Puget Systems Echo: Intel and AMD Showdown at 65 Watts
by Dustin Sklavos on March 21, 2012 2:35 AM EST- Posted in
- Systems
- AMD
- Intel
- Mini ITX
- Sandy Bridge
- Llano
- boutique
- Mini-Tower
Conclusion: AMD's Dark Horse
What we're really looking at today are two things: the Puget Systems Echo I as a system in both AMD and Intel configurations, and what AMD and Intel bring to the table in this smallest of form factors.
First of all, from the value standpoint, Puget Systems just isn't winning this fight. The Intel Echo I in the configuration we have for review is marked up nearly $450 from building it yourself, retail. That's basically a ~40% markup on the cost of parts, and when we're talking about a nearly $1,800 desktop, it's just too difficult to turn a blind eye. The AMD model fares little better; the savings is essentially commensurate with the difference in price between the A6-3500 and the i7-2600S. I try to be fairly forgiving of boutiques, and I recognize that they have to make a living, but this markup is pretty high even for a high quality boutique like Puget Systems.
From the review standpoint, this also probably wasn't as fair a fight as it should've been. While we were gunning for the most powerful AMD and Intel systems that could conceivably be built in this form factor, the differences between the platforms weren't accounted for (thus the DDR3-1333 in the AMD build), and a better foil for the A6-3500 might actually have been the Intel Core i5-2405S, the only Intel chip Puget offers for the Echo that has HD 3000 graphics instead of HD 2000. In fact, if you were going to build an Echo and wanted to go Intel, I think that's the chip you want and not the i7-2600S, which just isn't worth the $130 premium in this reviewer's opinion.
With the data we do have on the table, though, I find myself leaning towards the AMD build. I remain an avid proponent of Llano in notebooks while being skeptical of it in the desktop market, but in a small form factor build I do think AMD is correct in asserting that they have the better proposition in terms of building a balanced platform. The question is, as always, what you're planning on doing with the computer.
You already know if you need a system small enough to be mounted to the back of a monitor, and we're not arguing the merits of going with a small form factor system over a standard desktop here. If you do need every last shred of CPU performance, obviously you're going to want to buy Intel; that's not even a question. However, if your usage model is much broader, it bears mentioning that there's technically nothing an i3/i5/i7 processor can do that an A6-3500 can't; the A6 just may be slower getting there. The flipside is that the HD 2000 on most of Intel's desktop chips is inadequate for any kind of gaming, full stop, while the Radeon HD 6530D in the A6-3500 is going to be able to play games. (And while an HD 3000 equipped CPU would help, it's still not going to be enough in our opinion for most games at anything above minimum detail settings.)
If I had to choose which of these two systems I'd find more useful, no question, I'd go with the AMD system. It's true that I edit video on my desktop, but I also play a lot of games on my desktop. The A6-3500 can still edit video, albeit slowly, but the Intel chips aren't going to let me play Left 4 Dead 2 or Quake Wars with my friends.
We're left with two conclusions to our two questions: How is the Puget Systems Echo I, and what are AMD and Intel bringing to the small form factor table? The answer to the first question is that the build is certainly fine, but it's uncompetitive on price, and the gulf is wide enough that I can't recommend spending that much more money with Puget Systems when another boutique will be willing to build the same systems for you in a custom order for less. Likewise, while we understand the rationale for the default warranty length, given the large price markup it feels stingy. Sure, most desktops will last three years no problem regardless, but we'd like to see that backed up by the manufacturer, "just in case". As to the second, it's a matter of perspective and what you're intending to use the system for, but for the general user with a broader usage model, I think Llano is the clear winner.
Of course, this is really an old battle we're looking at here. The real question that we can't answer just yet is what will happen in the next round of CPU/APU updates. Ivy Bridge will certainly shore up some of the graphics deficiencies on the Intel side, and Trinity may improve the CPU side of AMD's offerings while further improving on their graphics capabilities. Both are due out in the not too distant future, so if you haven't yet jumped on the Sandy Bridge or Llano bandwagon, waiting for the pending refreshes might be the best tact right now.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
62 Comments
View All Comments
sabot00 - Wednesday, March 21, 2012 - link
A trip to the Wikipedia page for Llano http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD_Fusion#.22Llano.2...Shows that the A6-3500 is FAR, FAR from the best AMD has in the 65 W space.
The A6-3600 and A6-3620 deliver 4 cores at 2.1 and 2.2GHz (another whole core compared to the 3500)
Meanwhile, in the A8 it gets worse, the A8-3800 and 3820 deliver 4 cores at 2.4 and 2.5GHz WHILE ALSO giving the HD6550D (400 SP's, 80 more than the 3500).
Leaving AMD 1 core, 400 MHz, and 80 SP's down just feels wrong.
HW_mee - Wednesday, March 21, 2012 - link
1. This is Anandtech, what did you expect?2. Puget only sells the AMD system with an A4-3400 and the A6-3500.
Anandtech can only review pre-assembled systems as the systems are sold, the fact that Anandtech cares to compare such vastly different system is a different debate.
Arnulf - Wednesday, March 21, 2012 - link
Fine, but it woudl make sense to cobble together their own setup using the best components that still fit same thermal envelope (afteralkl a user might decide to upgrade !). This means fastest 65W APU and fastest memory that is supported by that CPU.HW_mee - Wednesday, March 21, 2012 - link
1st, let me mention that I love prebuild reviews, even when I don't have a chance of buying the reviewed system, but I find that this review is lacking or a bit odd.2nd, Adding a DIY system would be as awkward as the existing comparison, 1750$ prebuild Intel system vs 1400$ prebuild AMD system vs. DIY system with 65 watt CPU system?
I think Dustin has held a good scope by only looking at the top offerings for the Puget Systems Echo an he is very balanced in his praise of both systems.
Unfortunately I see no reason to compare performance of these systems, AMD will get a beating on the CPU side, again, and Intels horrible IGP is absent from half the test, again.
3rd, I have not read other Puget system reviews on anand, but I would have preferred the review had an extra page dedicated to the systems and reseller.
A large markup is mentioned, but an example of how cheap a DIY person can make it is not shown.
Build quality, noise, temperature etc. is leisurely mentioned but never with anything really tangible.
I could go on :-/
silverblue - Wednesday, March 21, 2012 - link
Yes, but there's time and there's money. In any case, judging by the power usage of the A6-3500 I think it's fair to assume that you can use one of the more powerful variants and still not get anywhere near the 100W ceiling (though I suppose, with the 3850, it'd get close - but we ARE talking the differences mentioned by sabot00 above plus the 157MHz higher GPU clock).djfourmoney - Thursday, April 12, 2012 - link
Read the reviews of the 3650 and you'll find under load (just the APU) it will exceed 100W. Under "Normal" use, however it might not see that.I don't think that would have helped much. I still don't understand if memory is so important to AMD's performance that they didn't put it inside their systems.
I smell something, as I said Tom's already did a test of several sticks of memory for APU's
djfourmoney - Thursday, April 12, 2012 - link
Only problem is finding a A6-3800 which is the Quad Core 65W. Missing Remote tested one, but I can't seem to find one here or in Europe and I haven't tried Asia yet.I already bought an A6-3500 though and since its an HTPC, it will be more than fine with 1600 speed memory and SSD like featured though smaller (64GB), so maybe with a slight OC and OC the memory I can smoke the benchmarks set here.
There is an A6-3860 which is the revision of the Quad Core but it seems those have all gone to OEM's now.
Guess this fight will continue when Trinity comes out and hopefully a low TDP Quad Core will be widely available.
Hrel - Wednesday, March 21, 2012 - link
If you guys read the entire article not only would you see some of what you've said here IN the article; but you would know WHY they tested the way they did.Dustin Sklavos - Wednesday, March 21, 2012 - link
This is a tired argument and something I've gotten really sick of seeing since I started writing here nearly two years ago. It's very easy to cry foul and scream bias without reading the entire article or thinking about why the material might seem the way it is.I will say this once to get it out of my system: nobody here is on anyone's payroll. There is no collective site bias. We report what we find. If you feel otherwise, so be it, but I was an AnandTech reader long before I started writing here and I can tell you I wouldn't have stuck around if things weren't honest.
MonkeyPaw - Wednesday, March 21, 2012 - link
I found the article valuable for what it was. Thanks.It was a shame they shipped the Llano build with DDR3 1333. As an owner of the A3850, even the jump to 1600 provides a fairly noticeable jump in gaming performance. Did the motherboard allow you to bump up the memory frequency? If not, I guess a decent option would be to get this system with the least amount of RAM possible and then buy 8GB of 1600 for $40 and install it yourself. :)