CPU Charts 2012: 86 Processors From AMD And Intel, Tested

Professional Applications

Professional application benchmarks show us a familiar picture. Intel’s Sandy Bridge-E-based Core i7-3930K and Core i7-3960X are in the front, followed by Intel’s Ivy Bridge-, Sandy Bridge-, and Nehalem-based offerings. 

AMD's FX-8170 and FX-8150, based on Bulldozer, come closest to Intel's offerings, but can't quite compete.

Create a new thread in the US Reviews comments forum about this subject
This thread is closed for comments
108 comments
    Your comment
    Top Comments
  • Sometimes I wish you updated legacy CPUs like the Core 2 Duo or even perhaps the Athlon 64 X2 series, just one or two models so that people upgrading can have an idea how much faster the CPU is in relation to their new purchase.
    50
  • Great benchmarks.
    But i want some processors which were legendary overclockers, and representatives of their generation of CPU's, included with a nominal OC :

    intel C2D E7300 : 2.66- > 3.33
    Intel C2Q Q6600 : 2.4- > 3.0ghz
    Intel i5-750 : 2.66 - >3.33

    Its highly likely that a person has owned at least one of these CPU's. I want to know how well these compare to modern processors.
    23
  • Sandy and Ivy i3s are MIA.
    20
  • Other Comments
  • Sometimes I wish you updated legacy CPUs like the Core 2 Duo or even perhaps the Athlon 64 X2 series, just one or two models so that people upgrading can have an idea how much faster the CPU is in relation to their new purchase.
    50
  • Where are the Visual Studio Test results?
    7
  • Sandy and Ivy i3s are MIA.
    20
  • Why is the fx6300 missing i wanted to see how it fit into this
    10
  • Thanks Toms, now i know that i can get double the performance and 3/4 the power consumption going from AMD 955 to a Core i5 3570K.
    2
  • Great benchmarks.
    But i want some processors which were legendary overclockers, and representatives of their generation of CPU's, included with a nominal OC :

    intel C2D E7300 : 2.66- > 3.33
    Intel C2Q Q6600 : 2.4- > 3.0ghz
    Intel i5-750 : 2.66 - >3.33

    Its highly likely that a person has owned at least one of these CPU's. I want to know how well these compare to modern processors.
    23
  • And please update the Winrar to version 4.2 . The 3.9 you are using is quite old and has poor multithreading.
    6
  • amdfangirlSometimes I wish you updated legacy CPUs like the Core 2 Duo or even perhaps the Athlon 64 X2 series, just one or two models so that people upgrading can have an idea how much faster the CPU is in relation to their new purchase.

    I always wish this. Beyond that the AM3 Athlon X2's are still being sold at newegg and the Phenom X2's are not...
    6
  • amdfangirlSometimes I wish you updated legacy CPUs like the Core 2 Duo or even perhaps the Athlon 64 X2 series, just one or two models so that people upgrading can have an idea how much faster the CPU is in relation to their new purchase.


    Agreed, maybe just one dual core and one quad? q9550 and e6850? not that I still own both of those or anything...

    But let's do some math. Just for a rough order of magnitude I figure an average of 15% increase in performance per clock cycle, per generation (not including clock speed, number of cores, etc.). So if we start back at Conroe and work our way to present day Ivy Bridge, that's 5 new generations of processors. 1.15^5 = 2.01

    Which means that an Ivy Bridge CPU at the same speed as a Conroe CPU (2006ish) is about 2x as fast per clock cycle, on average. Once you take into account faster clock speeds, number of cores, cache sizes, integrated memory controllers, etc. and more importantly what software will be used with the CPUs the real world performance difference could be almost nothing to somewhere around 10-15x as fast.

    I digress. The point being, is I would like to see some more benchies Tom's! Prove me wrong!
    -3
  • Lot of great info here, but missing Core i3 info leaves a big hole in the data point. Please add.
    16
  • amdfangirlSometimes I wish you updated legacy CPUs like the Core 2 Duo or even perhaps the Athlon 64 X2 series, just one or two models so that people upgrading can have an idea how much faster the CPU is in relation to their new purchase.

    Yes! Core 2 Duo E6750 CPU owner here.
    8
  • A Proud Owner of 2700K here !
    i'll skip ivy and Haswell as well with this Sensational Cpu at 4.6Ghz
    3
  • I believe the i5-2500K has a 95W TDP instead of 65W.
    15
  • This is very Helpful. Now I knew that I did a very good work upgrading to 3470. ;)
    There should be i3 3220 too. Really wanted to know about that.
    6
  • amdfangirlSometimes I wish you updated legacy CPUs like the Core 2 Duo or even perhaps the Athlon 64 X2 series, just one or two models so that people upgrading can have an idea how much faster the CPU is in relation to their new purchase.


    Throw in a Pentium 4 as a reminder to those folks who still think they can run BF3 on a 1.8 GHz Willamette.


    And as for fun, there should've been a CPU rendering test. Windows 7 has a function that allows a CPU do to DX10 graphics, completely bypassing the GPU. The only obviously issue that CPUs are terrible compared to GPUs when it comes to graphics.

    http://www.istartedsomething.com/20081126/direct3d-warp10-to-enable-you-to-play-dx10-crysis-using-software-renderer-only-albeit-slowly/
    8
  • amdfangirlSometimes I wish you updated legacy CPUs like the Core 2 Duo or even perhaps the Athlon 64 X2 series, just one or two models so that people upgrading can have an idea how much faster the CPU is in relation to their new purchase.
    Agreed, 1 Core 2 duo/quad 65nm & Core 2 duo/quad 45nm.

    There is no need to bench 2600K/2700K & Core i5-2300/Core i5-2310, just one of the 2 set will do, because we all know their performance is close to identical.
    12
  • amd has a lot of work to do
    4
  • Is it just me or are the Mafia II frame rates really low?
    11
  • Why are there no Vishera CPUs in the charts?
    1
  • "Of course, as we all know now, the Piledriver-based Vishera parts are available, and have been since late October. Worry not; we are in the process of running several more processors based on Piledriver through the same suite of benchmarks, and will be updating the charts soon"

    Sorry, didn't get to read that :D
    9