Real World Performance at 3 GHz

For our generational testing, we took each of the four main processors in this test and adjusted their CPU frequencies in the BIOS to 3 GHz. This was achieved through a 30x multiplier and 100 MHz base frequency, which for each processor is a reduction from the stock speeds. We set each CPU to perform at 3 GHz only to fix the frequency, and ran the memory in each case at the maximum supported frequency by the processor. Some benchmarks in the generational tests will probe the memory, and an upgrade in the memory controller to support higher frequencies (officially) than an older processor is, a generational upgrade, as important as the core or cache performance.

AMD CPUs
  µArch /
Core
Cores Base
Turbo
TDP DDR3 L1 (I)
Cache
L1 (D)
Cache
L2
Cache
Athlon
X4 845
Excavator
Carrizo
4 3500
3800
65 W 2133 192KB
3-way
128KB
8-way
2 MB
16-way
 
Athlon
X4 860K
Steamroller
Kaveri
4 3700
4000
95 W 1866 192KB
3-way
64KB
4-way
4 MB
16-way
 
Athlon
X4 760K
Piledriver.v2
Richland
4 3800
4100
100 W 1866 128KB
2-way
64KB
4-way
4 MB
16-way
 
Athlon
X4 750K
Piledriver
Trinity
4 3400
4000
100 W 1866 128KB
2-way
64KB
4-way
4 MB
16-way

Speaking of cache, as mentioned at the beginning of this review, the Athlon X4 845 has a significant advantage in the L1 cache layout, affording a 2x size L1 data cache along with a move from 4-way to 8-way associativity. Each of these methods, as a broad rule of thumb, typically decreases the cache miss rate by a factor of 1.414 (square root of 2x). Combined should see a factor two decrease in cache misses overall, and this will affect a number of benchmarks when we compare each processor at a fixed frequency. On the other side of the equation, the L2 cache for the X4 845 is half that of the X4 860K, meaning that if the data is not in the L1, it is less likely to be in the L2, which will add additional latency.

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 Emulation Benchmark

Emulation takes cues from a high IPC and base frequency, however for our generational testing it is all about the microarchitecture. The Carrizo has a 9% advantage here over the Kaveri.

WinRAR 5.0.1: link

Our WinRAR test from 2013 is updated to the latest version of WinRAR at the start of 2014. We compress a set of 2867 files across 320 folders totaling 1.52 GB in size – 95% of these files are small typical website files, and the rest (90% of the size) are small 30 second 720p videos.

WinRAR 5.01, 2867 files, 1.52 GB

WinRAR enjoys memory bandwidth with its variable workload, and seemingly the Kaveri has a strong showing here. The Carrizo only has 2MB of L2 cache, which most likely puts it at a disadvantage.

3D Particle Movement v2

The second version of this benchmark is similar to the first, however it has been re-written in VS2012 with one major difference: the code has been written to address the issue of false sharing. If data required by multiple threads, say four, is in the same cache line, the software cannot read the cache line once and split the data to each thread - instead it will read four times in a serial fashion. The new software splits the data to new cache lines so reads can be parallelized and stalls minimized. As v2 is fairly new, we are still gathering data and results are currently limited.

3D Particle Movement v2.0 beta-1

We saw this in our laptop Carrizo testing: if we adjust the software to avoid false sharing (which decreases performance), the Excavator microarchitecture pulls a significant lead in 3DPMv2. Part of this is most likely down to the larger L1 data cache as well.

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. 

WebXPRT 2013

WebXPRT

This benchmark can be memory intensive, as it draws various graphs and applies filters to pictures, among other things. The lower L2 cache hurts here.

Google Octane v2

Google Octane v2

In contrast, Octane attempts to stay as close to the execution ports as possible, and the Carrizo cores take an 18% lead over Kaveri.

Benchmark Overview Performance at 3 GHz: Office
Comments Locked

131 Comments

View All Comments

  • TheinsanegamerN - Monday, July 18, 2016 - link

    carrizo is gimped because it's a bulldozer product. AMD should have stuck with k10 cores on their APUs.
  • Lolimaster - Saturday, July 16, 2016 - link

    Unless they axed BR in favor of non-APU Zen and bring Raven Ridge early 2017.
  • Lolimaster - Saturday, July 16, 2016 - link

    They were nice in 2014.

    We should have a nice 20nm 768SP APU in 2015 with a full L2 cache Excavator and fully mature 896SP 20nm early this year.

    Remember the A8 3870K? That APU was a damn monster only hold back from being godly cause of their sub 3Ghz cpu speed, what we had after?

    400SP VLIW5 2011 --> 384 VLIW4 2012 --> 384VLIW4 2013 --> 512SP GCN 2015 --> 512SP GCN 2016

    Intel improved way faster (non "e" + edram igp's are near A8 level from being utter trash when the A8 3850 was release).
  • serendip - Saturday, July 16, 2016 - link

    Still not attractive when a cheap Pentium kills it on single-threaded performance, which is what matters in real-world usage. AMD needs to make tablet chips to take the place of Intel Atoms. I'd love to have a 2W TDP APU with double the performance of Atom GMA graphics and similar single-threaded performance.

    One can dream...
  • TheinsanegamerN - Monday, July 18, 2016 - link

    AMD powered surface 4 (non pro model) with LTE would be perfect.

    Too bad AMD abandoned that market. They had a good thing going with their cat cores, but they let that line wither on the vine.
  • leopard_jumps - Saturday, July 16, 2016 - link

    Thanks for the review ! You should include Intel i7 for comparison . Here :
    http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/amd_athlon_x4...
  • Meteor2 - Saturday, July 16, 2016 - link

    The latest microarchitecture from AMD based on the x86 instruction set was given the codename Excavator, using the fourth generation of AMD's Bulldozer cores, called Carrizo cores.' - Can someone explain that to me? Or are we saying these are Excavator Bulldozer Carizos??
  • Calculatron - Saturday, July 16, 2016 - link

    Fourth generation Bulldozer-style cores, named Carrizo.

    The architecture type/family is Bulldozer, this version/generation is called Excavator, and this specific kind of core is called Carrizo. The mobile version is called Carrizo-L, I think?

    If you, or anyone you know, bought an FX-8350, they bought a second-generation Bulldozer product, and it was called Piledriver. Anyone who bought the A10-5800K also bought a second generation Bulldozer product, but it was called Trinity. Both of these were Vishera, since they were second-generation.
  • Lolimaster - Saturday, July 16, 2016 - link

    No.

    The 1st APU platform featuring piledriver cores was called Trinity,
    The 1st and only desktop FX platform featuring piledriver cores was called Vishera.
  • Calculatron - Saturday, July 16, 2016 - link

    This is correct: I confused, and swapped, Piledriver and Vishera.

    Both the A10-5800K and FX-8350 were Piledriver, but they were Trinity and Vishera, respectively.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now