Jump to content

AMD and INTEL

Aaron2001
By Aaron2001
in CPUs, Motherboards, and Memory
 Share
Posted

What is the FX 8320e INTEL counterpart, It can be any intel architecture just am very curious in knowing what that CPU was made to compete against and when.

 

 

TY for gouging my curiosity!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

There's no direct equivalent.  If you're looking for something to match total performance, perhaps something like at 6600k (at stock even)

 

However, if you never used all 8 cores, you could probably get similar performance out of a Core 2 Quad Q9650 to be honest (the single core performance is close believe it or not, in theory)

Solve your own audio issues  |  First Steps with RPi 3  |  Humidity & Condensation  |  Sleep & Hibernation  |  Overclocking RAM  |  Making Backups  |  Displays  |  4K / 8K / 16K / etc.  |  Do I need 80+ Platinum?

If you can read this you're using the wrong theme.  You can change it at the bottom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

Nothing. Intel doesn't have to compete with what AMD releases since AMD isn't competitive in this market.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
  • Author
1 minute ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

There's no direct equivalent.  If you're looking for something to match total performance, perhaps something like at 6600k (at stock even)

 

However, if you never used all 8 cores, you could probably get similar performance out of a Core 2 Quad Q9650 to be honest (the single core performance is close believe it or not, in theory)

Just interested in knowing what CPU performs closely to it. I believe it an Ivy bridge CPU though

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
2 minutes ago, ThePartyLeader said:

Nothing. Intel doesn't have to compete with what AMD releases since AMD isn't competitive in this market.

oooh burn

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
2 minutes ago, Aaron2001 said:

Just interested in knowing what CPU performs closely to it. I believe it an Ivy bridge CPU though

Well if we look at similar ivy bridge CPUs, even an i3 3220 outclasses it considerably in single-threaded performance.  To match the total performance however, you'd need something like a 3570k

Solve your own audio issues  |  First Steps with RPi 3  |  Humidity & Condensation  |  Sleep & Hibernation  |  Overclocking RAM  |  Making Backups  |  Displays  |  4K / 8K / 16K / etc.  |  Do I need 80+ Platinum?

If you can read this you're using the wrong theme.  You can change it at the bottom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
  • Author
2 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

Well if we look at similar ivy bridge CPUs, even an i3 3220 outclasses it considerably in single-threaded performance.  To match the total performance however, you'd need something like a 3570k

How would it stack up with Sandy Bridge then? The I7's could still be better?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

The FX-8150 was able to keep up with the i7-2600K in a multi-threaded task. However, anything that was more sensitive to single threaded performance could lose to the Phenom II, which was competing against the first generation Core processors.

 

The FX-8350 is probably about an i7-3770K at best in a multi-threaded task.

I have a blog! And a list of guides I've posted

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
6 minutes ago, Aaron2001 said:

What is the FX 8320e INTEL counterpart, It can be any intel architecture just am very curious in knowing what that CPU was made to compete against and when.

 

 

TY for gouging my curiosity!

Ivybridge i5s were the competitor when it was first released.

 

Now though you can pick up a 8320e and board for under $100USD ($95 at microcenter with a board and without tax)

That is pretty much the same price as a newer pentium and h110 board, so the competition has changed over time.

 

 •E5-2670 @2.7GHz • Intel DX79SI • EVGA 970 SSC• GSkill Sniper 8Gb ddr3 • Corsair Spec 02 • Corsair RM750 • HyperX 120Gb SSD • Hitachi 2Tb HDD •

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
  • Author
1 minute ago, M.Yurizaki said:

The FX-8150 was able to keep up with the i7-2600K in a multi-threaded task. However, anything that was more sensitive to single threaded performance could lose to the Phenom II, which was competing against the first generation Core processors.

 

The FX-8350 is probably about an i7-3770K at best in a multi-threaded task.

Was the FX line released to compete with the 2nd gen or 3rd gen core CPUs? How come no improvement in single threaded tasks? Don't know much about early intel CPUs as I came in on the 4790k scene

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
8 minutes ago, Aaron2001 said:

How would it stack up with Sandy Bridge then? The I7's could still be better?

It would be a similar story.  They're not so different, and any shortcomings could be made up with an easy overclock to be honest.

Solve your own audio issues  |  First Steps with RPi 3  |  Humidity & Condensation  |  Sleep & Hibernation  |  Overclocking RAM  |  Making Backups  |  Displays  |  4K / 8K / 16K / etc.  |  Do I need 80+ Platinum?

If you can read this you're using the wrong theme.  You can change it at the bottom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
17 minutes ago, Aaron2001 said:

What is the FX 8320e INTEL counterpart, It can be any intel architecture just am very curious in knowing what that CPU was made to compete against and when.

 

 

TY for gouging my curiosity!

The AMD FX-8350e should slot in somewhere around a Intel Core i5-3470T...

Please spend as much time writing your question, as you want me to spend responding to it.  Take some time, and explain your issue, please!

Spoiler

If you need to learn how to install Windows, check here:  http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/324871-guide-how-to-install-windows-the-right-way/

Event Viewer 101: https://youtu.be/GiF9N3fJbnE

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
Just now, Aaron2001 said:

Was the FX line released to compete with the 2nd gen or 3rd gen core CPUs? How come no improvement in single threaded tasks? Don't know much about early intel CPUs as I came in on the 4790k scene

Two theories on my end:

  • Bulldozer also only had two ALUs and AGUs per integer core. AMD's previous architecture, K10, had three ALUs and AGUs per core. This means for a single threaded task that can only use one core, Bulldozer is 66% less effective than K10 right off the bat.
  • The Bulldozer family (which the FX line is from) has a bunch of pipeline stages. This is bad from a branching standpoint because if you miss a branch prediction, you have to dump the pipeline and start over essentially. Bulldozer's penalty for this was 20 cycles, versus Sandy Bridge's 14-17. While that might not seem like much, when you're processing millions of instructions in a second, that can add up. As a comparison, K10 only had a 12 cycle penalty.

I have a blog! And a list of guides I've posted

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
19 minutes ago, M.Yurizaki said:

-snips-

As a comparison, K10 only had a 12 cycle penalty.

Just a side note... what if Zen is just K10 but reworked to be more modern? xP

USEFUL LINKS:

PSU Tier List | F@H stats

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
  • Author
7 minutes ago, M.Yurizaki said:

Two theories on my end:

  • Bulldozer also only had two ALUs and AGUs per integer core. AMD's previous architecture, K10, had three ALUs and AGUs per core. This means for a single threaded task that can only use one core, Bulldozer is 66% less effective than K10 right off the bat.
  • The Bulldozer family (which the FX line is from) has a bunch of pipeline stages. This is bad from a branching standpoint because if you miss a branch prediction, you have to dump the pipeline and start over essentially. Bulldozer's penalty for this was 20 cycles, versus Sandy Bridge's 14-17. While that might not seem like much, when you're processing millions of instructions in a second, that can add up. As a comparison, K10 only had a 12 cycle penalty.

Cool theory! Can't wait for Zen if it's 4 core CPU actually does perform as well as the 6700k. The $149 price tag will finally force intel to lower their prices

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
12 minutes ago, TheRandomness said:

Just a side note... what is Zen is just K10 but reworked to be more modern? xP

You laugh but Intel did just that.  Netburst, the basis of the Pentium 4 architecture was a high TDP dead end, so they went back and looked at their mobile 'Pentium M' series, which had evolved from the Pentium III architecture, realized it was vastly superior, and built what is known as the 'Core' architecture family from that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
8 minutes ago, Aaron2001 said:

Cool theory! Can't wait for Zen if it's 4 core CPU actually does perform as well as the 6700k. The $149 price tag will finally force intel to lower their prices

The $149 price tag is a rumour, and could be higher than that. 

1 minute ago, AshleyAshes said:

You laugh but Intel did just that.  Netburst, the basis of the Pentium 4 architecture was a high TDP dead end, so they went back and looked at their mobile 'Pentium M' series, which had evolved from the Pentium III architecture, realized it was vastly superior, and built what is known as the 'Core' architecture family from that. 

I know about the Pentium M story and that kinda shit, but it's quite entertaining that AMD as a company hasn't realised they can use it and make it better. 

USEFUL LINKS:

PSU Tier List | F@H stats

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
14 hours ago, TheRandomness said:

I know about the Pentium M story and that kinda shit, but it's quite entertaining that AMD as a company hasn't realised they can use it and make it better. 

K10 did struggle against the last of the Core 2's though. As a comparison, a 2.6GHz Phenom II X4 9950 is barely beaten by a 2.5GHz Core 2 Quad Q9300.

I have a blog! And a list of guides I've posted

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

When it all comes down to it... aMD is way behind. Worst part is the 6700k has a 91w TDP so not a ton of heat, very efficient. the top aMD cores have a TDP of 220w! so you may get performance bUT board and chip are gunna make alot of heat. byE bye North bridge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
16 hours ago, Aaron2001 said:

What is the FX 8320e INTEL counterpart, It can be any intel architecture just am very curious in knowing what that CPU was made to compete against and when.

TY for gouging my curiosity!

core i7-920 came out in 2008 and has similar performance to the AMD FX-83XX which came out in 2012...so i think intel had a CPU with similar performance to what AMD is offering right now back in 2008.

http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-920-vs-AMD-FX-8320E/1981vs2985

| CPU: Core i7-8700K @ 4.89ghz - 1.21v  |  Motherboard: Asus ROG STRIX Z370-E GAMING  |  CPU Cooler: Corsair H100i V2 |
| GPU: MSI RTX 3080Ti Ventus 3X OC  |  RAM: 32GB T-Force Delta RGB 3066mhz |
| Displays: Acer Predator XB270HU 1440p Gsync 144hz IPS Gaming monitor | Oculus Quest 2 VR

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing CPUs, Motherboards, and Memory

×