Office Performance

The dynamics of CPU Turbo modes, both Intel and AMD, can cause concern in environments with variably-threaded workloads. There is also an added issue of the motherboard remaining consistent, depending on how the motherboard manufacturer wants to add in their own boosting technologies over the ones that Intel would prefer they used. In order to remain consistent, we implement an OS-level unique high-performance mode on all the CPUs we test, which should override any motherboard manufacturer performance mode.

All of our benchmark results can also be found in our benchmark engine, Bench.

Dolphin Benchmark: link

Many emulators are often bound by single-thread CPU performance, and general reports tended to suggest that Haswell provided a significant boost to emulator performance. This benchmark runs a Wii program that ray traces a complex 3D scene inside the Dolphin Wii emulator. Performance on this benchmark is a good proxy of the speed of Dolphin CPU emulation, which is an intensive single-core task using most aspects of a CPU. Results are given in minutes, where the Wii itself scores 17.53 minutes.

Dolphin Emulation Benchmark

All AMD CPUs performed similarly here.

WinRAR 5.0.1: link

Our WinRAR test from 2013 is updated to the latest version of WinRAR at the start of 2014. We compress a set of 2,867 files across 320 folders totaling 1.52GB – 95% of these files are small typical website files, and the rest (90% of the size) are small 30-second 720p videos.

WinRAR 5.01, 2867 files, 1.52 GB

WinRAR is all about threads and DRAM speed, so the CPUs that can support higher DRAM frequencies get a boost.

3D Particle Movement

3DPM is a self-penned benchmark, taking basic 3D movement algorithms used in Brownian motion simulations and testing them for speed. High floating point performance, MHz and IPC win in the single-thread version, whereas the multithread version has to handle the threads, and loves more cores.

3D Particle Movement: Single Threaded

Again, all AMD CPUs seem to perform similarly in 3DPM for single-thread mode, indicating that something more fundamental about the design is a bottleneck.

FastStone Image Viewer 4.9

FastStone is the program I use to perform quick or bulk actions on images, such as resizing, adjusting for color and cropping. In our test, we take a series of 170 images in various sizes and formats, and convert them all into 640x480 .gif files, maintaining the aspect ratio. FastStone does not use multithreading for this test, and results are given in seconds.

FastStone Image Viewer 4.9

Single-thread frequency and IPC win here.

Web Benchmarks

On the lower-end processors, general usability is a big factor of experience, especially as we move into the HTML5 era of Web browsing. For our Web benchmarks, we take four well-known tests with Chrome 35 as a consistent browser.

Mozilla Kraken 1.1

Kraken 1.1



Google Octane v2

Google Octane v2

A8-7670K Power Consumption & Overclocking Professional Performance: Windows
Comments Locked


View All Comments

  • Archetype - Wednesday, December 9, 2015 - link

    As far as processors are concerned. AMD needs a few crowd-pleasers again. Although I personally will always appreciate that they push some important boundaries in PC technology - Very often at no gain to themselves since they like to promote open standards - They will need to build up good will through good value and performance - Somewhere between mainstream and enthusiast. Would not hurt to shine a bit in the enthusiast market either.
  • syryquil1 - Thursday, January 17, 2019 - link

    Rip you I guess.
  • silverblue - Wednesday, November 18, 2015 - link

    I don't see how it'd be too difficult for AMD to get that 40%; K10 and Bulldozer both had bottlenecks that have since been identified. As for single threaded performance, wouldn't i3 be similar to i7?
  • KAlmquist - Wednesday, November 18, 2015 - link

    AMD's target is a 40% IPC improvement over Excavator, not over K10 or Bulldozer.
  • silverblue - Wednesday, November 18, 2015 - link

    I know; I was referring to Bulldozer in terms of the architectural family. Excavator may be much improved, but it's still Bulldozer in the end.
  • Flunk - Wednesday, November 18, 2015 - link

    No, i3's aren't similar to i7s single-threaded because i7s have more cache and in most cases higher clock speeds (except the U-series where the i3,i5 and i7 distinctions don't really exist).
  • silverblue - Wednesday, November 18, 2015 - link

    There ARE highly clocked i3s out there, so a comparison can certainly be made at the same clock speed. Cache will make a difference but not a huge one.

    The i3 has a higher base clock, sure, but lacks turbo, which helps propel the i7 to 3.9GHz. I know, it's not a like-for-like comparison, but that i3 can certainly hold its own at gaming and single-threading in general.
  • gamervivek - Thursday, November 19, 2015 - link

    For some reason AMD GPUs performance suffers on i3 while is alright with i5. See the single threaded draw call results here, where the i5 can do 60% more draw calls.
  • medi03 - Thursday, November 19, 2015 - link

    4 cores vs 2 dude
  • BurntMyBacon - Thursday, November 19, 2015 - link

    @media: "4 cores vs 2 dude"

    In response to the OP which included this statement:

    @gamervivek: "See the single threaded draw call results here, where the i5 can do 60% more draw calls."

    Am I missing something here?

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now