 |
Benchmarks : Tablet/MID GPAPU Performance: AMD "Brazos" APU (CPU+GPU) |
What is it?
"Brazos" is a new CPU architecture that includes a built-in GPU from AMD from the "Fusion" family - alias an "APU". "Brazos" targets low-end laptops, tablets and MIDs i.e. Intel's Atom territory. Other APUs target the desktop (see GPAPU Performance: AMD "Llano" APU (CPU+GPU)), mobile (see GPAPU Performance: AMD "Llano" Mobile APU (CPU+GPU)) and server/workstation market (see ).
"GPAPU" is General Processing (GP) using both the GPU (GPGPU) and the CPU (GPCPU) concurrently. We have worked to add support for APUs to all our GP benchmarks (Processing, Cryptography, Bandwidth) in Sandra 2011.
What are we measuring?
We are measuring the improvements in performance, power efficiency and cost efficiency ('bang-per-buck') of APUs compared to traditional discrete CPU + discrete GPU (if any) to end users. From a user’s point of view, it’s not important which chip in his system does the job, as long as they have to wait less, uses less power and costs less.
Thus we are measure GP performance (GPGPU, GPAPU) against native performance as well as software VM (.NET/Java):
Hardware Specifications
We are comparing an AMD E-Series "Brazos" APU (AMD E-350) against Intel Atom 330 + nVidia ION as well as the very latest Intel Atom D525 with built-in memory controller and integrated graphics.
| Specs. CPU/GPU |
AMD E-350 (incl. Radeon HD 6310) |
Intel Atom 330 + nVIDIA ION |
Intel Atom D525 (GMA 3150) |
| Speed |
1.6GHz CPU/ 500MHz GPU |
1.6GHz CPU / 1.1GHz GPU |
1.8GHz CPU / 500MHz GPU |
| Cores Threads / SP TMU ROP |
2C 2T / 80 8 4 |
2C 4T / 16 8 4 |
2C 4T / 8 |
| Caches L1/L2/L3 |
2x 512KB L2 |
2x 512KB L2 |
2x 512KB L2 |
| Total Power (TDP) |
18W |
24W (8W+16W) |
13W |
| Cost (USD) |
$130 (Asus E35M1-M PRO inc. CPU) |
$250 (Zotac IONITX-A-U inc. CPU and GPU) |
$90 (Gigabyte GA-D525TUD inc. CPU) |
Standard Processing Performance
We are testing native and software VM processing performance of the processors themselves, i.e. not using (GP)GPU - aka "traditional" benchmarking.
Results Interpretation: Higher values (GOPS) mean better performance.
Base 10 Multipliers: 1GOPS = 1000MOPS, 1MOPS = 1000kOPS, etc.
Environment: Windows 7 x64 SP1, latest AMD Catalyst, nVidia ForceWare and Intel drivers.
| CPU Processing Benchmarks |
AMD E-350 (incl. Radeon HD 6310 GPU) |
Intel Atom 330 + nVIDIA ION |
Intel Atom D525 (GMA 3150) |
Comments |
 |
.Net Dhrystone/Whetstone (GOPS) |
3.09 (8% higher) |
2.854 (baseline) |
3.44 |
In an VM environment Brazos performs better than the 330 Atom but not the higher clocked newer D525 version. |
 |
Native Dhrystone/Whetstone (GOPS) |
8.60 (20% higher) |
7.18 (baseline) |
8.28 |
Being and out-of-order design, the AMD design performs very well despite its frequency and number of threads disadvantage against both Atoms. |
Multi-Media Performance
We test raw native multi-media (SIMD) performance using any of the supported instruction sets (AVX, SSE, etc.) against GPAPU/GPGPU using any of the supported interfaces (OpenCL, DirectX ComputeShader/DirectCompute, CUDA).
Results Interpretation: Higher values (MPix/s) mean better performance.
Base 10 Multipliers: 1MPix/s = 1000kPix/s, 1kPix/s = 1000Pix/s, etc.
Environment: Windows 7 x64 SP1, latest AMD Catalyst, nVidia ForceWare and Intel drivers.
| Multi-Media Benchmarks |
AMD E-350 (incl. Radeon HD 6310) |
Intel Atom 330 + nVIDIA ION |
Intel Atom D525 (GMA 3150) |
Comments |
 |
.Net Multi-Media (Mpix/s) |
3.8 (74% higher) |
2.19 (baseline) |
3.08 |
Brazos is ahead of the competition: the Atoms just cannot keep up. |
 |
Native Multi-Media (MPix/s) |
13.79 (7% lower) |
14.88 (baseline) |
19.69 |
Brazos almost ties with the older 330 Atom even with its Hyper-Threading advantage while the newer Atom is still faster. |
 |
GPGPU Processing (MPix/s) |
16.64 (72% higher) |
9.697 (baseline) |
- |
nVIDIA's ION is way behind the built-in Radeon GPU and shouldn’t be taken into consideration if you buy a new system. |
|
GPAPU (CPU+GPU) Processing (MPix/s) |
18.18 (87% higher) |
- |
- |
Brazos can easily win this test in the APU configuration though the CPU does not contribute much: a clear win for the APU. |
Cryptographic Performance
We test cryptographic performance of the strongest common algorithms (AES256, SHA256) performance using any of the supported instruction sets (AVX, SSE, etc.) against GPAPU/GPGPU using any of the supported interfaces (OpenCL, DirectX ComputeShader/DirectCompute, CUDA).
Results Interpretation: Higher values (MB/s) mean better performance.
Base 2 Multipliers: 1MB/s = 1024kB/s, 1kB/s = 1024bytes/s, 1byte = 8bits, etc.
Environment: Windows 7 x64 SP1, latest AMD Catalyst, nVidia ForceWare and Intel drivers.
| Cryptography Benchmarks |
AMD E-350 (incl. Radeon HD 6310) |
Intel Atom 330 + nVIDIA ION |
Intel Atom D525 (GMA 3150) |
Comments |
 |
CPU (MB/s) |
118 (53% higher) |
77 (baseline) |
101 |
Brazos easily defeats both Atoms with ease, even without Hyper-Threading and slower clock. |
 |
GPGPU (MB/s) |
345 (183% higher, i.e. 2.8x) |
122 (baseline) |
- |
Again the old ION cannot keep up with the Radeon GPU, even it is scaled down. |
|
GPAPU (CPU+GPU) (MB/s) |
378 (210% higher, i.e. 3.1x) |
- |
- |
The superiority of this combination is obvious making Brazos the best performer by far: the APU makes all the difference. |
Efficiencies
Because not all things in life are evaluated to their true value, the next measurements will take into consideration various efficiency aspects:
| Performance vs. Cost (this measures 'bang-per-buck') |
AMD E-350 (incl. Radeon HD 6310) |
Intel Atom 330 + nVIDIA ION |
Intel Atom D525 (GMA 3150) |
Comments |
| Standard Native Cost Efficiency |
8600MOPS $130 (Asus E35M1-M PRO) 66.2 MOPS/$ |
7180MOPS $250 (Zotac IONITX-A-U) 28.7 MOPS/$ |
8280MOPS $90 (Gigabyte GA-D525TUD) 92 MOPS/$ |
Due to the nVidia GPU the old Atom+Ion combination is not cost effective, almost 3x an equivalent Brazos! The D525 Atom boards are now very cheap and thus 50% more cost effective at least on standard benchmarks. |
| Standard Native Cost Efficiency |
13.79Mpix/s (CPU) $130 (Asus E35M1-M PRO) 0.11 Mpix/$
18.80Mpix/s (APU) 0.14 Mpix/$ |
14.88Mpix/s (CPU+GPU) $250 (Zotac IONITX-A-U) 0.06 Mpix/$ |
19.69Mpix/s $90 (Gigabyte GA-D525TUD) 0.22 Mpix/$ |
Not even the GPU's significant performance contribution to the APU score can overcome the cost differential between Brazos and Atom boards ($40 or 44%), Brazos will need to come down in price a bit. |
| Performance vs. Power (this measures the efficiency of power design, or TDP) |
AMD E-350 (incl. Radeon HD 6310) |
Intel Atom 330 + nVIDIA ION |
Intel Atom D525 (GMA 3150) |
Comments |
| Standard Native Power Efficiency |
8600MOPS 18W 477.8MOPS/W |
7180MOPS 24W 299.2MOPS/W |
8280MOPS 13W 636.9MOPS/W |
Having incorporated a decent GPU, Brazos is a little behind D525 Atom, however the performance gain is worth it. The combination of Atom + ION it is not a good choice these days. |
| Multi-Media Native Power Efficiency |
13.79Mpix/s 18W 0.77Mpix/W (CPU)
18.80Mpix/s 18W 1.04Mpix/W (APU) |
14.88Mpix/s 24W 0.62Mpix/W (CPU+GPU) |
19.69Mpix/s 13W 1.51Mpix/W |
The Brazos APU is far more efficient than the older CPU+GPU Atom+ION combination; the newer Atom's D525 better performance at faster clock but lower power does pipe it to the post. |
| Performance vs. Speed (how performance scales with speed and how they perform at the same speed) |
AMD E-350 (incl. Radeon HD 6310) |
Intel Atom 330 + nVIDIA ION |
Intel Atom D525 (GMA 3150) |
Comments |
| Standard Native Speed Efficiency |
8600MOPS 1600MHz 5.375MOPS/MHz |
7180MOPS 1600MHz 4.488MOPS/MHz |
8280MOPS 1800MHz 4.600MOPS/MHz |
It is fairly obvious that AMD’s design has the best efficiency in his class; the newer Atom is not more efficient than the older sibling: it just runs at a higher frequency. |
Live Results @ SiSoftware Live Ranker
Related Articles
Final Thoughts / Conclusions
"Brazos" is a mixed combination that brings huge advantages when GP (either GPGPU or GPAPU) is used: the built-in GPU will not sit idle when extra processing power is required.
Efficiency wise, Brazos is worth it, even if it did not prove the most efficient due to its buit-in GPU which can perform very well in tasks that are mainstream today. It is clearly the choice for a low-power, quiet HTPC.
The Atom can only compete on cost - expect the many Atom-powered HTPCs, tablets/MIDs to get much cheaper though whether you should invest in one even at lower cost is debatable.
Please let us know what you thought of this article by voting using the icons/links below. Thank you for reading.
| 
© SiSoftware 1995-Present. All Rights Reserved. (Original (British) English by SiSoftware Staff)