In which way is an FX-8350/8320/8370 different from a hyper-threaded quad-core cpu?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
yeti_yeti

yeti_yeti

Reputable
Apr 29, 2017
414
4
4,965
First of all I would like to give a disclaimer, I'm fairly new to this subject, please forgive me if I said some incredibly dumb stuff, as my knowledge is still fairly limited. I started doing a little research on CPU architectures a couple days ago and came across an article that expalined AMD's older gen fx cpus (piledriver and bulldozer architecture). The article said that a instead of having regular cores, these cpus have a "module", which fits 2 physical cores in one "place". After reading this I instantly tried searching up, how a "vishera" or "zambezi" module is different from a hyper-threaded core, which can be found in intel's cpus. So what makes an FX-8350(8 cores but 4 modules) different from an I5,I7 which has 4 cores,which are theoretically 8, due to hyper-threading?
 
Solution
geofelt
Both use one "core" or module.(c/m)
Each c/m has several processing circuits. Some are duplicated and some less used functions have only one.

In the case of FX, most are duplicated, making each module function close to a full core.

In the case of intel, hyperthreading works a bit differently.
A second thread can use the resources not in use by the first thread.

In the case of FX, I guess that you get 90% of the performance on the second thread.
But, the basic architecture of FX was poor so single thread performance was not good. About 1400 passmark rating.

In the case of Intel, I guess that the second thread is about 35% effective, but the basic single thread performance due to architecture was much higher. perhaps 2000-2500...
Sort by date Sort by votes
Supahos

Supahos

Expert
Ambassador
Nov 11, 2013
12,756
48
57,640
Basically it's two cores with one part telling each what to do. If you count a hypthreaded core as a core, then an AMD module will outperform a core+hyperthreading core... However the full core on Intel's side will smoke a single core in a module. AMD now employs basically the same technology with ryzen r5&r7 just calls it smt. Basically they have parts of another core that can do some tasks Durning gap in the primary core.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
geofelt

geofelt

Titan
Oct 9, 2006
54,293
4,145
174,240
Both use one "core" or module.(c/m)
Each c/m has several processing circuits. Some are duplicated and some less used functions have only one.

In the case of FX, most are duplicated, making each module function close to a full core.

In the case of intel, hyperthreading works a bit differently.
A second thread can use the resources not in use by the first thread.

In the case of FX, I guess that you get 90% of the performance on the second thread.
But, the basic architecture of FX was poor so single thread performance was not good. About 1400 passmark rating.

In the case of Intel, I guess that the second thread is about 35% effective, but the basic single thread performance due to architecture was much higher. perhaps 2000-2500 passmark
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom