AMD FX-8320E CPU Review: The Other 95W Vishera
by Ian Cutress on January 13, 2015 10:00 AM ESTCPU Benchmarks
The dynamics of CPU Turbo modes, both Intel and AMD, can cause concern during environments with a variable threaded workload. There is also an added issue of the motherboard remaining consistent, depending on how the motherboard manufacturer wants to add in their own boosting technologies over the ones that Intel would prefer they used. In order to remain consistent, we implement an OS-level unique high performance mode on all the CPUs we test which should override any motherboard manufacturer performance mode.
HandBrake v0.9.9: link
For HandBrake, we take two videos (a 2h20 640x266 DVD rip and a 10min double UHD 3840x4320 animation short) and convert them to x264 format in an MP4 container. Results are given in terms of the frames per second processed, and HandBrake uses as many threads as possible.
For Low Quality conversion, the 8320E has trouble keeping up with the full-fat i3, but beats them by a good margin when the frame sizes open up.
Dolphin Benchmark: link
Many emulators are often bound by single thread CPU performance, and general reports tended to suggest that Haswell provided a significant boost to emulator performance. This benchmark runs a Wii program that raytraces a complex 3D scene inside the Dolphin Wii emulator. Performance on this benchmark is a good proxy of the speed of Dolphin CPU emulation, which is an intensive single core task using most aspects of a CPU. Results are given in minutes, where the Wii itself scores 17.53 minutes.
Dolphin historically prefers high IPC single core performance, which the 8320E is lacking.
WinRAR 5.0.1: link
The eight threads of the FX-8000 series show through here, beating all the i3 and some of our i5 parts.
PCMark8 v2 OpenCL
A new addition to our CPU testing suite is PCMark8 v2, where we test the Work 2.0 suite in OpenCL mode.
Hybrid x265
Hybrid is a new benchmark, where we take a 4K 1500 frame video and convert it into an x265 format without audio. Results are given in frames per second.
For x265 conversion those extra threads end up highly beneficial for the FX-8320E, nudging inbetween our i5 data.
3D Particle Movement
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. For a brief explanation of the platform agnostic coding behind this benchmark, see my forum post here.
While single thread performance is behind, the overclocked FX-8320E storms ahead of our FX-9590 results.
FastStone Image Viewer 4.9
FastStone is the program I use to perform quick or bulk actions on images, such as resizing, adjusting for color and cropping. In our test we take a series of 170 images in various sizes and formats and convert them all into 640x480 .gif files, maintaining the aspect ratio. FastStone does not use multithreading for this test, and results are given in seconds.
Web Benchmarks
On the lower end processors, general usability is a big factor of experience, especially as we move into the HTML5 era of web browsing. For our web benchmarks, we take four well known tests with Chrome 35 as a consistent browser.
Sunspider 1.0.2
Mozilla Kraken 1.1
WebXPRT
Google Octane v2
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
92 Comments
View All Comments
LeptonX - Tuesday, January 13, 2015 - link
How long do you test with OCCT and what data size? I ask because I often have crashes after 3-6 hours and if I want total stability that lowers my OC by as much as 200MHz.Oxford Guy - Sunday, April 19, 2015 - link
If the chip even lasts that long at an 1.550 volts and what is most likely a temperature well above the rated maximum.bsim500 - Wednesday, January 14, 2015 - link
"Idle to Delta Power Consumption":-"95w" FX-8320E = 86w
"95w" FX-8370E = 127w
"125w" FX-8350 = 163w
"220w" FX-9590 = 272w
And this is precisely why people want the actual idle & load figures not worthless "delta" scores that still do not reflect if, eg, one platform is idling 20w higher than another, etc. It doesn't involve any extra work since you need to acquire both anyway to calculate the delta!
yannigr2 - Wednesday, January 14, 2015 - link
Every time I see charts like these in the article, I am hitting my head on the wall shouting"32nm Thuban. 32nm Thuban you morons!".
Cryio - Wednesday, January 14, 2015 - link
Anandtech guys, please, sometime in 2015 please update the charts with some newer games, that are also CPU dependent.• Tomb Raider is exclusively GPU dependent.
• F1 2013 is old, 2014 was released some time ago. You should still probably benchmark GRID: AutoSport, since it's the newer game with the better optimized engine. F1 games always done poorly with AMD CPUs, for whatever reason.
• Battlefield 4 should be test only on MP. And if you really want to enphasize that CPUs can do in that game, get a HD 7000/R 200 series AMD GPU and run the game on Mantle to see what the CPU can do.
• Get an RTS game on that list.
• Get Far Cry 4, Watch_Dogs, Crysis 3 or Metro Last Light Redux on this list. These are properly CPU hungy games.
Paddockrj - Wednesday, January 14, 2015 - link
Dear members of this channel. You are eating a bull but a fly make you all bleed! AMD created those processors because a lot of people that has Am3+ 95w mobo's need it! If you have a 8120...8150...8320...8350...8370 or FX6xxx, you dont need 8320E or 8370E! AMD created those processor for a good upgrade ONLY.In gaming, FX8320E with a gtx770 or r9 280x gets the same fps that any Intel Core i. Some fps more, some fps less, but the same level. The diference happens when we try to play a Intel optmized game or a game that uses 2 or 4 cores better... MUCH BETTER. 1 core of Intel is better than 1 core of AMD, but we must see that in multicore, FX is excellent. Only i7 2nd or better can face a FX8350 per example in multicore.
But now, the most important perfomance is single core. And this way, Core i3 and i5 4th perform better. However it is not the FX end. I think within two or less years, when 4k be a truth here in Brasil, who have a FX6xxx or better will give thanks God for that. Because 4K uses multicore too much and, I told you all, FX is excellent this track.
We dont need be fanboys, we are getting nothing. I like AMD cause my Phenom 2 x6 + r9 270 run games like an i5 and I pay R$ 1200,00 less at least... More or less = U$ 500,00. That mean, I pay less and I do the same thing. Sure, i5 can convert a film in 30s, my old X6 can do it in 45s, but when I try to convert 2...3...4 films at the same time, X6 can do it in 3minutes, i5 = 5minutes. I lost in single, but in multicore I win. That is matter to me.
All processors has you reason to exist! When people ask me: Ok, multicore is very good, but for gaming? AMD? Why?
I can answer using this example. A lot of people say: I will buy an i5 4430 and a gtx750... or r7 250 or 7750... or 7730... MAN! Why? Oh God! Why?
You must see that NOTHING... Read it well: NO-THING is more important than graphics card in gaming. If you will use a 7870 or r9 270 or gtx760 and want use this build over and over and over and over... Why dont you buy an FX6300 + mobo withi usb3, 1600mhz memory support? = R$650... But no! Intel is VERY VERY VERY HIGH MUCH ULTRA MAXED MAJOR... They think this way. Thinking this way, they buy an i3 4150 + mobo B85 = R$707...
Ok... "tell me the diferences, man!"
i3 will win fx6300 in single core test...
i3 will convert film faster if the program use 2 cores (rare!)
i3 will have 5fps more in some cases
i3 will lose in multicore test
i3 will suffer in 4K
i3 will cost more
And now I ask you: Why pay R$60 plus to do the same thing? With the same quality?
I cant find a usual answer...
JumpingJack - Thursday, January 15, 2015 - link
So what you are saying is that AMD's higher end desktop processors are essentially competitive with Intel low end desktop processors. No wonder they are cheaper.BrokenCrayons - Thursday, January 15, 2015 - link
I consulted my fortune cookie and zodiac to find out that delta charts for power are still pointlessly useless.corsa - Friday, January 16, 2015 - link
PCMark8 v2 OpenCLThe only Benchmark that has no scores for the Blue Team, were they to embarrassing to publish Ian?
Oscarcharliezulu - Sunday, January 18, 2015 - link
What's up with agisoft? Your link http://www.agisoft.ru shows an info box page saying they haven't plaid their hosting bills.