jarlmaster
In Runtime
- Messages
- 473
- Location
- USA
Haha don't be sorry Biker! It's a forum and we all help each other learn so no hard feelings. I don't have a problem debating or asserting things I think I know to be true. Trust me lol.
apu?
- Thread starter zeezeiler99
- Start date
Glad to hear it.
This is one of the things that makes debates and discussion way better on forums than on YouTube. Understanding, learning and being polite about it. I mean, have you tried planting some sense into people on YouTube? They will make you regret even trying.
This is one of the things that makes debates and discussion way better on forums than on YouTube. Understanding, learning and being polite about it. I mean, have you tried planting some sense into people on YouTube? They will make you regret even trying.
~Darkseeker~
Fully Optimized
- Messages
- 2,494
- Location
- Welwyn Garden City, United Kingdom
I ran a 7870k black edition (CPU OC at 4.4GHz at about 1.45V and GPU at about 950MHz, Seemed to be running really hot but I think we had a faulty cooler (CM Seidon 120) ) in dual graphics mode with an R7 260X (2GB Gigabyte edition, GPU at 1200MHz). We were using corsair XMS3 (rated 1333, but running at 1600MHz with a little tinkering).
Machine was prime and valley stable for 6 hours - overall running dual graphics mode over just using the R7 260X on it's own made little to no difference for synthetic benchmark scores.
I built this machine with a friend for another friend who isnt too PC savvy. My friend built it, and I overclocked it and did all the stability testing.
This is more or less what we found:-
7870k using onboard graphics only - Unable to run valley benchmark at higher than low settings without considerable stuttering, CPU got insanely hot (touching 85C). only getting 20-30FPS in BF4 at 1080p, and only 40-50FPS at most in rome total war 2, spiking to 55 but dropping as low at 10.
7870k dual graphics mode with GB R7 260X - Able to push 40FPS in valley on high settings with MSAA turned off, CPU temperatures much more sensible (topping out around 75C). good playable framerates in TW2 and BF4 (around 45-55, dropping to 30 on occasion).
7870k with onboard GPU disabled - very similar to the above (45-55 FPS in game, valley 40 FPS on high with no MSAA) but CPU temperatures much lower (topping out 65C) .
all in all, we should have bought an FX chip and just used the R7 standalone. You can pick up the FX-8350 for about the same price as the A10-7870k, and IMO it's much better as a CPU, throw in as good a GPU as you can afford and away you go.
TL;DR even the most expensive A10 APU failed to impress me at 1080p, better off with a dedicated CPU and a dedicated GPU. OP if you can give us a budget I'm sure we can throw something together for whatever price range you might fit in
Machine was prime and valley stable for 6 hours - overall running dual graphics mode over just using the R7 260X on it's own made little to no difference for synthetic benchmark scores.
I built this machine with a friend for another friend who isnt too PC savvy. My friend built it, and I overclocked it and did all the stability testing.
This is more or less what we found:-
7870k using onboard graphics only - Unable to run valley benchmark at higher than low settings without considerable stuttering, CPU got insanely hot (touching 85C). only getting 20-30FPS in BF4 at 1080p, and only 40-50FPS at most in rome total war 2, spiking to 55 but dropping as low at 10.
7870k dual graphics mode with GB R7 260X - Able to push 40FPS in valley on high settings with MSAA turned off, CPU temperatures much more sensible (topping out around 75C). good playable framerates in TW2 and BF4 (around 45-55, dropping to 30 on occasion).
7870k with onboard GPU disabled - very similar to the above (45-55 FPS in game, valley 40 FPS on high with no MSAA) but CPU temperatures much lower (topping out 65C) .
all in all, we should have bought an FX chip and just used the R7 standalone. You can pick up the FX-8350 for about the same price as the A10-7870k, and IMO it's much better as a CPU, throw in as good a GPU as you can afford and away you go.
TL;DR even the most expensive A10 APU failed to impress me at 1080p, better off with a dedicated CPU and a dedicated GPU. OP if you can give us a budget I'm sure we can throw something together for whatever price range you might fit in
Last edited:
Rich-M
In Runtime
- Messages
- 156
- Location
- Pennsylvania USA
Where I like the Apu is in laptops whereas the AMD laptops used to be so doggy their lead in the APU positions them better in a laptop which has always suffered from normal onboard video. Some of the APU laptops can even make it for gaming better than an ordinary cpu and onboard video. I don't think they stand up to Intel anymore in desktops but they sure have in laptops for a while and can save you a boat load of money in comparison.
cb600fshornet
Fully Optimized
- Messages
- 2,190
- Location
- England, Birmingham
I would personally get the Athlon x4 860K instead and combine it with a dedicated graphics card if possible.
~Darkseeker~
Fully Optimized
- Messages
- 2,494
- Location
- Welwyn Garden City, United Kingdom
I don't think AMD are even trying to keep up with Intel in the desktop market anymore tbh. Since AMD's last big desktop CPU release, everything has been essentially a refresh. Every AMD FX series CPU currently on the market is more or less the same as what was available in 2012/13... The APU tech has remained more or less the same as well. compare the old FM2 athlons to the A10-7870k (released this year) and you'll find little difference besides the names and codenames
Since then, Intel have had numerous 'tick' cycles and several 'tock' cycles (Sandy Bridge-E, Ivy Bridge, Ivy Bridge-E, Haswell, Haswell-E, Broadwell and now Skylake)
If you can afford Intel, it's nearly always better. Right now, a 4690k i5 or a 6600k i5 is way, way ahead of any AMD offering. That's before we even take a glance as the i7-5820k, 4790k or 6700k...
Similar threads
