Performance increase?

xa376

Honorable
Jun 8, 2012
126
0
10,690
Hello,
Currently I am upgrading my CPU from an Intel Core 2 Duo @ 2.2 ghz. To an FX-6200 (6 core) 3.8 ghz. CPU.
I am curious as to how much of a performance increase there will be. Will it be noticeable in browsing as well as gaming?
 
Solution
You will see an improvement. Arguably, the FX CPUs performs as well as Core 2 Duo / Quad CPUs at the same clock speeds. Therefore, a FX-6200 @ 3.8GHz vs the older Core 2 Duo @ 2.2GHz should perform 73% better when taking into consideration 2 cores. When more than 2 cores are used the performance will be even greater. Note that this is just raw potential performance, not actual performance. For example if you were to overclock your Core 2 Duo by 10%, that does not mean all benchmark performance will improve by 10%. It may be more like between 4% - 7% depending on the program being benchmarked.

Also note that there are very few games that can use 4 cores, BF3 being one of those very few games.


For other purposes besides gaming. I wouldn't get a 81xx for that either, but it's still a better buy than a 6200. Seriously though, an i3 or a slightly OC'd Phenom II X4 will out perform the 6200 in games (and a 81xx too, actually). Wait for Piledriver if you're hell bent on a BD architecture CPU.
 
You will see an improvement. Arguably, the FX CPUs performs as well as Core 2 Duo / Quad CPUs at the same clock speeds. Therefore, a FX-6200 @ 3.8GHz vs the older Core 2 Duo @ 2.2GHz should perform 73% better when taking into consideration 2 cores. When more than 2 cores are used the performance will be even greater. Note that this is just raw potential performance, not actual performance. For example if you were to overclock your Core 2 Duo by 10%, that does not mean all benchmark performance will improve by 10%. It may be more like between 4% - 7% depending on the program being benchmarked.

Also note that there are very few games that can use 4 cores, BF3 being one of those very few games.
 
Solution


LOL, Nope. BD can't even even match first gen Core Intel's, so matching and/or exceeding a current i5 with Piledriver is just a pipe dream. AMD really screwed up with the BD architecture. It may make more sense in the future, but for now, it's a mess.
 
AMD is shooting for a performance increase of between 5% - 15% for every newly released CPU generation. Therefore, expecting 15% will be shooting for the high end of that range. Too early to tell what it's actual performance increase will be.

However, assuming a 15% increase, that means PileDriver's performance would be approximately between the performance of the 1st and 2nd gen Core i3/i5/i7 CPUs if the clock speeds were the same.
 


5% is just about at the high end of what I expect from any performance increase with Win 8. Just don't bet on it... Software improvements can't make up for horrible IPC.
 

MasterMace

Distinguished
Oct 12, 2010
1,151
0
19,460


It's actually been proven that the higher end FX processors are not worth the money, and the only one nearly worth the money is the FX-4100, as it is very cheap, and you can still overclock it. At higher price points, you might as well go with Intel.

Currently on Newegg (offer ends in 4 days [6/18]) the FX-4100 is $99.99, after the promo, it's $109.99. Under $100 is starting to approach a good bargain. If I see it drop to $90 or $80, I'd most likely buy it to upgrade off my Propus.