Video Perspective: AMD A10-4600M vs Core i7-3720QM on Diablo III

Subject: Graphics Cards, Processors, Mobile | June 1, 2012 - 10:52 AM |
Tagged: video, trinity, Ivy Bridge, Intel, i7-3720QM, diablo iii, APU, amd, a10-4600m

So, apparently PC gamers are big fans of Diablo III, to the tune of 3.5 million copies sold in the first 24 hours.  That means there are a lot of people out there looking for information about the performance they can expect on various harware configurations with Diablo III.  Since we happened to have the two newest mobile processors and platforms on-hand, and because many people seemed to assume that "just about anything" would be able to play D3, we decided to put it to the test.

View Full Size

In our previous reviews of the AMD Trinity and Intel Ivy Bridge reference systems, the general consensus was that the CPU portion of the chip was better on Intel's side while the GPU portion was still weighted towards the AMD Trinity APU.  Both of these CPUs, the A10-4600M and the Core i7-3720QM, are the highest end mobile solutions from both AMD and Intel. 

View Full Size

The specifications weren't identical, but again, for a mobile platform, this was the best we could do.  With the AMD system only having 4GB of memory compared to the Ivy Bridge system with 8GB, that is one lone "stand out" spec.  The Intel HD 4000 graphics offer a noticeable upgrade from the HD 3000 on the Sandy Bridge platform but AMD's new HD 7660G (based on Cayman) also sees performance increase. 

View Full Size

We ran our tests at 1366x768 with "high" image quality settings and ran through a section of the early part of the game a few times with FRAPs to get our performance results.  We did also run some tests to an external monitor at 1920x1080 with "low" presets and AA disabled - both are reported in the video below.  Enjoy!

June 1, 2012 | 02:15 PM - Posted by pdjblum

Brief , highly informative, and interesting. Thanks.

September 1, 2013 | 05:57 AM - Posted by Rick (not verified)

Actually no matter if someone doesn't understand then its up to other people
that they will assist, so here it happens.

Here is my web page :: тфайл

June 1, 2012 | 04:10 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

but, but, AMD is doomed right? *eye roll*

June 1, 2012 | 05:11 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

but, but, I can't run superPi as fast ... =(

June 2, 2012 | 12:07 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Most people don't know this, But. SuperPi is a program designed to run on a Intel processors.

June 1, 2012 | 07:01 PM - Posted by PaulDriver

AMD's 'Joe Sixpack' and 'Mrs Bigboxer' focus really does seem to be producing systems with more mainstream appeal then Intel's current offerings.

June 1, 2012 | 07:56 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

its all about bang for $buck.

June 5, 2012 | 03:36 AM - Posted by Kyle (not verified)

I commented on this on the youtube video, but the areas used in the game are not adequate at testing this performance. The following areas should be used. They are not hard to get to:

Leoric's Manor
Nephalem Temple

June 13, 2012 | 02:05 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

This test is already biased torwards amd with that test system having a ssd.

June 13, 2012 | 10:38 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

reference to MaximumPC.

A10s are bang for the buck.
Sad thing is that it cannot outperform i5 720 or intel duo quad core.

June 20, 2012 | 03:46 AM - Posted by Darksnesses (not verified)

My amd A6-3400m with Radeon HD 6520g outperforms that sandy bridge in D3. You intel fanboys can brag and boast about the extra raw cpu power of the sandybridge but fact is no one cares. The Amd A6, A8, and A10 laptop chips can still do anything and everything that 80% of all PC users need it to do and you will not notice more than a 1-2 second difference. But intel will never be able to compete in the gpu aspect of APU chips because AMD owns ATi and is now showing the world the reason they bought them. Every game AMD a hard time when there stocks dipped after they purchased ATi and spectators said AMD would bottom up. But it has turned out to be the best thing they could have ever done. There is not a need for more CPU power in this day and age. X86 architecture has already passed every expectation anyone could have ever had for it and as more performance is needed we simply add more cores and optimize load distribution with every need cpu and operating system release. Do research people. AMD turbo core is buggy at best now and its not the CPU to blame. It is Windows 7 not being optimized for it. When windows 8 comes out we will see much better multi thread performance out of the AMD chips. Also to the moron that said this review here is bias to AMD because of the solid state drive. You are so ignorant and know nothing about how a computer works. A hard drive will not increase frame rates. Only initial load time. If anything, The HP with the intel chip has the upper hand with 8gb of ram instead of the 4gb offered in the AMD reference laptop.

in the end Intel is doomed if they do not find a way to create a high end GPU or buy Nvidia. This day and age graphics and stream computing is far more important than adding another few mhz to raw cpu power.

October 18, 2012 | 12:17 PM - Posted by MiloTheFirst (not verified)

I really find your comment very biassed. and dont get me wrong, i admit i have had a more pleasent time with amd processors than intel, however. you are not being fair while saying "The Amd A6, A8, and A10 laptop chips can still do anything and everything that 80% of all PC users need it to do and you will not notice more than a 1-2 second difference.", i personally have an amd A6 in my laptop and i find its perfomance overall slightly superior than an intel i5, and in fact i bought it thinking mainly in gaming, but now that i have been trying and learning how to use different programs, i can notice how the diference in the in cpu matters big time. while in graphic based progarm such as autocad the outstanding gpu its a blessing, in others such as video edition which require more complex rendering intel has the advantage.

currently i need my computer to compute a great deal of very complex phisic equations for my tesis in college, so i was thinking in looking for amd newest processor, but it seems that for this specific purpouse i would do better with an intel. if anyone could tell me a reason why amd would work better please do,

October 26, 2012 | 01:41 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Holy crap! You're more of a nerd than I am!

August 8, 2012 | 12:52 AM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Well I agree with most of what darknesses says as multicore really isn't utilized that well if at all. And gamers who own quad+ cores don't need the extra cores an i3 is more cost effective. However if u have a pc should just get dedicated graphics... A pentium g620 + 6670 is far better for performance.

August 12, 2012 | 09:23 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

I love hearing these people talk about Intel being a better buy even when AMD shows a clear win in a market segment.

The truth is AMD is now going after specific segments and not Intel, this hole intel is better under specific test then AMD is crap as we all know that intel cheats. Real world test are the only way to get an accurate look at what you are really getting.

This banterring about who performs better under different circumstances is just fan boys trying to justify why there system does perform as well.

AMD performs better then Intel in the situation above. I am happy to see that AMD can perform even if they are in specific segments!

September 6, 2012 | 08:46 PM - Posted by Trent (not verified)

It's not exactly biased, but slightly fishy, because the intel processor had more RAM.

November 27, 2012 | 01:10 PM - Posted by Mike B (not verified)

So what one would be better for gaming if RAM was the same, and the HD was the same?

The A10-4600M with 2GB AMD Radeon HD 7670M Discrete-Class Graphics


the i7-3720QM with NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M Graphics with 2GB GDDR5 video memory?


January 11, 2013 | 04:31 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

a10-4600M laptops do not come equipped with 2gbs, they come with 512mb

December 14, 2013 | 12:34 PM - Posted by David F. (not verified)

I have a pc with i7 3730QM and 660m it plays games very well. 720p gaming. Lenovo y580.

December 14, 2013 | 01:26 PM - Posted by David F. (not verified)

What I meant to say was I have a pc with an i7 3610 and a geforce 660m. Plays good. 720p gaming. Lenovo y580.

March 1, 2014 | 07:53 PM - Posted by shitfuck (not verified)

its this simple... amd fm series is 2 level cache i series has l3 layer...and is really a big diff in cpu ever amd fm series has a built in powerful ati hd series vc..while intel i series has a weak hd series...that means if you compare fm to i in terms of cpu performace amd is dead,,but in gpu intel is dead...the best comparative amd cpu to compare with intel is the phenom in the old days or the fx in the modern age hehehe...if your not building a pc with phenom or fx to kill intel ..then the best solution is intel with ati grapics card...

June 12, 2014 | 06:27 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

All of the debates about the intel and amd CPU war is just a numbers game as it has been proven over and over that the complete system specification matters more than individual components. A great combination of components chosen to integrate with the best results.

Intel has all this single core processing power and all the intel CPU has been able beat AMD is on that pretext only. There is no way the laptop benchmarks are going to compare to desktop systems and I see alot of people clueless about what is really going on.

Everything is going lower on power consumption for a reason and running low voltage CPUs are slower to begin with. People are paying upwards of $1500 for i5-4200u and even, yesz, even i3 CPUs that cost well over a grand in a laptop system. Fact is that coupled with good discrete video, raw CPU power on a single core is not what makes the system better. And all intel fans have done is push that issue for several years.

AMD has proven they now have the thrown on discrete desktop graphics cards. This is not a debate. It's a fact. They now have much better rated and faster discrete graphics solutions than nVidea on Laptops and again, not a debate. A fact.

Now, we have i7 CPUs called quad core, on laptops, and everyone thinks these are fast. They are so slow, and an i7-4500u is pretty much less of a CPU than some of the desktop i3 processors. Today's laptop solutions are coupling with a low-mid level CPU and graphics that will get the job done because the goal is to take the need for CPU's to do all the work and let the GPU manage alot of the intensive workload relating to graphics procesing, that more powerful CPU's have been picking up the slack on. Raw power from the CPU core is not even going to matter so much and intel came to the party much later than AMD on this one people.

So, it's just a fact AMD is heading in the correct direction because they have both CPU and GPU under one umbrella and that gives them so much of an advantage over intel. Who gives a crap if intel has a desktop CPU that will run circles around an AMD CPU in a single core with tests that are meant to stress only RAW power of the CPU. Why there is even a debate among fellow computer users never made any sense to me because an open mind can actually make sense of things and only the humble can actually learn something valuable. I am not a fan of anything. But I do know that if you want to take intel's super powered 4930k desktop CPU and show incredible benchmarks, the intel fans will try to bask in glory. However, no matter what configuration is used to show off and brag of the incredible power house built around this intel 4930k, I bet you there are several who have built a system around the AMD FX CPU that has the right blend of companents, that can keep up with and sometimes exceed those scores that I always find so suspect with intel CPU benchmarks that are posted. Next thing intel lovers will say is that AMD CPU's use too much power. Oh I love that one.

If you know anything, you would know that comparing CPUs that are meant for high end gaming, then you will know one of the common comparisons known as "intel 4700k vs AMD FX8350. Here we go. These are the CPU's that were pitted against each other. The bickering begins.

AMD is 125W 32nm die, while intel is 84W and 24nm. I love how this actually matters. Fact is, that in the realm of performance junkies, nobody is worried about tweaking up the power to prove how much of a man they are. So to me, I already know that AMD will always beat intel when it comes to overclocking and withstanding the heat. AMD in this example, it is said that once the 2 CPU's are at the same mhz, the intel will outperform. Yes it will. So lets take it up several notches. AMD needs about 600mhz above the intel in order to be at a comparable speed. ANd AMD can do it without a hitch. Extra heat? So what, water cooling, even high end air. So intel ups the ante. Lets overclock our 4700k. oops. Intel has a bad habit of becoming excessively hot. And what? They do not like to be HOT. So if you are lucky, ytou might get a good die and your 4700K will overclock nicely to 4.6Ghz. But do not be surprised if you are one who gets a die that only lets you go to 4.4Ghz stable. ANd AMD will handle even more. I have seen 5.3Ghz on an FX8350 stable. And I know that with the newer AMD graphics monsters, my system will eat that intel off the planet. The additional power to get the intel up to the performance level of an AMD FX8350 overclocked to the gills makes it eat as much or more wattage than the AMD. And intel just cannot handle it. As the expression goes, if you cannot stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. Don't get me wrong, I know some of you intel owners have good CPUs will have the ability to catch up and maybe surpass an FX8350 on an extreme overclock, but it does not happen often and not with every CPU chip as they are known to be buggy when it comes to overclocking past 4.4 on alot of them. AMD has such a consistent CPU with alot more raw power that is un-used than an intel. And let's not forget the ones building system to reach world record status do not use Intel CPUs. AMD all the way.

So does any of it matter? Not as much as people think. The marketing is all smoke and mirrors. This raw power is becoming less relevant because most of what people need a computer to do is easily done with lower voltage, and less powerful CPU's. We don't need all that RAW power intel fans always brag about when using single core applications.

AMD was prepared long before intel. Do you think AMD just releases their products when the finish developing? The are many years ahead of us. They have the server market. They have the GPU market. You think a few enthusiasts looking to prove a point by posting higher framerates using an i7 quad core desktop CPU makes AMD go home with their tail between their legs? I am sure they laugh. Because at the cost of losing a morsel of bread, they are taking home the remainder of the loaf.

In short, intel's RAW CPU power that has been touted over the past several years has been all hype. It does not require all that RAW power to get the job done whether it be in the office, a high end game, or just at home doing some online shopping. An AMD system c an be built to accomplish the same things, and do it adequately, and almost always at a much better price. If you get 100FPS on a game, and I get 90FPS, your 10% performance increase can easily be matched by making some tweaks, or a better GPU (which will no doubt be an AMD). But it is almost never necessary to have to change to an intel CPU. End the war people. Facts are facts.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <blockquote><p><br>
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.

More information about formatting options

By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.