AMD 8700B benchmars are terrible, this CPU is a crap.

S

sblantipodi

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Messages
3,765
My computer company contains an AMD Carrizo A10 8700B CPU.
This CPU is a complete crap.

It scores 112 points in Cinebench and it took 23 minutes to finish the first run of FryRender.
An old Haswell-U have twice the performance of this crap.

How can AMD sell this CPU at this price?

Talking about HP EliteBook, 1920x1080 14 inch display, 512GB M.2 SSD, 16GB RAM.

fryrender.png


cinebench.png


this thing is a smartphone, with the same price you can get a CPU from intel that it has double the performance.
 
Last edited:
Because, just like my 11 year old c2d laptop, it's plenty for word processing and basic stuff....
Probably not much faster either lol.
Sure I can video edit in a pinch on it but that's not really the target market for something like that in this day and age.
 
Ocellaris said:
The real question is... Why does your company care so little about you they would give you such garbage hardware? :p
Click to expand...

They probably had a used car salesman of a computer dealer promise them "its like having an i7 hex core with 56 GB of ddr12 rams but for 1/10 the price U GETTING A DEAL TODAY"

I see it happen all the time.
 
sblantipodi said:
My computer company contains an AMD Carrizo 8700B CPU.
This CPU is a complete crap.

It scores 112 points in Cinebench and it took 21 minutes to finish the first run of FryRender.
An old Haswell-U have twice the performance of this crap.

How can AMD sell this CPU at this price?
Click to expand...

Just grab yourself any HEVC .265 content and try and run that on any Intel cpu and then see how bad the Carrizo will do.

I'm sure that you won't make a topic in the Intel forum on how Intel cpu seriously sucks at H.265 content ...
 
sblantipodi said:
My computer company contains an AMD Carrizo 8700B CPU.
This CPU is a complete crap.

It scores 112 points in Cinebench and it took 21 minutes to finish the first run of FryRender.
An old Haswell-U have twice the performance of this crap.

How can AMD sell this CPU at this price?
Click to expand...

Wait, so you get you machine, run some "benchmarks" on it, claim it is no good but do not tell us how the machine actually performs day to day? So, are you saying the machine is objectively slow without running benchmarks?
 
This is nothing new, it is pretty much a universal truth that anything they have put out since 2011 is complete pile of garbage which is evident in their financial reports.
 
Pieter3dnow said:
Just grab yourself any HEVC .265 content and try and run that on any Intel cpu and then see how bad the Carrizo will do.

I'm sure that you won't make a topic in the Intel forum on how Intel cpu seriously sucks at H.265 content ...
Click to expand...

Well yeah, it's not trendy to hate on Intel. All the cool kids are spitting and sputtering about AMD these days. Apparently I've got the 1 good AMD chip in the world because my rig shreds anything I need it to do pretty easily and it's a 5 year old chip! I must be the luckiest guy in the world.
 
Did everyone confuse the AMD forum for a bathroom? Seems like everyone comes here to take a crap.

First, the full part number would help, which is A10-8700B. The B is for business, the consumer version is A10-8700P. That one scores 194 in cinebench. AMD A-Series A10-8700P (Carrizo) Notebook Processor Specifications and Benchmarks
So, that means there is more to the story. Maybe there is some crap slowing the cpu down, or maybe part of the issue is that it could be running single channel ram. Some laptop makers, being cheap, only include one stick of RAM. Or some that make Carrizo laptops used a cheap motherboard design with only single channel RAM. That's not AMD's fault.
Some laptop makers also went cheap on the design in terms of cooling and just limited the cpu's TDP which of course hurts performance. Again, not AMD's fault.
And of course you haven't told us what laptop this is, or any details, so nobody can really help or understand the crap you are spewing. I wish people would go take their dumps somewhere else.
 
pgaster said:
Did everyone confuse the AMD forum for a bathroom? Seems like everyone comes here to take a crap.

First, the full part number would help, which is A10-8700B. The B is for business, the consumer version is A10-8700P. That one scores 194 in cinebench. AMD A-Series A10-8700P (Carrizo) Notebook Processor Specifications and Benchmarks
So, that means there is more to the story. Maybe there is some crap slowing the cpu down, or maybe part of the issue is that it could be running single channel ram. Some laptop makers, being cheap, only include one stick of RAM. Or some that make Carrizo laptops used a cheap motherboard design with only single channel RAM. That's not AMD's fault.
Some laptop makers also went cheap on the design in terms of cooling and just limited the cpu's TDP which of course hurts performance. Again, not AMD's fault.
And of course you haven't told us what laptop this is, or any details, so nobody can really help or understand the crap you are spewing. I wish people would go take their dumps somewhere else.
Click to expand...

Bingo...please read up on how OEM's literally sabotaged the Carrizo line up of mobile APU's becasue AMD allowed configurable TDP's. Of course they used the lowest TDP's for everything to cut costs and save on battery and cooling. ALL OEM's did this...including offering only single channel mode on the memory in many cases. The lower TDP also meant that max memory could only run at 1600MHz and for an APU that's a travesty. Customers and AMD have called them out on this but we'll see if that changes anything for the new mobile APU's.
 
Ocellaris said:
The real question is... Why does your company care so little about you they would give you such garbage hardware? :p
Click to expand...
I think the REAL question is: what are you actually supposed to be doing with it? im sure its not for running benchmarks. if its for accessing email and word processing the it will work just fine. not every system is meant to be encoding video or playing games. it is a work provided laptop that you are suppose to use for doing work related work, not for playtime.
 
pgaster said:
Did everyone confuse the AMD forum for a bathroom? Seems like everyone comes here to take a crap.

First, the full part number would help, which is A10-8700B. The B is for business, the consumer version is A10-8700P. That one scores 194 in cinebench. AMD A-Series A10-8700P (Carrizo) Notebook Processor Specifications and Benchmarks
So, that means there is more to the story. Maybe there is some crap slowing the cpu down, or maybe part of the issue is that it could be running single channel ram. Some laptop makers, being cheap, only include one stick of RAM. Or some that make Carrizo laptops used a cheap motherboard design with only single channel RAM. That's not AMD's fault.
Some laptop makers also went cheap on the design in terms of cooling and just limited the cpu's TDP which of course hurts performance. Again, not AMD's fault.
And of course you haven't told us what laptop this is, or any details, so nobody can really help or understand the crap you are spewing. I wish people would go take their dumps somewhere else.
Click to expand...


I'm talking about an HP EliteBook, not a cheap ultrabook but one with integrated M.2 SSD and 16GB of RAM.
 
So it supposed to be used for normal office type use. Right? with those specs I bet it runs everything else just fine.
Use it for what it's meant for.
 
pendragon1 said:
So it supposed to be used for normal office type use. Right? with those specs I bet it runs everything else just fine.
Use it for what it's meant for.
Click to expand...

it's not that the point, this CPU is simply a piece of crap, it costs like an intel and it has nothing more to offer,
it has half the performance at the same wattage/cost.
 
sblantipodi said:
it's not that the point, this CPU is simply a piece of crap, it costs like an intel and it has nothing more to offer,
it has half the performance at the same wattage/cost.
Click to expand...

Half the performance for what, something it wasn't intended for? These are NOT workstations cpu's even if they say elitbook, ultrabook or whatever. 15 watts cpu's can only do so much from either Intel or AMD.
 
sblantipodi said:
it's not that the point, this CPU is simply a piece of crap, it costs like an intel and it has nothing more to offer,
it has half the performance at the same wattage/cost.
Click to expand...

I have an i3 in my ASUS, absolute garbage struggles with decoding videos
Atom in Tablet, absolute garbage when decoding videos
i5 3570k - Absolute Garbage if you're multi tasking and gaming (which no one seems to ever test!) and I wish I had bought an FX with 8 Cores and saved money at the time, would have been better off saving money and had better performance
 
sblantipodi said:
it's not that the point, this CPU is simply a piece of crap, it costs like an intel and it has nothing more to offer,
it has half the performance at the same wattage/cost.
Click to expand...
Possibly but it does what it's supposed to do not what you want it to do. It's like a Celeron, it will do the basics pretty good. Stop boohooing over your company provided equipment, It didn't cost you anything.
 
pendragon1 said:
Possibly but it does what it's supposed to do not what you want it to do. It's like a Celeron, it will do the basics pretty good. Stop boohooing over your company provided equipment, It didn't cost you anything.
Click to expand...

I'm only sad that my company is wasting money on this crap.
and no, it doesn't doing what it is supposed to do well, because at the same price there is another CPU that do what it is supposed to do twice fast.
 
They wouldn't be in a life threatening position if they weren't making crap. They made crap, they admitted they made crap and fucked up in one cycle, just stop defending that crap. No one hates AMD but everyone agrees that their one design mistake led to crap for half a decade now.
When you have better for same money, you buy better (i3s / cheap i5s).

And whoever is going to talk about these 8 cores again is just being funny at this point, they cant even beat the lowest i5 SKU at a video rendering benchmark using all cores 100% utilized and oced to 4.7 ghz.
 
sblantipodi said:
I'm only sad that my company is wasting money on this crap.
and no, it doesn't doing what it is supposed to do well, because at the same price there is another CPU that do what it is supposed to do twice fast.
Click to expand...

And you still haven't explained what it is supposed to do. Surf the Internet all day? Then it's fine, a better CPU won't matter.
 
a3venom said:
They wouldn't be in a life threatening position if they weren't making crap. They made crap, they admitted they made crap and fucked up in one cycle, just stop defending that crap. No one hates AMD but everyone agrees that their one design mistake led to crap for half a decade now.
When you have better for same money, you buy better (i3s / cheap i5s).

And whoever is going to talk about these 8 cores again is just being funny at this point, they cant even beat the lowest i5 SKU at a video rendering benchmark using all cores 100% utilized and oced to 4.7 ghz.
Click to expand...

You must be in the wrong thread? AMD is only at fault for letting OEM's pick which configurable TDP, i.e., 15 watts, 25 or 35 watts their higher end APU's could use. The gpu and cpu have to share that load and 99% of them chose 15 watts and some chose single channel ram, at 1600 MHZ max. They would have been good enough if OEM's didn't sell that crap...if they chose ultrabooks in either AMD or Intel that needed a lot of cores/threads/processing power then the company is doing it wrong from the get go.
 
I wonder how the OP knows how much the CPU costs HP relative to an Intel processor? I'm willing to bet the 32-bit dual core Atom that costs HP the same wouldn't exactly shine here, either....
 
Ocellaris said:
And you still haven't explained what it is supposed to do. Surf the Internet all day? Then it's fine, a better CPU won't matter.
Click to expand...

This is simple thinking.
Don't you want the best your money can offer when you buy something?

Best can be more cool, more fashion, more simple, can be hundred of things, this thing doesn't have a single reason to exist.
 
Bowman15 said:
You must be in the wrong thread? AMD is only at fault for letting OEM's pick which configurable TDP, i.e., 15 watts, 25 or 35 watts their higher end APU's could use. The gpu and cpu have to share that load and 99% of them chose 15 watts and some chose single channel ram, at 1600 MHZ max. They would have been good enough if OEM's didn't sell that crap...if they chose ultrabooks in either AMD or Intel that needed a lot of cores/threads/processing power then the company is doing it wrong from the get go.
Click to expand...

We are taking about 15w CPUs. We are not comparing 35w Intel CPUs to a 15w AMD, we are comparing apples to apples.
 
sblantipodi said:
This is simple thinking.
Don't you want the best your money can offer when you buy something?

Best can be more cool, more fashion, more simple, can be hundred of things, this thing doesn't have a single reason to exist.
Click to expand...

So you know for a fact they could get the same specs in Intel and have twice the compute power. You know the discounts the vendors give them and all?
 
sblantipodi said:
We are taking about 15w CPUs. We are not comparing 35w Intel CPUs to a 15w AMD, we are comparing apples to apples.
Click to expand...

I add that at home I have a dell XPS 13 with a 4300u 15w.
The dell costs as much as the elite book and that CPUs is more than twice as fast on every single test I have done.

More than twice fast.
 
sblantipodi said:
We are taking about 15w CPUs. We are not comparing 35w Intel CPUs to a 15w AMD, we are comparing apples to apples.
Click to expand...

I really wish you knew what you were talking about. I really do as then maybe you would understand. Your 8700B cpu is configurable form 12 to 35 watts...do you realize how much the OEM gimped that Elitebook?

So you did the math at home...LOL
 
Bowman15 said:
I really wish you knew what you were talking about. I really do as then maybe you would understand. Your 8700B cpu is configurable form 12 to 35 watts...do you realize how much the OEM gimped that Elitebook?

So you did the math at home...LOL
Click to expand...

Probably you are not informed, I take the assumption that EliteBook are using 15w configuration.
 
you should just give it back and use your dell then.
waste of time arguing with him.
 
sblantipodi said:
My computer company contains an AMD Carrizo A10 8700B CPU.
This CPU is a complete crap.

It scores 112 points in Cinebench and it took 23 minutes to finish the first run of FryRender.
An old Haswell-U have twice the performance of this crap.

How can AMD sell this CPU at this price?

Talking about HP EliteBook, 1920x1080 14 inch display, 512GB M.2 SSD, 16GB RAM.

fryrender.png


cinebench.png


this thing is a smartphone, with the same price you can get a CPU from intel that it has double the performance.
Click to expand...

At first I thought the score was for single threaded performance (which wouldn't have been that bad), but for multi thread, that is abysmal.

With that being said, if this CPU is positioned to go head to head with Atom processors, then it may very well be running as expected.
 
caltech31 said:
At first I thought the score was for single threaded performance (which wouldn't have been that bad), but for multi thread, that is abysmal.

With that being said, if this CPU is positioned to go head to head with Atom processors, then it may very well be running as expected.
Click to expand...

For completeness I am talking about HP EliteBook 745 G3
 
It's hard to believe that people can defend this type of crap, saying it is good @ 35w? Would really someone want a laptop with 2 - 3hr battery life for business?
Only time someone would buy an AMD laptop is when they don't know what they're buying/are being fooled. For a long time AMD has offered inferior performance at a higher price and there is nothing that can change that.

If you want a good budget computer with great performance/price, you buy Intel.
If you want a high end computer where price isn't an issue, you buy Intel.
If you want to support AMD with your money, because you don't care about performance too much as long as it is "good enough" - you can buy AMD.
 
a3venom said:
It's hard to believe that people can defend this type of crap, saying it is good @ 35w? Would really someone want a laptop with 2 - 3hr battery life for business?
Only time someone would buy an AMD laptop is when they don't know what they're buying/are being fooled. For a long time AMD has offered inferior performance at a higher price and there is nothing that can change that.

If you want a good budget computer with great performance/price, you buy Intel.
If you want a high end computer where price isn't an issue, you buy Intel.
If you want to support AMD with your money, because you don't care about performance too much as long as it is "good enough" - you can buy AMD.
Click to expand...

Well, in all fairness, their APUs are quite capable in mobile devices. While Intel pulls ahead in CPU centric tasks, anything involving integrated graphics (most consumer grade laptops) will almost certainly favor AMD.

Your signature quote is actually pretty interesting, in that it raises the question surrounding what does a person really need from a computer? I would argue that if somebody is never going to take advantage of a particular feature (i.e. CPU performance), then the litmus test of value is whether their device meets their computing needs. If one does so for a cheaper price, then I would argue it is a better value.

With that being said, I actually don't know what offers the better value at the low end. If I were to recommend a laptop to somebody who wanted to do office, browsing and light gaming, I might very well recommend an AMD based platform if the price was right.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top