AMD Platform: 785G (Gigabyte MA785GMT-UD2H)
The AMD 785G chipset is AMD’s latest mainstream desktop core logic with integrated graphics. Don Woligroski reviewed it almost half a year ago, and it’s been a popular choice for HTPC setups and multimedia PCs, largely because mainstream AMD processors and their compatible motherboards are so much cheaper than Intel-based equivalents. One AMD advantage is that its advanced graphics core supports DirectX 10.1, which Intel still doesn’t.
We used Gigabyte’s MA785GMT-UD2H motherboard, based on the 785G and SB710 chipset. The southbridge offers five internal SATA/300 ports with basic RAID support (no RAID 5) and one eSATA port for external storage. There’s still one UltraATA/133 channel, which can be handy for keeping optical or IDE-based hard drives afloat. Gigabyte adds HD Audio support, a FireWire 1394a controller with one installed port, gigabit networking, and the full line of differentiating features, including DualBIOS and UltraDurable 3 technology. This entails using extra copper to reduce resistance and increase signal quality. All AMD processors with up to a 140W TDP are supported through five-phase voltage regulation.
Latest CPU News
- 10/02 – CPU Performance Boosted 20% When CPU, GPU Collaborate
- 10/02 – Leaked Slide Shows Intel Haswell Set for March-June 2013
- 09/02 – $100,000 If You Can Prove Quantum Computers Impossible
- 09/02 – AMD Adds FM1 CPUs Athlon II X4 638 and Athlon II X4 641
- 08/02 – Raspberry Pi Scheduled to Launch This Month
at the moment there is only one thing amd can do... cut prices a lot lol, but i think they already where expecting this... i think the next generation of CPU's is still gona be "dominated" by intel's offerings. but the one after that amd should start giving intel a run for its money, dont forget amd has been filling a financial hole for some time, but due to recent events, and because of very strong releases in the graphics department they have been that very steadly... give amd a little time...
One can only hope that Bulldozer turns out to be a MAJOR win for AMD...
I thought this article really missed the point comparing Intel's new $200 CPU against AMD's $95 part (regardless of core count). I read the bit about the Athlon 240e having the lowest power consumption vs the 3/4 core variants, which is only partially true according to the data in Anandtech's review of the Athlon 435.
At idle the 605e only looses 2.4 watts to the 240e, but at load the 605e runs a full 10.5 watts leaner than the 240e. The lower clock speed will likely be the reason, which would also result in lower single threaded performance, but at the same time the doubling of cores would improve well threaded apps such as video encoding.
When considering that the 605e comes in about $20 cheaper than the i5-661 (not including the board and more expensive DDR3), I think it borders on dishonest to not include the 605e in the comparison.
If you add the 605e into the picture then things are much less clear cut. Still a big win for Intel, but possibly not in all situations.
To maintain the journalistic integrity that have kept me reading Tom's for the last 13 years, you should always be looking to compare equally priced solutions. Whereas in my opinion, this article seemed to be tipped in Intel's favor.
I'd also question the use of a 785G when touting Intel's low power numbers, because in your own review you observed the Nvidia 8200 runs 10 watts leaner. With the 8200 equaling and beating the G45 in your 785G review in game performance I can't see why you didn't include it, other than to tip the scales in Intel's favor for MCE use.
Assuming that Intel abides by its latest agreements and terminates its predatory and monopolistic efforts aimed at destroying AMD's access to markets, AMD should have a chance at making a comeback. Their choice to go with a combined cpu/graphics package that pretty much dominates intel's onboard graphics offerings at substantially lower price points, appears to have been a good one. Until Intel comes up with a decent igp, opportunities for AMD will remain open-assuming the relevant watchdog governmental authorities keep a tight leash on Intel's unlawful predatory behaviors. One could argue that Intel's history in this regard reflects a deep seated fear of AMD's potential.
Not fair. You can't compare Amd's processors with doble-priced intel's ones.
Also, don't forget you are comparing apps that were compiled to be of generic use. In the open source world things are not that way since you can compile a given app to be optimized specifically for your cpu model. I get to handle quite some computers in my work, and realized that, if optimized, i usually find amd processors to be faster than intel ones.
I also agree that it is NOT FAIR to compare double priced intel processors with amd just because they are of different brands. Its like comparing the best car fiat has to offer, with the best car porsche has to offer... yeah... right...