AMD FX-8350 "Vishera" Linux Benchmarks

[Marc Driftmeyer]

The average user will be playing Mp3s from a collection (probably being organised by a database backend) while browsing the web, which means 10 to 20 tabs open, which means 10-20 threads, many of them running flash or something and buffering from youtube while the user is reading something else. And they probably have an anti-virus running on the background and a chat program and a p2p client downloading 3-4 movies minimised somewhere in the taskbar. They might even sync their smartphone or MP3 player with their collection at the same time, which takes a while, so they minimise that. You don't need fluid dynamics to need good multi-threaded performance.

The user who runs one process which then needs 300 GFLOPS of sustained single-thread performance is rather the exception. Browser, Word and Excel and most games run fine on 5-year old stuff.

What you wrote goes without saying. My first comment was in address to the dullard who thinks professional work only happens at the office.

Your scenario which is common amongst hundreds of millions of consumers will alone turn a system to a pile of goo real fast, especially those poorly developed Zynga games that are averaging over 2 GB each to run CityVille, CastleVille, Farmville, etc. Browsers eat system resources and the more threads to process the less the system has to wait for its turn.

Most commonly used applications you note are all multi-threaded. To see graphs of single-thread performance is insulting. Intel recognizes the direction industry needs to go: Heterogeneous Systems Architectures.

The Industry is jumping on board. When Intel does it will be just another vindication of AMD being ahead of the curve.

[curaga]

Thanks for the Visual Studio compile time benchmark link!

PTS should automatically use a good -j option, I think it uses the common 2x + 1 (so 17 for this 8-core). Note I'm not sure what the exact formula is, but it's certainly better than -j1.

In the linux kernel compile on page 8, 8350 beat the 3770.

[bug77]

I have corrected Anandtech fake graph.



1) Added missing zero base. Nonzero base is very known statistic fallacy.
2) Added arrow to point out where AMD CPUs are already done and idling, while Intel is still working.

Granted the AMD is still NOT as efficient as Intel when it comes to LOAD, it is still efficient at idling and the unefficiency is *in acceptable range* now, unlike Bulldozer.

Great. Now that you fixed the graph, let me help you read it:
Vishera: 200W x 1,000s = 180,000Ws = 50Wh
Ivy Bridge: 105W x 1,100s = 115,500Ws = 32.08Wh
Enjoy.

[crazycheese]

I have corrected Anandtech fake graph.



1) Added missing zero base. Nonzero base is very known statistic fallacy.
2) Added arrow to point out where AMD CPUs are already done and idling, while Intel is still working.

Granted the AMD is still NOT as efficient as Intel when it comes to LOAD, it is still efficient at idling and the unefficiency is *in acceptable range* now, unlike Bulldozer.

[crazycheese]

These are measurements from Anandtech:

Dafuq Anandtech still manipulates graphs by picking base POWER value of 50 instead of 0 ??!

Anyone doing his is *ALREADY* biased.

Intel gets the same job done in about the same time, but the whole system consumes about half the power. Idle power consumption is also lower.

From the graphs, Intel does the job 1/3 longer. Vishera comes first.
Also, from many other tests, Vishera idle is on paar to SB - 60W vs 70W.
And it costs less.
And has much more features.
And it overclocks.
And fits old socket.
And its better for multithreading.

Its very attractive CPU. Eats more, yet costs less and offers more.

3960X is the highest end, but it's also in a different league than 8350. The 3770 gives you 8 threads, same as 8350. And while I don't know the results of make -j8, here's a comparison using Visual Studio: http://www.anandtech.com/show/6396/t...x4300-tested/3

Matter of buying CPU, installing PTS and performing timed kernel compile.

[jjmcwill2003]

Thanks for the Visual Studio compile time benchmark link!

[bug77]

So how would a i7-3770 compare to the AMD 8350 on something like "make -j8" ?

I was referring to what I paid for the i7-990X when I had my work PC built. Is the 3770 considered a high end Intel CPU? I thought only the 3930K and 3960X fit that category?

3960X is the highest end, but it's also in a different league than 8350. The 3770 gives you 8 threads, same as 8350. And while I don't know the results of make -j8, here's a comparison using Visual Studio: http://www.anandtech.com/show/6396/t...x4300-tested/3

[jjmcwill2003]

So how would a i7-3770 compare to the AMD 8350 on something like "make -j8" ?

I was referring to what I paid for the i7-990X when I had my work PC built. Is the 3770 considered a high end Intel CPU? I thought only the 3930K and 3960X fit that category?

[bug77]

I develop CAE post processing software for a living. There are days when I spent a LOT of time waiting for code to recompile after catching up my local source tree with our source code repository. At work I have an i7-x990 CPU, which is insanely expensive. However, it's SO worth it to run "make -j10" to do parallel builds, and still be able to get other background tasks done while it grinds away.

We're also working very hard to leverage those multiple cores in our products. It's not easy!

Anyway, I'd love to be able to do something similar when I work from home. There's NO WAY I can afford a high end Intel CPU on my personal budget. I'd be VERY interested to see how the 8250 or 8350 performs running parallel builds. I have a Phenom 2 1090 now, and am wondering if I'd get a significant performance boost from 8 cores. I don't overclock much, because I don't want to risk an unstable overclock causing erratic behavior in our code.

You're exaggerating. You can have the latest from intel (i7-3770) for less than $300. Of course, if you're happy with an 8350, that will be cheaper.

[jjmcwill2003]

Cores

I develop CAE post processing software for a living. There are days when I spent a LOT of time waiting for code to recompile after catching up my local source tree with our source code repository. At work I have an i7-x990 CPU, which is insanely expensive. However, it's SO worth it to run "make -j10" to do parallel builds, and still be able to get other background tasks done while it grinds away.

We're also working very hard to leverage those multiple cores in our products. It's not easy!

Anyway, I'd love to be able to do something similar when I work from home. There's NO WAY I can afford a high end Intel CPU on my personal budget. I'd be VERY interested to see how the 8250 or 8350 performs running parallel builds. I have a Phenom 2 1090 now, and am wondering if I'd get a significant performance boost from 8 cores. I don't overclock much, because I don't want to risk an unstable overclock causing erratic behavior in our code.