|
管理員
吹水部屋
|
1#
大 中
小 發表於 2014-4-10 02:51 顯示全部帖子
Athlon 5350 Review
http://www.anandtech.com/show/79 ... t-1-athlon-5350-am1引用:If we compare single threaded performance between Kabini and our J1800 test system, the benchmarks are almost even between the two, particularly when it comes to synthetics such as Cinebench, but falls behind on emulation such as the Dolphin Benchmark and 3DPM. The integrated graphics of the Kabini pull ahead when it comes to gaming, despite the single channel memory interface.
When placing Kabini against any Intel Ivy Bridge socketed processor, the increased IPC and frequency pushes the system above the Kabini, in exchange for more power and a more expensive system overall. If we compare the Kabini single-threaded results to those of the Celeron G465, a Sandy Bridge based single core CPU at 1.9 GHz, the Celeron does pull ahead on the majority, but fails miserably in the graphical benchmark suite. 引用:Start hitting the low-end processors hard with a taxing workload, though, and the true desktop-oriented hardware pulls right away. Sure, AMD's Athlon might be a little snappier than the Celeron (an observation backed up by my data), but by a much smaller margin. In a game like Dota 2 or Grid 2, the Athlon can manage smooth frame rates at low details, while the Celeron is wholly incapable of usable performance. Get ambition and fire up Battlefield 4, though, and both low-power platforms choke.
Having said that, after using the hardware, I can comfortably say that the AM1 platform paired with an Athlon 5350 can deliver a satisfying experience in common computing and entertainment tasks. I can also say that, given a choice between Intel and AMD in this particular segment, the AM1 platform clearly wins. Intel is a bit more miserly with power, but a sub-20 W difference is largely irrelevant in the desktop space. So, congratulations AMD.
But I run into a problem when I try to imagine recommending an AM1 platform over, for instance, AMD's FM2+. Sure, a Sempron 2650 and motherboard might only cost about $60 together. But an A4-4000 and entry-level Socket FM2+-equipped motherboard combo starts in the $90 range. If you simply consider your options down the road, that extra $30 opens much larger world of options that AM1 cannot match. And frankly, the 3.2 GHz A4-4000 should clean house in a majority of our tests compared to the Athlon 5350, which is $10 more expensive than the A4.
A PC is so much more than just a CPU and motherboard, though. The rest of the components, such as memory, hard disks, and an operating system, already make up much of a budget machine's price tag. So I'm skeptical of this platform's ability to reclaim ground for the PC.
From an enthusiast's perspective, it's hard to imagine an environment where AMD's new AM1 platform is ideal, except in cases where very low-power and diminutive enclosures are desirable. Otherwise, this could be the foundation for a cheap computer a more mainstream user with simpler needs uses to check email and browse the Web. In ultra-low-cost developing markets, it probably also makes a lot of sense. But if you have higher aspirations for an upgradable platform, look elsewhere: Socket FM2+ is a vastly superior vehicle from a performance perspective, and scales many orders of magnitude higher than AM1. 
都話Jaguar architecture唔會輸俾BayTrail架啦
用電既話, 最多差13W, 即係一係10W報細數, 25W報大數 (呢個機會大d)
附件: 您所在的用戶組無法下載或查看附件
|
