AMD FX "Vishera" reviews info (again, after mod mistake)

[richierich]

first try

Seems like a very nice sweetspot for Clockspeed and vcore! Nice.

[Oese]

@ Oese

Fantastic! What cooling do you have with your 8320?

Water (see sig). Temps are around 50?C, 18-20?C ambient. I think I will try some outdoor OC with it when I have time

After a long time I have some luck again with that Chip

[Oese]

[Tomasis]

woohoo i hear Flanker crying a little

lets try 10 in CB with cold watter

[Oese]

power consumption is already through the roof... around 420 watts^^

but yeah i will try in winter but 10 is far away xD

[Tomasis]

ahh no wonder why I have hard times with my Corsair CX430 watt Plenty of time before I get back HX850 "repaired". Im gonna test winter especially CpuZ

[FlanK3r]

holly sh*t ...Wow, nice Oese!! Whats your temp in load? Looks, your H20 will be better than my AMD Liquid

[Daveburt714]

Killer scores Oese!!

Was that using winter (outdoor) water cooling?
Is your Sabertooth a Rev 2.0 board?

Reguardless that's a sweet chip!

[Oese]

Not yet winter/cold air, but ofc thinking about it.

rev. 1.0 Sabertooth, nothing special except the cpu

week is 1236 batch i didnt take notes :/ Need to untie cpu/cooler again for that.

BTW can someone help me with TMonitor? Doesnt work for me with Zambezi/Vishera on the Sabertooth. Someone knows why?

[FlanK3r]

do you have the last version? And you can try last Coretemp, working good with Vishera ....

[Oese]

yes i have version 1.04.

will try coretemp...

[Zeus]

That is one kickass chip you've got there Oese! Almost nearing my Intel CB 11.5 score.

[FlanK3r]

Oease: how exactly I can run benchamrk "Cyclone Xtreme"? Thx.

[Oese]

more numbers 3dm11 is making trouble...





that bench:

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...d.php?t=202139

[demonkevy666]

can someone at least run the openGL bench at 5.0ghz+

[FlanK3r]

Oese: I have problem with 3D05 CPU test, wtf? 3D11 OK, Vantage OK, POV Ray OK, but old 3D05 in CPU test frozed...

[informal]

Flanker,your system freezes even at stock clock(4Ghz)? Or when highly OCed? The older 3dmark CPU tests are stressing the fp units more (my guess) so maybe you hit some instability in there. If it freezes at stock then it's probably similar problem to the one 8150 had with certain games(BIOS issue).

[FlanK3r]

as you say, In high OC, but other hardcore benchmarks was fine (3D11 complete, 3D Vantage complete test, x264 HD 4.0, POV-RAY...)

[informal]

Yeah in that case you definitely hit a rare instability in one of the 4 FP units. Maybe try to manually set affinity to core pairs and see which one fails. If it's only 3dmark05 CPU test then disregard it.

[informal]

Can anyone of you guys try and run Maxwell benchmark test?
Results can be found here:
http://www.maxwellrender.com/benchwell

It's very interesting benchmark since unlike C11.5 it likes AMD cores .

[wICE_man]

I noticed something odd with the VR-Zone multi GPU results.

Supposedly they show Ivy Bridge wiping the floor with Vishera but there is a very curious thing about them. When comparing these setups at different quality settings the results are consistently 100% in Ivy Bridge favor no matter how GPU high you put the quality settings. This is odd since normally the CPU bottleneck disappears when the GPU setup can't handle running at the framerate the CPU is capable of.

Turning our attention to the games "Sniper Elite" and "Alien Vs. Predator" In the former title we have 173fps vs. 369fps at the lowest settings and 32fps vs 64fps at highest settings. Obviously they should be 100% GPU capped at that point and should be performing equally. The same thing applies to AVP where the difference is equal, i.e. 270fps vs 554fps at lowest settings and 75fps vs 148fps at highest.

The only conclusion I can draw is that VR-Zone were pitching a Vishera with single GPU vs. Ivy Bridge with Dual GPU in at least these two games. The reason could be that the crossfire is somehow disabled in these titles but how can we know if it's working properly in other titles?

I can only shake my head in dismay over such an obvious fail for a seasoned review site

I also want to point out a lazy habit that most review sites use when calculating overall performance and this is neither describing in detail how these averages are calculated nor weighing the benchmarks appropriately.

I took for example Techreport application results compared FX-8350 and i7-3770 on one hand and FX-8350 and i5-3570 on the other and normalized the results to the slower of the two in each case (otherwise if a processor is 3x faster in one test and 3x slower in another the results would be +200% and -66% or vice versa and the end result will be skewed) and taking average of the difference. I made several logical adjustments:

1. Omitting the single thread Cinebench 11.5 results. They are interesting on their own but nobody uses a multi-threaded program in single-thread mode so they should not be factored into any average.

2. Combining both povRay results in a single score. These tests are one of the strong points for FX-8350 but I feel they should not weigh double just because we get more detailed results from this program.

3. Only using the standard LUXmark results, the GPU results are meaningless after all and the CPU+GPU give a very similar normalized results as the standard test anyway.

4. Combining x264 tests by calculating the time it takes to complete X number of frames with both passes.

The end results are:

i7-3770K is about 9% faster than FX-8350
FX-8350 is about 14% faster than i5-3570K

Compare that to the overall score TR gives (which are normalized to A8-3850) where the difference is roughly 14% (vs. 9%) and 3% (vs. 14%) so incidentally their flat average approach favors Intel and especially the i5-3570. This is also true for other overall scores I've seen around the web. Single Threaded Cinebench results are included, pass 1 & 2 in h264 and x264 are weighted equal despite pass 2 taking significantly more time than pass 1. Sysmark and PCmark are also frequently used in these averages. But these are themselves averages that are not well described so I dislike them for that very same reason.

[keithlm]

Can anyone of you guys try and run

I ran it and got 311.19 everything at stock except memory which is at DDR3-2133@9-11-10-28-CR2

BTW: Not sure about how useful their results page is... If you look at the i7-2600 scores they range from 197 all the way up to 411... and all of the entries show the same 3.40Ghz speed... so I suspect they don't accurately display running frequency.

But I guess this could be a good tool for comparative levels to see your performance delta while tweaking things on a single system. (I.e.. changing NB speed... ram timings etc.)

[keithlm]

I can only shake my head in dismay over such an obvious fail for a seasoned review site

Actually any review should take into account anomalous results. If you run 20 games... and a majority of them have almost identical results but a few have results that are contradict the majority then you need to either discount the importance and/or remove the anomalous tests from your results. Plus a good reviewer should be able to come up with an explanation for exactly why the results are so skewed. (Using the excuse of "One brand is just better at that game" is not a good answer.)

[Daveburt714]

Can anyone of you guys try and run Maxwell benchmark test?

I ran it to, at my daily stable OC (4.815/2473/2200 9-11-10).
Scored 361.54.

My cores can do quite a bit higher than that (although not Prime Stable)...
I'll try it again with higher clocks when I get home from work.

[informal]

Thanks guys,good results.

@keithlm

You are right,the results vary a lot since the CPUs are highly OCed. Usually there is a note on the top right side of the entry which states the OCed speed or similar. I think that 2600K @ stock scores around ~275pts. At 4.5Ghz it scores ~365pts. Dave's score is ~362pts so the same as 4.5Ghz SB . 3770K @ 4.5 gets ~390pts. Vishera is very competitive in this rendered ,especially when you look at the perf./dollar.