FX 8120 vs 8320
Description
The 8120 is based on Bulldozer architecture while the 8320 is based on Piledriver.
Using the multithread performance as a reference, the 8120 gets a score of 70.8 k points while the 8320 gets 103.2 k points.
Summarizing, the 8320 is 1.5 times faster than the 8120. To get a proper comparison between both models, take a look to the data shown below.
Using the multithread performance as a reference, the 8120 gets a score of 70.8 k points while the 8320 gets 103.2 k points.
Summarizing, the 8320 is 1.5 times faster than the 8120. To get a proper comparison between both models, take a look to the data shown below.
Specs
CPUID
600f12
600f20
Core
Zambezi
Vishera
Base frecuency
3.1 GHz
3.5 GHz
Boost frecuency
4 GHz
4 GHz
Socket
Socket AM3+
Socket AM3+
Cores/Threads
8/8
8/8
TDP
125 W
125 W
Cache L1 (d+i)
4x64+8x16 kB
kB
Cache L2
4x2048 kB
4x2048 kB
Cache L3
8192 kB
8192 kB
Date
October 2011
October 2012
Mean monothread perf.
23.5k points
16.68k points
Mean multithread perf.
70.78k points
103.21k 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
8120
8320
Test#1 (Integers)
9.31k
5.35k (x0.58)
Test#2 (FP)
6.85k
5.14k (x0.75)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
2.77k
2.15k (x0.77)
Test#1 (Memory)
4.58k
4.04k (x0.88)
TOTAL
23.5k
16.68k (x0.71)
Multithread
8120
8320
Test#1 (Integers)
25.84k
36.79k (x1.42)
Test#2 (FP)
28.49k
40.2k (x1.41)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
13.84k
19.57k (x1.41)
Test#1 (Memory)
2.61k
6.66k (x2.55)
TOTAL
70.78k
103.21k (x1.46)
Performance/W
8120
8320
Test#1 (Integers)
207 points/W
294 points/W
Test#2 (FP)
228 points/W
322 points/W
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
111 points/W
157 points/W
Test#1 (Memory)
21 points/W
53 points/W
TOTAL
566 points/W
826 points/W
Performance/GHz
8120
8320
Test#1 (Integers)
2327 points/GHz
1339 points/GHz
Test#2 (FP)
1712 points/GHz
1285 points/GHz
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
693 points/GHz
537 points/GHz
Test#1 (Memory)
1144 points/GHz
1010 points/GHz
TOTAL
5876 points/GHz
4171 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