Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by brumgrunt, 3 Oct 2012.
Antony, could you clarify is this an actual review, or is it part of AMDs staged review?
I really, hope its the former, because BT hadn't published anything up until now, I assumed it was because they were upholding journalistic intergrity.
Everyone read this.
Nice review . Too bad you didn't add some openCL bench. It's now use in common software, like winzip, and can make a huge difference towards intel offering.
Also, it could be nice to add some of the free Steam games in your reviews : Team Fortress 2, Alien Swarm, etc. They are played a lot and for many gamers I know, they are the only games they play.
But again, nice review
From your linked article: "Although 'experiential testing' is allowed, sites may not publish the results of non-gaming CPU benchmarks."
From the review:
I think that should answer your question.
That's pretty low of them, not something the underdog should be doing at all. This has tainted the AMD brand for me.
Clearly AMD was concerned about maximising the gaming portion of the benchmarks, which we all knew were going to be better than HD 4000 and better than Llano. They'd have had to screw up in spectacular fashion if it wasn't. As far as non-gaming goes, Trinity is a significant improvement but it's not the Core i5 or even a Core i3 killer that had been reported, although it certainly strengthens the argument Llano had started.
TBH we didn't have time to meet the first stage of the NDA anyway, so thought we'd drop everything in one go in a single review. Even so, AMD's reasons for doing this I do find slightly odd, bordering on offensive both as a tech journalist and as a reader of articles like this.
' an effort to allow consumers to fully comprehend your analysis without prejudging based on graphs which do not necessarily represent the experiential difference'
Reading the first page of that review felt a bit like reading the publicity poster in an AMD CPU box..
Yeah, I did see the handbrake tests etc, but just wanted clarification, as when I checked I couldn't find full reviews (or Review Part 2s) out there, so thought the NDA might not have lifted.
Agreed. They tried to steer it so people would focus on the results from the GPU side of the chip, and ignore the CPU side. I abhor these kind of tactics, because for any review, of anything, you have to take the product as a whole. Not only that but its very sly indeed, and an insult to your audience/market, after all, readers of tech sites tend to be amongst the more intelligent portion of society.
What's more it puts sites in a difficult position; do they put nothing out, and have other sites suck up all the traffic, or do they compromise their integrity and put out a story knowing that it only tells half a story.
Really poor show from AMD.
As an aside, great review Antony.
Thanks Parge, much appreciated!
Bah - wanted to compare the A10-5800K's performance to my ageing Core 2 Duo E8400, but the two reviews use different benchmarks. I guess that should tell me all I need to know, but it'd still be nice to have some hard figures. Any chance of running PCMark Vantage x64 on the A10 just quickly?
What you are looking for
Huzzah - perfect! Well, that's pretty convincing. Guess I'm saving up for an A10-5800K, then - plus a wodge of 2,133MHz memory, a new motherboard, might as well get a smaller case while I'm at it, perhaps an SSD...
Hmm. On the plus side, by the time I've saved up for all that, the A10-5800K will probably be cheaper...
The Asrock FM2A75M-ITX accpets 2600+ MHz memory and with this layout has a great compatibility with CPU coolers.
Sad thing is there old 6 core is still faster some 2 and half years after its release, AMD have really not moved foward since then. Yes I know it was £200 on release but the fact is 2 and half years later you can pick it up second hand for £60-£80.
Image editing I'd say is pretty critical for most low end pcs as that will be one of the top 5 uses of there pc ahead of games. If you don't edit photos looks like a great little chip.
Are we likely to see anything to compete with intel in the £120-£220 brackets I wonder.
Nice review, if I was building a nice little budget gamer from scratch I would certainly consider the Trinity platform, the price point is very good.
With regards to "AMD shaping reviews" from reading the linked article it sounds as though they were saying that journalists could release some information early if they wanted to in their previews and a revised NDA.
They were never limiting what could be put in the final review once the NDA had expired, and if journalists were listing previews as genuine reviews then the problem lies with them.
The vast majority of people would know that a preview is only a glimpse at the product and would await a final review, and a simple line saying something like "under the terms of the NDA we are unable to publish CPU benchmarks, see full review for full details"
Isn't just like games previews? They show you what they consider to be the best parts for the game to drum up positive interest, then a full review of the final game tells you if it's as good through all parts of the game.
It's a shame AMD have abandoned anything approaching the performance market, and are aiming for the low-end no-discrete-GPU approach as their sole market. These new APUs are excellent for those looking for a basic PC or HTPC, with a bit of light gaming, but a no-go for many. They can't even outrun an i3 on compute tasks, which is a bit shameful.
Shennanigans over NDAs and trying to shape (p)reviews to concentrate on the GPU performance is also a bit dodgy in my eyes. Why try and build hype over one aspect of performance in advance, whilst trying to hide another unless you're sitting on a lame duck in the latter?
Regardless, should be a decent choice for budget systems as Moore's Law (although can that really apply to AMD's backward progression in compute terms?) means any CPU these days can handle basic computing tasks.
Does highlight how much help AMD needs, however. Trinity is the same as Llano; Very good for a GPU-less Media box or similar, but it's still not a viable alternative to most Intel chips.
I'm not even going near Piledriver till i've seen good reviews of it this time. I feel bad enough for having jumped onto the Bulldozer Freight Train (To hell.)
Also; Last Page, second paragraph: "Snapping at it's heals" - slight error there. ;3
What is the hybrid gpu performance like. I want to see a bench mark with the 5800K + 7870 vs i3 2100 + 7870. As it might make the 5800K very relevant if it is noticeably faster.
hybrid gpu does not work with HD7000 series. The HD7660 D is based on HD6000 core, not on Graphic Core Next. The highest GPU you can use for dual graphics with the A10-5800K and A10-5700 is an HD6670.
Separate names with a comma.