Chi crazy socket fm2 i. Socket FM2 plus vs Socket FM2: what is the difference between the new Socket FM2 plus and the old Socket FM2. Energy saving and energy efficiency

So, when we buy an AMD-based computer, what processor and socket should we choose? Especially now, if AMD changes them very quickly. What is the prospect of replacing the processor in the new one and what about the old processor? It is also important to know if there is a combination of old growth with different productivity. I need to get a computer for better productivity. The table shows that the range for creativity is decent. Especially for overclockers and gamers, a lot of money accumulates in the drain. I have the feeling to spend time on the mezzanine and pick up, for example, a computer at the dacha, or for a young brother/sister.

From the table it is clear that, unfortunately, the FM1 and FM2 sockets are absolutely not crazy. Here you need to choose, move along the road motherboard either a budget processor, or get an older PC, or on the front socket. In my opinion, the decisions are equal. For example, you're crazy pressing computer On the socket you're on, it doesn't matter that you have a bunch of rocks in it. If you want to buy a PC on a new socket, there is the prospect of installing a stronger and more economical CPU through the river.

To choose the right processor, you need to know what type of socket your motherboard has. The socket is the “landing place” of the processor. If you add a processor with an unmatched socket, your motherboard will simply not work. Therefore, we first need to determine the type of socket and then select a processor based on its technical characteristics. For example, the FM2 processor will only fit the output socket. And not like anyone else. Let's talk about the FM2 socket and the best processors. Let's take a look at the most popular models.

AMD Athlon II X4 750K Black Edition

This FM2 processor is the best in its class. It also has the same technical characteristics. Ale smut - those who have a multiplier unblocked. And this means that it can be easily dismissed. I want to be so strong. Otje, technical characteristics Whose processor looks like this. The number of cores is 4 pieces, which work in four threads. The nominal operating frequency is 4 gigahertz. It’s really bad for a processor that doesn’t cost that much anymore. Many of your “classmates” are much more precious. The processor is based on a 32 nm process technology and does not have any third-tier cache. But this is not very good. Prote our hero can be compared in productivity with a lot of everyday “stones”. Especially at the station of rozignanosti.

The processor is supplied in a black cardboard box, which clearly indicates that this gadget is intended for overclocking. Many AMD FM2 processors are equipped with this option. Never mind the Atlon. This “stone” miraculously copes with high voltages and supports high-frequency modules. RAMі good behavior when starting resource-intensive tasks ( powerful games, specialized software for processing graphics and video etc.).

Videos about AMD Athlon II X4 750K Black Edition

Here the thoughts of the Koristuvachs differed. The deeds of the rulers respect you the fastest processor all hours and peoples using the FM2 socket. Processors are, to speech, not very wide. And others, with divine zeal, insist that this stone has long been morally obsolete and will be scrapped at this hour. However, we will continue to insist on sinning with extreme radicalism. It’s crazy, those who respect what this “old man” shows. Your productivity is on par current processors middle price segment, it comes inexpensively and with all the necessary components. What else is needed for happiness? Let’s not even mention that this is a wonderful budget option for those who are on a budget.

AMD Athlon X4 860K

This FM2 processor is based on the Kaveri core and is further distinguished from the previous hero. Head honcho, Tim, is working on the 28 nm process technology. This technology is a little new. Also, this processor does not have an unlocked multiplier, which means that there is no need for overclocking in general. The maximum clock frequency in Turbo mode is 4 gigahertz. The cache of the third level is so silent. No graphics core. That's even better. The processor may change at the same time. And there’s no point in getting powdered. A warehouse processor has four cores that run on several threads. Standard characteristics of our days.

This "Athlon" contains a set of rich instructions and a large number of common components. And it’s actually cheaper, with lower front-end FM2 processors labeled Black Edition, which is intriguing. This is really a budget option that will bring you riches. The efforts of this “kamyan” can be achieved both in games (just not in the current ones) and in multimedia work. The owner can practically handle everything. In fact, processors from this line were especially popular for their time. The stench of those positions that have been won will not linger on the world.

Historical research of the company's first integrated platform

As evidence shows, statistics devoted to the testing of “old” (behind the shadows of the computer market) systems are no less popular than the “hot” new products. But it’s not surprising: if their leaders cease to control the obvious level of productivity, it’s still important to compare with the new computers that are being demonstrated - I would like to understand what they’re going to switch to (and what’s going on). It is naturally impossible to protest absolutely everything released by the publishers in the last five years, except for sign processors - in their entirety. Especially if they themselves are useful as stages of industry development or allow the development of research about certain other products. Zokrem, we also decided (as the opportunity presented itself) to repeat one test of the last fate, and also with the vikoristanny of the current PZ. Well, well, I'll say it again AMD platforms FM1.

Should I turn around to her? First of all, in its short life, it was, one might say, a turning point in the development of the market: a central platform, integrated graphics that were implemented not according to the principle of “just right”, but were effectively suitable for (even limited) gaming bo "Calculate non-graphic ones." In 2011, it was fresh and relevant - it is likely that Intel's current proposals supported what was already in discrete GPU technologies. AMD implemented it increased functionality That productivity is on par with young discrete video cards of the same fate, and not some distant past. However, later competition before productivity continued to be deprived of internal company - especially considering the budget segment, in which way FM1 could completely replace FM2, and later FM2+, but not updated a LGA1155 or LGA1150. In the past, however, processors with larger GPUs have been released, compared to AMD APUs, but the cost is much more expensive. What can you say about budget processors for the new LGA1151? It is possible, but for this purpose it is necessary to equalize the decisions of both companies without middle ground and in equal minds.

The processor storage of the first AMD APUs is also in its own way, albeit archaic: it dates back to the Athlon II from 2009. Regardless of the importance of these processors, there are still a lot of such processors, so they can also be protested. Ale robiti tse is really unnecessary. As previously shown by tests, the productivity of the A4-3400 is approximately equal to that of the young Athlon II X2 215/220, as well as the analogue of the A8-3870K - older processors on the same chip that were already sold under the Phenom II X4 840/850 brand. Moreover, the similarity of this type is practically complete: however, a large number of cores similar in microarchitecture (and, obviously, supported by technologies) can be covered by those when changing the software Sorry, everyone behaves in such a manner. Also, having protested the two predictions of processors for FM1, we refuse to evaluate the range of productivity of budget processors for AM3. I will finish it exactly. Also in this range are Intel processors for the LGA775 platform, from Pentium E5x00 to Core 2 Quad Q9500. Here the leveling is, of course, even rougher, but it also deserves respect.

So, don’t be surprised at any side, but spend almost an hour on the first generation APU AMD Varto. Let's get on with it today.

Test bench configuration

The biggest problems for us for the most important reasons are two processors, but we will test three (since it stinks), adding the A6-3500 to the list of the last ones. Tej, in his own way, is generous, having borrowed scraps from model line especially the situation: tri-core (one of all) with a good (not the worst) GPU, TDP 65 W and widely available (in addition to exotic four-cores for a given platform with such a thermal package). And again, from the point of view of assessing productivity in games, I want it A6 is what we need, but there are no others.

We will compare this trio first with the A8-7650K: this is the most recent and serious decision of the company, and the most powerful of the protested processors of the new generations. In the future, we plan to protest as much as possible and cheaper proposals for FM2+ (fortunately, in this segment, this platform still retains bad positions), but for now there are none - let’s evaluate the beast: the old A8 versus the new one.

Plus three Intel processors: a current Celeron and two Pentiums - one is current, and the other is a little old, but processors for the LGA1150 platform are still popular. How to store the Pentium G4500T choice? We need some kind of Intel processor with a GT2 video core (which is now available in the Pentium), but the older G4520 is a clear overkill, since the processor productivity often outshines the current A10. So we decided to take a larger model, let alone an energy-efficient one - for this parameter, the proposals of AMD and Intel have already come up with desktops, so it makes no sense to put them directly.

Testing technique

The methodology is clearly described in the accompanying statistics. Here we briefly recall that it is based on the following few whales:

• Technique for vibrating energy consumption during testing of processors
• Methodology for monitoring the tension, temperature and temperature of the processor during testing

Reported results of all tests are available in the form of a complete table with results (in Microsoft Excel 97-2003 format). In the articles we have already compiled the data. It is especially important to test add-ons, where everything is normal according to the reference system (as in the past, a laptop based on Core i5-3317U with 4 GB of SSD memory, 128 GB of storage) and is grouped within the areas of computer stagnation.

iXBT Application Benchmark 2016

Although the "important" cores of the A8-3870K still allow it to compete with dual-core Intel processors in many programs cob vine, And there are already more, a lower pair of dual-stream modules for current solutions for FM2+. The successes of other tests, understandably, are much more modest. And the greatest respect goes to those that the A4-3400 is already approximately twice as large as the Celeron G3900. What's going on here? Both processors are banal dual-core models without any SMT technologies and operate at the same frequency, but differ twice as much. So, just one more kernel is nothing to say about the speed of the high-threaded system: the number of old dual cores (we guess that the A4-3400 can also be compared with the Athlon II X2 or Celeron/Pentium for LGA775) here Like the inferior ones, the inferior ones among those around us. However, they have not yet taken the oldest model - the first representatives of this class (such as Athlon 64 X2 or Pentium D) are even older. The first four-core processors are only approximately similar to the current dual-core processors, which also gives food for thought.

It’s more in these minds, if they don’t go “to the fullest” - like Photoshop, for example. It is significant that in this group of add-ons, seemingly, the current Celeron and Pentium do not stand out for a variety of reasons. Let’s not “bring off” the stench on aphids of the same age, and not representatives of old architectures.

Single-threaded (important) addition, and the new AMD microarchitecture does not look great. The old ones, by the way, have over-converted - 3870K may have overtaken 7650K, regardless of the significantly lower clock frequency. But there has been a struggle in the “basement” for a long time, so you can’t give it great respect: this is true.

Audition is a little more loyal to multi-core processors, although in principle it does not change anything - only the A4-3400 looks even thicker, lower at the front end.

But in simple terms, the old A6 and A8 are still bad - no matter how important they are, they can compete with budget processors. If there are only two cores (like all A4s) or three low-frequency cores (a feature of the A6-3500) - nothing good will come of it. How I came to my senses.

Due to the presence of hidden cache memory, “athlon-like” and “for life” did not appear in such tasks, but, not least, older models, as most likely, can compete even with Celeron. The younger ones (who have a chance for a large number of kernels, which is indicated in the package) are more intense, and it’s almost impossible to say that it’s even more scary.

Already within the framework of AM3, the company provided its chipsets with support SATA interface, which was saved in the FM1 disk controllers, so that, in principle, processors for the remaining platform can normally “engage” the disk with robots solid state accumulator, current outbuildings I don’t give in to that mayhem. Complex scenarios may have nuances, but in the eyes of the primary everyday vicoristan, there are no real problems.

As we have already been told, given the program There’s no need to worry too much about the “virtual richness” technology, which played a terrible role in the new A8 AMD: it turned out to be almost indistinguishable from the old one. However, the calculative possibilities of one thing or another, and more young processors for FM1, at a glance today vzagali low, so “serious work” - not their konik. I have to cope with my tasks. It’s absolutely true.

Well, what do you mean by dry surplus? The direction of the A8-3870K is comparable to the current Celerons. Obviously, this is a problem if most of the people look bad at the remaining appearance of four nuclei, but it also happens that quantity there is no rush, but the axle and yakism make everything clear. The smart thing here, however, is not that, but those that AMD sparked progress in the development of thoroughly integrated platforms turned out to be no worse than Intel, although the most common thing is to say that the rest of the company. The A8-7650K, obviously, is not the best processor in the family, but the Athlon X4 880K with a discrete video card and 16 GB of memory took up more than 129.5 integral points - even the A8-3870K saw less than 20% less. Moreover, this is not the top segment - from the beginning, processors were positioned approximately as competitors of the Core i3. The rest, we guess, grew up a second time, so they went to fight on other fronts. Mainly on their own or with high-class Intel processors from earlier releases. And the “APU” axis was practically lost at the same level of processor productivity, regardless of changes in architecture and other improvements. Is it possible that progress in other areas will be less?

Energy saving and energy efficiency

Well, it’s good - that’s what it all started for: the swedish A8-7650K consumes energy significantly more than the lower A8-3870K. Moreover, it is significant that the technical processes have basically been changed: the processors for FM1 were the first technological processes to use 32 nm, and the upgrade was less than one krok. And not a big one at that: Intel 32 moved to 22, and now to 14 nm, and AMD has just mastered the transition from 32 to 28 nm. Therefore, there is no direct competition between companies. But don’t forget that AMD has also tried to limit the needs of its devices – it used to be even worse.

True, it is inevitable that all successes achieved at Intel will be ruined. Already they were working - well done, already. The first “APUs” were not only more effective, but even more ineffective. To put it in perspective, the Core i3-2120 has a system with a discrete video card (as we know, the results are just nonsense) with an “energy efficiency” score of 2.15 points, so it’s lower than the same ів » A8 family . But we still haven’t practically forgotten the graphics, like the early ones Intel processors was even weaker, and the launched AMD platforms were mainly bought for it. I'm amazed at what it's good for at once.

iXBT Game Benchmark 2016

Check with us the results of these games, which one of the participants would like to cope with in the same way. At this point, we decided to follow these practices, since we still have a favorite in the form of the A8-7650K, to which all others are not competitors. That’s why we can clearly see all the games that the A8-3870K can handle well – they are not so few.

For example, “tanks” that are no longer handled by the latest Intel processors in minimal settings mode. With the use of new video cards, problems appear and are due to high “single-threaded” productivity. However, the complexity of the integrated graphics is very noticeable, which imposes its own padding. Ok, in FHD mode the old A8-3870K easily outperforms all Intel processors with GT1 GPUs. Moreover, the low-frequency A6-3500 in the same minds beats the current Celeron, and even more so the Pentium for LGA1150. A4-3400 Such “feats” cannot be achieved, otherwise you can lose money on something else. And let’s try to work in the “full” permission mode - peers at Intel were not able to do this.

The “ships” can be handled much better than the older models for FM1, although the older models for FM1 can handle them better than today’s Celerons, not to mention the “advanced” Pentiums. The rest of them do it the same way - they give in to the young A6. The Pentium G45x0 is newer, of course, and as new as ever. Zahalom, definitely positioned only the A4-3400, but no one doubted it - the blame “for life” is placed in the budget segment.

What's new Celeron, what's a little old Pentium from this, apparently, not new gri, if they can compete, then only with A4-3400. And in order to be on par with the A8-3870K, representatives of the G45x0 family are already needed. That's how it is. What a little bit of darkness there is on display of the new A8, even the new ones - after all, we are wearing processors five years ago (as if we had forgotten).

The A8-3870K is nominally on par with the game in HD resolution - the Pentium G4500T did the same. It’s amazing that it’s all the same it will be too small, or more - processors for FM2+, for example. And the Pentium G3260 looks really funny, announced for the beginning of 2015, but I still can’t seem to catch up with the youngest A6 2011 :)

In this situation, everything looks a little better for Intel, but there’s no way to remember the difference. AMD was not in the forefront, however, the new A8 went far ahead. Intel processors are largely equal to their predecessors.

The picture is already familiar: the Celeron G39x0 looks like a young and old A6, the Pentium G32x0 is no less inferior to the ancient A4, the G4500T is a bad match for the A8-3870K, and the A8-76 looms dangerously above all this 50K:)

Is it possible to use the FM1 gaming platform today? No, it’s clear. Well, the role of FM2+ is given only mentally - we have always thought and continue to think that even when a computer is attached, it plays one of the purposes, a discrete video card has no alternative. You can also play any games (as imprisonment) pay i on IGP. From the point of view of today's statistics, the most important ones are those that the entire five-tiered platform does not compromise with the present day. budget decisions Intel. More precisely, Pentium and Core i3 with GPU HDG 530 are no worse than the older A8 for FM1, and the axis of all models up to HDG 510 inclusive (and the older “numberless ones”) are at least as good as the younger A6. And then A4. This has already hit the mark, so it’s not surprising - after all, the A4-3400 will have a new analogue of the Radeon HD 6450, which is de facto sold under the name Radeon R5 230. And the older A8 Radeon 6550D will be available soon deokart trichi Another level is close to the Radeon HD 5570. By the way, there are few discrete video cards, but here there are integrated solutions. This is how the new proposals of AMD itself look, but how many fates have passed. And Intel processors will only reach this level at a time, perhaps five years after the appearance of the FM1 platform, or close to six - as they will be more important than the company’s first GPUs, integrated “under the lid” of the processor (even on the edge of the chip).

Together

First of all, what needs to be clearly understood in the vysnovki – we did not encounter any problems during testing, regardless of the rest of the tests. Windows versions and daily set of programs. So, obviously, video drivers for older APUs are only available through Windows Update, but they are installed, and everything works fine - just like with the Ivy Bridge version of Intel (and the Sandy Bridge axis of the same 2011, and FM1, also works shortness).

In terms of hardware configuration, everything is still simple: absolutely standard (dosi) memory type DDR3, primary storage with the SATA600 interface, USB support 3.0 has been introduced, and PCI and PCIe buses are available for expansion cards - no such changes have been made to the market. Last but not least, you can get a small boost in gaming productivity by simply adding a discrete video card. Of course, there is no road to the senses, since the productivity of the solution for this platform is low - the road will not be used in the rest of the world.

For the sake of fairness, we tried to conduct such an experiment in 2011 rather than with the system of 2006, but everything worked out just as well for us. Problems could arise with the memory (through the transition from DDR2 to DDR3, which would become the end of the “zeros”), but not with other peripherals. And the axis with a computer in 2001 in 2006, everything would be even more difficult... AGP for video cards, Parallel ATA for savers, even exotic SDRAM or RDRAM memory - that's a long way to go: in 2006, for testing, we vikorized x64 -version of Windows XP (and at the end of the day Vista was released), and the first processors attached to it appeared only in 2003. Zagalom, just until about 2005-2006. The processes over the market began to finish the storm. Afterwards - repeated changes to the memory type (transition from DDR2 to DDR3 and the continuous process of DDR4 stagnation), and a leapfrog of processor sockets. Other interfaces have developed in an evolutionary manner to save money. Software security Mostly, it stabilized in queries that grew too quickly (which was due to the complexity of interfaces), but not clearly. And in some areas, many changes were not expected: the computer on which one could install and comfortably use Vista copes no better with the “ten”.

There is nothing surprising about the fact that all the systems of five decades ago are being put into operation. Well, the productivity of processors from 2006 to 2011 increased rapidly, lower from 2011 to 2016, so on the right, in the back, far from it (but crying and moaning from this drive in various forums and what is with them). It is clear that all these processors are either large or even more powerful - there is a lot to be found here. If we turn to our current heroine, the AMD FM1 platform, then in 2006 it would be top ivnyu that was shortest at that time Core 2 Duo/ Quad, and and their video part is on par with good discrete video cards of that time), in 2011 it was budgetary and already more intellectually gaming, and today... They themselves studied :) However, all the investments in such systems have long been lost, so productivity “not embossed” - then Thank you for those who did not break? If the situation is true and if you stop governing for other reasons, then when buying a new computer you can no longer worry about choosing. As a matter of fact, the integrated graphics of Intel processors have already reached this level, and the new AMD APUs are even higher. In terms of processor productivity, both have “grown up” - even in different ways, but still. So, don’t buy an old system on FM1 to replace it - it will be at least no worse, but at the same time cheaper. And if you don’t limit yourself to the cheapest propositions, then it’s definitely more beautiful. By the way, you don’t have to worry about what was available, but simply buy what is needed - since there was no computer in the first place. It's good, it's new.

Hello everyone. In this article you can thoroughly familiarize yourself with the main characteristics of FM2 and FM2+ processors. All processors have been added to the list: A4 to A10 series. The list of all processors for the FM2/FM2+ socket has processors upgraded due to reduced productivity (we have tried to arrange them this way): from the strongest to the weakest. Depending on the processor frequency, you can increase the values ​​in the arms - depending on the processor frequency (or the frequency in Boost mode). Prices for processors were taken from the cheapest online stores and are constantly updated. Therefore, there is no need to worry about the relevance of prices for FM2+/FM2 processors.

For low-end gaming computers, AMD has developed processors called APUs. They combine processor cores of average productivity with those that are already comparable to the standard video graphics cards. Current APUs use FM2 and FM2+ sockets.

The first processors with the FM2 socket appeared in 2012, but they were absolutely ridiculous with the first-generation APUs on the FM1 socket. Trinity and Richland cores are torn.

Roci came to replace FM2 in 2014. The new socket is the same with FM2, so when upgrading the system, you can initially add a new one to replace the old processor, and then a new processor.

If you plan to use the built-in graphics, it will be important when choosing a processor. For FM2 and FM2+ processor sockets, there are models without an installed video core, which should be included in the Athlon series. If you don’t worry about it, then, regardless of the presence of video outputs, the system will not start without installing a discrete card.

Let's look at the characteristics of processors. To upgrade, select Richland (FM2) and Kaveri (FM2+) kernels:

In contrast to most other processors with different sockets, AMD's solutions are designed to work with the same chipsets, and for this reason there is no sense in comparing them. Let's look at the characteristics of the remaining generation of chipsets.

As you can see, chipnets consist of a large number of SATA ports and supported by RAID levels.

Let's take a look at the productivity of older APUs for FM2 (A10-6800K) and FM2+ (A10-7870K) sockets

As can be seen from the table, the productivity of processors has not changed at all. The main feature of the platforms is the built-in video core. The results of their measured productivity in the 3DMark test are shown in the table:

The results of productivity improvements show that the new graphics perform better on DX10 and DX11 graphics, as compared to Cloud Gate and Fire Strike, which show a significant increase in productivity, but in the DX9 (Ice Storm) test the result is better.

When choosing a processor, you will increase your productivity as well as your energy efficiency. The greater the energy consumption, the greater the heating of the chip and, obviously, the greater the ability to reach the cooling system. We experienced energy gains in two countries: in the regime of inactivity and in the regime of renewed vantage.

The new ones tend to reduce energy efficiency, so that with similar productivity parameters they experience significantly less energy. In addition, there is support for the proprietary Mantle API, which allows you to reduce productivity gains in games supported by the API.