Yet again we can see anti- AMD propaganda... i7 and FX 8350 should very similar (i7 leading of course)
You're the one posting "AMD propaganda" on like, every thread and defending it for 200 posts
Hardware-wise, i'd expect 4-module piledriver to be decently competitive against 4c4t Haswell, but require software to effectively split up onto 8 threads to get there (which is a big weakness and is literally impossible for some workloads, difficult or cost prohibitive for others)
AMD is already abandoning module-based multithreading for a core that's supposed to be ~1.6x faster clock for clock than piledriver because having cores THAT slow just doesn't really work well for many consumer workloads - even if you can scale to ~1.68x performance per module when utilizing 2 threads. A CPU that performs well is better than one that performs well when X and Y conditions are met, but poorly otherwise.
dx12 and mantle game workloads are not perfectly threaded, they're just a lot more split up than dx11. Even in this test, on the fastest performing setup - having 8 cores is only ~3.8x faster than having one core - not 8x faster - because of relatively poor multithreading ability compared to other software. There are some workloads like video encoding where you can split a workload 8 or 16 ways with barely any overhead, but most of the time it's really awkward if possible at all with game code even before you deal with dx12 and other API's being more demanding on a main thread than the other threadsEdited by Cyro999 - 5/17/15 at 8:23pm