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

  • mrdude - Thursday, July 14, 2016 - link

    Fantastic work, Ian. Now if AMD put half as much work into their uArchs as you did into reviewing them, we might finally get somewhere =P
  • Geranium - Thursday, July 14, 2016 - link

    Ian,
    Exynos 7420 and Apple A9 is built on Samsang's 14nm LPE. Exynos 8890 and Snapdragon 820 is built on 14nm LPP.
  • Vlad_Da_Great - Thursday, July 14, 2016 - link

    AMD CPU R&D has been outsourced pretty much close to an 1 year ago. Even Jim Keller left before anything(silicon) was remotely close to be released. AMD has submitted on the CPU front, and now with the another failure from the RX 480 power fiasco it seems in the GPU segment too. ZEN is just a myth for the small minded amoebas. The closest they can come to is Haswell, even in some benchmarks they will be far behind.
    Intel has reported times in many improvement over the 4/5y spam CPU's. AMD can barely get 30% and in some synthetic benchmarks they are below something was produced/developed half a decade ago.
  • TheinsanegamerN - Friday, July 15, 2016 - link

    You have sources for your ludicrous claims?
  • wumpus - Friday, July 15, 2016 - link

    Zen tapped out. Thus the drawdown. But if you think Zen will compare as well to Intel silicon as the 480 does to the 1060, remember that Intel is still hand-laying out the transistors and AMD is using autorouters.

    Hopefully AMD will at least be able to get back to producing "the cheap stuff', but that is their best hope. They've pretty much surrendered.
  • Calculatron - Thursday, July 14, 2016 - link

    Great article, overall! I am glad to see someone finally review the product.

    I was hoping, however, that you would come across this strange "throttling" issue that this CPU seems to have while playing certain games (not all games, just certain ones). Some people have started threads on Tom's Hardware, and I started one on AMD's own forums:
    https://community.amd.com/thread/198618
    http://www.tomshardware.com/answers/id-3054721/ath...
  • DominionSeraph - Thursday, July 14, 2016 - link

    Yeesh, the barest overclock physically degrades the processor? This likely means it's degrading at stock as they've pushed a 35W part to 65W and beyond.
  • Sherlock - Thursday, July 14, 2016 - link

    /rant

    Who's your web-designer Anandtech - seriously - I see a big banner at the top & two big ads on the left & right of the page. I am so pissed by the design - I actually calculated the pixel count - only 24% of the screen is dedicated to content - excluding the large Anandtech logo & the menu bars - 10% for the screen is content - please don't kill the site with such crap

    rant/

    Also - "For clarity, hand was from AMD but not Lisa Su's" :)
  • DominionSeraph - Friday, July 15, 2016 - link

    A narrow column is more readable. Who cares what's on the sides?
  • The_Assimilator - Friday, July 15, 2016 - link

    Ad blockers are your friend.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now