| | | | | | |

Xeon E5-2690 0 vs FX 4100


Description
The E5-2690 0 is based on Sandy Bridge architecture while the 4100 is based on Bulldozer.

Using the multithread performance as a reference, the E5-2690 0 gets a score of 185.3 k points while the 4100 gets 44.3 k points.

Summarizing, the E5-2690 0 is 4.2 times faster than the 4100. To get a proper comparison between both models, take a look to the data shown below.

Specs
CPUID
206d7
600f12
Core
Sandy Bridge-EP
Zambezi
Architecture
Base frecuency
2.9 GHz
3.6 GHz
Boost frecuency
3.8 GHz
3.8 GHz
Socket
LGA 2011
Socket AM3+
Cores/Threads
8 /16
4/4
TDP
135 W
95 W
Cache L1 (d+i)
8x32+8x32 kB
2x64+4x16 kB
Cache L2
8x256 kB
2x2048 kB
Cache L3
20480 kB
8192 kB
Date
March 2012
October 2011
Mean monothread perf.
23.28k points
22.18k points
Mean multithread perf.
185.26k points
44.31k 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
E5-2690 0
4100
Test#1 (Integers)
8.76k
7.65k (x0.87)
Test#2 (FP)
7.35k
6.9k (x0.94)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
3.86k
2.88k (x0.75)
Test#1 (Memory)
3.32k
4.75k (x1.43)
TOTAL
23.28k
22.18k (x0.95)

Multithread

E5-2690 0

4100
Test#1 (Integers)
78.51k
15.53k (x0.2)
Test#2 (FP)
66.46k
15.13k (x0.23)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
36.42k
7.98k (x0.22)
Test#1 (Memory)
3.88k
5.67k (x1.46)
TOTAL
185.26k
44.31k (x0.24)

Performance/W
E5-2690 0
4100
Test#1 (Integers)
582 points/W
163 points/W
Test#2 (FP)
492 points/W
159 points/W
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
270 points/W
84 points/W
Test#1 (Memory)
29 points/W
60 points/W
TOTAL
1372 points/W
466 points/W

Performance/GHz
E5-2690 0
4100
Test#1 (Integers)
2305 points/GHz
2013 points/GHz
Test#2 (FP)
1933 points/GHz
1815 points/GHz
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
1015 points/GHz
758 points/GHz
Test#1 (Memory)
874 points/GHz
1250 points/GHz
TOTAL
6127 points/GHz
5836 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.


Test#1 (Integers) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com


Test#2 (FP) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com


Test#3 (Generic, ZIP) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com


Test#1 (Memory) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com

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.


Test#1 (Integers) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com


Test#2 (FP) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com


Test#3 (Generic, ZIP) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com


Test#1 (Memory) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com

Hardlimit Benchmark Central - Ver. 3.11.4