[Techspot] Then and Now: A decade of Intel CPUs compared, from Conroe to Haswell

[cbn]

Core 2 Duo/Quad is just not enough

Here are the rest of the gaming benchmarks:

A pronounced gap between Core 2 Quad and Nehalem also exists in Hitman Absolution and Crysis 3 (and to a lesser extent Bioshock Infinite).

P.S. On Bioshock Infinite, the Core i5 760 (2.8 Ghz/3.33 Ghz) is about 25% faster than Q9650 (3 Ghz). Maybe if the Core i5 760 can hold turbo on all cores during gaming that would explain it? This with Nehalem's IPC boost over Core 2 quad?

 

[mrmt]

Even that is revisionist history. The decline of the PC is what is killing AMD. Stars core could have continued (and ended up being moved to 32nm for Trinity -- so a lot of the engineering work was already performed for the die shrink) if Bulldozer was truly that bad. The bottom line is -- it isn't.

No, it is not. What happened with AMD wasn't that the market got smaller but they retained their share of this reduced market, but that the market got smaller but on top of that they also lost market shares, to the point they were wiped out in some segments.

But average product, really? I'm sure it's a big analytical for you leap to link Bulldozer and the other CMT chips to the precipitous market share drop AMD got in every single market segment this PoS was introduced. It's all there on their financial statements, every time they introduced the chip on the segment sales plunged, and every time they launched a new member of the family the actual result was smaller sales two or three quarters ahead. It's no surprise today that the low cost, low profile cat family comprises the majority of AMD's revenues today and that 100% of whatever operating profits they can get also come from it.

 

[Abwx]

It's no surprise today that the low cost, low profile cat family comprises the majority of AMD's revenues today and that 100% of whatever operating profits they can get also come from it.

Certainly that it s no surprise for the uninformed and prompt to jump on fud bandwaggons that are indeed always deprived of any numbers.

Others will notice that Gartner pointed AMD sales as comprising 30% of CPUs and 70% of APUs, this is an indication that a third are FX CPUs given that GPU less Kaveri/Richland are marginaly produced.

Anyway it s obvious that spreading fud require being not informed, why would it even be needed since the very point is to not be accurate.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Haha my Q9650 is still hanging in. Best PC investment ever Micro Center $300 or $250 I can't remember.

 

[RussianSensation]

All the above is revisionist history. Bulldozer and its derivatives killed AMD.

AMD is still alive -- which means you must be posting from the future and are very wealthy since you shorted/bought hundreds of thousands of puts on the stock in 2015 knowing it'll be bankrupt.

FX8320 bundle.
Mobo 1 = 970 Extreme3 R2.0 Socket AM3+ ATX = $154.99
Mobo 2 = M5A97 R2.0 Socket AM3+ ATX = $169.98
http://www.microcenter.com/site/products/amd_bundles.aspx

<$30 = one of the best after-market coolers.

Total price: $154.99-$169.98 + $40 cooler = $195-210

>>> 4.4-4.7Ghz is 15 min of work, max.

vs.

4th Gen Intel® Core&#8482; i3-4370 3.4GHz LGA 1150 Processor mobo bundle
Cheapest Mobo = H97M Pro LGA1150 mATX = $199.98
http://www.microcenter.com/site/brands/intel-processor-bundles.aspx

FX8320 @ 4.4-4.7Ghz will destroy an i3 4370 in almost every single task you throw at it, gaming, productivity, multi-tasking, etc.

But most people buying PCs are clueless - don't know how to overclock, don't read reviews, don't read benchmarks, just buy what they are told by marketing/media or their clueless friends/relatives.

i5/i7 K series are awesome but considering the situation, FX8320 should have been wiping the floor with an i3 in the United States for the last 4 years if PC users were actually ahem knowledgeable and tech savvy.

And before you reply that "But but FX8300 series needs an crazy high-end PSU"

850W = $51
750W Gold = $60
http://slickdeals.net/f/8012615-psu...-for-59-99-ar-more-newegg-com?&src=SiteSearch

Took 2 min of research. Tons of PSU deals like that in the US from different brands.

End result is up to 50% faster gaming performance in modern games.

And in gaming situations where Mantle can be used, the "poor" FX8350 + Mantle wipes the floor with an i3 in terms of minimum FPS. Guess what's going to happen in DX12 games for multi-threading of FX8000/9000 @ 4.5Ghz users?

I do agree though that AMD prioritized incorrectly. They should have made a Quad-core CPU with IPC as high as possible. PC gaming wasn't ready for 6-8 core CPUs from 2011-2014 and AMD paid a heavy price for it by getting double penalized due to lower performance in non well-threaded apps and high power usage since they were always a node/or 2 behind Intel. Things will get a lot worse once Skylake launches in August.

 

[tential]

RS, posting from an age where the FX8320 was $120 for the last 4 years instead of just on sale right now for $120.

And you posted 750W/850W PSUs. Great sized PSUs, I think you should get larger, but how many times do we see people on here with 500W PSUs or even 430 W sometimes and they end up going Intel/Nvidia. Lets face it, people WONT get large PSUs even if it's worth the marginal cost. They don't want it, you can't FORCE the market to buy something they don't want.

I didn't consider the FX lineup at all. The marginal cost of going intel i5 vs an FX lineup was an easy decision. Focus on OCing an FX lineup to compete with an i5. Or just get an i5 and already have the best performance the FX line can muster up. Then, I just went i7 because well, you really should if you have a microcenter deal.

Yes, the moral of the story though is that you should pick up processors on GOOD DEALS. Which most people don't do. I wouldn't get an i3 though. I'd get an FX on sale and OC it (lower perf than i3 sometimes but really you'd have a dual core in your pc if you don't have to? EW?) on the LOW end. An i5 on the Medium end. And an i7 (or now that the entry level for a worthwhile processor on the HEDT platform is lower than ever, I'd say get that.)

I'll upgrade my 4770k though to at least a hexacore processor just for fun. Maybe octocore. But that's not for a long time. Intel's processors are doing great in longevity which is why I got them in the first place.

 

[crashtech]

FX8320 @ 4.4-4.7Ghz will destroy an i3 4370 in almost every single task you throw at it, gaming, productivity, multi-tasking, etc.

Productivity? No, not so much. Aside from the 4370 representing the worst price/perf ratio in an i3, 4170 being about as fast and cheaper, it's no secret that the i3's ST performance is way ahead of the old Vishera, and this lead continues well into any reasonably anticipated "productivity" load. The extra cores of the 8320 just don't make any difference to most general computing needs, similarly, an i7 is a waste for most chores as well, though current AAA titles seem to finally be making some use of the extra thread capability.

 

[Abwx]

Focus on OCing an FX lineup to compete with an i5. Or just get an i5 and already have the best performance the FX line can muster up. T

And why overclocking the FX to the first place..?.

People where talking like you years before about the i5 2500K in respect of the FX8150, set apart in games and in the mandatory Intel optimised benches, what is left of the i5 comparatively to said FX.??..

http://techreport.com/review/27018/intel-xeon-e5-2687w-v3-processor-reviewed/8

 

[RussianSensation]

RS, posting from an age where the FX8320 was $120 for the last 4 years instead of just on sale right now for $120.

FX8320 has been going on sale for $120-140 for the last 2 years iirc. I've seen it that low for a long long time. I know when I went to work in Asia 2 yeras ago the FX8300 series was already going for $140-150 easily.

As early as October 2012, 8320 was $169 on launch day!

And you posted 750W/850W PSUs. Great sized PSUs, I think you should get larger, but how many times do we see people on here with 500W PSUs or even 430 W sometimes and they end up going Intel/Nvidia. Lets face it, people WONT get large PSUs even if it's worth the marginal cost. They don't want it, you can't FORCE the market to buy something they don't want.

I only linked those PSUs cuz it's the first couple posts that came up on SlickDeals. A gamer doesn't need a 750/850W PSU because a solid 550-650W will also work just fine. I just used it as an example that we can easily find high power PSUs without breaking the bank.

Also, I am not sure why someone might now want an 750W Gold rated PSU for $60 when PSUs last 7-10 years+. What are they buying instead some crappy 430W unit for $40 with 3 year warranty? Really now? Guess what, that falls into the category of uninformed PC builder.

You should know by now that PSU outlives almost every other component in the system but it's also THE most important component. A PSU will outlive nearly every component besides maybe the monitor or speakers. To save $ long-term it's better to just get a high quality PSU that will last 5 years. Doesn't have to be an 850W one for FX8320/i5.

I didn't consider the FX lineup at all. The marginal cost of going intel i5 vs an FX lineup was an easy decision.

I am the same way as you and for me I'll pay $100-200 extra since I tend to keep my platform a lot longer than in the past. I regret not getting the i7 2600K and I won't make the same mistake next time.

Focus on OCing an FX lineup to compete with an i5. Or just get an i5 and already have the best performance the FX line can muster up. Then, I just went i7 because well, you really should if you have a microcenter deal.

Agreed with your points.

My point is this forum has trashed FX8000/9000 series for so long but nothing even remotely close is attributed to Pentiums, Celerons and i3s of this world. Fact is, if FX8000/9000 are trash, then Pentiums, Celerons and i3s are the bacteria that eats the trash cuz they are worse!

Yes, the moral of the story though is that you should pick up processors on GOOD DEALS. Which most people don't do. I wouldn't get an i3 though. I'd get an FX on sale and OC it (lower perf than i3 sometimes but really you'd have a dual core in your pc if you don't have to? EW?) on the LOW end. An i5 on the Medium end. And an i7 (or now that the entry level for a worthwhile processor on the HEDT platform is lower than ever, I'd say get that.)

Yup, great point. But look how many people got i7 4790K when it made sense - i.e., when DDR3+Z97 mobos were much cheaper than DDR4+X99 mobos. Today, DDR4 prices have fallen so much and X99 boards are cheaper than at launch, yet people still recommend i7 4790K. We should adjust our views if the market conditions change.

If more games take advantage of multi-core CPUs, we should take notice and not praise the i3 or 3258.

upgrade my 4770k though to at least a hexacore processor just for fun. Maybe octocore. But that's not for a long time. Intel's processors are doing great in longevity which is why I got them in the first place.

Yup, good points. With Intel's 10nm new CPU architecture delayed until 2018 with Icelake (or w/e it's going to be called), it's going to be an extremely safe bet to get an i5-6600K or better yet i7-6700K and just OC it. That's why I expect AMD's CPU market share to decline even more over the next 5 quarters.

Point is though, this forum has massive double standards by bashing AMD's CPUs since Phenom I/II/Bulldozer but overhyping/defending trash like Pentiums, Celerons and i3s for years. :biggrin:

 

[CHADBOGA]

To reiterate, it depends on the environment you're measuring. Under Linux, the FX-8350 will rival an i7 3770k across the board and in several tasks outrun it. The 3770K usually sells for roughly twice an 8350.

Too bad for AMD that the Linux market for non-server products is so tiny and that Haswell came out over 2 years ago.

 

[RussianSensation]

Productivity? No, not so much. Aside from the 4370 representing the worst price/perf ratio in an i3, 4170 being about as fast and cheaper, it's no secret that the i3's ST performance is way ahead of the old Vishera, and this lead continues well into any reasonably anticipated "productivity" load. The extra cores of the 8320 just don't make any difference to most general computing needs, similarly, an i7 is a waste for most chores as well, though current AAA titles seem to finally be making some use of the extra thread capability.

Did you see most post above that compared the cheapest i3 bundle at MC (unless I missed other ones) vs. FX8320 + mobo + $40 cooler? A lot of people in the US have access to a MicroCenter. I don't think it's that easy to find an i3 combo much cheaper than the FX8320 combo. I suppose if someone is using their computer for productivity for many hours in the day, then the extra cost of electricity would be negate a lot of the benefits of the FX8320 @ 4.4-4.7Ghz but in that case the i3 isn't even a contender since it's pretty much a cripple in productivity scenarios (see benchmarks below).

By productivity I mean rendering, video editing/encoding, photo editing, encryption/decryption, etc. FX8320 @ 4.4-4.7Ghz will smoke an i3 in these productivity scenarios + modern gaming too.

^ If these FX9370/9590 parts used just 65-80W of power, then they wouldn't look so bad. AMD's problem is that they are multiple nodes behind Intel, soon 3. (32nm->28nm->22nm->14nm). Intel will already be on 14nm with Skylake and FX9370/9590 are still 32nm CPUs. There is no hope at all for AMD to keep up in perf/watt, performance and IPC in that case. Imagine if AMD 64/X2 were made on 2 nodes behind Intel? Or imagine if Intel was 2 nodes behind AMD? That's the reality for AMD right now and no engineers in the world can overcome this. That's why AMD desperately must to move down to 14nm node and then 10nm in 2018.

I am not really sure what "productivity" benchmarks you had in mind but clearly it is impossible to make a well-rounded gaming + productivity system today with a Core i3 unless you consider browsing the Internet, checking e-mail and playing Dota 2 the most intensive apps on your system.

For an informed consumer, and one who isn't lazy to do the leg work, there is no reason for the existence of the i3. It's better to just pick up a used i5 2500K/2600K or try to find a good deal on an i5.

The i3's purpose on the desktop is just to lure the uniformed consumers who buy into marketing. I can't think of any scenario where someone who actually uses their PC would build an i3 system over an FX8320 + OC or a used i5. If someone just needs a PC for basic browsing, even a Core 2 Duo E6600/G3258 + 120GB SSD + GTX750 is good enough for everything.

The i3 isn't good enough for modern gaming anyway so it literally sits in no man's land and this has been the case since the i3 came out. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if most people who have i3s are women who don't know anything about PCs, but the irony here is that these same users would be perfectly fine using a 5W Broadwell CPU/Snapdragon 810/Exynos 7420 in their PC.

 

[Abwx]

Too bad for AMD that the Linux market for non-server products is so tiny and that Haswell came out over 2 years ago.

The FX8350 was available and there was no HW when you bought your i5 IB...

Do you see where it stand in the graphs above..?.

Lol...it s literally torned apart by the FX8350 that did surely cost even less..

 

[escrow4]

If you are doing rendering or video encoding you are not a normal consumer who buys a Best Buy special (and you really think such a user will OC an FX and get it stable) and you won't be buying an i3 or 8350 you'd go straight to 4790[K] or hexa core both of which would obliterate any FX.

The point that an 8350 can best an i3 is pointless. People who need productivity grunt won't be thinking ooooo let's save $200 on old worthless chip with a dirt cheap 760G chipset frisbee mobo that dates back to 2009. Even a 970 is a rebadged and tweaked 770. They'll want Intel and they'll want quality.

For gaming the fact that a Haswell i3 can go head to head with an 8350 itself is amazing, all the while dumping half the power and heat. For gaming yes you want an i7+ at least now.

And right now Skylake is imminent, where is AMDs response? Sometime in 2016 when Cannonlake will dump on AMD further?

 

[crashtech]

By productivity I mean rendering, video editing/encoding, photo editing, encryption/decryption, etc. FX8320 @ 4.4-4.7Ghz will smoke an i3 in these productivity scenarios...

OK, I concede. My idea of an office productivity PC is different than yours, so the AMD offering is victorious in the scenarios you outline. But for the tasks the bulk of my customers perform, a cool, power sipping, fast i3 is a perfect match, overkill, actually.

 

[CHADBOGA]

The FX8350 was available and there was no HW when you bought your i5 IB...

Do you see where it stand in the graphs above..?.

Lol...it s literally torned apart by the FX8350 that did surely cost even less..

My usage of a computer dictates that as long as I have four cores, that the single core performance of those cores is what matters most.

The FX range of many weak cores, is not what I want at all and it comes down to it and the original Phenom design as being the worst AMD processors of the last 15 years.

 

[tential]

Why people cheap out on powersupply and cases is beyond me. I'm actually MAD I cheaped out and went with a 720W PSU. Having a good PSU that can handle a variety of scenarios and lasts long is so important. Same with case. GOOD PSU+Case means you have an amazing foundation for anything you want to put in your case.

That should be the cornerstone of any build. Start with ensuring you have a good case that you can work well in, and a PSU that is good. But no, people get horrible cases that can't fix bit GPUs (Why you're a gamer? Why are you getting some mini case? It's like getting a coupe when you need a pickup truck what?), get 400W Psus that are dirt cheap, then destroy their components when they OC their "efficient" gpu/cpu.
And the marginal cost for getting a good case/PSU is so cheap. I'm upset with my 720W PSU for now, I expected after the GTX 900 release, than AMD would go lower power usage too. But I think I'll be rewarded with the new GPUs, and with new intel CPUs later when I upgrade from Haswell in 2016-2018.

When people have an intel CPU, NV GPU, 450W PSU, and are FORCED into a maxwell GPU upgrade to stay in their power range because they gimp themselves with that PSU choice it mind boggles me.

I'm actually getting excited about upgrading now based on board features like M2 Sata. I'm actually curious now even if it's worth it on my 4770k if I don't go multigpu and don't need the PCIe lanes. Would allow me to take out another drive tray but well, that's more useful for multigpu and I'm eating PCIe lanes like that. But meh, I don't know much about that and hardware upgrades are out the window now that I'm getting a puppy. So much easier for me to spend money on a puppy than $1k+ on hardware lol.

 

[frozentundra123456]

Why people cheap out on powersupply and cases is beyond me. I'm actually MAD I cheaped out and went with a 720W PSU. Having a good PSU that can handle a variety of scenarios and lasts long is so important. Same with case. GOOD PSU+Case means you have an amazing foundation for anything you want to put in your case.

That should be the cornerstone of any build. Start with ensuring you have a good case that you can work well in, and a PSU that is good. But no, people get horrible cases that can't fix bit GPUs (Why you're a gamer? Why are you getting some mini case? It's like getting a coupe when you need a pickup truck what?), get 400W Psus that are dirt cheap, then destroy their components when they OC their "efficient" gpu/cpu.
And the marginal cost for getting a good case/PSU is so cheap. I'm upset with my 720W PSU for now, I expected after the GTX 900 release, than AMD would go lower power usage too. But I think I'll be rewarded with the new GPUs, and with new intel CPUs later when I upgrade from Haswell in 2016-2018.

When people have an intel CPU, NV GPU, 450W PSU, and are FORCED into a maxwell GPU upgrade to stay in their power range because they gimp themselves with that PSU choice it mind boggles me.

I'm actually getting excited about upgrading now based on board features like M2 Sata. I'm actually curious now even if it's worth it on my 4770k if I don't go multigpu and don't need the PCIe lanes. Would allow me to take out another drive tray but well, that's more useful for multigpu and I'm eating PCIe lanes like that. But meh, I don't know much about that and hardware upgrades are out the window now that I'm getting a puppy. So much easier for me to spend money on a puppy than $1k+ on hardware lol.

Yea, but you dont have to scoop poop from a computer!!!! Just kidding, I am a cat person myself, but congrats on your new pet.

 

[CHADBOGA]

Why people cheap out on powersupply and cases is beyond me. I'm actually MAD I cheaped out and went with a 720W PSU. Having a good PSU that can handle a variety of scenarios and lasts long is so important. Same with case. GOOD PSU+Case means you have an amazing foundation for anything you want to put in your case.

That should be the cornerstone of any build. Start with ensuring you have a good case that you can work well in, and a PSU that is good.

Unless one is going multi-GPU, a quality brand PSU with 720p is more than enough.

 

[SPBHM]

why are older than Nehalem (PII is newer but whatever) CPUs so bad at this?

I mean compare the i5 760 with th C2Q, and Phneom II X6 to the rest... it makes no sense

 

[myocardia]

why are older than Nehalem (PII is newer but whatever) CPUs so bad at this?

They don't have AVX extensions.

 

[SPBHM]

They don't have AVX extensions.

same as the 760 or Pentium Haswell, which are a lot faster

 

[BigDaveX]

If I had to guess, I'd say that modern programs (and OSes) are designed to quickly bounce data between threads, which works well on modern processors with shared caches and integrated memory controllers, but causes the Core 2 Quad, with its three decade-old bus protocol and MCM design, to completely tank.

Notice how in the sort of benchmarks that were commonplace in 2008-09 the Core 2 Quad is only slightly behind the Lynnfield i5, but as soon as you go to anything newer the latter surges massively ahead.

Nehalem did also introduce support for SSE4.2, though I never got the impression that resulted in particularly big performance improvements.

EDIT - Something else that occurs to me; if my memory's correct, a lot of the Core 2 architecture's performance-enhancing tricks only worked on 32-bit code, and didn't start working in 64-bit code until Nehalem showed up. And apps didn't really start making widespread use of 64-bit code until Windows 7 showed up, which was just over a year after Nehalem arrived on the scene. So it might be that the Core 2s are choking on 64-bit code, in addition to the problems caused by its bus design.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Comparing an OCed chip with a stock, disregarding everything else and then claim AMD is ok? Priceless.

For those people still not accepting reality. Look at the revenue for AMDs CPU+GPU division.

Its a 2% x86 revenue company. And the GPU part is in the gutters as well.

The only people you fool is yourself. Claiming terrible products are ok and the company is doing fine and none of it is related to its awful products that the market refuses to buy.

 

[lamedude]

why are older than Nehalem (PII is newer but whatever) CPUs so bad at this?

Here's a really technical answer.

 

[YBS1]

And why overclocking the FX to the first place..?.

People where talking like you years before about the i5 2500K in respect of the FX8150, set apart in games and in the mandatory Intel optimised benches, what is left of the i5 comparatively to said FX.??..

http://techreport.com/review/27018/intel-xeon-e5-2687w-v3-processor-reviewed/8

Not quite wishing to jump into the AMD vs. Intel debate at this point but I really have to question the validity of the benchmarks posted in that link. Many of these have the Westmere Xeons outperforming the SB-E, IB-E, and even HW-E, I've simply never seen this in any benchmarks I've ran on my personal systems and it just doesn't logically make sense.