Xeon E5-2620 v4 vs FX 8320
Description
The E5-2620 v4 is based on Broadwell architecture while the 8320 is based on Piledriver.
Using the multithread performance as a reference, the E5-2620 v4 gets a score of 147.8 k points while the 8320 gets 103.2 k points.
Summarizing, the E5-2620 v4 is 1.4 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 E5-2620 v4 gets a score of 147.8 k points while the 8320 gets 103.2 k points.
Summarizing, the E5-2620 v4 is 1.4 times faster than the 8320. To get a proper comparison between both models, take a look to the data shown below.
Specs
CPUID
406f1
600f20
Core
Broadwell-EP
Vishera
Base frecuency
2.1 GHz
3.5 GHz
Boost frecuency
3 GHz
4 GHz
Socket
Socket 2011-3
Socket AM3+
Cores/Threads
8/16
8/8
TDP
85 W
125 W
Cache L1 (d+i)
8x32+8x32 kB
kB
Cache L2
8x256 kB
4x2048 kB
Cache L3
20480 kB
8192 kB
Date
March 2016
October 2012
Mean monothread perf.
29.39k points
16.68k points
Mean multithread perf.
237.83k 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
E5-2620 v4
8320
Test#1 (Integers)
6.04k
5.35k (x0.89)
Test#2 (FP)
10.18k
5.14k (x0.51)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
2.74k
2.15k (x0.78)
Test#1 (Memory)
2.41k
4.04k (x1.68)
TOTAL
21.37k
16.68k (x0.78)
Multithread
E5-2620 v4
8320
Test#1 (Integers)
47.51k
36.79k (x0.77)
Test#2 (FP)
75.12k
40.2k (x0.54)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
19.72k
19.57k (x0.99)
Test#1 (Memory)
5.45k
6.66k (x1.22)
TOTAL
147.8k
103.21k (x0.7)
Performance/W
E5-2620 v4
8320
Test#1 (Integers)
559 points/W
294 points/W
Test#2 (FP)
884 points/W
322 points/W
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
232 points/W
157 points/W
Test#1 (Memory)
64 points/W
53 points/W
TOTAL
1739 points/W
826 points/W
Performance/GHz
E5-2620 v4
8320
Test#1 (Integers)
2013 points/GHz
1339 points/GHz
Test#2 (FP)
3393 points/GHz
1285 points/GHz
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
915 points/GHz
537 points/GHz
Test#1 (Memory)
802 points/GHz
1010 points/GHz
TOTAL
7123 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