Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AMD's New Athlon/Semprons Give Old Phenom CPUs A Big Run For The Money

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • AMD's New Athlon/Semprons Give Old Phenom CPUs A Big Run For The Money

    Phoronix: AMD's New Athlon/Semprons Give Old Phenom CPUs A Big Run For The Money

    Curious how AMD's new AM1 platform APUs compare to the original AMD Phenom processors? Wondering myself, I ran some tests showing how the Sempron 2650 and 3850 along with the Athlon 5150 and 5350 compare to the original Phenom 9500 and Phenom II X3 710 processors with RS780/RS880 motherboards. Besides the new APUs being competitive against the old hardware while costing much less than the original Phenom CPUs, their power consumption is also at a fraction of AMD's former high-end processors. Here's a brief but nice look at AMD's processing evolution in going from Phenom CPUs to today's AMD budget APUs.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=20234

  • #2
    Let's see:

    AMD Phenom X4 9500:
    Frequency: 2200MHz
    Cores: 4
    Cache: 4MB
    Introduction date: Nov 19, 2007

    AMD Athlon 5350:
    CPU Frequency: 2050MHz
    Cores: 4
    Cache: 2MB
    Introduction date: March, 2014

    In most tests the old Phenom is a lot faster than the new Athlon (sometimes twice as fast, e.g. in John the Ripper:md5), i.e. AMD's CPUs IPC hasn't really improved for seven years. Meanwhile Intel's CPUs sport almost 50% improvement in IPC.

    At least TDP has improved considerably (25W vs 65W), but that's not a relief when competitor's CPUs run 30-100% faster depending on tests.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by birdie View Post
      Let's see:

      AMD Phenom X4 9500:
      Frequency: 2200MHz
      Cores: 4
      Cache: 4MB
      Introduction date: Nov 19, 2007

      AMD Athlon 5350:
      CPU Frequency: 2050MHz
      Cores: 4
      Cache: 2MB
      Introduction date: March, 2014

      In most tests the old Phenom is a lot faster than the new Athlon (sometimes twice as fast, e.g. in John the Ripper:md5), i.e. AMD's CPUs IPC hasn't really improved for seven years. Meanwhile Intel's CPUs sport almost 50% improvement in IPC.

      At least TDP has improved considerably (25W vs 65W), but that's not a relief when competitor's CPUs run 30-100% faster depending on tests.
      Phenom's were $250 when they came out. Athlon's are $50.

      Compare the Phenom vs Kaveri 7850K if you want an actual "similar-price-point" comparison, and even then the Phenom was $70 more at launch than the 7850k is.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by birdie View Post
        Let's see:

        AMD Phenom X4 9500:
        Frequency: 2200MHz
        Cores: 4
        Cache: 4MB
        Introduction date: Nov 19, 2007

        AMD Athlon 5350:
        CPU Frequency: 2050MHz
        Cores: 4
        Cache: 2MB
        Introduction date: March, 2014

        In most tests the old Phenom is a lot faster than the new Athlon (sometimes twice as fast, e.g. in John the Ripper:md5), i.e. AMD's CPUs IPC hasn't really improved for seven years.
        I think you should have spent more time at school doing maths, the difference ids less than 50% which is probably predominantly a memory bandwidth issue.

        If you want to cheery pick benches make a point there are other benches where the Athlon is around 3 times faster than the Phenom such as Unvanquished.

        Comment


        • #5
          Thanks Michael, a very interesting article. Too bad you didn't have any x6s around anymore.

          Comment


          • #6
            Still would love to see those cheap A-series chips pitted against Athlon! You can score an A6-6400k for a mere 65 bucks!

            Comment


            • #7
              Interesting. I have a Phenom II X4, and at the moment it's in an HTPC (overpowered, I know), but in the future I plan to use that in a self-hosting server. Good to know it's still halfway decent at the job of actually computing things.

              Comment


              • #8
                Also note that the 25W of the 5350 includes CPU, GPU, and controllers, while the phenom only the CPU. Phenom GPU and system controllers are on north/south bridges and require additional power.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Why on Earth were the graphics/games benchmarks included? Anyone still using these CPUs (and caring about GPU speed) would almost certainly have a separate graphics card, not relying on the GPU in the chipset.

                  Of real interest with this comparison was CPU integer and floating point performance, and memory speed (including caches). The graphics benchmarks were pointless.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by birdie View Post
                    Let's see:

                    AMD Phenom X4 9500:
                    Frequency: 2200MHz
                    Cores: 4
                    Cache: 4MB
                    Introduction date: Nov 19, 2007

                    AMD Athlon 5350:
                    CPU Frequency: 2050MHz
                    Cores: 4
                    Cache: 2MB
                    Introduction date: March, 2014

                    In most tests the old Phenom is a lot faster than the new Athlon (sometimes twice as fast, e.g. in John the Ripper:md5), i.e. AMD's CPUs IPC hasn't really improved for seven years. Meanwhile Intel's CPUs sport almost 50% improvement in IPC.

                    At least TDP has improved considerably (25W vs 65W), but that's not a relief when competitor's CPUs run 30-100% faster depending on tests.
                    Ah yes because making comments on AMD's IPC by comparing their Netbook Processors to their Desktop Processors, and pretending they're the desktop processors makes so much sense. Here's a hint for you, if you want to compare modern AMD IPC look at the Kaveri APUs or the Piledriver FX series, this article is to see where the new/cheap netbook processors line up compared to the particularly old Phenom processors

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X