AMD Athlon X4-845 Carrizo Processor Review

Introduction Even though the overwhelming majority of media attention revolves around AMD's upcoming Zen architecture and AM4 socket, it's important to not overlook new additions to the current range. The company's Carrizo architecture is the final iteration of Bulldozer which launched way back in 2011. So what does Carrizo bring to the table? Firstly, Carrizo is a major step forward towards 25x20 and delivers much better performance per watt compared to Kaveri. This is due to the "real SoC" design which positions the Southbridge and I/O ports onto the chip itself. On another note, the voltage adaptive function reduces voltage variation by a significant degree which can result in power saving gains of 19 percent. Evidently, AMD is trying to produce new processors which target affordability and low power consumption. A few weeks after CES, AMD officially unveiled two APUs based on the Kaveri architecture and the Athlon X4 845 which utilises four Excavator cores. This particular CPU features a base frequency of 3.5GHz and maximum turbo reaching 3.8GHz. Additionally, the processor has a very respectable TDP of 65W, includes 2MB L2 cache and supports x8 PCI Express 3.0. Please note, the X4 845 requires a discrete graphics card and doesn't incorporate an iGPU. Despite this, the product has an enticing price point around £55 which is impressive given the quad-core configuration. Could this be the best budget CPU available today? Specification Packaging and Accessories The CPU is housed in a bold, attractive box which adopts a classic red and black colour scheme. Furthermore, the imposing Athlon logo looks fantastic and really stands out from the dark background. The front clearly states that there's no iGPU which should help consumers select a processor which matches their individual requirements. On the rear section, there's a very brief outline of the packaging's contents and the label displays information regarding the CPU's specification and part number. Once opened, the box contains the stock heatsink, warranty information/install guide, the processor itself and a case sticker. AMD's revised stock cooler is designed for low power usage scenarios and provides quieter operation than its predecessor. This "near-silent" 95W thermal solution can be deployed to achieve surprisingly decent overclocks although this isn't the method we rely on for AMD CPU reviews due to temperature restrictions. From this angle, we can see the traditional FM2+ mounting system and larger fan which provides better airflow at more acceptable RPM values. Sadly, the fan cable isn't sleeved but you can't expect much when using a cooler bundled with a sub-£60 processor. The CPU's appearance will be familiar if you own any FM2+ products and the model number is AD845XACI43KA. Test System and Methods Before we delve into any testing we would like to take this opportunity to overview our test system. Test System FM2+ Motherboard - Asus Crosshair Ranger A88X FM2+ RAM - 16GB Crucial Ballistix Sport XT (2 x 8GB) DDR3 1866MHz (10-10-10-30) CPU Cooler - Thermaltake Water 3.0 with Gelid GC-Extreme Graphics Card - Gigabyte G1 Gaming GTX 980Ti Power Supply - BeQuiet Dark Power Pro 850 Watt Main Storage Drive - Crucial M550 512GB Chassis - Lian Li T80 Test Bench Displays - U2868PQU 4K Operating System - Windows 10 Pro 64 Bit Z87 Motherboard - ASUS Maximus VII Ranger RAM - 16GB Crucial Ballistix Sport XT (2 x 8GB) DDR3 1866MHz (10-10-10-30) CPU Cooler - Thermaltake Water 3.0 with Gelid GC-Extreme Graphics Card - Gigabyte G1 Gaming GTX 980Ti Power Supply - BeQuiet Dark Power Pro 850 Watt Main Storage Drive - Crucial M550 512GB Chassis - Lian Li T80 Test Bench Displays - U2868PQU 4K Operating System - Windows 10 Pro 64 Bit Games Used Ashes of the Singularity (DirectX 12) Rise of the Tomb Raider Test Software 3DMark - available here AIDA64 Engineer - available here Cinebench - available here Compubench - available here CPUID HWMonitor - available here CPU-Z - available here Handbrake - available here Prime95 - available here WinRAR - available here WPrime - available here Test Procedure Here at eTeknix, we endeavour to disclose key information regarding the benchmarking process so that readers can quantify the results and attempt to replicate them using their own hardware. When it comes to CPU reviews, the benchmarks are pretty self-explanatory although there are a few exceptions. Please note, we prefer to re-test each CPU within a product's performance range to ensure the results are completely accurate and reflect any changes to our samples over time or enhancements via graphics drivers. This means we now include fewer results, but they are more accurate and easier to decipher. As always, your choice of motherboard, the silicon lottery and other factors can yield different numbers and there's always a margin for error when using software. Therefore, your experience may vary. Saying that, each benchmark is run at least three times and the average figure is taken to try to reduce the effect of hardware variation. Any important details regarding the benchmarks will be listed below. Handbrake To stress processors to their absolute limit and accurately judge performance in video editing workloads, we transcode a 7.7GB compilation of gaming footage. This particular file is freely available from here. The captured footage is 22 minutes and 12 seconds long, has a bit rate of 50.1 Mbps and uses the Advanced Video Codec. Additionally, the video runs at a constant 30 frames-per-second and opts for a 3820x2140 (4K) resolution. Once loaded into Handbrake, we transcode the 4K MP4 to a 1080p MKV file. Both the average frames-per-second and time taken are recorded to provide our readers with an idea of estimate video transcoding project times. CPU Benchmarks - Ashes of the Singularity, Cinebench, Handbrake, WPrime and WinRAR Ashes of the Singularity The new Ashes of the Singularity CPU benchmark absolutely hammers CPUs and it's able to thoroughly test multi-core performance. While this is an extreme benchmark, the results are fascinating and help us to distinguish between various tiers of processors. At stock values, the AMD X4-845 just edges the A10-7850K although both products struggle to complete the strenuous benchmark. Even though the overclocking headroom is small, a boost in performance can be seen. Cinebench R15 The CPU at its stock configuration is capable of outputting very good Cinebench scores and easily defeats the G3200 in multi-threaded benchmarking. On another note, the performance is remarkably similar to the A10-7850K. Overclocking the X4-845 enhances the both the single-threaded and multi-threaded performance rather well. Handbrake When transcoding a large 4K video file, the AMD X4-845 completed the task in a relatively impressive time considering its target audience. Saying that, it was slower than the A10-7850K when using its base frequency. Thankfully, overclocking helps matters and allows the CPU to fare better compared to the competition. WPrime The AMD X4-845 does remarkably well throughout the WPrime benchmark and the calculation time is much quicker than the A10-7850K. As you can see, overclocking extends this lead even further and it's another strong showing. WinRAR Sadly, the processor doesn't handle WinRAR compression very well and posts disappointing numbers. Memory Benchmarks - AIDA64 Memory Bandwidth In terms of memory bandwidth, the AMD X4-845 offers good performance and it's relatively close to the A10-7850K. Memory Latency The latency figure of 97.8ns is higher than I expected and the largest recorded number of any CPU we've encountered thus far. OpenCL Benchmarks - Compubench Compubench CL The CPU's OpenCL performance is worthy of praise and defeats other options in a similar pricing category. Overclocking increases the gap by a good margin too. In contrast to this, the physics calculation lingered behind other products even when an overclock was applied. Also, the lack of an integrated graphics chip means you're bound by the CPU's performance. Discrete GPU Benchmarks 3DMark In 3DMark, the AMD X4-845 couldn't compete with either the A10-7850K or the G3220. While the gap is far from ideal, consumers opting for a budget processor probably aren't overly concerned with synthetic scores. Also, overclocking the CPU appears to resolve this drop off in performance and it's extremely beneficial. Ashes of the Singularity Despite the mediocre stock 3DMark score, the processor fares much better when tackling real-world gaming scenarios. During the strenuous Ashes of the Singularity benchmark, the AMD X4-845 exhibited a good lead compared to the competition and overclocking really contributes to outputting great frame-rates. Rise of the Tomb Raider There's very little to choose between various processors in this price range as they output frame rates within a margin of error. Once again, overclocking does have a significant impact and helps to maintain a more fluid gaming experience. Overclocking Overclocking Sadly, the overclocking headroom is severely limited due to a locked multiplier and you can only make small BCLK adjustments. Even when using an extreme cooling solution, I hit a peak of 106MHz and couldn't go past this point. This was the case when I applied more voltage and attempted to stabilise the memory controller. Please note, the voltage reading at stock is higher than Kaveri processors which may inhibit the overclocking somewhat. Honestly, it should be fairly straight-forward to reach 4.0GHz, but beyond that, you're going to encounter memory stability problems. Power Consumption and Temperatures Power Consumption In terms of efficiency, the AMD X4-845 is relatively good and consumes just under 160 watts under extreme load. This isn't a major improvement though compared to the A10-7850K and it's well off the G3220. Temperatures Testing thermals on AMD processors can be a tricky task because popular software like HWMonitor and CoreTemp often misread the actual running temperatures. In my experience, HWInfo is much more reliable and we can use a calculation to find out the thermal load with a degree of confidence. The AMD X4-845 runs cooler than the A10-7850K under load and the idle temperature is very low. The overclock hardly impacts on the load temperature but it increases the idle output by a noticeable amount. Final Thoughts Pricing At the time of writing, the AMD Athlon X4 845 is on back-order from Amazon UK for £56.59 including delivery. This a marvellous value proposition considering the quad-core configuration and good multi-threaded performance. Overview Ideally, I would have preferred testing this particular CPU with lots of other budget options from Intel including the Pentium G3258 which is renowned for having exceptional single-threaded performance when overclocked. Unfortunately, issues with sampling meant this wasn't possible. Throughout the testing, I wanted to make sure the CPU was pitted against products in a similar price range in the interest of fairness. When spending just over £50 for a processor, expectations are quite low but there should still be enough performance to play various games, do some light video work and have a fulfilled PC experience. The AMD X4-845 is well suited to these tasks and consistently outputs very good performance. Granted, it's not great when dealing with WinRAR file compression and the memory latency is the highest I've seen. Putting these issues aside, the processor is capable of impressive multi-threaded performance as shown by the Cinebench results and happens to be more adept at video editing than the G3200. Of course, this is down to the additional two cores. Honestly, I don't expect many people to be purchasing this chip for its video editing abilities or compute time. The real purpose for the X4-845 is to be an affordable gaming CPU or part of an HTPC. It's a shame that the lack of an integrated GPU makes it less convenient for users building a compact, no-frills media PC and this also adds to the overall cost to the end-user. On a more positive note, the AMD X4-845 is a wonderful option for people investing in their first gaming PC and have no intentions of selecting expensive graphics hardware. It's also perfect for casual gaming scenarios and should please the majority of users with realistic expectations. The processor's gaming performance is remarkably strong and competes with the A10-7850K. I was a little disappointed with the 3DMark score but the overclocked result more than made up for this. In terms of overclocking, the locked multiplier restricts the chip's potential and it's challenging to surpass 4.02GHz via BCLK tuning, Even when using high-end water cooling, the memory controller comes into play and cannot remain stable even when accounting for this in the BIOS. Saying that, anyone should be able to achieve around 3.95-4.00GHz with decent cooling hardware and this also includes the stock heatsink. Much of this is insignificant though because the mainstream user wanting a cheap processor is unlikely to engage in overclocking. The AMD X4-845 is fairly efficient but there's not a massive improvement in thermal loads or power consumption compared to the A10-7850K. It's not a huge issue because the power consumption remains low and the CPU doesn't output much heat. Although, it would have been exciting to see the wattage closer to budget Intel solutions. Overall, the picture is very positive and I strongly believe this is one of the best value processors ever unleashed onto the market. Pros Excellent packaging Good multi-threaded performance Great temperatures Magnificent value-for-money New stock cooler is quiet Superb option for users with modest graphics hardware Cons x8 PCI Express 3.0 could bottleneck high-end GPUs Locked multiplier Requires discrete graphics card "The AMD Athlon X4-845 is a great processor for budget users wanting to build a PC which can confidently cope with the latest games and mainstream applications. Additionally, it competes pretty well against similar priced Intel offerings while offering more cores for your money." AMD Athlon X4-845 Carrizo Processor Review Thank you to AMD for providing this review sample.