AMD A10-6700 APU Richland Processor Review


<< PREVIOUS            NEXT >>

AMD A10-6700 Conclusion

So the question is whether or not the 35W lower TDP on the A10-6700 makes up for 200MHz slower clock speed. The benchmark results are very clear. The A10-6700 performs exactly the same as the A10-6800K when it comes to graphics performance. That makes sense, because the GPU portions of both APUs are identical.


The CPU portions are identical as well, except for the clock speeds. Those clock speeds translate into slightly lower benchmark scores across the board in the CPU tests. But if you look closely, you’ll notice that the 200MHz doesn’t make all that big of a difference. In fact, I would dare say that you probably wouldn’t see any difference in actual performance between the two APUs during normal usage. You’d have to overclock the A10-6800K to see any type of measurable difference in anything other than a benchmark.

So I guess the search for the answer really boils down to a question of whether or not you are planning on overclocking your processor. That brings up other possible questions as well. If you are an enthusiast with a penchant for overclocking, are you going to settle for a $148.99 APU? (Newegg | Amazon) I suppose that’s really a question of budget. Either way, if you are planning on overclocking, then I would say that the A10-6800 is certainly the better deal of the two. An extra 200MHz stock, plus the ability to overclock for the same price is well worth the 35W of potential power usage for someone like me. I don’t particularly worry about power consumption much.

If you are not going to overclock, on the other hand, then it makes total sense to save the potential power and go for the slightly slower processor. The problem is, I’m not positive that you’ll actually ever see that 35W of power saved. It’s extremely hard to isolate APU power consumption. Under normal usage and with all other components identical, the APUs used the same amount of power. I used a Kill-a-Watt EZ to measure power consumption and it was nearly identical in every case. Sometimes the A10-6700 used more, sometimes the A10-6800K used more. Under heavy load, of course, the A10-6800K used more, but never 35W more until I overclocked both the CPU and GPU portions of the A10-6800K.

The bottom line is that I am really torn on the value of the A10-6700. I am an enthusiast. I overclock my components. I don’t really ever consider power consumption in my decisions. At the same time, I know that power consumption is an ever increasingly important factor for a lot of consumers. For me, it isn’t worth it. I would buy the A10-6800K ten times out of ten over the A10-6700 for the same price. But I can’t speak for everyone.


+ Beats comparatively priced Intel CPUs
+ No Need to get a New Motherboard
+ 35W lower TDP than the A10-6800K


– Performance over Trinity doesn’t justify pricing
– 200MHz slower for the same price as A10-6800K
– Locked Processor


  • Performance: 8.00
  • Overclock: N/A
  • Construction: 9.00
  • Functionality: 9.50
  • Value: 7.50

Final Score: 8.50 out of 10.

COMMENT QUESTION: How often do you upgrade your PC?



<< PREVIOUS            NEXT >>

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>