Intel Pentium G2120 vs. AMD Athlon X4 750K

[cbn]

I noticed both these processors are priced fairly close to one another.

Pentium G2120 is ~ $75 (3.1 Ghz dual core)
Athlon X4 750K is ~ $85 (3.4 Ghz quad core with 4.0 Ghz turbo)

Some data on the performance:

Passmark scores (Multi-threaded):

Pentium G2120: 3037 http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Pentium+G2120+@+3.10GHz&id=1443

Athlon X4 750K: 4354 http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=AMD+Athlon+X4+750K+Quad+Core&id=1801

Passmark scores (Single thread):

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/singleThread.html

Pentium G2120: 1626

Athlon X4 750K: 1375

Based on that information, the Pentium has much better single thread performance. However, the AMD Athlon x4 750K does come with an unlocked multipler.

So I am wondering what frequency would it take for an overclocked AMD to match the non-overclockable Intel Pentium for single thread?

If we divide up the multi-thread Passmark benchmark by the number of CPU cores we come up with a score of 1519 for the Pentium and 1088.5 for the Athlon. This favors Pentium single thread by 40%.

Based on that data, simple math points to the Athlon needing a 4.76 Ghz clock to match the Ivy Bridge Pentium at 3.1 Ghz.

If we compare single thread Passmark scores of 1626 for Pentium vs. 1375 for Athlon x4 750 (4 Ghz turbo) the stock Pentium comes out 18% better. Based on that data, Athlon x4 750K needs 4.72 Ghz to achieve the same single thread performance.

That is encouraging!

However, I am wondering how cheaply can an AMD overclock be done?

1. At what frequency will the overlocked Athlon x4 750K need an aftermarket CPU cooler? (Thankfully, even though it does not have an iGPU, the processor still comes with the full 100 watt cooler from AMD. Hopefully this will provide a good amount of extra thermal headroom.)

2. How much extra motherboard durability is needed by the overclocked Athlon x4 (extra VRM Phases, heatsinks, etc). How much higher will this drive up the cost?

3. Power consumption of overclocked Athlon x4 750K vs Pentium? Although the price of the processors is the roughly the same, power consumption differences can affect total cost of ownership.

 

[inf64]

Based on that information, the Pentium has much better single thread performance. However, the AMD Athlon x4 750K does come with an unlocked multipler.

If 18% (1626/1375=1.18) is "much better single thread performance" then I have no comment lol . 18% better ST performance is peanuts and won't be noticed anywhere,sorry.

Do you know what is really a "much better" performance? A performance delta of 43%. That is massive difference that will be noticed (MT score difference).

 

[AtenRa]

However, I am wondering how cheaply can an AMD overclock be done?

1. At what frequency will the overlocked Athlon x4 750K need an aftermarket CPU cooler? (Thankfully, even though it does not have an iGPU, the processor still comes with the full 100 watt cooler from AMD. Hopefully this will provide a good amount of extra thermal headroom.)

2. How much extra motherboard durability is needed by the overclocked Athlon x4 (extra VRM Phases, heatsinks, etc). How much higher will this drive up the cost?

3. Power consumption of overclocked Athlon x4 750K vs Pentium? Although the price of the processors is the roughly the same, power consumption differences can affect total cost of ownership.

1.With 30c ambient you will need a better heat-sink above 4.1 or 4.2Ghz (all four cores)

2. At 4.2GHz most motherboards will be adequate, its at the 4.4GHz and above you will need better VRM cooling.

3. Depends on what you are doing. If you encoding Videos, the Athlon will finish much faster than the Pendium. The overall power consumption to do the same job will not be that much more than the slower Pentium. But if you run 100% 24/7 then yes it will make a big difference.

 

[frozentundra123456]

Dont forget that for the athlon will need a video card because the igp is disabled, or a motherboard with onboard video (do they make those for FM2??). So for general light usage, I would give the edge to the pentium.

For gaming with a discrete gpu, or for heavily multi threaded workloads, the athlon would be a better choice in most cases.

 

[cbn]

If 18% (1626/1375=1.18) is "much better single thread performance" then I have no comment lol . 18% better ST performance is peanuts and won't be noticed anywhere,sorry.

Do you know what is really a "much better" performance? A performance delta of 43%. That is massive difference that will be noticed (MT score difference).

Well yes, for a single thread the difference would be 18%.

But a lot of programs scale very nicely to two cores which should bring the delta somewhere between 18% and 40% (See quote below) depending on how much Turbo Core 3.0 scales back from 4 Ghz.

If we divide up the multi-thread Passmark benchmark by the number of CPU cores we come up with a score of 1519 for the Pentium and 1088.5 for the Athlon. This favors Pentium single thread by 40%.

Based on that data, simple math points to the Athlon needing a 4.76 Ghz clock to match the Ivy Bridge Pentium at 3.1 Ghz.

If we compare single thread Passmark scores of 1626 for Pentium vs. 1375 for Athlon x4 750 (4 Ghz turbo) the stock Pentium comes out 18% better. Based on that data, Athlon x4 750K needs 4.72 Ghz to achieve the same single thread performance.

 

[cbn]

3. Depends on what you are doing. If you encoding Videos, the Athlon will finish much faster than the Pendium. The overall power consumption to do the same job will not be that much more than the slower Pentium. But if you run 100% 24/7 then yes it will make a big difference.

Assume the person wants a fast dual core for games like Skyrim, etc.

What would the idle power consumption be?

 

[inf64]

Well yes, for a single thread the difference would be 18%.

But a lot of programs scale very nicely to two cores which should bring the delta somewhere between 18% and 40% (See quote below) depending on how much Turbo Core 3.0 scales back from 4 Ghz.

That doesn't make sense since Turbo core won't scale back in dual threaded workload. I have this chip and Turbo is engaged at 4GHz if I run 2 instances of SPi (fp intensive). It scales back only in 4 thread workloads and instead of 4Ghz it's between 3.5 and 3.6GHz as far as I've noticed. As threads are assigned (via proper patches in win7) to CU0 and CU1 in dual threaded workloads, the difference in dual threaded workload will still be 18%(no penalty as different CU do the work).

I have mine OCed to 4.3Ghz 24/7 with 1.5V for vcore with power savings enabled (drops to 1.4Ghz @ 0.9V and CPU fan is off). Temps in hottest summer now don't go over 67C in full load on all 4 cores. Cooler is OCZ Vendetta2 (old one from AM2 times but is still great).

 

[cbn]

That doesn't make sense since Turbo core won't scale back in dual threaded workload. I have this chip and Turbo is engaged at 4GHz if I run 2 instances of SPi (fp intensive). It scales back only in 4 thread workloads and instead of 4Ghz it's between 3.5 and 3.6GHz as far as I've noticed. As threads are assigned (via proper patches in win7) to CU0 and CU1 in dual threaded workloads, the difference in dual threaded workload will still be 18%(no penalty as different CU do the work).

I'm glad to hear the X4 750K Turbo doesn't scale back when running dual thread workloads.

However, the x4 750K processor is still 13% more expensive than Pentium G2120 while running 18% slower (in dual thread).

So looking further I found this Athlon x2 370K:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16819113336

It doesn't have a iGPU (like the x4 750K), but is only $60.

Some Pros:

1. Overclocked dual core should put less strain on the motherboard during a stress test compared to overclocking the x4 750k quad core. If I am not mistaken, less durable and less expensive motherboards could be used. (I don't know much about FM2 motherboards, but maybe even most bargain priced ones would still be good enough for this type of usage?)

2. Idle power consumption using overclocked settings should be lower than OC'd x4 750K.

Some Cons:

1. Comes with 65 watt Heatsink. (I am concerned this may force someone to upgrade coolers if overclocking. This will increase the total cost of ownership for this bargain processor compared to if AMD had shipped with it a 100 watt stock cooler.)

2. Reduced Cache. x2 370K only has 1 MB compared to the x4 750K's 4 MB. I wonder how much this will reduce performance in dual core workloads compared to Athlon x4 750K?

 

[el etro]

The Athlon is an awesome deal for this price...

 

[iiiankiii]

If you're in the market for a new PC, quad core is the way to go. More and more programs are starting to take advantage of more cores. If you play games, with the release of the newer consoles coming soon, multthreaded games will be in abundance. Ill pay the extra $10 and power consumption for the athlon if I had to chose between the two.

 

[cbn]

Doing some more research on x2 370K I found out it is a Richland Core compared to the Trinity core of x4 750K:

http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Bulldozer/AMD-Athlon X2 370K - AD370KOKA23HL - AD370KOKHLBOX.html

http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Bulldozer/AMD-Athlon X2 370K - AD370KOKA23HL - AD370KOKHLBOX.html

If a person wants a Richland quad core they need to get the x4 760K:

http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Bulldozer/AMD-Athlon X4 760K - AD760KWOA44HL - AD760KWOHLBOX.html

 

[cbn]

If you're in the market for a new PC, quad core is the way to go. More and more programs are starting to take advantage of more cores. If you play games, with the release of the newer consoles coming soon, multthreaded games will be in abundance.

I realize games having been scaling with quad core, but there are still a lot of really good games that are still optimized for dual core.

AMD really needs a budget challenger to the Pentium G2120.

But a few things concern me:

1. How does AMD Richland dual core compare in games to the Intel Ivy Bridge dual core processors? Is the margin closer or farther away than these passmark scores indicate? (If data is not available maybe some low resolution and 1080p tests can be run with x2 370K vs. G2120 using HD7750 or HD7770)?

2. Haswell Pentiums will be released Q3. How much better will these score in gaming benchmarks? From the chart I have seen clocks will remain the same as the Ivy Bridge Pentiums.

 

[iiiankiii]

The way I see it, the two processors are good enough for most single threaded apps. They're close enough to where it wouldnt matter too much. However, in multi threaded apps, there is a clear advantage for the quad core. That advantage will continue to grew as more and more apps start to use more cores.

Videos seems to be the craze in social media right now. That means more and more people will benefit greatly from more cores b/c of video editing and the likes.

Bang for the buck, AMD's lower end quad core over intel's dual core.

 

[AtenRa]

I wouldnt go for a dual core Ritchland for gaming, they are too slow for that. Unless you want them for casual gaming using the iGPUs.

Idle power should be very close between Athlon and Pentium, depending on the motherboard and settings in the BIOS. Mini-iTX motherboards have the lowest power consumption.

In Skyrim the Pentium will be faster, but again it depends on the GPU and IQ settings. If you use HD7750 you may be more GPU limited than CPU.

 

[skipsneeky2]

At $80,i would prefer actually a x4 640 as crazy as it sounds,its a drop in for am3 and am3+ and heck later on drop in a fx6300 or a fun 8 core.

Not sure if i see the point in a x4 750k for fm2,as a fm2 build should honestly be paired with a apu imho like a 5400k or a 6800k or the like.

Fm2 to me would only make sense if i wanted a cheap quad core like the x4 750k or 5600k and if i wanted a budget microatx motherboard that packed more features then the lackluster 880g boards on newegg that plague am3.....

 

[cbn]

I wouldnt go for a dual core Ritchland for gaming, they are too slow for that.

I've read that Richland can overclock to 5 ghz. If that is the case then x2 370K shouldn't be too bad for gaming (assuming that OC or a slower speed is truly stable and the 1MB cache doesn't excessively reduce IPC.)

Other than that, I think the main issue is price. Is the x2 370K processor really worth $60 or does AMD need to price it lower?

In Skyrim the Pentium will be faster, but again it depends on the GPU and IQ settings. If you use HD7750 you may be more GPU limited than CPU.

No doubt the GPU could be a bottleneck. So to isolate CPU for academic reasons, I think a very low resolution should be used for at least part of the benchmarks.

Maybe one set of gaming benchmarks (Pentium vs. overclocked Athlon x2) at 640 x480?

And the second set (Pentium vs. overclocked Athlon x2) at 1920 x 1080?

 

[seitur]

Those relatively Trinity & Richland new Athlon processors are propably most interesting and competetive piece of CPU, AMD does have available atm.

It is cheap, does have reasonably good perforance for it's price and is not bad for energy effeficiency for a unlocked quad.

PS. Skyrim does benefit from quad core. Just set iNumThreads=3 in SkyrimPrefs.ini and an 4th extra core will take care of GPU driver overhead.

 

[NTMBK]

I've read that Richland can overclock to 5 ghz. If that is the case then x2 370K shouldn't be too bad for gaming (assuming that OC or a slower speed is truly stable and the 1MB cache doesn't excessively reduce IPC.)

Some Richland parts can overclock to 5GHz, with an expensive aftermarket cooler- and using extremely high amounts of energy. No point spending $50 on a cooler for a part like that.

 

[SPBHM]

if you just need a cheap CPU, look for the G1610...

if you want to build something with higher performance for little money (not always, but overall), I would go with the X4.

 

[Insert_Nickname]

So looking further I found this Athlon x2 370K:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16819113336

It doesn't have a iGPU (like the x4 750K), but is only $60.

Notice that X2?. Yes, that's only a single module CPU. In essence a single core CPU with HT. I wouldn't bother, performance will be even lower then a cheaper Celeron G1610...

If a person wants a Richland quad core they need to get the x4 760K

Richland is just a newer stepping of the Trinity silicon. The 760K should be able to clock a bit higher then the 750K, but I don't think the difference will be earth-shattering or worth the higher cost...

if you just need a cheap CPU, look for the G1610...

if you want to build something with higher performance for little money (not always, but overall), I would go with the X4.

Spot on. The G1610 will also give you a basic, but perfectly acceptable IGP for basic use.

 

[AnonymouseUser]

I realize games having been scaling with quad core, but there are still a lot of really good games that are still optimized for dual core.

No new games are.

AMD really needs a budget challenger to the Pentium G2120.

They have plenty of better CPUs in the same price range. The fact that the Pentium excels in producing higher framerates in a few older games is of little consequence. Budget CPUs are not for gaming.

No self-respecting gamer will buy a Pentium for their gaming PC.

 

[monkeydelmagico]

2120 is cheaper, usually faster, draws less power, lower heat, has a wider variety of 5 star mobo's, and offers a build it and forget it simplicity.

If you like to tinker/overclock or see a need for dedicated 4 cores then athlon.

 

[cbn]

if you just need a cheap CPU, look for the G1610...

if you want to build something with higher performance for little money (not always, but overall), I would go with the X4.

Pentium G1610 ($43 shipped on Amazon) would be a great CPU to use for comparison.

So maybe these CPUs tested with a value discrete video card like HD7750 or HD7770 using both old and new games:

1. Athlon x4 750K (or 760K)
2. Pentium G2120
3. Athlon x2 370K
4. Pentium G1610
5. E6600 (yes, the old Conroe from 2006)

Regarding HD7770 as a "value discrete video card". These currently go for as little as $80 AR. In the recent past I have seen that price dip to as low as $70 AR after newegg promo code. This also includes the games "Far Cry 3" and "Far Cry 3: Blood Dragon". That seems like such a good deal I believe it pretty much obsoletes cheaper cards like HD6670 GDDR3/GDDR5. (EDIT: Maybe a caveat to that statement would be pre-built desktops that don't have a large enough PSU or extra power connectors to spare as HD7770 does need a 6 pin.)

 

[skipsneeky2]

No new games are.



They have plenty of better CPUs in the same price range. The fact that the Pentium excels in producing higher framerates in a few older games is of little consequence. Budget CPUs are not for gaming.

No self-respecting gamer will buy a Pentium for their gaming PC.

I would buy a pentium g2020 over anything amd had for $70 period,at $80 i would buy a amd chip like the x4 640 or the x4 750k and force myself to spend $120 for my next choices of a core i3 or a fx6300...

I would have a field day buying a celeron g1610,pairing it with a gt630,hook up my 5:4 1280x1024 monitor and build a retro pre 2006 game box/htpc.:biggrin:

 

[el etro]

Talking about value for sub-100$ cpus?? If you mentioned the old E6600 What about the oldie Phenom II X4 955? Way better than all of these CPUs.

I believe the value comparison tends to favor more intel if you're going to a10 vs the i3. But in this case(considering value) i prefer the a8 and a6(Or still the Phenom II if the only thing you want is cpu performance).