Wow, another pro-AMD post with cherry-picked data! Did anyone even know that Deserts of Kharak even existed before csbin decided to include its chart (due to being perhaps the only game on the planet that AMD chips perform uncharacteristically well it)?
But yea, in 2 of the 3 games, it seems gpu (or some other factor) limited. I wonder as well why they dont give 4790k or 6700k results, especially since they obviously have skylake as they give HD530 results in the APU tests.
Wow, another pro-AMD post with cherry-picked data from csbin!
Did anyone even know that Deserts of Kharak even existed before csbin decided to post it as the first chart (due to being perhaps the only game on the planet that AMD chips perform uncharacteristically well it)? Probably not.
The 8150 has an inferior architecture and the 6300 lacks cache and floating point.If multithreading was the whole story, the 8150 and 6300 should do a lot better than they do.
The 8150 has an inferior architecture and the 6300 lacks cache and floating point.
Why is that? If you're correct then the developers inserted a purposeful bottleneck to hamper that chip's performance which doesn't seem likely. Or, there is some sort of strange bug that only affects that chip.It cant be that inferior.
It may be because of the scheduler dealing with an odd number of modules. The tri module parts always trail the full Bulldozer chips in games that leverage the cores well. And even with Ashes, which appears to not rely heavily on multithreading, it trails significantly.And the 6100 and 6300 shows no improvement over 4100 and 4300.
Why is that? If you're correct then the developers inserted a purposeful bottleneck to hamper that chip's performance which doesn't seem likely. Or, there is some sort of strange bug that only affects that chip.
It may be because of the scheduler dealing with an odd number of modules. The tri module parts always trail the full Bulldozer chips in games that leverage the cores well. And even with Ashes, which appears to not rely heavily on multithreading, it trails significantly.
If that was the objective I think he failed at it. According to the charts 2013 and older Core i5 CPUs were faster than the FX8350. And the top performers are mostly outdated/irrelevant, no mention of Devil's Canyon, Broadwell-K, Skylake or 6C/12T Haswell-E.
No doubt. My favorite part was that a 5 year old, non-overclocked i7 is 92½-95% as fast as AMD's fastest overclocked CPU, even in these cherry-picked benchmarks. I'm gonna jump out on a limb here, and say that a 2600k running at the 4.5-5.0 Ghz overclocks that we usually see them attain would utterly embarrass the 9590k, in every game ever.
And?Look at the difference outside core performance. 8150 to 8350 is 15-20%.
That chip is back from when Intel sold soldered chips, right?No doubt. My favorite part was that a 5 year old, non-overclocked i7 is 92½-95% as fast as AMD's fastest overclocked CPU, even in these cherry-picked benchmarks. I'm gonna jump out on a limb here, and say that a 2600k running at the 4.5-5.0 Ghz overclocks that we usually see them attain would utterly embarrass the 9590k, in every game ever.
Yea, it does... AMD made Zambezi as the worst piece of crap ever (except the E1 2100, only the Celeron N3000 ties on how low a company delivers to the people).It cant be that inferior.
And the 6100 and 6300 shows no improvement over 4100 and 4300.
Its more a mix of cache speed, cache size and simple frequency that its actual core performance.
Wow, another pro-AMD post with cherry-picked data from csbin!
Did anyone even know that Deserts of Kharak even existed before csbin decided to post it as the first chart (due to being perhaps the only game on the planet that AMD chips perform uncharacteristically well it)? Probably not.
And do you think threadcrapping is OK? The last time I did it I got a day ban.Cool story, bro. When a friend comes to me and asks me for a recommendation for the best CPU for her/his money, I will ask them if they the MEGA POPULAR game Deserts of Kharak. If they tell me this is their most favorite game of ever, I will be sure to help them put together a sweet Core i7 4790K build (since the FX 9590 is likely to be slower based on these benchmarks and about the same price).
Thank you for yet another valuable contribution to these boards, csbin. Without these "drive-by" posts I don't know how I would make hardware purchasing decisions! :thumbsup:
And do you think threadcrapping is OK? The last time I did it I got a day ban.