Overclock.net › Forums › AMD › AMD CPUs › I'm extremely disappointed with the fx4100 performance
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

I'm extremely disappointed with the fx4100 performance - Page 2  

post #11 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by xd_1771 View Post

He is comparing one game.
This CPU competes well in every other game except for Starcraft II.  It may have to do with coding optimizations to favour Intel - whether on purpose or not.  If you are coming to conclusions from his observations with just this game, then I am going to have to consider your thoughts to be short-sighted.

Budget wise, Metro 2033 also differentiates i3-2100 and FX-4100.

Metro2033%20B%206850.png
Edited by trumpet-205 - 3/30/12 at 7:50pm
Misaka
(18 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i5-3570K ASRock Z68 Extreme4 Gen3 Sapphire HD 7850 2 GB Samsung DDR3 16 GB (30 nm) 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Crucial M4 128 GB WD Caviar Blue 1 TB Lite-on DVD Burner Thermalright Venomous X 
OSOSMonitorKeyboard
Windows 7 Professional x64 (Host) Crunchbang Linux x64 (Guest) HP 2311x HP PS/2 Keyboard 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
Rosewill Capstone 450 W Rosewill Challenger Logitech M570 ASUS Xonar D1 
Other
Hauppauge HVR-1250 
  hide details  
Misaka
(18 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i5-3570K ASRock Z68 Extreme4 Gen3 Sapphire HD 7850 2 GB Samsung DDR3 16 GB (30 nm) 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Crucial M4 128 GB WD Caviar Blue 1 TB Lite-on DVD Burner Thermalright Venomous X 
OSOSMonitorKeyboard
Windows 7 Professional x64 (Host) Crunchbang Linux x64 (Guest) HP 2311x HP PS/2 Keyboard 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
Rosewill Capstone 450 W Rosewill Challenger Logitech M570 ASUS Xonar D1 
Other
Hauppauge HVR-1250 
  hide details  
post #12 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by xd_1771 View Post

He is comparing one game.
This CPU competes well in every other game except for Starcraft II.  It may have to do with coding optimizations to favour Intel - whether on purpose or not.  If you are coming to conclusions from his observations with just this game, then I am going to have to consider your thoughts to be short-sighted.

SC2 is not optimized for Intel, it simply needs high single threaded performance. Look how close the i3 is to the 2500k. The FX4100 is a very cheap CPU with bad IPC, you get what you pay for.
VIP3R
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5 750 @ 4.0GHz 1.35v EVGA P55 LE GTX 480 @ 850/2155 8GB Corsair XMS3 1600mhz 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
2x 500GB F3s RAID0, 1x 7200.11 1.5TB, 1x 500GB Win7 64-bit 27'' Dell 2707WTP + 2x HP LP2465 IBM Model M mini 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
OCZ ProXStream 1000w CM Storm Scout DeathAdder 3.5g Artisan Shiden-Kai mid 
AudioAudio
Xonar D2X Beyerdynamic DT880 '03 
  hide details  
VIP3R
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5 750 @ 4.0GHz 1.35v EVGA P55 LE GTX 480 @ 850/2155 8GB Corsair XMS3 1600mhz 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
2x 500GB F3s RAID0, 1x 7200.11 1.5TB, 1x 500GB Win7 64-bit 27'' Dell 2707WTP + 2x HP LP2465 IBM Model M mini 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
OCZ ProXStream 1000w CM Storm Scout DeathAdder 3.5g Artisan Shiden-Kai mid 
AudioAudio
Xonar D2X Beyerdynamic DT880 '03 
  hide details  
post #13 of 52

^ No, it is definitely just Starcraft II.

 

Here is Skyrim with a 6950 - Skyrim is a game that is optimized for only two CPU cores like SCII:

With low targets, results are equal:

Skyrim%206950.png

With higher targets (FXAA enabled - I don't believe that having FXAA enabled when you play is actually necessary either), the FX 4100 is shown to be behind due to lacking instructions per second.  An overclock can solve this problem:

Skyrim%20B%206990.png

 

No doubt, Starcraft II is optimized for high IPC/IPS but that fact may not be relevant in cross-platform comparisons.  While it may still be true, there appears to be another level of optimization that is more cross-platform than anything.  It may have to do with instruction sets, processor, design... I don't know for sure.  The fact is, it appears to be there and it is affecting the results of gamers on this game only.  You cannot come to conclusions on all games and general performance between these two processors based on just this result and its rather glorified nature due to the conditions of the particular game being compared, or you would have to be short-sighted.

 

SC2 is outperforming AMD systems with several more cores on Intel based setups that are totally limited to both two cores and threads (i.e. while Starcraft II is running, background system tasks must also use those two cores) and on processors that should exhibit lower Starcraft II performance because of lower IPC (instructions per clock)/IPS (instructions per second - i.e. IPC + clock speed = IPS performance) compared to higher-end, higher-speed processors.  Certainly, with the presence of other running tasks, actual IPS should not exceed that of the AMD implementations that have more cores and more ability to dedicate full cores to SCII.

 

You can see this by noting the significant difference between a G620T and G850 in one benchmark.  The G620T exhibits lower performance than the G850 because it has lower performance.  This suggests that Starcraft II is more stressful on and takes up more CPU %age because it is using up so much CPU that it cannot provide the same FPS results.  At the same time, background system processes also require CPU and they must steal it from the CPU-heavy Starcraft II (thus degrading FPS).  Despite the presence of what may be significant FPS degrading through background tasks, the G620T still exhibits equal performance with the A8 3850 - and this is a quad core CPU with cores that can offload the CPU needs of other background system tasks.


Edited by xd_1771 - 3/30/12 at 8:02pm
post #14 of 52
Just for comparison, I played sc2 with an x3 720 @ 3.6 and it ran 60 fps easy. Also had an hd 4870. BD ipc is truly that bad. :/
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
4690k @ 4.5 MSI Z97 Gaming 5 EVGA 980 Ti 16GB GSkill 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Evo 250 500GB, 2x 1TB F3 + 3TB Seagate GoFlex +... Optical Drive? You mean 5.25 Floppy drive? I go... Nh-D14 Win7 64. Diewin10die. 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardCase
XB270HU My girlfriend stole my other monitor. Damn women! Celeritas Phanteks Enthoo Pro 
MouseMouse Pad
Cheap Sharkk gaming mouse. Last Mx518 died yea... Puretrak Talent 
  hide details  
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
4690k @ 4.5 MSI Z97 Gaming 5 EVGA 980 Ti 16GB GSkill 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Evo 250 500GB, 2x 1TB F3 + 3TB Seagate GoFlex +... Optical Drive? You mean 5.25 Floppy drive? I go... Nh-D14 Win7 64. Diewin10die. 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardCase
XB270HU My girlfriend stole my other monitor. Damn women! Celeritas Phanteks Enthoo Pro 
MouseMouse Pad
Cheap Sharkk gaming mouse. Last Mx518 died yea... Puretrak Talent 
  hide details  
post #15 of 52
People be tripping over 1 game.
Rigamormus
(19 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX-8350@5Ghz Asus Crosshair V Formula MSI GTX 680 Lightning@1333+600mem 8gb Gskill Sniper 1600 9-9-9-24 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
2x500gb Crucial M4 OCZ Vertex III walmart brand 
CoolingCoolingOSMonitor
Raystorm custom loop. Coolgate 360 Windows 7 64 Ultimate LG IPS236v 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Razer Black Widow Ultimate 2013 Corsair TX850M Corsair 600t SE Razer Deathadder 
Mouse PadAudioAudio
OCZ Regulator Razer Tiamat 2.2 Creative Sound Blaster Recon3D/audigy 
  hide details  
Rigamormus
(19 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX-8350@5Ghz Asus Crosshair V Formula MSI GTX 680 Lightning@1333+600mem 8gb Gskill Sniper 1600 9-9-9-24 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
2x500gb Crucial M4 OCZ Vertex III walmart brand 
CoolingCoolingOSMonitor
Raystorm custom loop. Coolgate 360 Windows 7 64 Ultimate LG IPS236v 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Razer Black Widow Ultimate 2013 Corsair TX850M Corsair 600t SE Razer Deathadder 
Mouse PadAudioAudio
OCZ Regulator Razer Tiamat 2.2 Creative Sound Blaster Recon3D/audigy 
  hide details  
post #16 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by pwnzilla61 View Post

People be tripping over 1 game.

Its only a few games that show BD getting bulldozed by intel by that large of a margin but those few games (SC2, WoW and Skyrim) are extremely popular.
post #17 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by xd_1771 View Post

SC2 seems to be very optimized for Intel processors at higher settings.  You'll have to blame the developers for possibly unfairly coding the game.  This trend is evident and dubious.

450x588px-LL-2549d5e9_StarCraftII.png

The Pentium G630 is a 2.7Ghz dual core (i.e. all other tasks which include OS and system tasks must share the 2 cores with Starcraft 2) with no overclocking capabilities and no HyperThreading or other SMT/CMT.  It features just 3MB of cache compared to higher end Intel implementations.  It is besting all AMD processors in minimum FPS and average FPS.  Through to the FX-8120, the Phenom II x6 1090T, and the Phenom II x4 980 - all of which have more cores to be shared with the system and in other tasks exhibit performance as a result of equivalent or better instructions per second.

Note that this test is being done with an HD 7970.  But even down to the mid-range, trumpet-205's post below this one shows that results don't change much with midrange cards vs high end cards (i.e. 6770s can max SCII regardless of CPU and same results can be expected above that) - so these results, just the same, apply to realistic setups that pair midrange CPUs with midrange GPUs.


There is absolutely no other game on the market that is seeing these sort of ridiculous trends in gaming FPS likewise to Intel and AMD processors.

Again, blame the developers.  Until recently many Intel code compilers were coded so as to unfairly sabotage AMD processor performance with the same code; AMD even sued for it once and won the case.

Every other site shows these trends where SCII is being played with Ultra CPU settings or other such high settings for CPUs enabled.  This is Anandtech's:
550x420px-LL-57930fb5_40751.png
All these tests are again being done with the same GPU (5870).  The trend is clear.  The Pentium G620T is a 2.2Ghz dual core processor.  Again, only two cores to share with the entire system and all background tasks that may be running - and it is up to bat with the 2.8Ghz (more cache too) AMD A8 3850 quad core APU.

waatttt tttthhhheeeeee...... thats messed lol
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i5 2500k ASRock Z68 Extreme3 GEN3 MSI HAWK GTX560ti G.Skill Ripjaws 8gb 9-9-9-24 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Intel 320 Series 80gb Western Digital Caviar Blue 640gb TSSTcorp CDDVDW TS-H653R CoolerMaster Hyper212+ 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit Samsung SyncMaster2233 Stock HP Seasonic x660 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Corsair Carbide 400r stock hp my desk :) on board (good enough dont know y people need s... 
  hide details  
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i5 2500k ASRock Z68 Extreme3 GEN3 MSI HAWK GTX560ti G.Skill Ripjaws 8gb 9-9-9-24 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Intel 320 Series 80gb Western Digital Caviar Blue 640gb TSSTcorp CDDVDW TS-H653R CoolerMaster Hyper212+ 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit Samsung SyncMaster2233 Stock HP Seasonic x660 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Corsair Carbide 400r stock hp my desk :) on board (good enough dont know y people need s... 
  hide details  
post #18 of 52
Quote:
Just for comparison, I played sc2 with an x3 720 @ 3.6 and it ran 60 fps easy. Also had an hd 4870. BD ipc is truly that bad. :/

^ People who are trying to compare BD and Phenom II and drawing the conclusion that BD IPC is bad and BD-based processors in general are bad should have a look at one of the charts I just posted... seriously, do it, I should warn you that you are making yourselves look bad with your claims:

 

450x588px-LL-2549d5e9_StarCraftII.png

 

The 3.6Ghz FX-4100 in its platform is providing approximately the same performance as the 3.8Ghz Phenom II x4 980, which is probably about equal to a 4.4-4.6Ghz FX CPU in most other tasks.  This is actually surprising to me, as other results have shown much bigger gaps between the 4100/etc and Phenom II.  No doubt Bulldozer architecture generally features worse IPC and IPS (at default speeds) than Phenom II CPUs as it has been confirmed through several tests, but the Starcraft II results are really not showing this.  So by coming to the conclusion that BD IPC is bad even though the SCII results that you attempt to justify that claim with (and SCII results only) show otherwise, you are making a very short-sighted claim.

 

Also, I couldn't be more annoyed by these IPC arguments, generally. IPC is just one thing and not part of the whole equation.  I have said this too many times.  If you take both the FX and the Phenom II and overclock them to their approx. max levels - the 4100 will garner a much higher overclock percentage than the Phenom II x4 980 would because the 980 is clocked closer to 45nm Deneb cores' expected maximum clock speed limits - it will most certainly outperform the also-overclocked 980 due to higher instructions per second observed by higher overclock percentage and ability.


Edited by xd_1771 - 3/30/12 at 8:11pm
post #19 of 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Derp View Post

Its only a few games that show BD getting bulldozed by intel by that large of a margin but those few games (SC2, WoW and Skyrim) are extremely popular.


With the new patches skyrim is perfectly fine on bd, scII is the only game it seems to have trouble from what I have seen.
Rigamormus
(19 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX-8350@5Ghz Asus Crosshair V Formula MSI GTX 680 Lightning@1333+600mem 8gb Gskill Sniper 1600 9-9-9-24 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
2x500gb Crucial M4 OCZ Vertex III walmart brand 
CoolingCoolingOSMonitor
Raystorm custom loop. Coolgate 360 Windows 7 64 Ultimate LG IPS236v 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Razer Black Widow Ultimate 2013 Corsair TX850M Corsair 600t SE Razer Deathadder 
Mouse PadAudioAudio
OCZ Regulator Razer Tiamat 2.2 Creative Sound Blaster Recon3D/audigy 
  hide details  
Rigamormus
(19 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX-8350@5Ghz Asus Crosshair V Formula MSI GTX 680 Lightning@1333+600mem 8gb Gskill Sniper 1600 9-9-9-24 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
2x500gb Crucial M4 OCZ Vertex III walmart brand 
CoolingCoolingOSMonitor
Raystorm custom loop. Coolgate 360 Windows 7 64 Ultimate LG IPS236v 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Razer Black Widow Ultimate 2013 Corsair TX850M Corsair 600t SE Razer Deathadder 
Mouse PadAudioAudio
OCZ Regulator Razer Tiamat 2.2 Creative Sound Blaster Recon3D/audigy 
  hide details  
post #20 of 52
what no one has mentioned is he has a 2500k and he then gets a FX 4100 and expects it to perform at the same level
1) the intel has hyperthreading so each core will do 2 threads on one core
2) AMD each core dose a single thread

can the 2 really be compaired
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: AMD CPUs
This thread is locked  
Overclock.net › Forums › AMD › AMD CPUs › I'm extremely disappointed with the fx4100 performance