|AMD FX-8350 Vishera Desktop Processor|
|Reviews - Featured Reviews: Processors|
|Written by David Ramsey|
|Monday, 22 October 2012|
Page 4 of 15
AIDA64 Extreme Edition Tests
AIDA64 Extreme Edition is the evolution of Lavalys' "Everest Ultimate Edition". Hungarian developer FinalWire acquired the rights to Everest in late November 2010, and renamed the product "AIDA64". The Everest product was discontinued and FinalWire is offering 1-year license keys to those with active Everest keys.
AIDA64 is a full 64-bit benchmark and test suite utilizing MMX, 3DNow! and SSE instruction set extensions, and will scale up to 32 processor cores. An enhanced 64-bit System Stability Test module is also available to stress the whole system to its limits. For legacy processors all benchmarks and the System Stability Test are available in 32-bit versions as well. Additionally, AIDA64 adds new hardware to its database, including 300 solid-state drives. On top of the usual ATA auto-detect information the new SSD database enables AIDA64 to display flash memory type, controller model, physical dimensions, and data transfer performance data. AIDA64 v1.00 also implements SSD-specific SMART disk health information for Indilinx, Intel, JMicron, Samsung, and SandForce controllers.
All of the benchmarks used in this test— Queen, Photoworxx, ZLib, hash, and AES— rely on basic x86 instructions, and consume very little system memory while also being aware of Hyper-Threading, multi-processors, and multi-core processors. Of all the tests in this review, AIDA64 is the one that best isolates the processor's performance from the rest of the system. While this is useful in that it more directly compares processor performance, readers should remember that virtually no "real world" programs will mirror these results.
The Queen and Photoworxx tests are synthetic benchmarks that iterate the function many times and over-exaggerate what the real-world performance would be like. The Queen benchmark focuses on the branch prediction capabilities and misprediction penalties of the CPU. It does this by finding possible solutions to the classic queen problem on a chessboard. At the same clock speed theoretically the processor with the shorter pipeline and smaller misprediction penalties will attain higher benchmark scores.
Like the Queen benchmark, the Photoworxx tests for penalties against pipeline architecture. The synthetic Photoworxx benchmark stresses the integer arithmetic and multiplication execution units of the CPU and also the memory subsystem. Due to the fact that this test performs high memory read/write traffic, it cannot effectively scale in situations where more than two processing threads are used, so quad-core processors with Hyper-Threading have no real advantage. The AIDIA64 Photoworxx benchmark performs the following tasks on a very large RGB image:
The AMD FX-8350 wins the Queen benchmark, but the Intel CPU takes a decisive (by more than 30%) victory in the PhotoWorxx test. Interestingly the AMD CPUs all return virtually the same PhotoWorxx score, even when overclocked.
In the ZLib test, the AMD CPUs leap ahead of the Intel 2500K, with even last years' FX-8150 beating it by 20%. In the Hash test, the difference is even more profound: the Intel CPU simply can't keep up with the AMD CPUs here.
Intel's Clarksdale and subsequent CPUs have dominated the AES test due to their Advanced Encryption Standard New Instructions (AES-NI), which dramatically accelerate AES code. AMD's own implementation of AES-NI made its first appearance in last year's Bulldozer-based CPUs, and although in last year's FX-8150 review it beat the 2500K, in this year's test the 2500K wins decisively. What's even weirder is that overclocking the FX-8350 significantly reduces its score! Why the odd results? The main difference this time around is the new version of AIDA64, which at 2.60.2100 is many revisions beyond the 1.85.1600 I used previously. As they say, results from different versions of the benchmark cannot be compared, but it's still weird.
So far, we've seen the Intel and AMD CPUs slug it out and swap wins in these tests. Let's move on to the PCMark 7 Pro benchmark.