Sandy Bridge vs Nehalem vs Bulldozer vs Piledriver {BENCHMARKS!!!}

[Artas1984]

This benchmark came out of my personal need to find out which processor i will be keeping for myself - which CPU fits my needs most, does not bottleneck my gaming experience at 1920X1200 and deals with my programs the fastest!

Representing Sandy Bridge - Core i7 3820



Representing Nehalem - Xeon W3520 (Core i7 920)



Representing Bulldozer - FX6200



Representing Piledriver - FX6300



Why not AMD FX 8 core CPUs? Because in the future i might want to throw the Phenom II X6 and keep it competitive with AMD FX 6 core CPUs.

Most of hardware used for CPU testing was kept the same for all processors:

GeForce GTX670 4 Gb video card .
4 DIMMs of 2 Gb DDR3 1333 MHz CL7 RAM & 4 DIMMs of 2 Gb DDR3 1600 MHz CL8 RAM.
Hitachi Deskstar 1 Tb 7200 rpm sata2 hard drive
Dell 24 inch 1920x1200 resolution monitor

All the software used for testing was identical for all 4 processors:

Windows 7 Pro X64
Forceware 306.97
Passmark 7 X64
Winzip
Irfan View
Adobe Photoshop CS2
Virtual Dub X64
20 games - 20 different engines

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Let's start with a synthetic benchmark and see what prognoses does it tell for the processors.

PASSMARK 7 X64 - calculating CPU, all tests, fast



According to Passmark 7, the new Piledriver will wipe the floor with both Bulldozer and Nehalem, even beat Sandy Bridge...!...

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now let's toss in some real life applications which i myself use!

WINZIP - custom file compression



Looks like the Piledriver is a minor upgrade to the Bulldozer, but both are nowhere close to Intel processors.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Let's now extract that same compressed file!

WINZIP - custom file extraction



That was really impressive on AMD part! But most impressive is the consistency in time! I guess here extra cores do matter...

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I use Irfan View as my main photo viewing program. For it's small same it is the most powerful program that i could think of. One of the tasks i had to do with it was to convert a massive photo archive from jpeg to gif.

IRFAN VIEW - batch conversion from jpeg to gif



Piledriver is a massive upgrade to Bulldozer here, but not really in the league with Intel processors.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I use the good old Adobe Photoshop CS2 for the most difficult photo tasks and it is enough for me. One of the more simple tasks i wrote in Photoshop CS2 for this benchmark was a simple photo editing command, that included filtering to diffuse glow, resizing and rotating the custom photo archive made of 950 photos.

ADOBE PHOTOSHOP CS2 - photo archive editing



The biggest surprise here is the incredible performance of my Nehalem based Xeon, which beated the newer Sandy Bridge CPU considerably. I have repeated this several times to the same result. Finally the Piledriver here is an upgrade to Bulldozer and scores the same as the Sandy Bride.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Most of all programs i use Virtual Dub to compress raw gaming videos. X264 and ffdshow codecs are my top 2. Let's see how the processors deal with this task.

VIRTUAL DUB X64 - compressing raw to X264



Really disappointed with the Piledriver here.. Perhaps it just does not like X264 codec...

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Typically for avi i use ffdshow, not X264, so let's see how the processors deal with it. Perhaps Piledriver will redeem itself here?

VIRTUAL DUB X64 - compressing raw to ffdshow



There is not really much difference here, though Sandy Bridge is clearly superior to all.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Let's game!
Here are included 20 games and each one of them uses a different engine! Now, typically when you want to find out which processor is the best in gaming, you lower the resolution and disable all effects right? But actually who games at 800X600?.....................
I game on 1920x1200 and since my GTX670 can handle that resolution and all effects easy, my biggest concern (as should be yours) is - will the processors be able to keep up with GTX670 at the resolution and settings i want to play! All games have been tested on max settings, 4X AA, 1920X1200 resolution.


ALIENS VS. PREDATOR 3 (Asura engine)



First game is a fluke - there is no real difference between the processors. This is one of the few "equilibrium" exceptions

ALAN WAKE (MAX-FX 3.0 engine)



The Piledriver offers absolutely no improvement on Bulldozer and both AMD processors get beaten by the 4 year old Nehalem. Even further from the rest sits the Sandy Bridge with it's mighty minimal frame rate!

AVATAR (Dunia engine)



The Piledriver is a small improvement on Bulldozer, but both AMD processors lie quite further from Intel.

CRYOSTASIS (AtmosFear 4 engine)



The Piledriver gains on Bulldozer and keeps up with Intel processors!

CRYSIS 2 (Cry 3 engine)



Bulldozer really suffered in Crysis 2 and Piledriver managed to redeem that shame by keeping up with Intel processors!

DEUS EX HUMAN REVOLUTION (Crystal engine)



Nothing to comment here really.

FEAR 3 (Despair engine)



Another game that could not care less about CPU

Formula 1 2011 (EGO 2.5 engine)



The Piledriver is a definitive improvement over Bulldozer, but not quite up with Intel processors.

HAWX 2



The Piledriver is more than i could have asked for in this game! Unfortunately for AMD this is the only game where the Piledriver manages to beat both Intel processors! Bulldzoer is just pathetic here!

HARD RESET (Road Hog engine)



Not only does the Piledriver offer no improvement over Bulldozer, but it get's totally trashed by both Intel processors.

HOMEFRONT (Unreal 3 engine)



Once again the Piledriver offers no improvement over Bulldozer, and once again it get's trashed by both Intel processors. The difference, having in mind that Nehelem is so much older, is just scary!

LOST PLANET 2 (MT Framework)



The Piledriver just slightly improves Bulldozer's frame rate, but not in the class of Intel.

METRO 2033 (4A engine)



I regret adding this game to the list. Worst benchmark game of all time.

NECROVISION (Pain engine)



Older engine games are just fine for testing processors as well!
Piledriver is not much of difference from Intel, but clearly no improvement over Bulldozer.

PORTAL 2 (Source engine)



Another older engine game makes life easy for both Intel processors with absolute max performance possible out of this engine, yet AMD struggles! At least the Piledriver is an improvement over Bulldozer!

RED FACTION ARMAGEDDON (Geo-Mod 2.5)



The Piledriver is a small improvement over Bulldozer, yet once gain does not have the steam to push the Intel from the crown.

SERIOUS SAM 3 (Serious 3.5 engine)



Piledriver tries hard to get the shame off from it's predecessor by adding at least some extra FPS, but quite far from Intel.

SYNDICATE (Starbreeze engine)



Piledriver very well done in this game, being quite far from Bulldozer and not far from Intel!

STALKER CLEAR SKY (X-ray 1.5 engine)



The difference between Bulldozer and Piledriver is the difference between unplayable and playable as Piledriver manages to keep that critical minimal FPS where it needs to be!

WORLD IN CONFLICT (MassTech engine)



Piledriver offers no improvement over Bulldozer and gets trashed by Nehalem in those so so important minimal frame rates. Sandy Bridge is even further ahead!

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RELATIVE PERFORMANCE






Conclusion: in my opinion the Piledriver FX adds way too little improvements to be competitive clock per clock with both Nehalem and Sandy Bridge Core i7 processors, and though it is a must upgrade from a Bulldozer FX CPU, no way in hell should it be an upgrade from Nehalem based Core i7 processors.

[slaveondope]

Thanks for the extensive side by side comparison. Only complaint would be memory speed differences and Nehalem running in single channel unless that is a cpuz error.

[Artas1984]

Thanks for the extensive side by side comparison. Only complaint would be memory speed differences and Nehalem running in single channel unless that is a cpuz error.

Nehalem RAM was in dual channel, not triple, not single. CPU Z error for sure! Memory difference was not a big deal - the latencies were almost the same, as Sandy Bridge 1600 MHz RAM was running at C8/C8/C8/C24, while Nehalem, Piledriver and Bulldozer 1333 MHz RAM were running at C7/C7/C7/C20.

[FlanK3r]

very nice comparison, I saw something this first time (3CU/6C FXs vs Bloomfield vs 4c/8t SB-E). Very nice!

[Olivon]

Great job Artas1984, Thanks

[stangracin3]

I vote throw in an 8k series piledriver. you are comparing 6 thread amd processors with 8 thread intel processors. of course they are going to lose. Lets be honest that is what the 6300 is a 3 core 6 thread processor.