Monday, July 11th 2011
AMD FX-8130P Processor Benchmarks Surface
Here is a tasty scoop of benchmark results purported to be those of the AMD FX-8130P, the next high-end processor from the green team. The FX-8130P was paired with Gigabyte 990FXA-UD5 motherboard and 4 GB of dual-channel Kingston HyperX DDR3-2000 MHz memory running at DDR3-1866 MHz. A GeForce GTX 580 handled the graphics department. The chip was clocked at 3.20 GHz (16 x 200 MHz). Testing began with benchmarks that aren't very multi-core intensive, such as Super Pi 1M, where the chip clocked in at 19.5 seconds; AIDA64 Cache and Memory benchmark, where L1 cache seems to be extremely fast, while L2, L3, and memory performance is a slight improvement over the last generation of Phenom II processors.
Moving on to multi-threaded tests, Fritz Chess yielded a speed-up of over 29.5X over the set standard, with 14,197 kilonodes per second. x264 benchmark encoded first pass at roughly 136 fps, with roughly 45 fps in the second pass. The system scored 3045 points in PCMark7, and P6265 in 3DMark11 (performance preset). The results show that this chip will be highly competitive with Intel's LGA1155 Sandy Bridge quad-core chips, but as usual, we ask you to take the data with a pinch of salt.
Source:
DonanimHaber
317 Comments on AMD FX-8130P Processor Benchmarks Surface
<-- Intel fanboy check my rigDepends if you consider gimmicks rip offs
Quad-Channel, The Great and Honorable QPI returns, what else oh YEAH! PCI-Express 3.0!!
I feel like I am missing something else
Your choices for reputable sites is interesting.
on topic:
at work I just did a super pi out of curiosity, e7500 wolfdale @ stock = 17.93 seconds for 1M.
so this is slower per clock than 775 on that paticular bench. 3dmark scroes aren't paticularly bad, but still not great.
I was really hoping for more market competition, but it doesn't seem like AMD has changed that at all.
Anyways, this article disagrees with you. appropriately titled "AMD Outpaces Sandy Bridge in early tests". 3DMarks 11 and CineBench, x64 encoding AMD beats pulls ahead impressively. SuperPI, goes to Intel as usual.
fudzilla.com/processors/item/23381-bulldozer-performance-figures-are-inA lot of what he was saying was true though. Granted he didn't provide links for most of what he was saying, but who wants to be that guy that runs around the internet looking for evidence all day to appease geeks on a forum lol
With that in mind, I present my own SuperPI times, done with my 2600k @ 4.9 GHz(2133 MHz memory)
Wake me up when AMD can reach these.
Poor SuperPi doesnt equate to poor overall performance or value for money.
1x AVX(256bit)
1x x87(64/80bit)I need a wide variety of reviews to say "YOUR BIASED!! ha ha" then leave like no one saw meIt's for $320~ish the AMD Zambezi FX Processor for comparison to beating the i7 970-990XNever
SuperPi is using the dead x87
Tell us your wPrime 32M and 1024M time/scoresActually, that is never going to come loli7 720QM *Cringe* I have nightmares using that even the Core 2 Duo Celeron rebrands are better than that CPUAMD Zambezi isn't for x87 it's all out brute forcing SSE2 - SSE5(XOP, CVT16, FMA4 amd exclusive)
and yeah my i7 @ 4.2 comes in just under 10 seconds, I was just curious if amd finally managed to catch up to 775 yet. Still no go.