claim, where is yours?

[ZahirS]

He has provided data to back his claim, where is yours?

 

Previous page.

[Dokar]

Previous page.

 

you didn't look very hard at what at what you posted

 

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/amd_a10_7850k_apu_review,14.html

[BuriDogshin]

you didn't look very hard at what at what you posted

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/amd_a10_7850k_apu_review,14.html

In particular:

the A10 7850K APU offers decent enough CPU performance ... Gamers with a high-end dedicated graphics cards will however require a little more in terms of raw processor performance.

[ZahirS]

That why I said, if you still can afford an i7 paired with a monster GPU go for that is best gaming rig.

 

If you want the best on budget go AMD which is too close to i7, to even notice difference.

 

Btw here is the quote in context:

These APUs are just great for any HTPC or small form factor functionality. The A10 has 512 Shader processors, the move towards the GCN GPU architecture was a great, albeit expensive, one. But utilizing both the CPU and GPU architecture does make Kaveri Excel at tasks that will make use of both, OpenCL keeps coming back into my mind as well as gaming. If you purchase a Kaveri APU with the combination of that Series 8 motherboard, you'll have a processor, graphics subsystem, up-to eight SATA-600 ports, USB 3.0, heaps of USB 2.0 ports, Gigabit Ethernet, HD audio and you simply get a very up-to-date PC.

 

Any Kaveri APU will be will be hard to beat in terms of features and overall performance, it is an excellent and affordable APU for a HTPC or a mainstream Windows 8.1 PC. Gamers with a high-end dedicated graphics cards will however require a little more in terms of raw processor performance. But if enough games get supported, Mantle might be the magic that AMD needs to happen and solve that need. The A10-7850K really is a terrific product offering heaps of features, fun and a very decent PC experience.

Edited May 28, 2014 by ZahirS

[Dokar]

That why I said, if you still can afford an i7 paired with a monster GPU go for that is best gaming rig.

 

If you want the best on budget go AMD which is too close to i7, to even notice difference.

 

Btw here is the quote in context:

 

left part of what they said out

 

Concluding

 

If you take away a high-end gaming rig from your mindset and understand what AMD is bringing to the table with Kaveri, then you should be impressed. It is a rather bold move for AMD to focus more on the IGP side of things rather then CPU performance. I profoundly like the new Kaveri architecture, it is the first true native heterogeneous APU architecture that will set the path into the future. With it's well over 2 Billion transistors it isn't even a cheap chip to produce. I do worry though that the overall serial processing performance (raw processor performance) is just not enough to make a big enough difference for you guys as you demand something faster. That really is my only negative view on Kaveri. On the architecture side of things, Kaveri is looking mighty good.

[ZahirS]

left part of what they said out

 

Concluding

 

If you take away a high-end gaming rig from your mindset and understand what AMD is bringing to the table with Kaveri, then you should be impressed. It is a rather bold move for AMD to focus more on the IGP side of things rather then CPU performance. I profoundly like the new Kaveri architecture, it is the first true native heterogeneous APU architecture that will set the path into the future. With it's well over 2 Billion transistors it isn't even a cheap chip to produce. I do worry though that the overall serial processing performance (raw processor performance) is just not enough to make a big enough difference for you guys as you demand something faster. That really is my only negative view on Kaveri. On the architecture side of things, Kaveri is looking mighty good.

 

Still what I said stands if you want best processor with best video card=best gaming rig

 

If you want somthing affordable with a good graphics card go AMD for the rest best

Edited May 28, 2014 by ZahirS

[AshlaBoga]

I don't understand why anyone would get a 7850k for gaming, as there are better AMD cpus.

 

The 8350 is only $20 more ($220), and the 9370 is $60 more.

 

If budget is a big concern I'd still get the 8350 over the 7850k.

Edited May 28, 2014 by AshlaBoga

[Malastare]

That why I said, if you still can afford an i7 paired with a monster GPU go for that is best gaming rig.

 

And we've shown you evidence that an i3-4330 will outperform the 8750K with the same GPU. And its cheaper. What part of this isn't making sense?

 

If you want the best on budget go AMD which is too close to i7, to even notice difference.

 

That's not true at all. Again: Comparison of 4770k and 7850k.

 

Both are quad core CPUs, but the 4770K has hyperthreading. The 4770K scores 35% higher in single-core performance, 75% higher in multi-core performance, and 120% higher in 32bit application performance. That is not "too close to even notice". It also has lower power consumption and better performance per watt, which are also very important for gaming performance.

 

You're not reading and understanding your own source material:

 

These APUs are just great for any HTPC or small form factor functionality. The A10 has 512 Shader processors, the move towards the GCN GPU architecture was a great, albeit expensive, one. But utilizing both the CPU and GPU architecture does make Kaveri Excel at tasks that will make use of both, OpenCL keeps coming back into my mind as well as gaming....

 

You seem to think that HTPC and SFF use has high demands on CPUs. It doesn't. HTPCs are low-end use cases for CPUs. People who build HTPCs like AMDs APUs because they don't have to find room for a dedicated GPU card, leaving the cases more open and easier to cool. It doesn't take a great chip to power a HTPC. The reason why i7's aren't used is because it is hilarious overkill.

 

Any Kaveri APU will be will be hard to beat in terms of features and overall performance, it is an excellent and affordable APU for a HTPC or a mainstream Windows 8.1 PC. Gamers with a high-end dedicated graphics cards will however require a little more in terms of raw processor performance. But if enough games get supported, Mantle might be the magic that AMD needs to happen and solve that need. The A10-7850K really is a terrific product offering heaps of features, fun and a very decent PC experience.

 

Point 1: Note the segments they're aiming for: HTPCs and mainstream use (internet, office, flash gaming). This is a lower performance market than gaming and heavy processing.

 

Point 2: They're not talking about the 7850K being a gaming powerhouse. They're talking about it being suitable for games. It still can't hope to match Intel chips.

[Transcendent]

Not a problem, like Guru3D site me too check this:

 

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/amd_a10_7850k_apu_review,10.html

 

and this:

 

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/amd_a10_7850k_apu_review,13.html

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/amd_a10_7850k_apu_review,16.html

AMD 7850k is superior in gaming to I7 because the margin is so low, you dont even notice it and AMD is a lot cheaper.

 

Note if you can buy an i7 top of the line and a monster GPU go for that, that still the best gaming rig, but AMD has the casual/hardcore mid rig option for everyone that cant afford a i7, if its laptop OP go i7.

 

You may have skipped over the majority of the post you quoted. Perhaps go back and read it again before refuting the information given.

 

I clearly stated that;

 

only relates to the GPU side of things, afaik

 

There is a huge difference between an IGP integrated onto a CPU and a dedicated GPU. Not relying on Guru3D for an in-depth on the architecture or benchmarks, Anandtech has that one down much better.

 

This pretty much sums it up and gives me all the information I needed on the 7850k;

 

In the broader sense however, Kaveri doesn't really change the CPU story for AMD. Steamroller comes with a good increase in IPC, but without a corresponding increase in frequency AMD fails to move the single threaded CPU performance needle. To make matters worse, Intel's dual-core Haswell parts are priced very aggressively and actually match Kaveri's CPU clocks. With a substantial advantage in IPC and shipping at similar frequencies, a dual-core Core i3 Haswell will deliver much better CPU performance than even the fastest Kaveri at a lower price.

 

The reality is quite clear by now: AMD isn't going to solve its CPU performance issues with anything from the Bulldozer family. What we need is a replacement architecture, one that I suspect we'll get after Excavator concludes the line in 2015.

 

source: http://www.anandtech.com/show/7677/amd-kaveri-review-a8-7600-a10-7850k/16

 

Don't take my post out of context, try reading the information given before jumping the gun. I'm not getting into the whole AMD vs Intel vs Nvidia thing (I have zero brand loyalty ) On paper an APU using HSA / GCN is all very good and well, it still isn't quite there yet on catching up with a solid CPU and a solid GPU (even mobile variants)