This article is nothing more then a performance overview of all four processors released yesterday. In this article we'll review the AMD FX 8150 - 8120 - 61 in a quickie performance review.
#Amd fx 8350 temp monitor series#
It is AMD's most high-end and processor series to date, yet will remain an affordable processor series.ĪMD FX 8150 - 8120 - 61 performance review Also known as the Vishera generation with PileDriver cores, today FX 8300 series is tested. You guys have been hearing the magic word 'Vishera' for a while now and it is the codename for the Piledriver core based FX series processors f. We review the AMD FX 83E processor today. It's Vishera time again, and yeah that is the codename for the Piledriver core based FX series processors from AMD. We review the AMD FX 8320E processor today. A similar benchmark for integer and string operations is thus Dhrystone. The Whetstone benchmark primarily measures the floating-point (FPU) arithmetic performance. This was later changed to Millions of Whetstone Instructions Per Second (MWIPS). The Whetstone benchmark originally measured computing power in units of kilo-Whetstone Instructions Per Second (kWIPS). It was initially written in Algol 60, back in 1972. The Whetstone benchmark is a synthetic benchmark for evaluating the performance of computers. It's interesting to see what a little 10%~15% performance bump over the last gen product can do and mean for a processor. As you can see, the AMD FX 8350 immediately positions itself in-between at Core i7 2600 / 3770 processors. The other processor/mobo entries are there for CPU/APU and respective platform scaling throughout the benchmark session. The light bar is the processor tested today in it's default configuration with the DDR3 memory at 1600 MHz.
#Amd fx 8350 temp monitor software#
Due to the nature of changes in our benchmark software we'll try to add many processors per benchmark title for you to compare to. So then, let me first explain how and what we will be testing and comparing in this article. The rest of the processors are in the chart just for scaling. Though one of the oldest, Dhrystone remains a simple yet accurate and effective way to show you RAW CPU processing performance making it a very good indicator. A perfect test to observe the general efficiency per core. These two tests are pure unadulterated 100% CPU tests that run completely within the CPU + cache memory itself. The resulting number is the number of executions of the program suite per second.Īlrighty, first stop is the SANDRA DhryStone and Whetstone tests. It can be used to measure two aspects, both the processor's speed as well as the optimizing capabilities of the compiler.
Since the whole program should be really small, it fits into the processor cache. We make use of a multi-threaded Dhrystone test from SiSoftware Sandra, which is basically a suite of arithmetic and string manipulating programs.
Finally, the first step should be completely black. As well, the dark-end step differences should be about the same as the light-end step differences. If your monitor is correctly set up, you should be able to distinguish each step, and each step should be roughly visually distinct from its neighbors by the same amount.
This simple test pattern is evenly spaced from 0 to 255 brightness levels, with no profile embedded. We realized, if that happens, your monitor is not properly set up. How do we know this? Because we receive a couple of emails every now and then telling us that a reader can't distinguish between the benchmark charts (colors) in our reviews. I realized recently that a lot of you guys have set up your monitor improperly. Before playing games, setting up your monitor's contrast & brightness levels is a very important thing to do.
0 kommentar(er)
