Legacy Benchmarks at 3 GHz

Some of our legacy benchmarks have followed AnandTech for over a decade, showing how performance changes when the code bases stay the same in that period. Some of this software is still in common use today.

All of our benchmark results can also be found in our benchmark engine, Bench.

3D Particle Movement v1

3DPM is a self-penned benchmark, taking basic 3D movement algorithms used in Brownian Motion simulations and testing them for speed. High floating point performance, MHz and IPC wins in the single thread version, whereas the multithread version has to handle the threads and loves more cores. This is the original version, written in the style of a typical non-computer science student coding up an algorithm for their theoretical problem, and comes without any non-obvious optimizations not already performed by the compiler, such as false sharing.

3D Particle Movement: Single Threaded

3D Particle Movement: MultiThreaded

We ran 3DPM v2 earlier in the review, and it showed significant gains for Carrizo when running software that is not competing for data in shared cache lines. This older version of that benchmark still has those 'base CS' flaws that a non-CompSci science student might make, and while Carrizo has a small gain in single threaded mode, moving to multithreaded puts some strain on the caches, resulting in lower performance.

Cinebench 11.5 and 10

Cinebench is a widely known benchmarking tool for measuring performance relative to MAXON's animation software Cinema 4D. Cinebench has been optimized over a decade and focuses on purely CPU horsepower, meaning if there is a discrepancy in pure throughput characteristics, Cinebench is likely to show that discrepancy. Arguably other software doesn't make use of all the tools available, so the real world relevance might purely be academic, but given our large database of data for Cinebench it seems difficult to ignore a small five minute test. We run the modern version 15 in this test, as well as the older 11.5 and 10 due to our back data.

Cinebench 11.5 - Single Threaded

Cinebench 11.5 - Multi-Threaded

Cinebench R10 - Single Threaded Benchmark

Cinebench R10 - Multi-Threaded Benchmark

On the older versions of CineBench, like the newer ones, Carrizo has some notable microarchitectural advantages over Kaveri and previous versions of the Bulldozer microarchitecture.

POV-Ray 3.7

POV-Ray is a common ray-tracing tool used to generate realistic looking scenes. We've used POV-Ray in its various guises over the years as a good benchmark for performance, as well as a tool on the march to ray-tracing limited immersive environments. We use the built-in multithreaded benchmark.

POV-Ray 3.7 Beta RC4

For our base ray tracing benchmark in Windows, again Carrizo pulls out a lead. This time it's around 13% over Kaveri or 32% over Trinity/Richland.

TrueCrypt 7.1

Before its discontinuation, TrueCrypt was a popular tool for WindowsXP to offer software encryption to a file system. The version we use for our tests, 7.1, is still widely used however the developers have stopped supporting it since the introduction of encrypted disk support in Windows 8/7/Vista from 5/2014, and as such any new security issues are unfixed. The benchmark itself is a good representation of microarchitectural advantages for base encryption methods.

TrueCrypt 7.1 Benchmark (AES Performance)

The AES performance for Carrizo is notably above Trinity/Richland, and pulls a 12% gain over Kaveri as well.

x264 HD 3.0

Similarly, the x264 HD 3.0 package we use here is also kept for historic regressional data. The latest version is 5.0.1, and encodes a 1080p video clip into a high quality x264 file. Version 3.0 only performs the same test on a 720p file, and in most circumstances the software performance hits its limit on high end processors, but still works well for mainstream and low-end. Also, this version only takes a few minutes, whereas the latest can take over 90 minutes to run.

x264 HD Benchmark - 1st pass - v3.03

x264 HD Benchmark - 2nd pass - v3.03

Using slightly older conversion tools shows that Carrizo and Kaveri, when the frames are small, are essentially neck and neck for performance (but still 20% over Trinity/Richland).

7-zip

7-Zip is a freeware compression/decompression tool that is widely deployed across the world. We run the included benchmark tool using a 50MB library and take the average of a set of fixed-time results.

7-zip Benchmark

The 2MB of L2 cache for Carrizo hurts here. It makes we wonder how much more performance a 4MB cache would provide.

Performance at 3 GHz: Linux Gaming at 3 GHz: Alien Isolation
Comments Locked

131 Comments

View All Comments

  • Meteor2 - Saturday, July 16, 2016 - link

    Thanks. It's a little more complex than i3/5/7-nxxx, where n increments by one each generation...
  • TheinsanegamerN - Monday, July 18, 2016 - link

    cariizo cores use the excavator design. excavator is core design, carrizo is the product line.
  • Mokona512 - Saturday, July 16, 2016 - link

    Please do this test with the Phenom II series in order to understand the generational IPC changes, and also providing a better point of reference for the Zen CPUs. The Zen claims are based on IPC changes from a CPU series where there was a drop in IPC.
  • Ian Cutress - Monday, July 18, 2016 - link

    I recently redid a Phenom X6 in Bench, though that's absolute chip perf and not exactly what you're looking for, but it's there :)
  • Elizabeth king - Sunday, July 17, 2016 - link

    Love spell came out tremendously, I highly recommending robinson.buckler @ yahoo . com for whatever problems you are experiencing in your relationship. He is the real deal. his love spell is absolutely wonderful.
  • lwatcdr - Sunday, July 17, 2016 - link

    I find AMDs low cost offerings really interesting but this just doesn't work for me. The Carrizo on the desktop just seems too limiting. I wish that AMD would update the AM1 line. It is so inexpensive and can support a good number of PCIe lots. For things like a NAS, media pc, or even a Chrome box/low end pc they seem like a really good choice except that they have not been updated in years.
  • silverblue - Monday, July 18, 2016 - link

    Puma+ is kind of like what Atom did with their earlier Atoms, a more efficient version of Jaguar. I'm surprised that they didn't just lock the turbo and produce these in Jaguar's place, unless it's not cost-effective to do so.

    The cat cores are dead now, which is a shame as we never got to see how a dual channel memory interface would improve their performance.
  • Eris_Floralia - Monday, July 18, 2016 - link

    Another great review. I've translated all articles about Bulldozer architecture into Chinese in order to let people know why it didn't success. I believe that an eight-core Steamroller or Excavator would be competitive, but that never comes out.
  • TheinsanegamerN - Monday, July 18, 2016 - link

    it wont be competitive, excavator is still far behind intel is performance and in TDP, and cant overclock at all. And it is still 28nm and cache limited.

    AMD really needs to kill the bulldozer line. It is AMD's netburst.
  • Eris_Floralia - Monday, July 18, 2016 - link

    well, with some adjustments, steamroller can still reach high frequency. with additional L3 and larger L2, the problem with excavator may get solved. I mean that latest bulldozer architecture can do better than present piledriver, but the improvement obiviously doesnt worth a try.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now