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

244 Comments

View All Comments

  • 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
  • Spunjji - Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - link

    Thanks! +1 to that. Reply
  • CeriseCogburn - Tuesday, October 30, 2012 - link

    ROFL, thank you the 3 stooges.
    I'd like to particularly thank silverblue the little co amd fanboy who provided immense entertainment in that they lost, then moments later, they won, deranged fantasy spew. Good to know Stearoller is going to "pull away" !

    hahahahhahahahahha

    One for all and amd all won !

    LOL
    Reply
  • rkrb79 - Friday, October 10, 2014 - link

    FYI I joined Anandtech just so I could tell you that you are a douchebag!! Reply
  • Taft12 - Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - link

    +2 in fact!

    An official lower-TDP version version of the 8-core CPU would be very nice. 95W or even lower as Intel does with their -S SKUs.

    At my workplace, the i7-3770S has been just plain outstanding for our small form-factor server/workstation appliance that travels to tradeshows with our sales guys. I'd happily trial an AMD 8-core equivalent.
    Reply
  • silverblue - Wednesday, October 24, 2012 - link

    Happy to +3 you on that. :) Reply
  • CeriseCogburn - Tuesday, October 30, 2012 - link

    - 10 for the once again PATHETIC HACKING that is required for amd to be acceptable.
    (that's minus ten !)

    LOL - fan boy fan joy fan toy EPIC FAIL !
    Reply
  • StevoLincolnite - Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - link

    I wouldn't say it has delivered. Not yet anyway.

    Remember the Phenom 2's IPC is lower than the later model Core 2's and Piledriver still needs 700mhz+ to beat a Phenom 2, so that puts it in perspective.
    Mind you, overclock the NB on a Phenom 2 and you can get some pretty interesting gains in the range of 5-15% depending on the situation.

    However, like AMD has done for the last several years, they are happy to throw more cores at the performance problem, which is great, we just wish those cores were a little beefier or software to become more heavily threaded.

    The other flip-side is this will drop straight into some AM3 motherboards and all AM3+ motherboards, so it's a worthy upgrade if you're running something like an Athlon, plus it's cheap.

    But the consensus is that if you're still running a Phenom 2 x6, and you don't need 8-threads and mostly play video games, it really is throwing money into the fire in order to upgrade to the FX line, Piledriver or not, unless you intend to overclock the chips to 4.8ghz+ which the Phenom 2's can't reach on air.
    Reply
  • wwwcd - Tuesday, October 23, 2012 - link

    But the consensus is that if you're still running a Phenom 2 x6, and you don't need 8-threads and mostly play video games, it really is throwing money into the fire in order to upgrade to the FX line, Piledriver or not, unless you intend to overclock the chips to 4.8ghz+ which the Phenom 2's can't reach on air


    Yes, we don't neeed of 8 core/threads for gaming today, but do You have prognosis for near future?
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now