Over the past couple of years, AMD has slowly released their mainstream brand of Kaveri processors. In turn, we have reviewed them, and they consistently aim to provide a midrange integrated gaming option, especially for those on a budget. The recent release of the A8-7670K was perhaps not that exciting, as AMD is filling up their product stack with new parts, taking advantage of an improved manufacturing process and aggressive binning. To that end, we're taking a different tack with this review. Alongside the regular tests, we also corralled Rocket League (an amazingly simple yet popular take on car football/soccer that sits on the precipice of e-sports glory) into a benchmark aimed at those sub-$600 gaming systems.

The AMD A8-7670K

Earlier this year, AMD announced their new line of Kaveri Refresh processors, starting with the A10-7870K (which we reviewed here). As the name suggests, these are Kaveri processors at their core, still based on the combination of Steamroller processor cores and 2nd generation Graphics Core Next (GCN) microarchitecture for graphics. These new refresh models are designed to take advantage of minor improvements in manufacturing, resulting in the ability to get higher clock speed for the same power consumption, even 18 months after the first Kaveri processors hit the scene. As a result, these Refresh processors — or, to use AMD's internal code name, "Godavari" — fill in the blank spots in the product stack and supersede the older parts, with the aim of squeezing in more frequency and performance for the same power consumption. It sounds deceptively simple — improve your process, refresh the part at the same price, and reap the benefits.

If we look at AMD's current lineup, we see that this new A8-7670K surpasses the older A10-7700K on the specification sheet, and comes in cheaper when brand-new.

AMD Kaveri Lineup
  A10-
7870K
A10-
7850K
A10-
7800
A10-
7700K
A8-
7670K
A8-
7650K
A8-
7600
 X4
860K
Price $137 $134 $131 $120 $118 $104 $89 $85
Modules 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Threads 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
Core Freq. (GHz) 3.9-4.1 3.7-4.0 3.5-3.9 3.4-3.8 3.6-3.9 3.3-3.8 3.1-3.8 3.7-4.0
Compute Units 4+8 4+8 4+8 4+6 4+6 4+6 4+6 4+0
Streaming
Processors
512 512 512 384 384 384 384 N/A
IGP Freq. (MHz) 866 720 720 720 754 720 720 N/A
TDP 95W 95W 65W 95W 95W 95W 65W 95W
DRAM
Frequency
2133 2133 2133 2133 2133 2133 2133 1866
L2 Cache 2x2MB 2x2MB 2x2MB 2x2MB 2x2MB 2x2MB 2x2MB 2x2MB
 

As it stands, the A8-7670K is a dual-module 3.6 GHz base frequency processor with a boost frequency up to 3.9 GHz. It comes with six graphics compute units, which translates to 384 streaming processors, similar to other A8 parts, but at a slightly higher IGP frequency of 754 MHz. The combined increase in processor and integrated graphics frequencies come at no extra cost in thermal design, with the A8-7670K at the same 95W TDP.

One of AMD's marketing strategies with these ~$100 processors is the price/performance angle. Aside from the integrated graphics, each of the AMD processors can pair with an R7 240 or R7 250 graphics card (DDR3 or GDDR5; AMD suggests an R7 250 GDDR5, as you might expect) in a hybrid dual graphics scenario, boosting performance. Thus, for the same price as an APU and an R7 250 graphics card, on average, AMD aims to offer a better gaming experience — especially for games that run at around 60 frames per second on medium settings — than a similarly priced Intel + NVIDIA platform. We've seen this marketing spiel corroborated in previous reviews, and would expect not to see anything different here. At launch, AMD put a $118 price on the A8-7670K, which, in recent sales, has been pushed down to under $100 at times.

The A8-7670K is an FM2+ socket processor, and thus requires either an A88X, A85X, A78 or A68 motherboard to go with it in order to take full advantage. As part of the launch, and given that this processor is a slightly boosted A8-7650K, AMD sees value in pairing it with something like a $50 A68H motherboard, making an APU+MB combination around $150 when on sale. However, as one might imagine, due to the age of the FM2/FM2+ socket, there are relatively few "new" motherboards on the market. The last one we reviewed was MSI's A88X-G45 Gaming, which brought over some of the components seen on its new Intel gaming motherboards, but other manufacturers have also put out M.2 capable AMD chipset-based motherboards as well.

A8-7670K Power Consumption & Overclocking
POST A COMMENT

154 Comments

View All Comments

  • tipoo - Thursday, November 19, 2015 - link

    In DX12 that will matter, in DX11 going from single threaded to multithreaded for draw calls doens't help. Check the link. Reply
  • tipoo - Thursday, November 19, 2015 - link

    On the other hand " Also note that the FX 6300's DX12 results on R7 260X, GTX 970 and R9 290X comprehensively beat the more expensive Core i3 4130." Reply
  • silverblue - Thursday, November 19, 2015 - link

    A lot may be simply down to the number of floating point units; the Pentium has two, the i3 has two with turbo and hyperthreading, and the FX6300 has three with turbo and a sort of hyperthreading mode as the FlexFPU can handle two 128-bit instructions at once or work together for a single 256-bit instruction, though Piledriver is horrendously crippled with the latter. Reply
  • Kutark - Thursday, November 19, 2015 - link

    I feel like a "bruh" would have been better here instead of "dude". Reply
  • Morawka - Thursday, November 19, 2015 - link

    no because of cache size, and more actual hardware on the i7's die Reply
  • hojnikb - Saturday, November 21, 2015 - link

    What kind of actual hardware does i7 have, that i3 dont ?

    I mean, i3 is really just an i7 cut in half.
    Reply
  • eanazag - Wednesday, November 18, 2015 - link

    I fully expect AMD to disappoint with Zen. I see no facts that indicate they will not do what they did in the past - fail to meet expectations at the time they said they would. Reply
  • Oxford Guy - Wednesday, November 18, 2015 - link

    Just like when they were beating Intel's Netburst. Reply
  • JoeMonco - Wednesday, November 18, 2015 - link

    And that was what? Like 15 years ago? It's definitely brought AMD great financial success that they beat a CPU microarchitecture from nearly 2 decades ago. Reply
  • silverblue - Thursday, November 19, 2015 - link

    I don't think anybody was saying that. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now