• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

BF4 Retail CPU scaling measured

I will try to test my FX 8320/7990 setup at 1080p during the weekend. Will try CPU at 4.6, 4.85 and 5GHz to see what sort of bottlenecking is going on.

I think multiplayer will be tough to replicate between the different setups.
 
alex_123_fra said:
I will try to test my FX 8320/7990 setup at 1080p during the weekend. Will try CPU at 4.6, 4.85 and 5GHz to see what sort of bottlenecking is going on.

I think multiplayer will be tough to replicate between the different setups.
Click to expand...

Could just do 3 whole matches on a 64 man with each set up on the same map and average it out.
 
Relentless81 said:
Would the performance difference be noticeable enough for it to be worth it? I have a GTX760 and the change shouldn't cost me too much with being able to sell my old parts I would like to play on Ultra at 1920x1080

Will I need new RAM or will my current RAM work? Sorry I'm out of touch and don't have the time to read into things as much as I used to, the Toms Hardware Gaming CPU Hierarchy chart shows my current CPU and FX's as all in the same tier but the chart on page 1 of this thread shows quite a difference in BF4
Click to expand...

An FX830 overclocked can have easily twice the total performance of a Phenom II X4.

Your current RAM will work fine.
 
rolypolyman said:
Thanks ALXAndy you have convinced me! :D
Click to expand...
Seriously...it is a bad idea to go from an 2500K to a FX8 (for gaming).

At the same clock, best case scenario is that the FX83xx is may be 3-5% faster than the i5 2500K in BF4; but in any games that don't use all 8 cores fully, the FX83xx would be slower than your current i5 2500K.

I'm not telling you to not go AMD ever, but at the moment if you do go from the i5 2500K to the FX83xx, it'd still be only a side-grade. If you are interested in 8 cores, then at least wait for AMD's next gen and see what it may bring...for now, just clock your i5 2500K higher.

If you must upgrade now, you'd much better off just upgrading your i5 2500K to a i7 2600K or something with HT. It would matches the FX83xx at a much lower clock (as show in 1st post of this thread), and exceed it by a fair margin when both are on the same clock.
 
Last edited:
Marine-RX179 said:
If you must upgrade now, you'd much better off just upgrading your i5 2500K to a i7 2600K or something with HT. It would matches the FX83xx at a much lower clock (as show in 1st post of this thread), and exceed it by a fair margin when both are on the same clock.
Click to expand...

Sell 2500K, buy used 2600K, avoid messing around changing boards and stuff, don't lose performance in 99% of games, get better BF4 performance, win.


cheesyboy said:
Like the performance of the 3.5Ghz £90 fx-6300 compared with the 3.4Ghz £180 i5-4670k you mean?
Click to expand...

I think he was talking about the high end ones, the FX-9590 is basically a factory overclocked chip so it's quite representative of a decent FX-8 overclock, assuming you can get 5GHZ all cores out of an 8320/8350 then you would be looking at roughly stock 4770K performance. That in turn means that when overclocked the i7 4770K, 3770K and 2600K would start to walk away from the FX-8's.

--------------------

Something I found cool is that the 3970X is SB-E which basically means it has mor ein common with the 2600K than the 4770K below it, it's like the 2600K with some extra cache, an extra 200MHz (all core turbo) per core and 2 more cores. And from it's 30% performance advantage over the 2600K it looks like BF4 doesn't stop scaling at 8 threads, something to think about for the future maybe with mainstream hex cores on the horizon.
 
Last edited:
ubersonic said:
I think he was talking about the high end ones, the FX-9590 is basically a factory overclocked chip so it's quite representative of a decent FX-8 overclock, assuming you can get 5GHZ all cores out of an 8320/8350 then you would be looking at roughly stock 4770K performance. That in turn means that when overclocked the i7 4770K, 3770K and 2600K would start to walk away from the FX-8's.
Click to expand...

I'm sure he was - maybe he should have been a bit more specific though; that's how terrible broad generalisations develop isn't it

In any case, a £280 CPU damn well should outperform a £150 one.
 
cheesyboy said:
I'm sure he was - maybe he should have been a bit more specific though; that's how terrible broad generalisations develop isn't it

In any case, a £280 CPU damn well should outperform a £150 one.
Click to expand...

Yes logically that should be the case. As we see in many types of hardware though (not even necessarily PC-related), that is often not the case.
 
cheesyboy said:
I'm sure he was - maybe he should have been a bit more specific though; that's how terrible broad generalisations develop isn't it

In any case, a £280 CPU damn well should outperform a £150 one.
Click to expand...

Not relevant to the consumer, but the i7 price is pretty artificial, Intel will be making killer profits on them :(.
 
ubersonic said:
I think he was talking about the high end ones, the FX-9590 is basically a factory overclocked chip so it's quite representative of a decent FX-8 overclock, assuming you can get 5GHZ all cores out of an 8320/8350 then you would be looking at roughly stock 4770K performance. That in turn means that when overclocked the i7 4770K, 3770K and 2600K would start to walk away from the FX-8's.
Click to expand...

Just remember that getting 5ghz out of all cores on that chip will make it a 200W TDP one.. have you ever seen a review of the 9590 where it does not throttle? (I know it hasn't been reviewed much, but it throttles like hell on all of the tests done on it). Assuming a 8350 clocked = 9590, same problem.

Maybe a 4.8ghz would be representative, but reaching that 5ghz limit on all cores is not really possible, even on a proper waterloop.
 
Make said:
Just remember that getting 5ghz out of all cores on that chip will make it a 200W TDP one.. have you ever seen a review of the 9590 where it does not throttle? (I know it hasn't been reviewed much, but it throttles like hell on all of the tests done on it). Assuming a 8350 clocked = 9590, same problem.

Maybe a 4.8ghz would be representative, but reaching that 5ghz limit on all cores is not really possible, even on a proper waterloop.
Click to expand...

You've posted this before, and it was equally wrong then.
 
rolypolyman said:
ALXAndy I see your setup would be similar to what I'm considering, sli 670 being close to xfire 7950 etc, how do you find your 8core Fx chip with your sli 670's. :)
Click to expand...

This was what I read. I didn't see your specs.. Either keep your I5 or go 2600k.

I thought you were just asking me about SLI and the 8320, didn't realise you were the same guy with the 2500k.

The 2600k would definitely be the best way to go.
 
Hmmm....

yEy.jpg


http://www.techspot.com/review/734-battlefield-4-benchmarks/
 
Make said:
Please tell me when have I posted about 9590 TDP being wrong? Or anything at all about the 9590 related to this?

Oh sorry, it was actually 220W.

http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Bulldozer/AMD-FX-Series FX-9590.html

Feel free to correct me though. What will be a 8350's TDP at 5.0ghz? Is anyone running theirs at that frequency?

It's an honest question, I really do not know.
Click to expand...

I am and I honestly don't know. What I do know is that a 750W 80% bronze rated PSU couldn't cope with the 8320 at 5GHz and my 7990 on a mild overclock of 1100 core/1575mem. On the other hand, my new 860W platinum PSU copes fine.
 
Make said:
Please tell me when have I posted about 9590 TDP being wrong? Or anything at all about the 9590 related to this?

Oh sorry, it was actually 220W.

http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Bulldozer/AMD-FX-Series FX-9590.html

Feel free to correct me though. What will be a 8350's TDP at 5.0ghz? Is anyone running theirs at that frequency?

It's an honest question, I really do not know.
Click to expand...

You've posted before that the 9590 cannot maintain 5GHz even under custom water loops. That is what is completely wrong.
 
teppic said:
You've posted before that the 9590 cannot maintain 5GHz even under custom water loops. That is what is completely wrong.
Click to expand...

I'd like to see when I have posted it before as I cannot seem to remember and don't want to get mixed up on someone else's comments.

Cool to know it works on custom loops at least then, I assume you have tried it? Because the H100 is not enough for it to not throttle.

(Well, OCuk said it doesn't throttle with the fathom, so I guess that's kind of a custom loop. But if it still runs close to throttling that's not good. I don't know).
 
Make said:
Please tell me when have I posted about 9590 TDP being wrong? Or anything at all about the 9590 related to this?

Oh sorry, it was actually 220W.

http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Bulldozer/AMD-FX-Series FX-9590.html

Feel free to correct me though. What will be a 8350's TDP at 5.0ghz? Is anyone running theirs at that frequency?

It's an honest question, I really do not know.
Click to expand...

I can run my 8320 at 5ghz all day long if I feel like it. It does run quite hot but well within safe limits. What it does do though is heat up the room, and with the heating on it turns into a sweat box. I prefer 4.7ghz as basically I get stock temps (idles of 25c and max of 52)

I've no idea how much power it is using to be honest. What I do know is that with it and SLI 670s and five mechanical drives and so on with my 750w psu I have no issues. I'm also running a boat load of fans off the PSU too.

I really must get myself one of those power useage meters...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom