QX6700>G860>E8400>FX-4100>Ahtlon II X4 640

90 Blood Elf Warrior
5740
Pretty sad but after testing all of these PC's with a GTX 650 in world of warcraft, this is my results. In crowded areas, cities/raids the QX was pretty far ahead of the crowd, but I was surprised that the G860 and E8400 both were a solid 12 and 8 FPS ahead of the FX-4100 and 17 and 13 FPS ahead of the 640. This really shows the terrible architecture design of AMD's pre piledriver. These were the settings I ran @
1920x1080
Ultra
Good shadows
Low SSAO
4x anisotropic
1x multisampling
Reply Quote
90 Pandaren Monk
8505
i use a FX-6100 and i run 30+ FPS in Org on max settings the FX-4350 looks nice i cant wait to test one out
Reply Quote
90 Blood Elf Warrior
5740
Granted these tests are not perfect as the first 2 CPU's used 4GB DDR2 667MHz vs 8GB DDR3 1333MHz, but they all used a GTX 650. I played world of warcraft running doing fly overs of Stormwind times each and averaged the results. So these by no means are perfect, but they do stand for reason but here is what I did.



Settings:
1920x1080

Ultra Base

Good Shadows

low SSAO

4x anisotropic

1x multisampling (AA)



The test I did was a fly over from Stormwind entrance threw the right of the cathedral and ended behind the Dwarven district. I flew in a 45* angle camera view giving it equal view of the ground and the horizon.



QX6700: 49.4

G860: 47.6

E8400: 42.3

FX-4100: 37.9

X4 640: 32.2



These numbers FLOORED me that there is such a distinction between AMD vs Intel in these scenarios. Now I have not tested the FX-4300 but even overclocked can it really overcome THAT much of a difference?
Reply Quote
91 Blood Elf Paladin
10060
Yeah Intel kills AMD in WoW. It's sad. So cool to see the old Core2Duos are still great cpus, especially the ones with the full size cache like the e8400.

The difference is so disproportionate to most other benchmarks though, it makes me wonder what's up exactly. Maybe Blizz uses the Intel compiler that purposefully makes performance worse on AMD hardware?
Reply Quote
90 Blood Elf Warrior
5740
One thing I noticed especially with the X4 640, it was very slow on basic desktop media and browsing. I really felt like I was playing on a single core it was THAT bad.
Reply Quote
91 Blood Elf Paladin
10060
That's really strange, because normal desktop stuff should feel just fine on the x4 640. I'd never recommend anyone buy one though. Heh. It would be interesting to add a Phenom x4 965 to the mix, or a 955 or something.

I dunno. Sometimes I think to myself I should've gone I3 instead of FX-6300, but the overall performance was close enough that I can shrug it off (except in WoW, which is the main game I play.../sigh). I went AMD out of nostalgia I guess, and just to tangibly root for the underdog. I began building computers with AMD, so there's a special place in my heart for them. If Intel were to release an I3 "K" series part, there'd be no contest though. $120 Intel I3 clocked at 4.Xghz? Why would you buy AMD then? But also, why would you buy an I5 in that case either?
Reply Quote
90 Pandaren Monk
8505
heres a time test form Org to azeroth 100% Max settings on a Fx-6100 same type of chip as the Fx-4100 http://tinypic.com/r/xolh0x/5
Mal'ganis is one of the most packed servers on horde side
it's a old test a new one may get more FPS
Edit: i also may have been running a Multi Seat at the time of the Test
Edited by Katzenbär on 5/7/2013 2:48 PM PDT
Reply Quote
90 Blood Elf Warrior
5740
The problem with your test katzenbar is it's an entirely different test. I flew lower near the crowd and also I used different hardware. Your GPU may be much better than the one I used, also your settings/resolution may be different. Also the FX-6100 has more L3 and L2 cache than the FX-4100 so they are not the same chip.
Reply Quote
90 Dwarf Rogue
2565
That is dedication on OPs part. You should write up a review and post it on a blog or fan site.
Reply Quote
90 Blood Elf Warrior
5740
My test isn't a very good test and there is much room for error. However with personal experience with just basic tasks and dual threaded gaming the older AMD's don't perform well. However I've read and seen the Phenoms perform pretty well in comparison.
Reply Quote
64 Undead Warlock
5145
This worries me... WoW may perform worse on an FX-6300 than on my Q6600 lol. Damn intel.
But I can take a hit in performance on WoW for the sake of the performance increase I'll see in all my other games
Reply Quote
63 Draenei Shaman
5600
FX-6300 with the reduces latency and increased IPC's should show a solid improvement over the Q6600. However it is known something like an I3-3220 beats an overclocked FX-6300 slightly in wow specifically because it HEAVILY favors Intel.
Reply Quote
64 Undead Warlock
5145
FX-6300 with the reduces latency and increased IPC's should show a solid improvement over the Q6600. However it is known something like an I3-3220 beats an overclocked FX-6300 slightly in wow specifically because it HEAVILY favors Intel.


Oh so it will be a good increase... that's good. I know for WoW Intel would be better since it's better per-core-performance, but I'm happy w/ having that extra power for games like Battlefield and for rendering videos without paying an extra $100+
Reply Quote
63 Draenei Shaman
5600
It's moreso wow does better b/c it's a dual threaded engine that excels in areas like IPC's. Wow is a rarity in the current era of AAA titles. In most areas they are pretty equal.
Reply Quote

Please report any Code of Conduct violations, including:

Threats of violence. We take these seriously and will alert the proper authorities.

Posts containing personal information about other players. This includes physical addresses, e-mail addresses, phone numbers, and inappropriate photos and/or videos.

Harassing or discriminatory language. This will not be tolerated.

Forums Code of Conduct

Report Post # written by

Reason
Explain (256 characters max)
Submit Cancel

Reported!

[Close]