Post reply

Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.
Message icon:


shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview

Topic Summary

Posted by: John
« on: November 28, 2015, 07:46:37 »

This test is poorly executed. The A series APU's can use up to 4085mb of onboard  ram for the IGP and testing a laptop with only 4GB is severely limiting the capabilities of the processors. I have a laptop upgraded to an A10 4600m and 2x8GB 1600 RAM. The difference between when it was running with 4GB and now that it is running with 8 is astronomical.
Posted by: Joe or Joe
« on: April 04, 2014, 23:03:12 »

Simply put, is this processor good for gaming?
Posted by: Saso
« on: March 07, 2013, 20:01:28 »

As a NON-gamer but PHOTO-editer I am looking for a processor suitable for Photoshop editing. Will the AMD A10 be suitable? Not sure if this is the place to ask, but will use an external I need to get a laptop with 1080p or will one with less not make a diffence in display on the External monitor. Thanks

Presently using a laptop with I5 m580 , 8  gb ram
Posted by: Rick
« on: November 14, 2012, 20:33:29 »

 WoW, GW/GW2, Skyrim all play great on my K75DE,
The HD7670m blows the 630m out of the water, and it cost about $350 less than any comparable Intel/630m notebooks. !
Posted by: Klaus Hinum
« on: May 23, 2012, 18:21:27 »

As long as we got data from our reviews we did compare it against Sandy Bridge Core i3 to i5 CPUs with and without dedicated GPUs. According to AMD this is the counterpart of the A10-4600M (Core i5 according to the slides). The first prices also indicate this. We added the OpenCL and DirectCompute benchmarks to our test bench, therefore we did not have results from a lot of laptops. As written in the verdict, the A10 looks like to be a very good solution against entry level Sandy Bridge and even Ivy Bridge i3 and i5 CPUs as long as they dont have a discrete GPU.
Posted by: ToasterGhost
« on: May 21, 2012, 22:20:43 »

I kind of agree with Franzius to the extent of price point comparison, I would like to say I appreciate your time and effort as I know that it's too early to speak prices without retail models. One thing I would suggest is maybe relevant updated reviews as support improves and time allows for a more complete picture.  This would really help consumers in the market to purchase.
Posted by: Franzius
« on: May 21, 2012, 00:26:11 »

Please show these comments in their chronological order. What is the advantage to having them numbered and in reverse order? How nutty is that?

On to the review:
What do you spend so much time comparing the Trinity to Intel CPUs costing up to 3 times the price? When you want to buy a value  car like an Escort or a Jetta, do you really need to be giving performance differentials vs a Lamborghini or a Corvette? Really?

A fairer and more usable review will limit the comparison to similar class CPUs or priced notebooks. Basically, you have produced a larger than needed review with a lot of unnecessary and confusing comparisons that are not informative in any useful way. Try dropping all references to out-of-class CPUs and your review will be a lot more readable and useful.

However, if you true objective was to produce confusion in favor or Intel while pretending  to compliment AMD on a much needed product (by dropping here and there a few back ended compliments), congratulations, missions accomplished. Not!
Posted by: dbdkmezz
« on: May 20, 2012, 22:49:12 »

Wonderful preview, but I'd like to second Omar's request for more Arma II benchmarks. I've fallen so much in love with DayZ that running that is one of the most important things for my next laptop!
Posted by: Omar
« on: May 20, 2012, 09:34:55 »

I don't understand, why would you guys only benchmark Arma 2 at ultra settings?
I really want to know if this APU can handle arma 2 at other settings like high/medium/low, specially now that the famous DayZ Mod is out for Arma 2.
Posted by: rish
« on: May 20, 2012, 07:06:10 »

i request you to please tell us how is the subjective performance of the crossfire in asus k75 d a8  4500 m and 7670m.
Since amd has improved crossfire performance and also added support for direct x 9 games. So please tell us the status of micro stutter on this combo a8 and 7670m.
Posted by: Klaus Hinum
« on: May 19, 2012, 16:19:48 »

SATA-2 and SATA-3 error corrected, thanks for the tip (although not quite polite).
Posted by: Svayneturke
« on: May 19, 2012, 13:45:29 »

Sata 3.0 gb means sata 2, sata 3 means sata 6 gb fix it...
Posted by: junjun
« on: May 18, 2012, 17:42:04 »

synthetic run of the mill benchmarks are useless.  :o
Posted by: Klaus Hinum
« on: May 17, 2012, 20:43:48 »

We did conduct the X264 benchmark and it also went into the average scores, to see all detail benchmarks for the A10-4600M go to
There you can see that in X264 the A10 was slightly slower than a i5-2410M (we have not yet benchmarked a standard voltage i3 with X264).
Posted by: PS
« on: May 17, 2012, 09:33:34 »

Piledriver/Bulldozer sucks at Cinebench, which is a bit of an obsolete benchmark tbh. I suggest trying something more intensive like X264 Benchmark, I am sure A10-4600M will beat those Core i3 in those.

» Impressum     Sprachen: Deutsch | English | Español | Français | Italiano | Nederlands | Polski | Português | Русский | Türkçe | Svenska
Diese Webseite nutzt Cookies. OK