Overclock.net › Forums › AMD › AMD CPUs › Hypothetical Question - FX-4300 vs. Phenom II X4 Clock for Clock
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Hypothetical Question - FX-4300 vs. Phenom II X4 Clock for Clock - Page 2

post #11 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeffredo View Post

I probably already know the answer to this, but being the consensus seeker I am I thought I'd ask here. Say you have a Phenom II X4 @ 4.0 Ghz. What would it take for an FX-4300 to equal it in gaming only? 4.0 Ghz as well, or a bit more? Anyone here have experiences with both? I know the FX would have lower power consumption.

A phenom II execution core has 6 execution ports (3xALU + 3xAGU), a pipeline depth of approximately 12 steps and a front-end (fetch/decode/schedule) that can deliver up to 3 instructions per cycle to the execution resources.

A PileDriver execution core has 4 execution ports (2xALU + 2xAGLU), a pipeline depth that AMD claims is unchanged (but has higher branch mis-prediction penalty than Phenom II, though this is likely due to a new, theoretically improved prediction engine) and shares a front-end (fetch/decode/schedule) with another core that can deliver up to 4 instructions per cycle.

On the surface, there have been major regressions in available execution resources on PileDriver compared to phenom II when compared "core for core." However, the PD architecture does achieve far higher saturation within its limited resources than Phenom II does in most workloads. Judging solely on the numbers above, one might predict that an entire PD module is only 33% faster than a phenom II core. In reality, a Piledriver module achieves ~60% higher compute performance per cycle than a phenom II core. This is of course conditional on there being 2 threads for PD to work on. When we run 1 thread per module, vs 1 thread per core, the primary performance penalty on PD is the limited execution resources, the front end is actually overkill in these conditions, which (combined with various refinements) results in approximately 20-50% better execution port saturation than Phenom II. Of course, phenom II has 50% more execution resources, so PD still winds up with less IPC/C than phenom II in many workloads.


Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisjames61 View Post

...Personally I can say that my 6300 at 4200 MHz spanks my 1090T at 4000 MHz. More so than 200 MHz would indicate. I also can say that my 4300 at 4300 MHz bests either my 965 BE or my 960T at 4200 MHz. My A10-5800K seems faster than my 965 BE and 960T for that matter. I do no benchmarking. I don't do much gaming. I just think the FX cpu's multi-task better. Less mouse lag, faster window re-sizing. That sort of thing. I usually have two browsers running. Tons of open tabs, Youtube, iTunes, Prime95, burning cd's etc....

The performance differences you are describing sound to me like the differences in low-power-state behaviors between phenom II and FX.

FX idles at 1.4ghz and ramps to full speed in a fraction of the time it takes phenom II to respond to changes in load. Phenom II idles at 800mhz and takes substantially longer to respond to changes in load. This causes the FX chips to "feel" much more responsive in every day use when idle states are intact, and is probably the most practical advantage to FX over phenom II for most users. Coincidentally, it is also this slow to respond behavior trait of phenom II that causes many users to experience enormous improvements in gaming performance when switching from phenom II to FX chips.

If you disable the low power states and lock the phenom II to 4ghz all the time, it will feel just as responsive *if not more so* than the FX chip will with idle states enabled.
Edited by mdocod - 4/8/14 at 10:32pm
     
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-8350 990X EVO R2.0 Sparkle GTX460 768MB ballistix tactical 2 x 8GB 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Toshiiba THNSNH 256GB Enterprise RE3 1TB Asus BD combo drive Artic A30 
OSMonitorMonitorMonitor
Manjaro Linux Samsung 21.5" LCD E2009WFP E2009WFP 
PowerCase
Seasonic G 550W Modular Fractal Design Core 3500 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-6300, 4.7 GHZ@1.43V GA-970A-UD3P GTX 460 768MB Mixed DIMMs. 2x4GB + 2x8GB @ 1600-8-8-8 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Toshiba THNSNH 19nm 256GB 1TB Spinpoint F3 WD RE3 1TB WD RE3 1TB 
Optical DriveCoolingOSOS
yes CM Seidon 120V SolydK OpenSuse 13.1 
OSOSMonitorMonitor
Linux Mint 9-32 bit // Linux Mint 17-64 bit  Manjaro Xfce Samsung 21.5" HannsG 21.5" sideways! 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Sticky ATNG Rosewill Green 630W NZXT Gamma Basic Microsoft corded 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
A10-6800k 4.8GHZ @ 1.375V, 1.2GHZ iGPU Gigabyte GA-F2A85XN-WIFI HD8670D Ripjaws 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Seagate ST1000DM003 Asus BC-12B1ST/BLK/B/AS Zalman CNPS5X Linux Mint 15 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
LG IPS224V-PN Logitec K360 FSP 400W Aurum S 80+ gold Prodigy 
Mouse
logitec M235 
  hide details  
Reply
     
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-8350 990X EVO R2.0 Sparkle GTX460 768MB ballistix tactical 2 x 8GB 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveCooling
Toshiiba THNSNH 256GB Enterprise RE3 1TB Asus BD combo drive Artic A30 
OSMonitorMonitorMonitor
Manjaro Linux Samsung 21.5" LCD E2009WFP E2009WFP 
PowerCase
Seasonic G 550W Modular Fractal Design Core 3500 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX-6300, 4.7 GHZ@1.43V GA-970A-UD3P GTX 460 768MB Mixed DIMMs. 2x4GB + 2x8GB @ 1600-8-8-8 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
Toshiba THNSNH 19nm 256GB 1TB Spinpoint F3 WD RE3 1TB WD RE3 1TB 
Optical DriveCoolingOSOS
yes CM Seidon 120V SolydK OpenSuse 13.1 
OSOSMonitorMonitor
Linux Mint 9-32 bit // Linux Mint 17-64 bit  Manjaro Xfce Samsung 21.5" HannsG 21.5" sideways! 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Sticky ATNG Rosewill Green 630W NZXT Gamma Basic Microsoft corded 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
A10-6800k 4.8GHZ @ 1.375V, 1.2GHZ iGPU Gigabyte GA-F2A85XN-WIFI HD8670D Ripjaws 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Seagate ST1000DM003 Asus BC-12B1ST/BLK/B/AS Zalman CNPS5X Linux Mint 15 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
LG IPS224V-PN Logitec K360 FSP 400W Aurum S 80+ gold Prodigy 
Mouse
logitec M235 
  hide details  
Reply
post #12 of 131
I love this technical stuff! mdocod is the man!
post #13 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisjames61 View Post

I love this technical stuff! mdocod is the man!
Yeah he knows quite a lot rolleyes.gif Hehe. He knows a lot!
Jay
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX 8350 4.4Ghz at 1.36v GA 78LMT USB3 Rev 5.0 Sapphire R9 285 OC 16GB Kingston Savage Ram 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
1TB Western Digital 500GB Seagate Barracuda Noctua NH-D15S Windows 8.1 
MonitorPowerMouseMouse Pad
Asus MG279Q Fressync OCZ ZS 650 Watt PSU Dragonwar ELE-G9 Dragonwar 
  hide details  
Reply
Jay
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX 8350 4.4Ghz at 1.36v GA 78LMT USB3 Rev 5.0 Sapphire R9 285 OC 16GB Kingston Savage Ram 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
1TB Western Digital 500GB Seagate Barracuda Noctua NH-D15S Windows 8.1 
MonitorPowerMouseMouse Pad
Asus MG279Q Fressync OCZ ZS 650 Watt PSU Dragonwar ELE-G9 Dragonwar 
  hide details  
Reply
post #14 of 131
Pretty much why upgrading from my Phenom II X4 to FX is a waste of time and funds in my case. I wouldn't notice the difference when the most intensive thing I do on my PC is gaming (no MP and no heavy mods ect.). Not sure if the same could be said for someone else and their PC usage scenario though.

It amazes my how long this chip has stayed relevant for my personal needs.
 
ThinkPad Yoga
(10 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Phenom II X4 970 @ 4 Ghz Asus M4A88TD-V EVO EVGA SuperClocked 1050 Ti 4GB G.Skill Snipers 8GB DDR3 1333 (2x4GB) 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Crucial MX300 275GB SSD Seagate NAS 2TB Seagate NAS 2TB Asus DVD Burner 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
CoolerMaster GeminII S524 Win 7 Pro x64 Samsung 24" S24D590 (1080p) Logitech G510 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Corsair TX750 V2 Corsair 600T Silver Logitech Trackball Dead mouse carcass 
AudioOtherOther
Logitech Z313 Linksys WRT54G w/ DD-WRT @ 225Mhz Samsung Galaxy S3 16GB - Rooted/Carbon Rom 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Baytrail Quad Core @ 2.16 Ghz OEM Lenovo 20DAS02X00 Intel HD Graphics 8GB DDR3L 1600 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
240GB Kingston SSD N/A Windows 8.1 Pro 11.6" IPS Touch Display @ 1366 x 768 
KeyboardAudio
ThinkPad baby... HD Audio 
  hide details  
Reply
 
ThinkPad Yoga
(10 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Phenom II X4 970 @ 4 Ghz Asus M4A88TD-V EVO EVGA SuperClocked 1050 Ti 4GB G.Skill Snipers 8GB DDR3 1333 (2x4GB) 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
Crucial MX300 275GB SSD Seagate NAS 2TB Seagate NAS 2TB Asus DVD Burner 
CoolingOSMonitorKeyboard
CoolerMaster GeminII S524 Win 7 Pro x64 Samsung 24" S24D590 (1080p) Logitech G510 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Corsair TX750 V2 Corsair 600T Silver Logitech Trackball Dead mouse carcass 
AudioOtherOther
Logitech Z313 Linksys WRT54G w/ DD-WRT @ 225Mhz Samsung Galaxy S3 16GB - Rooted/Carbon Rom 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Baytrail Quad Core @ 2.16 Ghz OEM Lenovo 20DAS02X00 Intel HD Graphics 8GB DDR3L 1600 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
240GB Kingston SSD N/A Windows 8.1 Pro 11.6" IPS Touch Display @ 1366 x 768 
KeyboardAudio
ThinkPad baby... HD Audio 
  hide details  
Reply
post #15 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrawesome421 View Post

Pretty much why upgrading from my Phenom II X4 to FX is a waste of time and funds in my case. I wouldn't notice the difference when the most intensive thing I do on my PC is gaming (no MP and no heavy mods ect.). Not sure if the same could be said for someone else and their PC usage scenario though.

It amazes my how long this chip has stayed relevant for my personal needs.
If all you do is gaming then you will notice a difference between the two. If you max out msaa in games with the rest of the settings at ULTRA or the maximum preset then you won't see much of a difference but when settings are lowered a little and msaa is off the cpu needs to work harder. This is when you will notice a difference, maybe of 8-15fps depending on the game. Talking with respect to the FX 6300. Do you have thief? Maybe we could bench?
Jay
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX 8350 4.4Ghz at 1.36v GA 78LMT USB3 Rev 5.0 Sapphire R9 285 OC 16GB Kingston Savage Ram 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
1TB Western Digital 500GB Seagate Barracuda Noctua NH-D15S Windows 8.1 
MonitorPowerMouseMouse Pad
Asus MG279Q Fressync OCZ ZS 650 Watt PSU Dragonwar ELE-G9 Dragonwar 
  hide details  
Reply
Jay
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX 8350 4.4Ghz at 1.36v GA 78LMT USB3 Rev 5.0 Sapphire R9 285 OC 16GB Kingston Savage Ram 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
1TB Western Digital 500GB Seagate Barracuda Noctua NH-D15S Windows 8.1 
MonitorPowerMouseMouse Pad
Asus MG279Q Fressync OCZ ZS 650 Watt PSU Dragonwar ELE-G9 Dragonwar 
  hide details  
Reply
post #16 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by jason387 View Post

Can you Phenom II x4 do this?

That's the FX 6300 with two cores disabled, thus, running as a quad core.

Second Intel Rig
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
2700 4.5/ 1.28 77 290 (2) 16 / 1866 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
1000 360/240 10 64 28 2160 
PowerCase
850 540 
  hide details  
Reply
Second Intel Rig
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
2700 4.5/ 1.28 77 290 (2) 16 / 1866 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
1000 360/240 10 64 28 2160 
PowerCase
850 540 
  hide details  
Reply
post #17 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by rdr09 View Post


Appreciate the benchmark but for proper comparison you need to run Black hole final v4.2. Will give different results.
Jay
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX 8350 4.4Ghz at 1.36v GA 78LMT USB3 Rev 5.0 Sapphire R9 285 OC 16GB Kingston Savage Ram 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
1TB Western Digital 500GB Seagate Barracuda Noctua NH-D15S Windows 8.1 
MonitorPowerMouseMouse Pad
Asus MG279Q Fressync OCZ ZS 650 Watt PSU Dragonwar ELE-G9 Dragonwar 
  hide details  
Reply
Jay
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX 8350 4.4Ghz at 1.36v GA 78LMT USB3 Rev 5.0 Sapphire R9 285 OC 16GB Kingston Savage Ram 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
1TB Western Digital 500GB Seagate Barracuda Noctua NH-D15S Windows 8.1 
MonitorPowerMouseMouse Pad
Asus MG279Q Fressync OCZ ZS 650 Watt PSU Dragonwar ELE-G9 Dragonwar 
  hide details  
Reply
post #18 of 131
Clock for clock they are about the same on average, the PhII being a tiny bit faster in most cases. The problem comes when you get into comparing an FX module with a Phenom core. The individual cores on the FX chips are indeed weaker than the cores on the older Phenom CPUs, so you kind of have to compare a FX module to a Phenom core.
Personally I wouldn't waste time or money on any FX that has less than 3 modules.
Magicbox
(17 items)
 
crapbox
(13 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX 8320 Sabertooth 990FX Nitro+ RX480 Kingston HyperX Fury 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Samsung 850 EVO  Kingston HyperX 3K Seagate Barracuda 7200.14 Noctua NH-D15 
OSOSMonitorKeyboard
Kubuntu  Windows 10 Pro Dell U2515H CM Quickfire TK (Cherry Blue) 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Cooler Master Silent Pro M 850W Enthoo Pro Logitech G502 Logitech G440 
Audio
Xonar DX 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Sempron 3300+ HP stock mobo (laptop) 200M (IGP) 2x1GB PC3200 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
100GB ATA133 DVD/CDRW Kubuntu 32 bit 14.1" (1280x768) 
Power
6 cell 
  hide details  
Reply
Magicbox
(17 items)
 
crapbox
(13 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX 8320 Sabertooth 990FX Nitro+ RX480 Kingston HyperX Fury 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
Samsung 850 EVO  Kingston HyperX 3K Seagate Barracuda 7200.14 Noctua NH-D15 
OSOSMonitorKeyboard
Kubuntu  Windows 10 Pro Dell U2515H CM Quickfire TK (Cherry Blue) 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Cooler Master Silent Pro M 850W Enthoo Pro Logitech G502 Logitech G440 
Audio
Xonar DX 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Sempron 3300+ HP stock mobo (laptop) 200M (IGP) 2x1GB PC3200 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
100GB ATA133 DVD/CDRW Kubuntu 32 bit 14.1" (1280x768) 
Power
6 cell 
  hide details  
Reply
post #19 of 131
I wonder how a PHII today would perform if it had the available instruction sets PD has? rolleyes.gif

Phenoms are full fat milk and taste delicious, but Piledriver is semi-skimmed milk that tastes just as delicious but lacks in some areas tongue.gif

Both are different, hence their differing performance. I still love my Thuban though rolleyes.gif
post #20 of 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Melcar View Post

Clock for clock they are about the same on average, the PhII being a tiny bit faster in most cases. The problem comes when you get into comparing an FX module with a Phenom core. The individual cores on the FX chips are indeed weaker than the cores on the older Phenom CPUs, so you kind of have to compare a FX module to a Phenom core.
Personally I wouldn't waste time or money on any FX that has less than 3 modules.
I back this up. When locking 4 cores and then using it with 6 cores makes a huge difference.
Jay
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX 8350 4.4Ghz at 1.36v GA 78LMT USB3 Rev 5.0 Sapphire R9 285 OC 16GB Kingston Savage Ram 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
1TB Western Digital 500GB Seagate Barracuda Noctua NH-D15S Windows 8.1 
MonitorPowerMouseMouse Pad
Asus MG279Q Fressync OCZ ZS 650 Watt PSU Dragonwar ELE-G9 Dragonwar 
  hide details  
Reply
Jay
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
FX 8350 4.4Ghz at 1.36v GA 78LMT USB3 Rev 5.0 Sapphire R9 285 OC 16GB Kingston Savage Ram 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
1TB Western Digital 500GB Seagate Barracuda Noctua NH-D15S Windows 8.1 
MonitorPowerMouseMouse Pad
Asus MG279Q Fressync OCZ ZS 650 Watt PSU Dragonwar ELE-G9 Dragonwar 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: AMD CPUs
Overclock.net › Forums › AMD › AMD CPUs › Hypothetical Question - FX-4300 vs. Phenom II X4 Clock for Clock