FX 8320 vs Xeon E5-4640
Description
The 8320 is based on Piledriver architecture while the E5-4640 is based on Sandy Bridge.
Using the multithread performance as a reference, the 8320 gets a score of 103.2 k points while the E5-4640 gets 610.2 k points.
Summarizing, the E5-4640 is 5.9 times faster than the 8320. To get a proper comparison between both models, take a look to the data shown below.
Using the multithread performance as a reference, the 8320 gets a score of 103.2 k points while the E5-4640 gets 610.2 k points.
Summarizing, the E5-4640 is 5.9 times faster than the 8320. To get a proper comparison between both models, take a look to the data shown below.
Specs
CPUID
600f20
206d7
Core
Vishera
Sandy Bridge-EP
Base frecuency
3.5 GHz
2.4 GHz
Boost frecuency
4 GHz
2.8 GHz
Socket
Socket AM3+
LGA 2011
Cores/Threads
8/8
8 /16
TDP
125 W
95 W
Cache L1 (d+i)
kB
8x32+8x32 kB
Cache L2
4x2048 kB
8x256 kB
Cache L3
8192 kB
20480 kB
Date
October 2012
May 2012
Mean monothread perf.
16.68k points
13.88k points
Mean multithread perf.
103.21k points
610.16k 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
8320
E5-4640
Test#1 (Integers)
5.35k
5.01k (x0.94)
Test#2 (FP)
5.14k
4.5k (x0.88)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
2.15k
2.18k (x1.01)
Test#1 (Memory)
4.04k
2.19k (x0.54)
TOTAL
16.68k
13.88k (x0.83)
Multithread
8320
E5-4640
Test#1 (Integers)
36.79k
251.29k (x6.83)
Test#2 (FP)
40.2k
236.61k (x5.89)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
19.57k
114.89k (x5.87)
Test#1 (Memory)
6.66k
7.36k (x1.11)
TOTAL
103.21k
610.16k (x5.91)
Performance/W
8320
E5-4640
Test#1 (Integers)
294 points/W
2645 points/W
Test#2 (FP)
322 points/W
2491 points/W
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
157 points/W
1209 points/W
Test#1 (Memory)
53 points/W
78 points/W
TOTAL
826 points/W
6423 points/W
Performance/GHz
8320
E5-4640
Test#1 (Integers)
1339 points/GHz
1790 points/GHz
Test#2 (FP)
1285 points/GHz
1609 points/GHz
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
537 points/GHz
777 points/GHz
Test#1 (Memory)
1010 points/GHz
782 points/GHz
TOTAL
4171 points/GHz
4957 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