FX 4100 vs Xeon E5-1620 v2
Description
The 4100 is based on Bulldozer architecture while the E5-1620 v2 is based on Ivy Bridge.
Using the multithread performance as a reference, the 4100 gets a score of 44.3 k points while the E5-1620 v2 gets 144.6 k points.
Summarizing, the E5-1620 v2 is 3.3 times faster than the 4100. To get a proper comparison between both models, take a look to the data shown below.
Using the multithread performance as a reference, the 4100 gets a score of 44.3 k points while the E5-1620 v2 gets 144.6 k points.
Summarizing, the E5-1620 v2 is 3.3 times faster than the 4100. To get a proper comparison between both models, take a look to the data shown below.
Specs
CPUID
600f12
306e4
Core
Zambezi
Ivy Bridge-EP
Base frecuency
3.6 GHz
3.7 GHz
Boost frecuency
3.8 GHz
3.9 GHz
Socket
Socket AM3+
LGA 2011
Cores/Threads
4/4
4 /8
TDP
95 W
130 W
Cache L1 (d+i)
2x64+4x16 kB
4x32+x4x32 kB
Cache L2
2x2048 kB
4x256 kB
Cache L3
8192 kB
10240 kB
Date
October 2011
September 2013
Mean monothread perf.
22.18k points
34.37k points
Mean multithread perf.
44.31k points
144.57k points
AVX optimized benchmark
The benchmark in mode II (AVX) is optimized to used 256 bits registers beside the first version of the Advanced Vector Extensions (AVX). The first AVX compatible CPU was released in 2011.
Monothread
4100
E5-1620 v2
Test#1 (Integers)
7.65k
12.55k (x1.64)
Test#2 (FP)
6.9k
12.14k (x1.76)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
2.88k
4.83k (x1.68)
Test#1 (Memory)
4.75k
4.85k (x1.02)
TOTAL
22.18k
34.37k (x1.55)
Multithread
4100
E5-1620 v2
Test#1 (Integers)
15.53k
51.93k (x3.34)
Test#2 (FP)
15.13k
56.7k (x3.75)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
7.98k
23.81k (x2.98)
Test#1 (Memory)
5.67k
12.14k (x2.14)
TOTAL
44.31k
144.57k (x3.26)
Performance/W
4100
E5-1620 v2
Test#1 (Integers)
163 points/W
399 points/W
Test#2 (FP)
159 points/W
436 points/W
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
84 points/W
183 points/W
Test#1 (Memory)
60 points/W
93 points/W
TOTAL
466 points/W
1112 points/W
Performance/GHz
4100
E5-1620 v2
Test#1 (Integers)
2013 points/GHz
3217 points/GHz
Test#2 (FP)
1815 points/GHz
3113 points/GHz
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
758 points/GHz
1238 points/GHz
Test#1 (Memory)
1250 points/GHz
1244 points/GHz
TOTAL
5836 points/GHz
8812 points/GHz
Monothread performance graph
Monothread performance graphics gives the performance vs time. They are useful to measure the time it takes to the CPU to reach the maximum performance.
Usually, CPU's performance will be steady during these tests but if it has a slow frequency strategy, the first samples will show a lower score.
Usually, CPU's performance will be steady during these tests but if it has a slow frequency strategy, the first samples will show a lower score.
Test#1 (Integers) [points vs time]
Test#2 (FP) [points vs time]
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP) [points vs time]
Test#1 (Memory) [points vs time]
Multithread performance graph
Multithread graphs measure the performance against a heavy load during certain time.
If CPU's TDP doesn't limit the frequency and the machine is properly cooled, performance should remain steady vs time. Otherwise, the performance score will oscillate or decrease over time.
If CPU's TDP doesn't limit the frequency and the machine is properly cooled, performance should remain steady vs time. Otherwise, the performance score will oscillate or decrease over time.
Test#1 (Integers) [points vs time]
Test#2 (FP) [points vs time]
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP) [points vs time]
Test#1 (Memory) [points vs time]
Hardlimit Benchmark Central - Ver. 3.11.4