Raster Graphics Processing

Again, the new AMD processor performs slightly better than FX-4170, and much worse than any today's Intel CPU. However, its predecessor is completely defeated.

Vector Graphics Processing

This group of tests doesn't favor module architecture. Nevertheless, A10-5800K outperforms A8-3870K.

Video Encoding

It would seem that fewer vector units would play a role here but it somehow doesn't. Though the new AMD processor doesn't catch up with Core i3-3240 or FX-4170, it still outperforms A8-3870K.

Office Suites

The results of this single-threaded group of tests justify our expectations: A10-5800K defeats A8-3870K, yields a little to FX-4170 and a lot to the Intel processors.

Java

Here, physical cores deliver much more than any HT. However, like in the previous case, A8-3870K outperforms the successor just a little. A10-5800K does almost as good as the 2nd-generation Core i3, which is certainly not a failure.

Games

Any AMD APU is aimed at gaming. Otherwise, there would've been no need in powerful integrated graphics. As you can see, all the competitors except for Core i3-3240 perform on a par. Though A10-5800K is last but one, it still fulfils his role: outperforms the previous-generation A8-3870K.

Multitasking Environment

This experimental test proved to be even more interesting after it had revealed the significant progress of Hyper-Threading in one of our recent reviews.

No surprises here. A8-3870K wins, being the only solution with four physical cores. Core i5-680 is the outsider because of the slow cache. A10-5800K is the forth, yielding to FX-4170 due to the absence of L3 cache. However, it wedges between the Core i3 CPUs, although closer to the Ivy Bridge one.

Overall Score and Final Thoughts

Like you would imagine, in some cases, the move from cores to modules results in performance decrease, though the gap is rather small due to the increased clock rate and other improvements. In some cases, these last two factors improve performance over the previous generation, so this whole matter kind of balances out. Moreover, there is not a single test group where A8-3870K would significantly outperform its successor. Overall, the average performance boost that the Trinity APU is about 10% (sometimes, 20%). This happens because even though multi-threading tests favor physical cores, many of those resources idle with very few threads involved. For example, a single-thread task only loads A8-3870K cache and cores by 25%. If A10-5800K performs the same task, the load is 50% (cache) and 40% (core).

As for the Intel processors, the new A10-5800K catches up with Core i3-2100. However, we should remember: while A10-5800K is the top FM2 processor as yet, Core i3-2100 is but the lowest-end 2nd Gen Core i3. Moreover, today, you can already buy Core i3-2120 or i3-3220 for the same money.

In comparison to FX-4170, the new A10-5800K looks rather good: it consumes less power (even despite integrated graphics) and offers comparable performance despite having lower clock rates and no L3 cache. However, this is achieved through the architecture and won't work against the FX-43xx series.

Drawing a bottom line, the main (and almost only) reason to buy a Socket FM2 APU is its integrated graphics. Which will also be the topic of our next review, so stay tuned.

Write a comment below. No registration needed!