Its graphics performance lags behind the A8-3850, but the A6-3650 is just as fast in Crossfire mode and not far off in 2D applications
Written By
Published on 12 August 2011
To help us provide you with free impartial advice, we may earn a commission if you buy through links on our site. Learn more
1 / 2
Our rating
Reviewed price £78 inc VAT
AMD’s new A-series processors, codenamed ‘Llano’, have built-in DirectX 11 3D graphics and are a direct rival for Intel’s latest ‘Sandy Bridge’ chips. The range-topping A8-3850‘s 3D power and reasonable price gained it a Best Buy award in June, so we were interested to see how the lower-end A6-3650 compares. Like the A8-3850, the A6-3650 has four AMD ‘Stars’ cores, which are updated versions of the K10 cores found in AMD’s Phenom II. The K10 core design is more than a couple of years old, but the Llano versions are based on a 32nm rather than 45nm process, so run cooler and use less power – the A6-3650 has a TDP of 100W, which compares favourably to a Sandy Bridge Core i5-2500K’s 95W and is significantly less than the 125W of top-end Phenom IIs.
While the relatively low TDP means you can use standard socket AM2 processor coolers, Llano processors require a new socket type – FM1. We’ve reviewed the FM1-based Asrock A75 Pro4 and Asus F1A75-V Pro, both of which gained good ratings and are reasonably priced, so it’s not a particularly onerous upgrade.
The A6-3650’s processor cores run at 2.6GHz compared to the A8-3850’s 2.9GHz. This makes some difference in our benchmarks – the image-editing test was almost identical, but the A6-3650 was significantly slower in our video-encoding and multitasking tests, and its overall score of 60 shows it to be around 12% slower than the top-end chip in 2D tasks. Considering the A6-3650 is about 22% cheaper than the A8-3850, it offers good 2D performance for its price.
However, the main difference between the processors is in their graphics chipsets. Instead of 400 stream processors running at 600MHz, the A6-3650 has 320 running at 443MHz. This made a significant difference in our Dirt 3 benchmark – where the A8-3850 managed a smooth 35fps at 1,280×720 with 4xAA and High detail, the A6-3650 could only produce a slightly jerky 28.6. Despite this, the chip’s lower power didn’t make much difference when we added a Radeon HD 6450 in CrossFire mode – we saw a smooth 50.3fps in Dirt 3, which is only 2fps less than the A8-3850 / Radeon HD 6450 combination.
The A6-3650 may be slower than Intel’s Sandy Bridge range of processors in 2D tasks, but it’s far cheaper and significantly better in games. If you’re after a budget gaming PC, the main choice is between this and the £102 A8-3850. There’s not a great deal of difference between them in 2D performance, but the A6-3650’s reduced graphics power is the difference between playable and jerky frame rates in less-demanding modern games. If you’re planning on building a PC that uses the Llano on-processor graphics, we’d recommend the A8-3850, but if you’re going to use a dedicated graphics card or a cheap AMD 6-series card in Crossfire with the processor, the cheaper A6-3650 is the chip to buy.
Chris has been writing about technology for over ten years. He split his time between ExpertReviews.co.uk and Computer Shopper magazine, while obsessing over Windows Phone, Linux and obscure remakes of old games, and trying to defend Windows 8 from its many detractors
