Synthetic: AIDA64 AND SANDRA 2012

AIDA64 V2.60

AMD positioned the A10-5800K against the Intel Core i3 processor and based on the AIDA64 CPU Queen benchmark, the competition is justified. Notice that the older Llano actually performs faster here despite both APUs featuring four integer cores. This test involves the branch prediction capabilities of the CPU and looks like despite the improvement on the Piledriver’s branch prediction, it may not be as fast as the old offering.

Things turns around for Trinity in the Phtoworxx benchmark where the new APU not only out-performs the older models but also is faster than the Core i3 2100. The test involves not just the CPU integer arithmetic and multiplication execution unit but also the memory subsystem. 

The A10-5800K does very well in this test where it is even faster than the Core i7 920.

All new AMD APUs will feature a dedicated hardware AES acceleration and thus it is no surprise to find it performs very well here. Some of the Intel Core i3 processors (like the Core i3 2100) lack a dedicated hardware AES support. While the APU is still not as fast as the more expensive Intel CPUs with hardware AES support, it is nonetheless good to see it is significantly faster than those CPUs without. If AES is important for you, then be sure to choose one with hardware support.  

The new entry to the AIDA64 supports many of the new instructions such as AVX or XOP extensions. Here again the A10-5800K does very well and we can see that the A8-5600K is actually just as fast as the fastest Llano, the A8-3870K. 

Despite only having two float-point units, the A10-5800K is not doing such a bad job here. It is almost as fast as the A8-3850 and is faster than the Intel Core i3 2100. For both single (32-bit) and double (64-bit) precision, the A10-5800K is trailing behind the A8-3850 with about 7% and 14%, respectively. It is faster than the Core i3 2100 by 30%.

The extended float point calculation (80-bit) is a weak spot for Trinity, most likely because it only has two float-point units.

VP8 is yet another new entry to the AIDA64 where it tests the FPU’s performance at video compression. Here the A10-5800K edges out the Core i3 2100 but is still lagging behind the A8-3850. 

The memory subsystem has been improved significantly on Trinity where its memory performance is much better not only over Llano but also over Bulldozer. The write speed on A10-5800K is almost as fast as the Sandy Bridge and is more than double the K8 and about 70% faster than the Bulldozer.

The read is not as big of a jump as the write. Trinity is still faster than the the K8 by about 50% but it is slower than Bulldozer. Intel still dominates here, and even the older Nehalem memory controller is still faster than Piledriver.  

The copy is faster than Llano but still trailing behind the Intel platform.  

Interestingly, the latency on the Trinity is worse than that of  either Llano or Bulldozer. Intel once again dominates the chart here. 

SANDRA 2012

The A10-5800K is 67% faster than the A8-3850 and 30% faster than the Core i3 2100. 

Here, the A10-5800K is just marginally faster than the A8-3850 and is actually a tad slower than the Core i3 2100.  

Not much of a surprise here as with four dedicated integer calculation core, the A10-5800K comes ahead of the Core i3. Notice that Trinity is actually much faster than the K8 CPUs (Phenom II and A8-3850) and is about as fast as the Nehalem (Core i7 920). 

A10-5800K performs pretty good here where it is about as fast as the A8-3850 and faster than the Core i3 2100. 

When comes to Cryptography, we can see that Intel still dominates here but the dedicated hardware assistance on the Trinity definitely helps a lot with the workload. Keep in mind that that chart above only shows the performance difference between CPUs with dedicated hardware AES encryption and not those without (Llano and some Core i3 CPU models). 

Oddly enough, the memory performance on Trinity seemed to be worse here.