AMD have launched Mobile Kaveri with FX-7600P leading the pack

Reviews and introduction can be found here:
AMD's Kaveri Mobile APU promises budget gaming for your notebook - CNET
AnandTech Portal | AMD Launches Mobile Kaveri APUs
AMD FX-7600P Review - AMD Mobile Kaveri APU
Review: AMD FX-7600P (28nm Kaveri) - CPU - HEXUS.net
AMD Kaveri Mobile APU, FX-7600P Preview - HotHardware
AMD tops processor evolution with new mobile Kaveri chippery • The Register

 

Looking at the 3DMark11 scores in the HotHardware reviews, and correlating them with NotebookCheck's stats...

AMD says that the i7-4500U gets 932 in the performance test, according to their slide on page 2. It has the HD Graphics 4400, which Notebookcheck says averages 829. So AMD is actually overstating Intel's performance by 12%. Maybe they're just giving Intel the benefit of the latest drivers, but that's surprising...

Comparing to Intel's CPUs, as well as Trinity, in 3DMark 11 (haven't found Richland stats, assuming slightly better than Trinity):

A6-5200/Radeon 8400 (Kabini, 2013): 688
i7-4600U/HD 4400: 829
A10-4655M/HD 7620G (Trinity, 2012): 948
i7-4650U/HD 5000: 1077
i7-4600M/HD 4600: 1118
i7-4558U/Iris Pro 5100: 1342
FX-7500 (Kaveri 19W, 2014): 1473, AMD slide
FX-7600P (Kaveri, 2014): 2142 HotHardware
i7-4750HQ/Iris Pro 5200: 2291 (CPU used in System76 Galago Ultra Pro, $999)

So either Kaveri is 30% better than the HD 4600, or it's within spitting distance of the Iris Pro 5200. Obviously that's a big difference. TechReport's game stats show the FX-7600P at nearly double the FPS of the HD 4600 in BioShock Infinite, Dirt Showdown, and Tomb Raider, however. Given that, it's possible that AMD screwed up their own slide, HotHardware's benchmark is accurate, and Kaveri really is pretty close to Iris Pro.

Either way, I'm definitely not buying anything with the HD 4400 at this point, and even the HD 4600 is looking weak. If Kaveri really is pretty close to Iris Pro, it's a slam-dunk. If not, it will likely still have a good price advantage that may make it worth it. AMD suggested an FX-7600P with a 256 GB SSD and 8 GB RAM for $700 is possible, which would be worth considering vs. the Galago Ultra Pro with a 500 GB, 5400 RPM HDD, 4 GB RAM, and no Windows for $999, even if their own pessimistic benchmarks prove more accurate. Although let's hope that $700 option doesn't include a rubbish screen. I can live with Twisted Nemantic, but please more than 1366x768 resolution!

 

Even if the screen is 1366x768 and includes the PCIe SSD, I would buy it for $700.


See:
AnandTech | Samsung SSD XP941 Review: The PCIe Era Is Here



But I don't see how they can build a complete system for that price when the SSD itself is north of $300...

 

Why are we comparing the i7-4500u, which is a ULV 15w part, to the FX-7600P, which is a standard voltage 35w part, and being surprised when the FX-7600P is faster? I mean if it's AMD making the comparison for marketing reasons then fine, but it's still an odd comparison to make when you normally wouldn't compare ultrabook ULVs to standard voltage 15" laptops.

 

What?

Anyway, nice this FX-7600P, but not interested to buy any 15" or 17" laptop.

 

AMD knows they can't compete at the high end and don't even try. So they target the area in which they think they can compete. I agree that a much more fair test would be AMD standard-voltage vs. Intel standard-voltage, but the current benchmarks are likely all from systems at AMD's event, and we're going to have to wait a while to get accurate comparisons from more similar Intel-based systems.

 

What what?


My point is that the storage subsystem is worth buying that $700 system for. Not that I would use such a platform myself; I would simply reuse the PCIe SSD in a better machine.

 

Not sure who this was directed to, but the CPUs I listed vary significantly in wattage. The i7-4600M, in particular, is a 37W part - slightly above the FX-7600P, and the FX-7600P is still significantly better than it in graphics. Depending on which benchmarks are more accurate, its GPU may even be competitive with what's in Intel's 47W mobile parts.

But as for myself, looking at laptops, I don't care if the CPU is 15W or 35W or 45W, as long as the cooling is adequate. I just care about performance, price, and build quality. It happens that there are a lot of Intel CPU laptops that only offer low-voltage CPUs - IIRC the Surface Pro 2 is one of these. If that's all a model offers, I'll compare it against whatever CPU the competing models offer.

Edit: It's also worth noting that the i7-4500U is a nearly-$400 processor. We don't know the exact pricing for the FX-7600P, but it likely does not exceed $200 by much, and may well be below that. Price-wise and power-wise, the i5-4200M is probably the closest comparison, but if the price is below $200, you'd have to go considerably lower on Intel's chart to find a CPU to compare to.

 

The OEMs don't see an issue in using that ULV CPU with a discrete GPU that consumes more than the FX-7600P as a whole. So I think it is a fair comparison.
The great issue that AMD will face with these APUs is that OEMs will STILL only use them in crapbooks: those 15,6'' plastic aberrations with 1366x768 TN displays, slow mechanical hard-drives and only one RAM stick. Exactly everything that is necessary to make the Kaveri APUs look bad.

 

That 2142 points awesome from integrated graphics. I wonder do they used with DDR3 2133MHz memory?

 

A number of reviewers claimed that the reference Kaveri notebook used DDR3 1866, so that's even more impressive.

 

You are confusing older 3DMark11 benchmark (high scores) with newer 3DMark FireStrike (lower scores which AMD provided). Still over 2100 for 3DMark11 is nothing but impressive for integrated graphics using only DDR3 memory, and unlike Iris Pro the score is not being bloated by a large on-die memory cache.

 

Ok, than I looking forward to get a 13-14" quality thin laptop with this APU and with two changeable memory slot. It will be interesting to compare with my Samsung series 5 Ultra, both have about the same CPU and GPU power in 35W TDP.

 

Actually, looking at it closer, the slide I was looking at said FX-7 500, not FX-7600P. So if that is to be believed (and given the FX-7600P's scores in multiple reviews, it may well be accurate), even the ULV 7500 outperforms the HD 4600 by a healthy margin, and Iris Pro 5100 by a good 10% in graphics.

So the FX-7600P is impressive. Almost up to Iris Pro 5200 performance, and if it's available for $700, versus Iris Pro's $1000, that's a fantastic deal.

 

I think there was a Reddit thread that was keeping track of all of the upcoming Kaveri laptops, but I don't remember the link.

 

Keep looking. That will continue to be AMD's downfall. They offer max 35W mobile chips yet the machines OEM's stuff the chips in are as big or bigger than systems with an Intel 45W CPU and 45-55W dGPU. There's no reason there shouldn't be thin and light AMD laptops in 13 and 14 inch form factor with the 35W CPU's, and at hudreds of dollars cheaper than an Intel counterpart. But it likely will not happen.

This news would make me excited, but until they make some decent laptops and even tablets designed around these, I wouldn't hold my breath.

 

Ha, ha it is funny, the form what would it be ideal for this APU, we can wait for forever. Instead coming in supersized 15" + laptops.

What is interesting this APU with 2133MHz RAM would make about 2200 points, but even the desktop 95W Kaveri makes barely more;

http://www.guru3d.com/index.php?ct=articles&action=file&id=8990


So, I guess 3DMark11 is very awefull to measure the performance of this APU, the GPU part at maximum, the CPU cores on the lowest clocks to fit in 35W TDP. In games where CPU cores will have to work, we will see significant performance drops, for example GTA 4.

 

Here's to hoping that HP refreshes their 14" Probook that had Trinity or Richland.

And if that doesn't happen, then I'll settle for their Elitebook 745. I'm going to enjoy the 110 WHr of total battery capacity from adding on an external battery slice.

Their 14" Probook with an A10-5750m is still currently priced at over $1000 as of now. That puts it in direct competition against laptops with dedicated GPUs or Iris Pros.

 

If you do find it, post a link! I was just wondering if there was such a thread.

The ProBook 6475b was priced quite competitively at Micro Center - $600 with Trinity and $800 with Trinity + dedicated Radeon GPU and a couple other upgrades IIRC. I'm hoping for something in that ballpark. The $600 had a low-end screen, so perhaps a bit above that for the better screen.

I do agree that seeing the FX7600-P in something smaller than a 15" would be great. Back when I was traveling more, I wanted my next laptop to be 13.3 or 14.1" for improved mobility over my 15.4". Now I'd be okay with a 15.4 or 17" again, but there's definitely a lot of people who'd like something smaller. And I might yet go for a 14" over something bigger if it becomes available with the horsepower I'm looking for.

I'd also like to see more OEMs than just HP offer AMD's high-end APUs. All else equal, HP wouldn't be among my top choices for OEM.

 

There is nothing wrong with HP, especially considering the quality that the elitebooks offer, and the only OEMs that are better are Lenovo and ASUS, Samsung being in similar position and Acer closing the distance. The other OEMs aren't even worth talking about (not including Gaming Notebook makers such as MSI, since that is a niche market usually dominated by bulky designs, although MSI recently made a lot of thin systems.)

 

Is Toshiba still requiring laptops to install their custom graphic drivers that they never update? I recall there were many Toshiba laptops that were stuck with GPU drivers dated back to 2009, when I was doing some searching last year.

 

I don't know. Wonder if HP will ever make an Envy with a Mobile Kaveri? Might be a good option for a budget model. Yes, we need some great thin and light laptops (maybe UltraBooks too) with this processor. Acer has potential to make a nice machine in that form factor with one or Lenovo.

 

The things that I dislike about HP are that, from what I've seen, their laptops don't tend to last very long, and that they whitelist network cards, so you can't upgrade to a WiFi card of your choosing without a hacked BIOS. The EliteBooks and Z series workstations have good quality, but their consumer and lower-end business lines I wouldn't buy from. As for the network whitelists, it's silly, and results in things such as my 2007 Inspiron having superior WiFi to my parents' 2011 HP can, all because of the whitelist, even though they were looking to upgrade the card. It was already the best one on the whitelist.

I'd still go with HP over Acer, but not many other manufacturers. Dell, perhaps at this time, their quality varies over time. But I'd rather go with Lenovo, Asus, Samsung, Sony, MSI, Sager, etc. over HP assuming the specs were equal and the price was comparable. And the product line - I'd still favor an EliteBook vs. an IdeaPad if specs and price were comparable. I might go with HP over Toshiba, too - while I know some people who've done okay with Toshibas, knowing people who've had their Toshiba power adapters start smoking doesn't make them more appealing.

The funny thing is that Envy is a budget model option now. When it was introduced, it was the high-end consumer model. And it had pretty nice specs, too - although also some cooling issues.

 

I'd blame the FCC regulations for the network card whitelists.
The Intel Wireless drivers have recently begun enforcing this as well. The installer from the Intel site will refuse to install even if the hardware is accepted. The only workaround is to use Station-Drivers.

 

So how do other OEM's get away with it? And if a card meets the wi-fi spec then there should be no FCC concerns.

 

Anyone checked the Elitebook 745 1080p option? They're limited to the configurable option... and mother of god it is expensive.

$929 stock config (1600x900) to $1650 (1080p, nothing else changed).

Over $700 for just for a 1080p screen.

I talked with a HP sales representative and he/she said they don't know when will there be a cheaper 1080p option.

Link to the Elitebook 700s series purchase page: http://shopping1.hp.com/is-bin/INTE...se?CatalogCategoryID=EOcQ7EN6eEUAAAFFh1kRvdw1

I don't think Dell ever made an AMD laptop. I think they're Intel-exclusive.

 

I just checked that page and it seems that they just removed the 1080p opting for the 745. As for all of those Elitebooks, are they all using VA panels? That seems a bit strange. Also i noticed that some of them are using eDP panels, which already support FreeSync!
When it comes to Dell laptops I think they used to have options with Llano in them. They completely dropped all AMD laptops with Trinity and now they have probably 1 Richland model and a few with cat cores. Still I wouldn't bother with Dell since their quality has been subpar recently.

 

I wouldn't shy away from an Acer. Case in point my fiance has a Samsung 305E, where I have a Acer Aspire 5560G-7809. We both use the same AMD A6-3420m. The only Hardware difference is that I have a discreet 7670m and, we have different sized same speed hard drives. The build quality on the samsung is junk. Very flimsy with a now worn hinge floppy screen. The Acer on the other hand feels very tight and sturdy after 2 years of use. Not only that but I have had to overclock the cpu and gpu to make games playable since I got it. Stock a6-3420m is 1.5 with 2.5 boost modified with my 2.05 boost to 2.8 undervolted. Stock 7670m is 600 mhz with 900 mhz memory, modified to 745 , 990. It can play battlefield 4 right now! The Acer has been a great laptop and actually my first. Best $450 I had ever spent.

 

If you go to their configurable laptop models option, you'll find the 1080p panel options, at a price of $1600 if you only want the A6 APU, $1690 if you want the A10: HP's Small & Medium Business Online Store

 

The difference between the 1600X900 and the 1080p options is only $105. Their price might be calculated wrong, they will probably fix it soon.

 

Doesn't HP usually price their customizable laptop models pretty high? Their sales representative told me that the 1080p is limited only to the customizable laptop models, and aren't available to the cheaper stock models.

 

yes they do exactly that. the best idea is to go call and haggle if you want some of the customisation options available

 

with the 2013 HP Envy models HP dropped the whitelist and allows you to upgrade the wifi-cards. people in the Envy 15 2013 thread here at NBR have upgraded their Wifi cards to the Intel 7260 AC version.

 

You can upgrade an Envy 15 to a 1080p screen witch will cost you $580 dollars http://www.shopping.hp.com/en_US/ho...HP-ENVY-15z-j100-CTO-Notebook-PC-ENERGY-STAR- or a envy 17 upgrade a screen to 1080p witch will cost you around $800 bucks before tax. http://www.shopping.hp.com/en_US/ho...0-Select-Edition-CTO-Notebook-PC-ENERGY-STAR-
Honestly how many window PC's can you get a laptop with a 1080p screen cheaper than that? HP also usually have coupons floating around so you may be able get it cheaper.

 

Like HTWingNut said, no other manufacturers have whitelists, so FCC regulations don't explain it. If they were that onerous, whitelists would be the norm, not the exception.

Not true. The Dell Inspiron 1521 is one such example. I'm not sure how recently Dell has shipped AMD, but they have in the past.

I haven't looked seriously at those HP laptops yet since I haven't seen an option with the FX-7600P. The prices are a bit higher than what AMD suggested, but they're also the first ones to market.

I'll admit that my perception of Acer is heavily influenced by the mid-2000s, when they were an increasingly popular manufacturer due to their very low costs, but the build quality was rubbish. They may have improved by now. I tend to skip over anything Acer due to their earlier poor reputation, so I wouldn't necessarily know if things have improved. They were kind of the successor to eMachines in the very-low-cost-but-questionable-quality market in the U.S.

Samsung I don't actually have much experience with. They're relatively new to the U.S. market in laptops, since they used to have an agreement with Dell not to enter the U.S. market. I'd figured that they'd be at least okay in quality given their expertise in other electronics, but that could be wrong. They do also make really inexpensive Chromebooks, though, so I suppose it wouldn't be too surprising if some of the inexpensiveness wore off on their Windows laptops.

I was also thinking of Fujitsu a bit when I was visualizing Samsung laptops. Fujitsu's another manufacturer I'd consider, but they tend to be above-average in price.

Really? That's big news. Is this just the Envy 15, or other models as well? If it's in-general, that's a big negative removed in my book.

 

The Envy 15 and 17. Not sure about the Envy 14 or the 2013 pavilion models though

 

I'd like to get this A10 Pro-7800B into a laptop. Maybe one of the gaming laptop manufacturers could put one in and keep temps in check. Doubt it though as its a business model.

I want that 12.5" 725 G2 J5N82UT but damn that $1250 price tag makes me think hard before pulling the trigger. I just might.

Sent from my XT1049 using Tapatalk

 

That Elitebook 725 G2 does look nice. But dang, 0.6lbs more and 0.15 inches thicker for a touch screen? I will opt for the non touch anyhow. But 12.5" 1920x1080 with that CPU looks like a nice option. Price is a little high, but HP usually has frequent coupons and discounts. But it doesn't seem to be available for sale yet.

 

I was already looking for a refurb but they're so new so nothing yet. Its a good price compared to a configured model even without os and stripped down with just 1080p, backlit KB, and A10. It could literally replace my two current lappys right now and give me more so time to sell!

Sent from my XT1049 using Tapatalk

 

I attempted to haggle with the HP sales representative for the customizable Elitebook 745 with the A10 and 1080p screen. Gave me a 25% discount, but I want to see if I can try again tomorrow and haggle it down even more.

Since I'm also buying the 60 WHr secondary battery for $219, could I use that to convince the sales rep to offer a deeper discount?

Alternatively, I could just haggle for a discount on the stock model with the 1600x900 panel.

 

WOW, I honestly have NO idea how AMD managed to create a configurable 35W mode for those Pro models, when the Desktop A10-7800 has the same specs but 65/45W modes. Heck I would even be happy to have a 45W FX APU with the same specs as the A10-7800 in 45W mode.
Also the lowest variant is an A6. Now I wonder what the real clocks on those Pro models are in 35W mode.

 

Probably cant boost for more than 2 seconds and/or GPU must be inactive. Exactly similar to how the 10W Haswells operate, massive frequency range.

 

If I could get 725 g2 with 1080p non touch screen and a10 for $1000 I'd buy it in a heartbeat.

Beamed from my G2 Tricorder

 

If i may ask, why would you want to pay 1000$ for such a weak hardware, i mean, that hardware is fine for a 500-700$ laptop,but for 1000$?

 

I thought it had the 35W CPU not the 19W.

 

This guy called "Unfriendlyfire" in Tech Report also took notice of how much HP charges for an upgrade from 768p to 900p (about $200), and then from 900p to 1080p (about $800): Wednesday Shortbread - The Tech Report

He also noted that HP only charges $50 to upgrade from a 768p to 1080p on a consumer Richland HP ENVY 15z-j100 PC laptop.

 

So are there any laptops announced with the FX-7600P so far? I've just seen the HP ones at this point, but those don't have the top-end one, and are rather expensive, perhaps due to lack of competition. But I haven't been to every manufacturer's website, so I may be missing some.

 

Besides the HP Elitebook 725, 745, and 755's, the only other laptop "announced" seems to be the Acer Aspire E5-551, which was purportedly used to edit the video of the balloon launch event. The 551 may refer to a design weight of ~5.51 pounds. (Last time I checked E5-551 models are on Acer's main site, but not yet in the search index, and not yet in the Acer store site. A10-7300 and A8-7100 models are listed, with 15.6-inch 768p screens.)

 

The E5-551 looks better than anything HP has been crapping over it's consumers lately. If only it came with a FX-7600P.. and I didn't have a bad experience with Acer before..
Here's a link, I hope the pictures are for the right model, I'm sure the video is not (and sponsored by Intel )
Acer | Aspire E | Aspire E5-551-89TN | Overview A8-7100
Acer | Aspire E | Aspire E5-551-89TN | Overview A10-7300

I hope other manufacturers follow soon.
~Aeny

 

Regarding the FX 7600p's CPU performance: AMD Kaveri Hands-On: Performance Testing the FX-7600P - AMD Kaveri FX-7600P: Performance

It outperformed the i7-4500U (15W TDP, 1.8 GHz to 3.0 GHz).


Tech Report used a desktop i5-4570T (35W TDP, 2.9 GHz to 3.6 GHz) as a comparison, which is exactly like the i7-4600M except for a slightly slower IGP.

The i5-4570 slightly outperformed the FX 7600p in encoding and encryption, and completely outperformed Kaveri in Cinebench (controversial from what I've heard) and Javascript. For obvious reasons, the FX 7600p's IGP outperformed the i5.

A first look at AMD's Kaveri APU for notebooks - The Tech Report - Page 2