AMD Carrizo FX-8800P Benchmarks (15W)

Good performance at 15W, higher potential, but not enough for gaming.

AMD Carrizo FX logo

AMD Carrizo FX 12 compute cores logo So, recently, the new AMD Carrizo chips have become available (scarcely) and I got my hands on the HP Envy 15Z-ah000 with an FX-8800P APU (review here).

Like many others have discovered, the HP Envy 15Z-ah000 FX-8800P Carrizo APU is limited to 15W cTDP, a limitation that was imposed by HP and cannot be removed easily. The FX-8800P cTDP can be configured to a value between 15W and 35W. The reason for this limitation is to allow manufacturers to use the chip in different kinds of machines with different kind of cooling and to allow differentiation, or something. But, the end result for the consumer is that you get a rather low performance Carrizo APU, compared with its full potential, as a budget gaming chip. It is important to understand that HP did not declared the cTDP in their 15Z, they simply marketing it as the FX-8800P. Without talking morality, this is a misleading practice, common in the marketing world.

Anyway, I did some small tests for the FX-8800P, to see how it compares to Intel’s 15W counterparts, the I5-U and I7-U. Also included are result tests of the FX-7600P AMD Kaveri APU. I’ve used notebookcheck’s tests for those (linked to at the bottom). This is a short one, don’t worry.

These are the CPUs I’ve compared. Brief specifications:

Intel : GPU / CPU TDP Core EU Dedicated memory
HD5000, I7-4650U 15W Haswell GT3, 22nm 40@200-1100MHZ No, shared memory
HD5500, I5-5200U Broadwell GT2, 14nm 24@300-950MHZ No, shared memory
HD5200 Iris Pro, I7-4750HQ Haswell GT3e, 22nm 40@200-1300MHZ 128MB eDRAM
HD6000, I7-5250U Broadwell GT3, 14nm 48@300-1000MHZ No, shared memory
AMD: GPU / CPU Core Shaders/CUs Dedicated memory
Radeon R7 Carrizo FX-8800P 15W 15W (there are 35W variants) Carrizo GCN 1.2, 28nm 512 shaders, 8CUs (guesstimation), core@300-800MHZ No, shared memory
Radeon R7 Kaveri FX-7600P 35W Kaveri GCN 1.1, 28nm 512 shaders, 8CUs, core@550-680MHZ No, shared memory

Let’s start with some 3D performance in games and synthetic benchmarks

mobile integrated GPU comparison Intel-U vs AMD FX-8800P Carrizo

What do we see? That the Intel I5-5200U with its HD5500 integrated GPU isn’t much faster than the FX-8800P, or in some cases, not faster at all. Now, remember we are talking here on two 15W chips, head to head and remember that the AMD APU is far more limited/slower clockwise/IPC.

Remember that the CPU, in games, downclocks to around 1.3GHZ and we already know that AMD’s drivers add considerably API overhead, so I wouldn’t be surprised to discover that the GPU performance here is limited also by the CPU, besides the memory limitations and the core downclock.

Some more numbers:

FX-7600P 35W (Kaveri) I7-5250U (HD6000) I7-4750HQ (HD5200, GT3e) I7-4650U (HD5000) I5-5200U (HD5500) FX-8800P 15W, Radeon R7
40 22 30 25 GFXBenh 3.1
15000 15200 13630 13951 Octane V.2
235 146 325 187 170 194 Luxmark 2.0, Room, GPU only
31 31 46 27 26 22.5 Cinebench R15, OpenGL
223 260 612 256 260 202 Cinebench R15 MT, CPU
16.4 19.5 8.7 18.1 19 16.7 wPrime 32MB
5700 9900 4600 4800 4200 3DMark 13, Cloud Gate, Standard

Pretty nice for a 15W AMD chip based on the old Bulldozer architecture.

Throttling. The FX-8800P is throttling under load. The number are around 300-500MHZ for the GPU core and 1.3GHZ for the CPU core with some jumps in clocks, though the GPU clocks usually set around 300-350MHZ stable after a while. Let’s take a look at the CPU and GPU utilization statistics and clocks (HWInfo):

FX-8800P 15W CPU and GPU usage World of Tanks

FX-8800P CPU and GPU clocks World of Tanks

HP Envy 15Z FX-8800P 15W Furmark

Besides the fact that there is an obvious throttling here, as we already know, it seems that there is a utilization problem of the CPU and GPU. It might be a result of the memory system being overloaded and even some kind of reading errors. Though I didn’t add those, GFXBench numbers behavior were similar and the CPU and GPU were underutilized too. Prime95 and wPrime benchmarks did result in 100% core usage.

And some additional synthetic FX-8800P benchmarks, including the 3DMark API overhead test:

AMD Carrizo FX-8800P 15W API overhead test (HP Envy 15Z)

The API overhead numbers are pretty nice too and are much higher than the Intel number for I7-4770R with its Iris Pro integrated GPU (source) at about 50% for DX12 and around 85-90% with Mantle. It also related to what I’ve mentioned earlier – the Radeon R7 integrated GPU is probably limited by the CPU in games. I guess that DirectX12 / Vulkan games, accompanies by a good, less limited AMD APU, will see a big boost, with the right optimized application.

AMD Carrizo FX-8800P 15W Cinebench 15 OpenGL and CPU benchmark (HP Envy 15Z) AMD Carrizo FX-8800P 15W Octance V2 benchmark (HP Envy 15Z) AMD Carrizo FX-8800P 15W 3DMark (HP Envy 15Z)

I’ll add battery performance tests from HP Envy 15Z-ah000, for a 48Wh battery. The FX-8800P could easily do 5-6W consumption for very low loads (like reading/writing) and around 7-8.5W for common use like internet browsing, excel sheets and stuff.

HP Envy 15Z Review Battery performance

The Carrizo FX-8800P 15W is around as fast as the Intel 15W counter parts for the most part and it seems that AMD has optimized it well for this scenario. Keep in mind we are talking a 28nm APU here, as opposed to Intel’s Haswell 22nm and Broadwell 14nm. Carrizo chips also implement fully HSA 1.0 and as more and more applications will start using it well, the Carrizo (and later chips) will be more cost effective.

As my subjective experience, in “power saver” mode, comparing the HP Envy 15Z laptop to my everyday work laptop, Dell e7440 with an I5-4210U, the HP Envy 15Z felt faster, sincerely, and the E7440 comes with a 250GB SSD vs the 750GB 5400RPM basic HDD in the 15Z. So, this chip has potential and so are laptops that are equipped with it, but not as a gaming chip at 15W, at least not under DX11.

I’m not that it is as good for the 25-35W scenario, but I’m pretty sure the integrated GPU could use another 200-300MHZ core clocks and a steady CPU core 2.4GHZ clocks would have helped the performance considerably.

It remains to be seen what the 25-35W Carrizo FX-8800P can do and we’ll see it soon enough with laptops from Lenovo or others, and maybe some mini-PC systems. I guess that this chip could be great for $400 laptops, if set to a higher cTDP. Remember that it is cheaper than Intel counter parts and laptops equipped with it should be cheaper to (though it is not 1:1).
Sources: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

0 0 vote
Article Rating
Notify of

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Bavani Sankar
Bavani Sankar
4 years ago

Bottom line, AMD came up with a nice offering for mid range gaming laptops, but OEMs totally ruined it. I’ve been expecting so much out of AMD, and now this happens. It hurts to even expect anymore. I wouldn’t be surprised if AMD closed shop now.

4 years ago

15w intel is better than 15w AMD

4 years ago
Reply to  maroon1

it looks like they perform about the same, with the AMD being cheaper though.

4 years ago
Reply to  Barron

They don’t perform the same. The GPU performance might be close, but Core i5 easily beat in CPU performance

As for price, I don’t know how much AMD offering cost

ALso, keep in mind that intel also have core i3 option (same iGPU as i5, but slightly slower CPU)

4 years ago
Reply to  maroon1

The GPU is way powerful if you ask me, but the bottom line performance is quite limited by factors like the memory bandwidth and mostly the 15W cTDP in this case

4 years ago
Reply to  maroon1

in what way? Obviously you have never used the hardware, and have ignore countless benchmarks. Just another intel fanboy!

4 years ago
Reply to  overlord

That’s a desktop, no?

4 years ago
Reply to  Junky

Yep 🙂

Cristian Soave
Cristian Soave
4 years ago

Good job, thx!.

4 years ago
Reply to  Cristian Soave