AMD "Piledriver" refresh of Zambezi - info, speculations, test, fans

[informal]

Notice the C11.5 score of FX8350 on the top left . It's ~9pts at either 5Ghz or 4.8Ghz. At stock (4Ghz) it should therefore score : 9pts x 4Ghz /5Ghz=7.2pts if the 9pts was a score @ 5Ghz (which we don't know). For reference "blogger who shall not be named" reported the score on simulated FX8350 @ 4Ghz to be 6.89pts while FX8150 @ stock scores ~6pts. Therefore in best case scenario FX8350 will be ~1.2x faster than FX8150 or if "blogger's" result are closer to the real thing then 1.15x. The difference between two results(what is in the screenshot at presumably top OC of 5Ghz and "blogger's simulated FX8350) in C11.5 is exactly ~5% . There is a slight chance the top score of ~9pts is actually achieved at 4.8Ghz which will be too good to be true (IMO) or it may have been achieved at much higher (unstable OC) at ~5.5Ghz which might be the case.

[repman]

Notice the C11.5 score of FX8350 on the top left . It's ~9pts at either 5Ghz or 4.8Ghz. At stock (4Ghz) it should therefore score : 9pts x 4Ghz /5Ghz=7.2pts if the 9pts was a score @ 5Ghz (which we don't know). For reference "blogger who shall not be named" reported the score on simulated FX8350 @ 4Ghz to be 6.89pts while FX8150 @ stock scores ~6pts. Therefore in best case scenario FX8350 will be ~1.2x faster than FX8150 or if "blogger's" result are closer to the real thing then 1.15x. The difference between two results(what is in the screenshot at presumably top OC of 5Ghz and "blogger's simulated FX8350) in C11.5 is exactly ~5% . There is a slight chance the top score of ~9pts is actually achieved at 4.8Ghz which will be too good to be true (IMO) or it may have been achieved at much higher (unstable OC) at ~5.5Ghz which might be the case.

I noticed that the specs in CB say 4,82GHz on the left. Maybe that is from the last score?