Gaming Performance

Our latest discrete GPU gaming tests use a GeForce GTX 680, while the older tests use the Radeon HD 5870. We're focused on looking at differences between CPUs here so most of the numbers you see are CPU bound rather than pushing the GPU to the limits. As most games are at best a mixture of single and lightly multithreaded workloads, AMD's FX platform doesn't do well here at all. If you're looking to build a high end gaming machine and want the best CPU for the job, Vishera isn't it.

Windows 8 - Skyrim - 1680 x 1050

Windows 8 - Diablo 3 - 1680 x 1050

Dragon Age Origins - 1680 x 1050 - Max Settings (no AA/Vsync)

Dawn of War II - 1680 x 1050 - Ultra Settings

World of Warcraft

Starcraft 2

Photoshop & 3D Rendering Performance Power Consumption
POST A COMMENT

241 Comments

View All Comments

  • Got my first AMD - Thursday, May 08, 2014 - link

    I OC my 8320 to 4.7 GHz and only have to raise the voltage .0125 from stock. Why is it that you think AMD is worthless. They are all for the consumer and I am grateful for it. I'm really sick of your ignorance. Really sick of it. Reply
  • cbrown - Thursday, June 12, 2014 - link

    What everyone will get "sick" of in a hurry is if AMD falls on its face with its "crap" cpu manufacturing... Intel will double their pricing on cpus again, same as they were during the time period AMD released it's "crap" slot athlon 500. AMD also has a decent gpu to fall back on since they bought ATI which was a smart move.

    *AMD released Slot A Athlon 500 Intel slashed it's prices in half same day to match.

    *If ATI hadn't stepped up to the plate and suceeded when nVidia bought 3dfx Everyone would be crying about the prices of gaming cards

    *Sure AMD is lagging behind right now but never underestimate the importance of competition and the effect it has on affordable upgrades for everyone...

    I love AMD for the pricing they have brought to us this day and time... with cpu's AND gpu's
    I am fixing to build my FIRST intel platform since the since amd released the slot a athlon simply because I want a hackentosh... there is simply too much heartache building one on a AMD CPU/MOBO combo for the simple fact apple does not support them. I dont know if you would call me a amd fanboy or not, your opinion, I simply have supported a company that brought affordability to everyone.... I am either MAC (intel, no choice really) or AMD for the windows platform...

    Anyone that cannot see the reasoning behind this, now I would say they are a intel fanboy though.... Everyone has the right to choose.....
    Reply
  • sleekz - Thursday, May 02, 2013 - link

    Priced cheaply, but they don't match price/performance wise. Price is not a valid argument against intel. Reply
  • Abdussamad - Monday, August 12, 2013 - link

    Do the math on electricity consumption and you find it is not priced decently at all. Let's say you run a system with an idle FX 8350 for 8 hours a day everyday for 5 years and electricity costs you $0.16 per kwh:

    (( 8 hours * (74.2 - 57.5) * 365 days * 5 years ) / 1000) * 0.16 = $39

    (74.2 - 57.5 is the difference in idle power consumption between an fx-8350 and i5-3570)

    So add $40 to the price of the FX 8350 before you do a comparison. More if you run your system 24/7.
    Reply
  • lostinspacex - Wednesday, November 13, 2013 - link

    duuude its 40 dollars in 5 years, you spend more going to a restaurant once , and u are multiplying watts with kilowatts xD, basic math mistake Reply
  • chekk42 - Wednesday, November 13, 2013 - link

    Look closer. The math is correct. However, yes, $40 over 5 years is not really a concern. Reply
  • ninza228248 - Monday, April 14, 2014 - link

    After 5 years add $40 to AMD and you will get mind blowing processor compared to Intel Core i5-3570 or any intel processor after 5 years in that price bracket... Reply
  • Operandi - Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - link

    Looks like Piledriver delivered. Granted the bar was set pretty low with Bulldozer but this at least has a use case, highly threaded applications but considering this is a process node behind Intel I’d say its pretty good. If they can keep this pace up and hit IPC a bit harder AMD could be back in a pretty good position. Reply
  • silverblue - Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - link

    At least now they can say they beat Intel in a lot of multithreaded situations. Losing to Intel AND using more power was unpalatable. I'd like to see an undervolted 8350, perhaps AMD's conservative side is rearing its ugly head again.

    I'm a bit concerned that, even with hard-edge flops and the RCM, the clock speed difference is about 11% for the same power. I'd have thought that even the former would shave off a decent amount, unless RCM doesn't work so well at higher speeds. Still, there's one disadvantage to be had - overclocking won't work so well due to the flop change.

    If AMD can beat Intel now in multithreading in most circumstances, Steamroller is just going to let them pull away. Single-threaded workloads are the worry, though. Still, at least they can say that they finally beat Nehalem even in single-threaded work. I did lament the lack of an appearance of Phenom II, but looking at the results, they've buried that particular ghost.
    Reply
  • Finally - Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - link

    Undervolting, you said?
    Here you go: http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/prozessoren/201...
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now