CPU-Z Benchmark for AMD Athlon X4 860K (1T)
Best CPU performance — 64-bit — February 2023
AMD Athlon X4 860K (1T)
Back to validation
Intel Core i7-7700K
Intel Core i7-6700K
Intel Core i5-6600K
Intel Core i7-4790K
Intel Core i7-6850K
Intel Core i5-4690K
Intel Core i7-6900K
Intel Core i7-6800K
Intel Core i7-6950X
Intel Core i5-6600
Intel Core i7-5930K
Intel Core i7-4770K
Intel Core i7-6700
Intel Core i5-4670K
Intel Core i3-6100
Intel Pentium G3258
Intel Core i7-5820K
Intel Core i7-3770K
Intel Xeon E3-1230 v5
Intel Core i5-3570K
Intel Core i7-4790
Intel Core i7-4930K
Intel Core i7-4820K
Intel Core i5-4690
Intel Core i7-7500U
Intel Core i7-4770
Intel Core i5-6500
Intel Pentium G4400
Intel Core i5-4670
Intel Core i7-5960X
Intel Core i3-4170
Intel Core i7-3770
Intel Xeon E3-1231 v3
Intel Core i7-6820HK
Intel Core i5-4590
Intel Core i3-4160
Intel Core i5-3570
Intel Core i5-6400
Intel Xeon E3-1230 v3
Intel Core i5-2500K
Intel Core i5-4570
Intel Core i7-2700K
Intel Core i5-3550
Intel Core i3-4150
Intel Core i7-2600K
Intel Xeon E3-1230 V2
Intel Core i7-4720HQ
Intel Core i7-3960X
Intel Core i3-4130
Intel Core i5-3470
Intel Core i7-3820
Intel Pentium G3260
Intel Core i5-7200U
Intel Core i5-2550K
Intel Core i7-6700HQ
Intel Core i7-4710HQ
Intel Core i5-4460
Intel Core i7-4710MQ
Intel Core i5-4210H
Intel Core i5-3450
Intel Core i7-3930K
Intel Core i7-3520M
Intel Core i5-4200H
Intel Core i7-4700MQ
Intel Core i7-4700HQ
Intel Core i3-3240
Intel Core i5-4440
Intel Core i7-6500U
Intel Core i7 X 990
Intel Core i5-4430
Intel Core i3-3220
Intel Core i5-6300HQ
Intel Core i5-6300U
Intel Core i7-3630QM
Intel Core i5-3350P
AMD FX -9590
Intel Core i7-2600
Intel Core i5-4210M
Intel Pentium G3220
Intel Core i7-4702MQ
Intel Core i7-5500U
Intel Core i7-3610QM
Intel Core i7 X 980
Intel Core i5-3330
Intel Core i5-3320M
Intel Core i5-2500
Intel Xeon W3690
AMD FX -9370
Intel Pentium G2030
Intel Core i7-4510U
Intel Core i5-6200U
Intel Core i7-3632QM
Intel Core i5-3230M
Intel Core i5-4200M
AMD FX-8370
Intel Pentium G2020
Intel Core i7-3612QM
AMD FX -4350
Intel Core i5-2400
Intel Core i5-3210M
AMD FX -8350
AMD A10-6800K
AMD A10-7890K
Intel Xeon X5675
Intel Xeon X5470
Intel Xeon E5-2683 v3
AMD Athlon X4 880K
Intel Core i3-2120
AMD FX-8370E
Intel Xeon X5670
Intel Core i7-2620M
AMD FX -6350
Intel Core i5-4300U
Intel Core i7 870
Intel Core i5-2320
Intel Core i7 960
Intel Core i5-5200U
AMD Athlon X4 845
AMD A8-6600K
AMD A10-5800K
Intel Xeon E5-2670
Intel Core i5-2540M
AMD A6-6400K
AMD FX -8320
Intel Core i5 760
AMD A10-7870K
AMD Athlon X4 870K
Intel Core i5-2310
AMD Athlon X4 760K
Intel Core i7 950
AMD FX -8300
AMD FX -4300
AMD FX -6300
AMD Athlon X4 860K
AMD FX-8320E
Intel Core i3-2100
AMD A10-7850K
Intel Core i5 650
Intel Core 2 Duo E8600
Intel Xeon X5460
Intel Core i5-2520M
Intel Core i5-2300
Intel Core i7 860
Intel Core i3-6100U
AMD Athlon X4 750K
AMD A10-7860K
AMD A6-5400K
AMD A8-5600K
Intel Core i5 750
Intel Core i3 550
Intel Core i7-2670QM
Intel Core 2 Duo E8500
Intel Xeon E5450
AMD A10-7700K
AMD A10-7800
Intel Core i5-3337U
Intel Core i7 930
Intel Core i5-2430M
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9650
Intel Core i5 M 560
Intel Core i3 540
Intel Xeon X5650
AMD A8-7600
Intel Xeon X5450
Intel Core i5-2450M
Intel Xeon X3440
(YOU) AMD Athlon X4 860K
AMD A8-7650K
Pentium E5700
Intel Core 2 Duo E8400
Intel Core i5-2410M
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550
AMD Athlon X4 740
Intel Core i7-2630QM
Intel Core 2 Duo E6850
Intel Core i3-3110M
Intel Xeon E5440
Intel Core 2 Duo E7500
Intel Core i7 920
Pentium E6500
Intel Core i3 530
Intel Core i5 M 480
Intel Pentium G620
Intel Core 2 Duo E7400
Pentium E5500
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9450
Intel Core i5 M 460
Intel Core i5 M 520
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9400
Intel Core i3-5005U
Intel Core 2 Duo E7300
Pentium E5400
Intel Core 2 Quad Q8400
Pentium E5300
Intel Core 2 Duo E6750
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9300
AMD FX -8150
Pentium E5200
Intel Xeon L5420
Intel Core 2 Quad Q8300
Intel Core i3 M 380
Intel Core i3-2350M
Intel Core i5 M 430
Intel Core i7 Q 720
AMD FX -8120
Intel Core i3 M 370
Intel Core i3-4030U
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600
Intel Core i3-2330M
Intel Core 2 Quad
AMD FX -6100
AMD FX -4100
Intel Core 2 Quad Q8200
Intel Core 2 Duo E6550
Intel Core i3-2310M
AMD A10-8700P
Intel Core i3 M 350
Intel Core i3-3217U
Intel Core i3-4005U
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T
AMD Phenom II X6 1090T
Intel Core 2 Duo E4500
Intel Core i3 M 330
AMD Phenom II X6 1055T
AMD Phenom II X4 965
AMD A8-7410
AMD Phenom II X4 955
AMD Phenom II X4 B55
AMD A8-6410
AMD A8-4500M
AMD Phenom II X4 840
AMD Phenom II X4 B50
AMD A6-6310
AMD Phenom II X4 945
AMD Athlon II X2 250
AMD Athlon II X4 640
AMD Athlon II X2 245
AMD Phenom II X4 925
AMD Athlon II X4 630
AMD Athlon II X2 240
AMD Athlon II X4 620
AMD Athlon 64 X2 6000+
AMD Athlon 64 X2 5200+
AMD Athlon 64 X2 5000+
Intel Pentium N3540
Intel Celeron N2840
Intel Celeron N3050
Intel Atom x5-Z8300
CPU-Z Benchmark for AMD Athlon X4 860K (4T)
Intel Core i3-8350K
Intel Core i5-7600K
Intel Core i3-9100
Intel Core i3-9100F
Intel Core i5-7600
AMD Ryzen 3 3200G
Intel Core i5-6600K
Intel Core i5-4690K
AMD Ryzen 3 1300X
Intel Core i5-4690
Intel Core i3-8100
AMD Ryzen 3 2200G
Intel Core i5-6600
Intel Core i5-7500
Intel Core i5-4670K
Intel Core i5-4670
Intel Core i5-4590
Intel Core i5-4570
Intel Core i5-3570K
Intel Core i5-6500
Intel Core i5-3570
Intel Core i5-7400
Intel Core i5-4590S
Intel Xeon E3-1220 v3
Intel Core i5-3550
AMD Ryzen 3 1200
Intel Core i5-4460
Intel Core i5-6400
Intel Core i5-3470
Intel Core i5-7300HQ
Intel Core i5-4440
Intel Core i5-2500K
Intel Xeon E3-1220 V2
Intel Core i5-2500
Intel Core i5-4430
Intel Core i5-3450
Intel Core i5-3470S
Intel Core i5-3350P
Intel Core i5-2400
Intel Core i5-6300HQ
Intel Core i3-1115G4
Intel Core i5-6500T
Intel Core i5-3330
Intel Core i5-2320
Intel Pentium Gold G6400
Intel Core 2 Extreme X9650
Intel Core i5-2310
Intel Core i5-2300
Intel Core i3-1005G1
Intel Core i3-7100
Intel Pentium Gold G5420
Intel Xeon X5460
Intel Core i3-10110U
Intel Core i3-6100
Intel Pentium Gold G5400
AMD Athlon 3000G
Intel Core i3-8145U
Intel Xeon E5450
Intel Pentium G4600
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9650
Intel Core i5-2400S
Intel Core i3-4170
Intel Celeron N5095
Intel Xeon X5450
Intel Pentium G4560
Intel Core i7-7600U
Intel Core i5 760
Intel Core i3-4160
Intel Core i5-7300U
Intel Core i7-7500U
AMD Athlon 200GE
Intel Core i3-4150
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9500
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550
Intel Xeon E5440
Intel Core i3-8130U
Intel Core i5 750
Intel Core i3-4130
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9450
Intel Core i7-5600U
Intel Celeron N5100
AMD Athlon Gold 3150U
Intel Core 2 Quad Q8400
Intel Core i7-6600U
Intel Core i5-4200H
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9400
Intel Core i5-7200U
Intel Core i5-4300M
Intel Core i7-5500U
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9300
Intel Core i7-3520M
Intel Core 2 Quad Q8300
Intel Core i3-3240
Intel Core i5-4210M
Intel Core i7-6500U
Intel Xeon X3430
Intel Core i3-3220
Intel Core i3-2130
Intel Core i5-6300U
Intel Core i5-5300U
Intel Core i5-4200M
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600
Intel Core i7-4600U
Intel Core i3-2120
Intel Core i5-3340M
Intel Core i7-2640M
Intel Core i3-3210
Intel Core 2 Quad Q8200
AMD A8-6600K
AMD A10-9700
AMD Ryzen 3 2200U with
Intel Core i7-2620M
Intel Core i5-3320M
Intel Core i5-6200U
AMD A10-5800K
Intel Core i7-4510U
Intel Core i5-5200U
AMD Ryzen 3 3250U
Intel Celeron J4125
(YOU) AMD Athlon X4 860K
AMD Ryzen 3 3200U with
AMD FX -4300
AMD Athlon X4 760K
Intel Core i5-3230M
Intel Core i5 650
Intel Core i5-2540M
Intel Core i3-2100
AMD Athlon X4 860K
Intel Core i7-4500U
Intel Pentium Silver N5030
Intel Core i5-4310U
Intel Celeron N4100
Intel Core i5-2520M
Intel Core i7-3537U
Intel Core i3 550
Intel Core i5-3210M
AMD A10-7860K
AMD A8-5600K
Intel Celeron N4120
AMD A8-9600
Intel Pentium Silver N5000
Intel Core i5-4300U
AMD Athlon X4 840
AMD A8-7600
Intel Core i3 540
Intel Core i5-2450M
AMD A8-7650K
Intel Core i3-7100U
Intel Pentium 5405U
Intel Core i5-2430M
Intel Core i3 530
AMD Athlon X4 740
Intel Core i5-4210U
Intel Core i3-6100U
Intel Core i7 M 620
Intel Core i3-7020U
Intel Pentium N4200
Intel Core i5-2410M
AMD FX -4100
AMD Phenom II X4 965
Intel Core i5-4200U
Intel Core i3-3120M
Intel Core i5-3337U
Intel Core i5 M 560
Intel Core i3-5005U
Intel Core i5 M 480
AMD Phenom II X4 955
Intel Core i3-3110M
Intel Core i5-3317U
Intel Core i5 M 520
AMD Athlon II X4 645
Intel Core i3-2370M
AMD Phenom II X4 945
Intel Core i5 M 460
Intel Core i3-6006U
AMD Athlon II X4 640
AMD A12-9720P RADEON R7; 12 COMPUTE CORES 4C+8G
Intel Core i5 M 450
Intel Core i3-2350M
Intel Core i3 M 370
Intel Core i3-2330M
Intel Core i3-2328M
Intel Core i5 M 430
Intel Core i3 M 380
Intel Core i3-4030U
AMD A10-9600P
AMD A8-7410
Intel Core i3-2310M
Intel Core i3 M 350
AMD A8-6410
AMD A6-7310
Intel Core i3 M 330
Intel Core i3-4005U
Intel Core i3-4010U
AMD A6-6310
Intel Core i3-3217U
Intel Pentium N3540
Intel Pentium N3710
Intel Pentium N3700
Intel Atom x5-Z8350
Comparative testing of AMD Athlon X4 860K and Intel Core i3-2120, i3-3220 and i3-6320 processors
or Progress for five years without taking into account GPU
Methodology for testing computer systems
sample of 2016
There is an opinion that the performance of central processing units for personal computers has changed little in recent years. Some attribute this to the lack of competition in the market, some to an «architectural dead end» and other apocalyptic scenarios, some say nothing at all about this, but the fact remains: for the majority of those who speak out, productivity does not increase, and that’s it. here. In principle, tests of processors of «neighboring» generations of Intel really show approximately the same result, and AMD has not made major architectural changes to its products for a long time, so the grounds for such thoughts are understandable.
And it is worth noting that both companies constantly fertilize it in one way or another. For example, the names of processors have not been changed for a long time. Since 2011, AMD has had a variety of FX and A-series in its assortment, increasing their numbers, but nothing more (from the previous brands, only Athlon has survived, but has become a niche one from a mass market). At Intel, the various Core i3 / i5 / i7 became the main products in 2009 at all.
And in the already mentioned 2011, we saw the division of Core into “previous generation” and “second generation”. Then the “third”, “fourth” appeared … now it’s already the “sixth”, but in general, when viewed from the side, only the numbers also change. Therefore, somehow everyone is used to talking about “Core i3 level” or “Core i7 level”, without specifying which ones. Sometimes funny collisions result — when a person who is accustomed to the levels of «desktop» processors suddenly collides with laptops and finds out that «everything is somehow wrong there.»
But is it really that simple even with «desktop» processors? We decided to test the Core i3 on an example, since the old models of this family are not so often guests of test labs, unlike the same Core i7, where everything is more or less clear. And here?
We decided not to touch on the very old models for LGA1156, since this has been officially known as the “previous generation Core” for five years now. We limited ourselves to the LGA1155 platform, which is less distant from the current moment, which, however, also presented its own surprises: although the HD Graphics Gen6 and Gen7 GPUs are officially supported by modern operating systems (unlike the very first built-in video accelerators, limited to a maximum of Windows 7), application software sometimes has your opinion on this.
In particular, we were unable to get SolidWorks to work properly on Sandy Bridge with integrated graphics under Windows 10. So far everything is fine with Ivy Bridge, but … In principle, we already know the graphics capabilities of the HD Graphics 2500 on the example of the Pentium G2130, and previous models should be even worse, and in general — progress in the field of graphics cores is still not disputed by anyone. Therefore, we conducted testing together with the discrete Radeon R7 260X, since recently, firstly, we once again found out that it is possible to compare processor performance with different video parts, and secondly, we scored a few results for a more accurate comparison under the same conditions.
Coincidentally, we got two processors with an index ending in «20». Both have the same frequency of 3.3 GHz, but slightly different positioning: 2120 is the middle one in a very short line of three models, and 3220 is the second from the bottom of four. If we consider all Core i3, then the company’s range was a little wider — due to the fact that many had «doubles» with an older GPU (in parallel with our heroes, there were 2125 with HDG 3000 and 3225 with HDG 4000), and there were also several processors «T ‘-family.
But in general, Core i3 for LGA1155 (like their predecessors) were created, let’s say, according to the residual principle. They were all inexpensive, had low clock speeds and average performance, in which they could not even always catch up with some old processors, such as Core 2 Quad (they «smashed» dual cores easily, but Pentium did it too). In fact, it is a rejection of crystals intended for laptops that “did not fit” into the requirements of the latter in terms of power consumption.
The situation has changed somewhat with the transition to LGA1150. Firstly, the dancing around the video has ended: all desktop processors of the Core lines received GT2 in various modifications. Secondly, taking into account some stagnation in the upper segment and some kind of competition in the $150 region, Intel decided to make different Core i3s. The processors of the 41×0 family became the heirs of the previous models — also inexpensive and limited, but not quite limited: the clock speeds still had to be increased.
And 43×0 is a full die with all 4 MB of L3 cache and even higher clock speeds, which are achievable (even at partial load) by far from all top processors. True, the price of such models is already closer to the younger Core i5, but so is the performance — especially in mass applications, where the Core i3-43×0 can be one of the fastest on the market. Which is interesting.
Therefore, for comparison with the old ones, we took not someone from the 61×0 line, but the oldest (at the moment) processor in the family — Core i3-6320. However, as mentioned above, performance in general-purpose tasks can be independently compared with 4170 or 6100, since it depends very little on video. Here, the power consumption of the platform, of course, is better to evaluate within the same line of tests, since the use of the Radeon R7 260X affects it, as well as the use of any other video card.
| Processor | AMD Athlon X4 860k | ||
| Nuclear Nuclear | Kaveri | ||
| Technology Ave | Frequencies STD/MAX, GG frequency STD/MAX, GG frequency ,0 | ||
| Number of cores (modules)/threads | 2/4 | ||
| L1 cache (total), I/D, KB | 192/64 | 2×2048 | |
Here we briefly recall that it is based on the following four pillars: 
Note, however, that both are behind the Athlon X4 860K. The Core i3-6320, however, is far ahead, but this is also predictable — over the past couple of years, the frequencies of the older models of the family have increased significantly, which would have affected even without architectural changes. And in cases where it is not possible to enter the full boot mode, it lags behind even the Core i3 five years ago. However, we (and not only us) have repeatedly noted that low «single-threaded performance» is the weakest point of the current AMD microarchitectures. Let’s see what their successors will change in this regard (it’s a pity that this will not happen just about the other day ).
But on a well-paralleled integer code, the modules work as expected.
It’s not Haswell level yet, but at least Ivy Bridge.
Support for high-frequency memory is not the key to unambiguous success in itself. However, the 860K performs data compression at the same speed as the i3-2120, but in single-threaded decompression it even lags behind it. As a result, he loses to everyone, but not so much. Moreover, in WinRAR the superiority of 6320 over old processors is much less convincing than in many other cases.
By the way, the old Intel platform handles file operations worse than the new ones or FM2+. In addition, we still have a case where Hyper-Threading support only gets in the way — the Pentium G2130 even worked a little faster than the i3-3220 with a slightly higher frequency. Older processors are even worse — to compensate for the differences, you need an even greater advantage in clock speed. But if you remember that compared to representatives of new platforms, it usually does not exist (but there is the opposite), even in such “processor-independent” (but often encountered in the life of any computer user) situations, LGA1155 starts to look not the best.
Although in practice, of course, such a lag can be ignored.
In contrast to the very significant difference between old and new processors in scientific calculations. Of course, not dual-core / dual-module processors are usually purchased for such use, however, as we can see, the most modern models of the latter are quite capable of demonstrating good results. Much better than the old ones, anyway.
In the end, we come to confirm the common opinion that «Athlon X4 is somewhere like Core i3, but without video and cheaper.» With a small note — Core i3 are very different. Architectural improvements over the years have accumulated, clock speeds have grown. In general, over five years, Intel has «accumulated» about 50% of additional performance within this family, which is not so little. AMD processors were also growing — «construction equipment» only debuted on the market less than five years ago, and the old Athlon II X4 from Core i3 on the Sandy Bridge core lagged behind quite noticeably, but somewhat unevenly.
In particular, the 860K was announced back in the summer of 2014 (at the time of Haswell), and the 870K and 880K that replaced it a little later differ from the “ancestor” only in the clock frequency, and literally by 5%. Obviously, this is not enough to compete with modern Core i3. On the other hand, the advantage of these models in price still remains — they cost at the Pentium level, but they support four computing threads, which can be successfully used by those buyers who are still oriented towards buying a discrete video card.
Energy consumption and energy efficiency
However, the FM2+ has another weak point — a rather high power consumption. Intel managed to reduce it from generation to generation, and despite the increase in clock frequencies, but AMD is not very good at it. Moreover, this state of affairs cannot be attributed even to a lag in the technical process: we recall that the Athlon X4 860K is manufactured according to 28 nm standards, while the Core i3-2120 is 32 nm.
At the same time, the processors are comparable in performance, and the second one was less «gluttonous» even in its years, which leads to such an unpleasant result. On the other hand, this indicator is not very important for buyers of systems with a discrete graphics card, decent models of which consume (under load) much more than any processors.
iXBT Game Benchmark 2016
To save time and space, we decided to confine ourselves to the results of only those games in which the difference between the processors is noticeable at least in one of the modes — the inherent abilities of the Radeon R7 260X in conjunction with at least very fast, at least with very slow processors, we already know 🙂
It is clear that one of such examples is «tanks», but they depend (which has long been known) on single-threaded performance. Which in the old Core i3 was not so high — in the «HD Max» mode, not too different from modern budget AMD processors.
As noted in the previous article, it is impossible to get more than about 73 frames per second in this game, which is almost always done with this video card in the minimum settings mode and for any processor.
But the maximum settings, even at a reduced resolution, is already a more difficult task, with which only the Core i3-6320 completely coped with the test subjects. The rest are slower, and the difference between the Athlon X4 860K and the Core i3-2120 generally becomes negligible.
The game fully complies with the criterion formulated above — the performance depends on the processor. In it (as we remember) and dual-threaded processors look pale. True, it is clearly visible that this all becomes relevant only when the frame rate exceeds a hundred. So first you need to find the appropriate video card. More precisely, this is in the second place — in the first place, to find a reason to strive for such an amount of FPS instead of increasing the quality of the picture.
When playing on a newer version of the EGO engine, it is at least clear why higher performance is needed. And (more importantly) the processor affects it even in the maximum quality mode (albeit low resolution). And again, we see the approximate parity of Athlon and Core i3-2xxx, and newer processors of the Core i3 family are traditionally faster.
There is a slight difference in the minimum quality mode, but even then it is really small. Much less than between Athlon X4 and Celeron G3900, for example.
The behavior of the processors also differs only in the minimum quality mode, and here the Athlon X4 even managed to overtake the Core i3-2120.
The game has high requirements for both the video card and the processor, but the latter most often requires only one fast thread of computation. This traditionally «beats» AMD products, but the old Core i3, in general, were practically no better.
In Batman in the minimum quality mode, everyone has nowhere to grow, in Bioshock there is still some reserve, but basically the difference between the processors is observed only in the low resolution mode with maximum quality. However, it is also small. Only the Core i3-6320 clearly stands out, but it always does.
Total
What do we have in the bottom line? Of course, you can talk about «Core i3 class». However, it should be clearly understood that0289 during the journey the dog could grow up . Comparison of two processors of neighboring generations belonging to the same family and with the same clock speeds leads to the same result regardless of the family: about +10% performance per iteration. This is true for older Core i7, and for Core i5, and for Core i3, and for Pentium. A significant «but» — in the first two classes, the clock speeds have indeed remained close for many years, and Core i3 and Pentium began to increase them apart from the top families somewhere around the time of LGA1150. If a few years ago many people dreamed of a fast dual-core, but did not receive their requests, now the same Core i3-6320 actually overtakes the top models in frequency in the dual-core load mode.