The older version of Cinebench lets you run the 3D rendering engine across all available threads in the CPU or just one. We opted here to run one to see how efficient each “core” in the new FX-8350 is. Vishera has a small advantage over Bulldozer which AMD says half comes from the higher clocks, and the other half from the under-the-hood improvements. The bad news though is pretty clear from this graph. Despite slightly lower clocks, the Ivy Bridge cores in the Intel part is all over Vishera and Bulldozer.
Winner: Ivy Bridge
To gauge the performance of the CPUs when all threads are tapped, we ran Cinebench 11.5 using Maxon’s rendering engine across the chips. The eight-core FX-8150 Bulldozer gets stomped on by the four-core Core i5-3570K but Vishera gets vengeance by acing the Intel chip by a healthy clip.
Winner: Vishera
The POV Ray benchmark is a freeware ray tracer that has its roots on the Amiga. The benchmark exploits all available threads on a CPU and the advantage should go to the 8-core chips. And no surprise it does. Vishera wins this one by a wide margin although, with but four-cores at its back, Ivy Bridge doesn’t too poorly.
Winner: Vishera
Click the next page for 3DMark 11 and gaming benchmarks.
Comments are closed on this article
dakishimesan
October 23, 2012 at 3:20am
an honest question:
I was thinking, i know benchmarks are necessary to test relative performance, and we know from them that AMD does well in heavy threaded work, and Intel much better in IPC. Okay, but when you run a benchmark, it's just the benchmark and an otherwise idling system.
What if you had a benchmark that tested simultaneous normal tasks, such as virus scan/browser tabs/flash video/video compression/music playing/photoshop/etc all at once, the kind of stuff that we all do? When the system has more cores to submit thread work to, wouldn't that favor AMD?
I want to see that benchmarks -- all/some the other benchmarks running at once.
kevaskous
October 23, 2012 at 12:46am
Yes this is more promising of the ideals behind this design, we keep seeing these sort of improvements and this will be a winner quickly, next rig, AMD, for sure, support what I'm seeing without caring on the minor loss.
vrmlbasic
October 23, 2012 at 12:28am
I really wish that the benchmarks were interactive, that I could compare MaximumPC tests between this new AMD chip and older chips, where applicable. Specifically my older 955 Phenom II x4 which has served me well. A Phenom who will probably be put into another machine after seeing these benchmarks ;)
Say, what parameters did MPC use for its 7-zip tests? I fired up 7-zip and ran the benchmark with default settings and after one pass my "overall rating" is a mere 10,456 MIPS. This is less than half the performance of the new AMD chip, so I'm curious.
BTW, when is AMD coming out with a chipset to succeed the 990FX? It's getting a bit long in the tooth, AMD's FM2 boards are more feature-rich, their budget tech is beating what seems to be their flagship tech.
Neufeldt2002
October 22, 2012 at 9:32pm
Well, at least it is a step in the right direction. Hopefully we will see more steps in the right direction and get some competition from AMD.
Print
