AMD Richland review
Gaming performance sees Richland gain ground on its Intel rivals. The A10-6800K’s Radeon HD 8670D graphics core scored 90fps in our Low-quality, 1366 x 768 Crysis benchmark and 43fps in the Medium-quality, 1,600 x 900 test. Both results are five frames faster than the HD Graphics 4600 core included in the Core i7-4770K.
It’s also much further ahead of older chips. The Intel HD Graphics 4000 GPU in the Core i7-3770K scored 53fps in our Low-quality Crysis test, and last year’s top-end Trinity chip, the A10-5800K, ran through the same benchmark at 78fps.
The A10-6800K ably demonstrates another of Richland’s strengths – power efficiency. In our power tests, the A10-6800K idled at 37W and peaked at 108W – that’s one Watt less than the Core i7-4770K at idle, while the peak figure is significantly less than the Intel chip’s draw of 185W.
AMD’s chip retains the lead in the value for money stakes, too. The A10-6800K and A10-6700 both cost £115 inc VAT – a little more than the Core i3-2130, albeit with much improved gaming performance and CPU horsepower. Every other Richland APU is less than £100, with the A4-4000 coming in at only £33. And, unlike Haswell, there’s no need to buy a new motherboard if you’re upgrading from a system bought or built last year – Richland retains the FM2 socket and is compatible with the A55, A75 and A85 chipsets that were introduced last year.
AMD has all but surrendered the processing high ground to Intel, but Richland builds on last year’s Trinity chips to deliver a well-balanced and affordable option for less ambitious machines. The A10-6800K exemplifies Richland’s strengths: it’s cheaper, more power-frugal and better in games than top-end Haswell chips, yet it’s still powerful enough for the vast majority of users. For mid-range and low-end systems, it’s almost a perfect fit.
|Cores (number of)||4|