AMD Carrizo Part 2: A Generational Deep Dive into the Athlon X4 845 at $70
by Ian Cutress on July 14, 2016 9:00 AM ESTStock Comparison: Real World
For our stock performance comparison, we take our four CPUs at their off-the-shelf frequency and also add in benchmark results from previous reviews for processors that are at a similar price. In the case of the Carrizo core based Athlon X4 845, which had an original MSRP of $70, this means that Intel’s dual core Pentium G3258 at $72 is the main competition. The Pentium comes with integrated graphics and a higher per-clock performance, however the Athlon has four threads to play with, which is two more than the Pentium, meaning the initial examination is a back and forth between the two.
Dolphin Benchmark: link
Many emulators are often bound by single thread CPU performance, and general reports tended to suggest that Haswell provided a significant boost to emulator performance. This benchmark runs a Wii program that raytraces a complex 3D scene inside the Dolphin Wii emulator. Performance on this benchmark is a good proxy of the speed of Dolphin CPU emulation, which is an intensive single core task using most aspects of a CPU. Results are given in minutes, where the Wii itself scores 17.53 minutes.
Dolphin historically favors Intel, and all three of our comparison points beat all the AMD processors here. The Athlon X4 845 holds the top spot for the AMD parts however.
WinRAR 5.0.1: link
Our WinRAR test from 2013 is updated to the latest version of WinRAR at the start of 2014. We compress a set of 2867 files across 320 folders totaling 1.52 GB in size – 95% of these files are small typical website files, and the rest (90% of the size) are small 30 second 720p videos.
As stated earlier in the review, the X4 845's performance is below that of the other Athlon parts due to the 2MB of L2 cache. It still stays within reasonable striking distance of the Pentium here though.
3D Particle Movement v2
The second version of this benchmark is similar to the first, however it has been re-written in VS2012 with one major difference: the code has been written to address the issue of false sharing. If data required by multiple threads, say four, is in the same cache line, the software cannot read the cache line once and split the data to each thread - instead it will read four times in a serial fashion. The new software splits the data to new cache lines so reads can be parallelized and stalls minimized. As v2 is fairly new, we are still gathering data and results are currently limited.
As 3DPMv2 is still new, we don't have G3258 results at this time, but we do have i3-6100TE results. Carrizo has an architectural advantage over other AMD microarchitectures, but the speed of the 760K means that it catches up. Both parts are ahead of the Core i3.
Web Benchmarks
On the lower end processors, general usability is a big factor of experience, especially as we move into the HTML5 era of web browsing.
Google Octane v2
Both AMD and Intel get similar scores in Octane.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
131 Comments
View All Comments
lefty2 - Thursday, July 14, 2016 - link
I'm predicting Bristol Ridge will be just as bad a failure as Carrizo. I.e. the few design wins will only have single DIMM memory and be universally unavailable, buried somewhere in a dark corner of the OEM's website. It's a pity, because both SoCs are very good in their own right.nandnandnand - Thursday, July 14, 2016 - link
If it's not Zen, it can be thrown straight in the garbage.Samus - Friday, July 15, 2016 - link
I still rock a few Kaveri desktops and they are incredibly powerful for the price. The 860K is half the cost of a comparable Intel chip, which supporting faster memory and a lower cost platform.Carizo on the desktop is an anomaly. I'd like to see what it could do with 4MB cache (would require an entirely new die)
Lolimaster - Saturday, July 16, 2016 - link
They were nice in 2014.We should have a nice 20nm 768SP APU in 2015 with a full L2 cache Excavator and fully mature 896SP 20nm early this year.
Remember the A8 3870K? That APU was a damn monster only hold back from being godly cause of their sub 3Ghz cpu speed, what we had after?
400SP VLIW5 2011 --> 384 VLIW4 2012 --> 384VLIW4 2013 --> 512SP GCN 2015 --> 512SP GCN 2016
Intel improved way faster (non "e" + edram igp's are near A8 level from being utter trash when the A8 3850 was release).
The_Countess - Tuesday, July 19, 2016 - link
yes being able to thrown in a extra billion transistors compared to AMD (1.7 vs 0.75 billion transistors for a quad core with GPU) because of 14nm really does help intel along a lot.but as nobody has been able to make a 20nm class process for anything but flash and ram besides intel, AMD's hands were tied. there is nothing AMD could have done to change that.
BlueBlazer - Friday, July 15, 2016 - link
Formula for failure: FM2 socket (with limited CPU upgradeability), only PCI Express x8 lanes available (which can bottleneck GPUs), and only "4 cores" (which performs more like 2C/4T Core i3 processor).neblogai - Friday, July 15, 2016 - link
Bristol Ridge is not FM2; PCI-E x8 can not bottleneck midrange GPUs; ultra low power mobile APU also sold as desktop chip is not a failure, just additional revenueBlueBlazer - Friday, July 15, 2016 - link
The results in the article shows otherwise, where AMD's Bristol Ridge was slower in most gaming tests, despite having better performance in some applications. Both FM2 and FM2+ are still the same (legacy) socket. AMD will be probably selling these chips at a loss. Note that these are the same (large) dies as Carrizo chips, and at 250mm^2 coupled with low prices typically meant razor thin margins or none at all.silverblue - Friday, July 15, 2016 - link
That L2 cache is probably making more difference than you realise.evolucion8 - Saturday, July 16, 2016 - link
The PCI-E is busted, even at PCI E 2.0 @ 4X, it barely makes a difference on the Fury X and the GTX 980 Ti.