AMD A10-6700 And A10-6800K Review: Richland Hits The Desktop

Richland, code name for AMD's highest-end APUs, finds its way into our lab in the form of A10-6700 and A10-6800K. Based on the Piledriver architecture and VLIW4 graphics, these chips are slight improvements to Trinity. Can they outshine Core i3, though?

AMD's Kabini: Jaguar And GCN Come Together In A 15 W APU showed us what the company's Jaguar and GCN architectures could accomplish between 4 and 25 W TDPs. But, on the desktop, AMD isn't quite ready to make the leap to a next-gen design. It just introduced its desktop-oriented Richland APUs, which aren't really new at all. Rather, you can think of them as power-optimized Trinity parts, sporting the same Piledriver-based x86 cores and VLIW4 graphics configuration. Moreover, Richland-based APUs have been available to mobile device makers for months. The only real revelation is that we're getting this update in the desktop and low-voltage mobile spaces now.

Model
Radeon
Package
TDP
CPU Cores
Base/Max CPU Clock
L2 Cache
Radeon Cores
Base GPU Clock
A-Series Low-Voltage and Ultra Low-Voltage APUs
A10-5745MHD 8610G
FP2
25 W
4
2.1/2.9 GHz
4 MB
384
533 MHz
A8-5545MHD 8510G
FP219 W
4
1.7/2.7 GHz
4 MB
384
450 MHz
A6-5345MHD 8410G
FP217 W
2
2.2/2.8 GHz
1 MB
192
450 MHz
A4-5145M
HD 8310G
FP217 W
2
2.0/2.6 GHz
1 MB
128
424 MHz

In the table above, we see the new mobile-oriented options spanning 17 to 25 W TDPs. Richland isn’t much different from Trinity, but it's more efficient thanks to specific Turbo Core optimizations that include a greater number of P-states to facilitate more granular power and performance levels.

Model
Radeon
TDP
CPU Cores
Base/Max CPU ClockTotal Cache
Radeon Cores
GPU Clock
Unlock
Price
A10-6800K
HD 8670D
100 W
4
4.1/4.4 GHz
4 MB
384
844 MHz
Yes
$149
A10-6700
HD 8670D
65 W
4
3.7/4.3 GHz
4 MB
384
844 MHzNo
$149
A8-6600K
HD 8570D
100 W
4
3.9/4.2 GHz
4 MB
256
844 MHzYes$119
A8-6500
HD 8570D
65 W
4
3.5/4.1 GHz
4 MB
256
800 MHz
No
$119
A6-6400K
HD 8470D
65 W
2
3.9/4.1 GHz
1 MB
192
800 MHz
Yes$77

And then we have the desktop-specific Richland parts. The very fastest model enjoys a 300 MHz base clock rate bump compared to the A10-5800K, along with official support for 2133 MT/s DDR3 memory (the other SKUs top out at 1866 MT/s memory). Also, its GPU is 44 MHz faster than the prior-gen version. And yet it fits within the same 100 W TDP.

On the other hand, the A10-6700 looks a lot like the -5800K, aside from a 100 MHz-lower base clock, a 100 MHz-higher Turbo Core ceiling, and a slightly quicker GPU. That one drops to a 65 W thermal limit.

Like the Trinity-based APUs before them, these Richland designs plug into a Socket FM2 interface. A BIOS update should be all that you need for compatibility with existing A55, A75, and A85 platforms.

And what about those shiny new Radeon model numbers? That's marketing being bad. We were already dealing with Radeon HD 7000-series naming on APUs, which was confusing because AMD's desktop 7000-series GPUs are commonly associated with the GCN architecture. Now we have 8000-series nomenclature. And yet, we're still working with the VLIW4 configuration that was around back when AMD was shipping Radeon HD 6900-series cards. Architecturally, the only difference between Richland's Radeon HD 8000 graphics and Trinity's Radeon HD 7000 graphics is the name.

Again, the top-end A10-6800K gets 2133 MT/s memory support, which is particularly meaningful for its on-die graphics engine given a lack of shared L3 cache. The theoretical 34 GB/s of DDR3 bandwidth should go a long way to improve frame rates in the games we'll be testing. With that said, let's move on to why we aren't able to test Richland's Dual Graphics feature today...

Create a new thread in the UK Article comments forum about this subject
This thread is closed for comments
6 comments
Comment from the forums
    Your comment
  • Robi_g
    Don't see why you'd buy an i3 now. Nice one AMD for catching up a bit
    0
  • abundantcores
    Does CF not work at all then on Richland? everytime the 6670 was added to the APU the performance was the same, what happened?
    0
  • tadej petric
    Quote:
    Don't see why you'd buy an i3 now. Nice one AMD for catching up a bit

    Maybe beacuse i3 is still better with GPU (if both have 7750 for example). Better to go with i3 and 7770 than i5 and hd 4000 thats why.
    So you should say Don't see why you'd buy an i3 without dedicated GPU now.
    i3 is still the boss in low end CPUs.
    0
  • MajinCry
    Anonymous said:
    Quote:
    Don't see why you'd buy an i3 now. Nice one AMD for catching up a bit

    Maybe beacuse i3 is still better with GPU (if both have 7750 for example). Better to go with i3 and 7770 than i5 and hd 4000 thats why.
    So you should say Don't see why you'd buy an i3 without dedicated GPU now.
    i3 is still the boss in low end CPUs.


    The i3? Pshaw. The 965 BE has been the king of the low-end for a good while now.
    0
  • mateau
    AMD's highest End CPU is the FX-9590 at 5 ghz. Another innovative first for AMD and a failure for the men in Blue.

    Gotta love AMD's Marketing Manager Marc Diana's pointed observation: ”You don’t buy a Ferrari because of the MPG."
    -1
  • mateau
    AMD's highest End CPU is the FX-9590 at 5 ghz. Another innovative first for AMD and a failure for the men in Blue.

    Gotta love AMD's Marketing Manager Marc Diana's pointed observation: ”You don’t buy a Ferrari because of the MPG."
    -1