Quantcast AMD A10-4655M vs Intel i7-3517U

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 25
  1. #1
    Newbie
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    5
    Rep Power
    7

    Default AMD A10-4655M vs Intel i7-3517U

    Hi all, I'm considering to buy a "sleekbook" 6z-1000 from HP.
    I tried to search the web for comparisons between AMD A10-4655M Quad core processor and the Intel i7-3517U Dual core (the last is common for ultrabooks as Samsung Series 9).
    Considering virtual machines, I think the quad should perform better than the dual.
    Also the graphic power of the apu makes me groove for OpenCL...
    What do you think about? Maybe someone can post his detailed windows experience index (showing the cpu value)?
    many thanks

  2. #2
    Hello, here I go again
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    on the way
    Posts
    1,286
    Rep Power
    16

    Default Re: AMD A10-4655M vs Intel i7-3517U

    The AMD A10-4655M level with the old A8-3550MX 45W APU, therefore superior of I7-3517U Dual Core. Here you can read a proper review of 6z-1000 with A10-4655M.

    Some comparsion:
    Intel Core i7-3517U: around 630 at 3DMark11
    A10-4655M: 895 at 3DMark11

    About CPU performance: 4 cores will handle better more threads than 2+HT. Do not listen Chinebench or similar syntetic craps, means nothing in real situations .
    Last edited by Atom Ant; 31st July 2012 at 01:30 PM.
    Dell Latitude 3540; Intel Core i5-4210U, AMD Radeon 8890M, Corsair 2x4GB 2133MHz CL11, Samsung 840 EVO 250GB SSD, Samsung M9T 2TB HDD

  3. #3
    Notebook Deity
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,989
    Rep Power
    24

    Default Re: AMD A10-4655M vs Intel i7-3517U

    The i7-3517U will give you better CPU performance. Don't be fooled by the "quad" labeling -- it does not have four cores in the same sense that previous processors did (there are four integer cores, but only two FPUs and only two of various other resources usually associated with cores). As a result, the A10 "quad-cores" tend to be slower than Ivy dual-cores with hyperthreading. I can't find any benchmarks for the 4655M, but here is a comparison for some applications from notebookcheck for the A10-4600M:

    i7-3517U vs. A10-4600M

    Cinebench R11.5 64Bit: 2.8 vs. 2.0
    WinRAR 4.0: 2376 vs. 1891.5
    TrueCrypt AES: 1.4 vs. 1.2

    The only difference between the 4600M and the 4655M is that the 4600 is clocked at 2.3Ghz whereas the 4655M is only 2.0GHz. Thus, the 4655M will be even slower.

    On the other hand, unless Intel is much more aggressive about Turbo, the 4655M should have a better GPU.

  4. #4
    Newbie
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    5
    Rep Power
    7

    Default Re: AMD A10-4655M vs Intel i7-3517U

    good to know, Althernai
    Atom_Anti, I know A10 is awesome in 3D, but I don't need it (except some apps with opencl support).

    many thanks!

  5. #5
    Hello, here I go again
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    on the way
    Posts
    1,286
    Rep Power
    16

    Default Re: AMD A10-4655M vs Intel i7-3517U

    Althernai; Chinebench roll the dice, check a real CPU situation:

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	46663.png 
Views:	75 
Size:	43.9 KB 
ID:	81097

    +he Considering virtual machines, where fore integer cores rather working as quad core as 2+HT.
    Dell Latitude 3540; Intel Core i5-4210U, AMD Radeon 8890M, Corsair 2x4GB 2133MHz CL11, Samsung 840 EVO 250GB SSD, Samsung M9T 2TB HDD

  6. #6
    Notebook Deity
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,989
    Rep Power
    24

    Default Re: AMD A10-4655M vs Intel i7-3517U

    That graph doesn't actually have any Ivy CPUs on it. The difference between floating point and integer workloads is that in the former, the A10 will lose by a hilariously large margin whereas in the latter, it will merely lose. Here are a bunch of real-life applications comparing the i5-3427U to the A10-4600M. Note that the i5-3427U is clocked at 1.8GHz with 2.8/2.6 single/dual max turbo whereas the i7-3517U is clocked at 1.9GHz with 3.0/2.8 single/dual max turbo. Thus, the 3517U will be faster than the 3427U and, as I already mentioned, the 4655M will be slower than the 4600M... but the 4600M still loses in practically everything to the 3427U.

    I do not know about virtualization -- I think manzamanna is the first person I have heard of to try doing it with these power-optimized CPUs. However, Ivy is faster than Trinity in practically every CPU test I can think of so I'm pretty sure the 3517U will be faster there as well. And while the A10's do have four integer cores, there are a lot of shared elements between the pairs in a module (L2 cache, instruction fetching and decoding, etc.) so Intel's nearly independent cores are not directly comparable to AMD's.

  7. #7
    R3d
    R3d is offline
    Notebook Virtuoso
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    2,343
    Rep Power
    31

    Default Re: AMD A10-4655M vs Intel i7-3517U

    Quote Originally Posted by Atom_Anti View Post
    Althernai; Chinebench roll the dice, check a real CPU situation:

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	46663.png 
Views:	75 
Size:	43.9 KB 
ID:	81097

    +he Considering virtual machines, where fore integer cores rather working as quad core as 2+HT.
    That benchmark has neither of the CPU's that OP listed.

    Atom_Anti, first you say that synthetic benchmarks don't matter and then list 3dmark scores. And the 3200 point 3dmark06 score you listed for the i7-3517 is the CPU only score, not the overall score. The A10-4655m from the other link you posted has a CPU score of 2000... And then you claim that the the A10-4655m is faster. Right.

    OP, both of those CPUs are going to be mediocre for "serious" VM usage. If you really want good performance with VMs you should get a full powered i7.

  8. #8
    Hello, here I go again
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    on the way
    Posts
    1,286
    Rep Power
    16

    Default Re: AMD A10-4655M vs Intel i7-3517U

    I sad Chinebench or similar syntetic craps do not matter. I'll delete 3dMark06 scores, seems unfair for comparsion, you are right at that point.
    And of course I'm claiming A10-4655M faster than I7-3517, since these are APUs which means lot more than just a CPU. Therefore we have to consider overall CPU+GPU performance. But let's back to only CPU tasks and reviewing Althernai link; where I see minimal difference in Winrar contest, plus we are already know newer version of Winrar support OpenCL acceleration which gives big boost to AMD. I do not know what is TrueCrypt, but supports acceleration via Intel's AES-NI instructions, probably not favor for AMD.

    Finally he need multithreading, so try something similar on I7-3517:

    The real power!

    I tell I7 will fail to do this.
    Last edited by Atom Ant; 31st July 2012 at 03:12 PM.
    Dell Latitude 3540; Intel Core i5-4210U, AMD Radeon 8890M, Corsair 2x4GB 2133MHz CL11, Samsung 840 EVO 250GB SSD, Samsung M9T 2TB HDD

  9. #9
    Notebook Deity
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,989
    Rep Power
    24

    Default Re: AMD A10-4655M vs Intel i7-3517U

    Quote Originally Posted by Atom_Anti View Post
    And of course I'm claiming A10-4655M faster than I7-3517, since these are APUs which means lot more than just a CPU. Therefore we have to consider overall CPU+GPU performance.
    That doesn't make any sense -- they are not interchangeable, at least not in a way that is meaningful to most people. There are very few workloads that are performed by both -- more now than before, but still very few. If your workload demands a fast CPU, go with Intel. If you need a fast GPU, go with AMD. If you want both, you need Intel + discreet graphics (or wait for Haswell). manzamanna's workload is mostly CPU-heavy therefore Intel is the better choice.

    But let's back to only CPU tasks and reviewing Althernai link; where I see minimal difference in Winrar contest, plus we are already know newer version of Winrar support OpenCL acceleration which gives big boost to AMD. I do not know what is TrueCrypt, but supports acceleration via Intel's AES-NI instructions, probably not favor for AMD.
    TrueCrypt is encryption/decryption software. If you look just below the AES graph, there's also Twofish which is without any special instructions -- the i5 still wins.

    You can see the OpenCL applications on the next page of the same review. As the reviewer says, "the A10-4600M doesn't really distance itself from the 17W Intel CPUs—not even with its IGP chipping in via OpenCL." It wins one and loses one, but the difference is small -- the Ivy IGP is not that bad and Amdahl's Law does the rest.

    And yes, the difference between the 3427U and 4600M is not much for many things... but keep in mind what is being compared. The 4600M is the fastest mobile product AMD is offering right now -- it is optimized for speed and has a TDP of 35W. The 3427U is a 17W processor intended for ultrabooks and it's not even the fastest of the 17W processors. TDPs from Intel and AMD are not directly comparable, but 17W is definitely much less than 35W... and yet the 3427U wins practically across the board. The difference between the i7-3517U and the A10-4655M is going to be much larger.

  10. #10
    Notebook Deity
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    1,661
    Rep Power
    17

    Default Re: AMD A10-4655M vs Intel i7-3517U

    Quote Originally Posted by manzamanna View Post
    good to know, Althernai
    Atom_Anti, I know A10 is awesome in 3D, but I don't need it (except some apps with opencl support).

    many thanks!
    I think you may have answered your own question here. The A10 will have the upper hand in 3D graphics but you say you do not need it. If better CPU performance is what you need, then the choice is obvious, go with the i7. But in my opinion, in real life usage the difference might not be as dramatic as benchmarks make it out to be. Both of the processors will handle daily tasks with ease. The biggest difference will come down to price and other factors such as battery life, construction, keyboard and display quality to name a few.

    Quote Originally Posted by R3d View Post
    OP, both of those CPUs are going to be mediocre for "serious" VM usage. If you really want good performance with VMs you should get a full powered i7.
    I second this. Unless you're purposely after a LV/ULV chip or the ultra-thin form factor, (performance-wise) you would be better off with a standard voltage CPU like a quad i7. What is your budget and or purpose/goals for this computer? More details would be of help.

    Acer Aspire V5-122P-0600
    11.6" 1366x768 IPS AUO, AMD A6-1450, Radeon 8250, Samsung 6 GB 1.35 V, Samsung 830 256 GB SSD
    HP EliteBook 725 G2 J5N82UT
    12.5" 1920x1080 IPS LG, AMD A10-PRO-7350B, Radeon R6, Samsung 16 GB 1.35V, Intel Pro 1500 180 GB SSD
    HP ProBook 6475b
    14.0" 1600x900 TN LG, AMD A10-4600M, Radeon 7660G, 8 GB 1.50V, Seagate Momentus 320 GB HDD
    RW Motorola Moto X

 

 
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. *HP dv6z AMD Llano (6XXX series) Owners Lounge*
    By scy1192 in forum HP Pavilion Notebooks
    Replies: 6985
    Last Post: 28th May 2014, 07:48 PM
  2. AMD Fusion Info Thread
    By Jayayess1190 in forum Hardware Components and Aftermarket Upgrades
    Replies: 1710
    Last Post: 9th May 2014, 06:20 AM
  3. dv6z-7000 vs. dv6t-7000
    By bfpri in forum HP Pavilion Notebooks
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 10th July 2012, 05:52 PM
  4. HP A-10 Trinity vs I7 Ivy and other issues
    By JPSbr in forum What Notebook Should I Buy?
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 6th July 2012, 06:36 PM
  5. Need to move Quickly: HP AMD vs Intel
    By boeingguy1 in forum What Notebook Should I Buy?
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 3rd June 2012, 02:30 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:41 PM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.2
Copyright © 2014 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1