Phenom X3 8450 [in 3 benchmarks]
AMD
Phenom X3 8450
Buy
- Interface
- Core clock speed
- Max video memory
- Memory type
- Memory clock speed
- Maximum resolution
Summary
AMD started AMD Phenom X3 8450 sales on April 2008. This is Toliman architecture desktop processor primarily aimed at office systems. It has 3 cores and 3 threads, and is based on 65 nm manufacturing technology, with a maximum frequency of 2100 MHz and a locked multiplier.
Compatibility-wise, this is AMD Socket AM2+ processor with a TDP of 95 Watt.
It provides poor benchmark performance at
1.20%
of a leader’s which is AMD EPYC 7h22.
Phenom X3
8450
vs
EPYC
7h22
General info
Phenom X3 8450 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and pricing.
| Place in performance rating | 2288 | |
| Value for money | 4.29 | |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | |
| Architecture codename | Toliman (2008) | |
| Release date | April 2008 (14 years ago) | |
| Current price | $22 | of 18494 (Xeon Platinum 8280M) |
Value for money
To get the index we compare the characteristics of the processors and their cost, taking into account the cost of other processors.
- 0
- 50
- 100
Technical specs
Basic microprocessor parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state.
These parameters can generally indicate CPU performance, but to be more precise you have to review its test results.
| Physical cores | 3 (Tri-Core) | |
| Threads | 3 | |
| Boost clock speed | 2.1 GHz | of 5.8 (Core i9-13900K) |
| L1 cache | 128 KB (per core) | of 1536 (EPYC Embedded 3401) |
| L2 cache | 512 KB (per core) | of 12288 (Core 2 Quad Q9550) |
| L3 cache | 2 MB (shared) | of 32 (Ryzen Threadripper 1998) |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | of 5 (Apple M1) |
| Die size | 285 mm2 | |
| Number of transistors | 450 million | of 9900000 (Ryzen 9 7950X) |
| 64 bit support | + | |
| Windows 11 compatibility | — |
Compatibility
Information on Phenom X3 8450 compatibility with other computer components and devices: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc.
Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one.
Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.
| Number of CPUs in a configuration | 1 | of 8 (Opteron 842) |
| Socket | AM2+ | |
| Thermal design power (TDP) | 95 Watt | of 400 (Xeon Platinum 9282) |
Virtualization technologies
Supported virtual machine optimization technologies. Some are specific to Intel only, some to AMD.
| AMD-V | + |
Benchmark performance
Single-core and multi-core benchmark results of Phenom X3 8450. Overall benchmark performance is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
Overall score
This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.
Phenom X3 8450
1.20
- Passmark
- GeekBench 5 Single-Core
- GeekBench 5 Multi-Core
Passmark
Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.
Benchmark coverage: 69%
Phenom X3 8450
1214
GeekBench 5 Single-Core
GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance.
This version uses only a single CPU core.
Benchmark coverage: 37%
Phenom X3 8450
254
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.
Benchmark coverage: 37%
Phenom X3 8450
696
Relative perfomance
Overall Phenom X3 8450 performance compared to nearest competitors among desktop CPUs.
Intel Celeron G550
100
AMD Phenom X3 8650
100
AMD Phenom X3 8600
100
AMD Phenom X3 8450
100
Intel Pentium E6700
99.
17
AMD A4-4000
96.67
AMD Athlon II X2 255
96.67
Intel equivalent
We believe that the nearest equivalent to Phenom X3 8450 from Intel is Celeron G550, which is nearly equal in speed and higher by 1 position in our rating.
Celeron
G550
Compare
Here are some closest Intel rivals to Phenom X3 8450:
Intel Celeron J3160
101.67
Intel Pentium G620
100.83
Intel Celeron G550
100
AMD Phenom X3 8450
100
Intel Pentium E6700
99.
17
Intel Core 2 Duo E8400
96.67
Intel Pentium E6800
96.67
Similar processors
Here is our recommendation of several processors that are more or less close in performance to the one reviewed.
Phenom X3
8650
Compare
Phenom X3
8600
Compare
Phenom II
X3 705e
Compare
Pentium
E6700
Compare
Phenom X3
8450e
Compare
Core 2
Duo E8500
Compare
Recommended graphics cards
These graphics cards are most commonly used with Phenom X3 8450 according to our statistics.
GeForce
9600 GT
8.5%
GeForce GT
710
4.7%
GeForce GTS
450
4.1%
GeForce GT
630
4%
GeForce GTX
550 Ti
3.6%
GeForce GT
730
3.3%
GeForce
9800 GT
3.3%
GeForce GTS
250
2.
4%
GeForce
9500 GT
2.3%
GeForce GTX
650
2.1%
User rating
Here is the rating given to the reviewed processor by our users. Let others know your opinion by rating it yourself.
Questions and comments
Here you can ask a question about Phenom X3 8450, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.
Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.
Page not found — Technical City
Page not found — Technical City
We couldn’t find such page: /en/cpu/phenom-x3-8450%23characteristics
Popular graphics cards comparisons
GeForce RTX
3060 Ti
vs
GeForce RTX
3060
GeForce RTX
3060 Ti
vs
GeForce RTX
3070
GeForce RTX
2060
vs
GeForce RTX
3050 8 GB
GeForce GTX
1050 Ti
vs
GeForce GTX
1650
GeForce GTX
1660 Super
vs
GeForce RTX
3050 8 GB
GeForce GTX
1660 Ti
vs
GeForce GTX
1660 Super
Popular graphics cards
GeForce GTX
1050 Ti
GeForce RTX
4090
Radeon RX
Vega 7
GeForce RTX
3060
GeForce GTX
1650
GeForce GTX
1060 6 GB
Popular CPU comparisons
Ryzen 5
5600X
vs
Core i5
12400F
Ryzen 5
3600
vs
Core i5
10400F
Core i5
1135G7
vs
Ryzen 5
5500U
Ryzen 5
5600X
vs
Ryzen 5
5600G
Ryzen 5
3600
vs
Ryzen 5
5600X
Ryzen 7
3700X
vs
Ryzen 5
5600X
Popular CPUs
Ryzen 5
5500U
EPYC
7h22
Core i3
1115G4
Core i5
1135G7
Ryzen 5
3500U
Ryzen 3
5300U
AMD Phenom X3 8450 — 18 secret facts, review, specifications, reviews.
Top specifications and features
- PassMark CPU score
- Heat dissipation (TDP)
- Technological process
- Number of transistors
- Number of Cores
PassMark CPU
AMD Phenom X3 8450 score:
1107
Best score:
89379
Test results
AMD Phenom X3 8450:
8670
Best score:
Performance
AMD Phenom X3 8450:
1048
Best score:
Interfaces and communications
AMD Phenom X3 8450:
1000
Best score:
Main Features of
AMD Phenom X3 8450:
1263
Best score:
Description
In this case, the maximum frequency in Boost mode reaches 2.1 Hz. 3 cores available. The L1 cache is 384 KB, L2 1.
536 MB and L3 3 MB. Power consumption at peak times can reach 95 watts.
The maximum number of threads that AMD Phenom X3 8450 can handle is 3.
AMD Phenom X3 8450 runs on 65 nm architecture. Total number of transistors 450 million
Regarding memory specification.
Now about the tests of AMD Phenom X3 8450. According to PassMark, the processor scored 1107 out of possible points. Based on the analysis of more than 4000 processors, AMD Phenom X3 8450 ranked 2556 in the ranking of the best.
Why AMD Phenom X3 8450 is better than others
- 384 KB L1 cache. This parameter is higher than that of 43%
- PassMark CPU score 1107 . This parameter is lower than 41%
- Thermal Dissipation (TDP) 95 W. This parameter is higher than 73%
- Process 65 nm. This parameter is higher than 81%
- Number of transistors 450 million. This parameter is lower than 32%
- Number of cores 3 . This parameter is lower than that of 56%
- Number of threads 3 .
This parameter is lower than 65% - L2 cache size 1.536 MB. This parameter is lower than that of 34%
Review AMD Phenom X3 8450
Test results
Performance
Interfaces and communications
Main characteristics
AMD Phenom X3 8450 Review: Highlights
PassMark CPU score
The PassMark benchmark considers read speed, write speed, and seek time when testing SSD performance.
Show all
1107
max 89379
Average: 6033.5
89379
Number of threads
The more threads, the higher the performance of the processor, and it will be able to perform several tasks at the same time.
Show all
3
max 256
Average: 10.
7
256
L1 cache size
Large amount of L1 memory accelerates results in CPU and system performance settings
Show all
384KB
max 4608
Average: 299.3 KB
4608KB
L2 Cache Size
L2 cache with large scratchpad memory to increase processor speed and overall system performance.
Show all
1.536 MB
max 512
Average: 4.5 MB
512MB
L3 cache size
Large amount of L3 memory accelerates results in CPU and system performance settings
Show all
2MB
max 768
Average: 16.
3 MB
768MB
Maximum Turbo Clock Speed
When the processor’s speed drops below its limit, it can jump to a higher clock speed to improve performance.
Show all
2.1GHz
max 5.5
Average: 3.2 GHz
5.5GHz
Number of cores
3
max 72
Mean: 5.8
72
Max. number of processors in configuration
one
Mean: 1.3
8
Socket
AM2+
AMD Virtualization Technology
Yes
Process technology
The small size of the semiconductor means it is a new generation chip.
65 nm
Average: 36.8 nm
5 nm
Number of transistors
The higher their number, the more processor power it indicates
450 million
max 57000
Average: 1517.3 million
57000 million
Thermal Dissipation (TDP)
Thermal Dissipation Requirements (TDP) is the maximum amount of energy that can be dissipated by the cooling system. The lower the TDP, the less power will be consumed.
Show all
95W
Average: 67.6 W
0.025W
Supports 64-bit system
A 64-bit system, unlike a 32-bit system, can support more than 4 GB of RAM.
This increases productivity. It also allows you to run 64-bit applications.
Show all
Yes
Code name
Toliman
Purpose
Desktop
FAQ
How many cores does the AMD Phenom X3 8450 have?
3 cores
What socket is AMD Phenom X3 8450
AMD Phenom X3 8450 is using AM2+ to install.
Is the AMD Phenom X3 8450 a 64-bit processor
Yes
What architecture does the AMD Phenom X3 8450 use?
The AMD Phenom X3 8450 is based on the Toliman architecture.
What is the maximum frequency of the AMD Phenom X3 8450 processor?
In this case, the maximum frequency in Boost mode reaches 2.1 Hz.
How much cache is the AMD Phenom X3 8450?
L1 cache is 384 KB, L2 1.536 MB and L3 3 MB.
How many watts does the AMD Phenom X3 8450 consume?
Power consumption at peak times can be up to 95 watts.
leave your feedback
AMD budget multi-core processors — Phenom X3 8450 and Phenom X4 9550.
Testing and comparison with Core 2 Duo E4400 / Overclockers.ua
1 — AMD Phenom X3 8450 and Phenom X4 9550
2 — Test results. conclusions
Display as one page
You can’t argue with Intel’s leadership in the processor market now. However, AMD does not stop trying to win a part of the market, and what it failed to do with the release of the new generation of Phenom processors, is now being done by keeping low prices for its products. In competition, the company even released such an unusual solution as a three-core processor. The lower models of both quad-core and tri-core Phenoms are attractive because of their low cost, because Intel has only dual-core Core 2 Duo models in this price range.
In this article, we will get acquainted with the junior and inexpensive Phenom X3 and Phenom X4 models, compare them in a number of applications, and try to find out how justified the unusual combination of three cores is.
And what’s most interesting, let’s compare them with Core 2 Duo to reveal the leader. Will processors with a weaker architecture be more attractive due to their lower prices? Or is the position of Core 2 Duo also unshakable in the budget sector?
First, a few words should be said about the changes in the architecture. As a logical development of the old Athlon 64 architecture, the new processors have been significantly improved. In particular, the instruction prefetcher has been improved, the branch prediction logic in the program code has been improved, the work with the stack has been optimized, and numerous improvements have been made in the performance of integer and floating point calculations. The development of the memory subsystem resulted in the emergence of a high-speed common third-level cache. And although the L3 cache operates at a lower frequency than the processor itself, it allows you to get rid of bottlenecks when exchanging data between cores. The improved memory controller now has two independent 64-bit channels.
The HT interface received a new index 3 and a frequency from 1800 to 2600 MHz (effective 3600-5200 MHz), depending on the CPU. The improved Cool’n’Quiet technology now works independently for each core, which can individually change the frequency by lowering the multiplier. K10 generation processors support SSE4a instructions, but they have nothing to do with SSE4.1 in new Intel processors and are incompatible.
An important advantage of the new processors is their compatibility with some old motherboards for Socket AM2. However, not all processor technologies and benefits will work. And if the lack of support for the new Cool’n’Quiet may not be so terrible, then the lower HT frequency installed on older boards can in some cases affect performance.
AMD Phenom X3 8450
Let’s start with the youngest member of the Phenom family, which has three cores. The packaging of the BOX version is absolutely traditional for such processors and is made in branded blue-violet colors.
Despite a decent TDP level of 95 W, the processor comes with an ordinary aluminum cooler.
A thin layer of thermal interface has already been applied to the outsole. To prevent its lubrication when packed, the sole is covered with a plastic casing.
And here is the processor itself.
The tri-core Phenom runs on the Toliman core using the 65nm process technology. Our model operates at a frequency of 2.1 GHz. Let’s take a look at the information provided by the CPU-Z utility about the Phenom X3 8450 processor.0005
The processor has a fractional multiplier of 10.5. Each core has 512 KB of L2 cache and a total L3 cache of 2 MB. This processor has a B3 steping and the TLB error has already been fixed in it. As mentioned above, the TDP of this model is 95 watts.
For maximum overclocking of Phenom processors, in most cases, only top-end motherboards based on AMD 7 Series chipsets are suitable.
Why only them? Yes, because other boards do not provide such wide possibilities and settings. Theoretically, many Phenom processors can operate at up to 3 GHz with air cooling. To do this, in addition to raising the voltage, it is quite possible that you will have to play with the HT and NB frequencies (the built-in part of the north bridge in the CPU). However, if you are determined to purchase such a board, then you will have to face their inaccessibility in the domestic market. If you walk through our stores, we will see that the price lists are filled with exclusively budget solutions. To be honest, we also had a similar problem, and we had to be content with a simpler motherboard based on AMD 780G, namely the ASUS M3A78-EMH-HDMI. The board supports all technologies for Phenom, but it doesn’t have a lot of overclocking capabilities. And this is despite the fact that it costs like boards based on the Intel P35 chipset for a competing platform with a much greater overclocking potential.
On the ASUS M3A78-EMH-HDMI motherboard, the Phenom 64 X3 8450 processor was overclocked to 2.53 GHz, but the system was unstable at this frequency. Unfortunately, the board simply did not allow setting enough voltage on the processor to achieve stability in overclocking.
The stable frequency was 2.4 GHz. Relative to the nominal value, this is only 14% overclocking.
AMD Phenom X4 9550
The packaging of this processor is no different from its predecessor.
It comes with the same simple cooler as the Phenom X3 8450.
And this is what the processor itself looks like
The Phenom X4 9550 is a full-fledged quad-core processor made on a single chip. Based on the Agena core, manufactured according to 65nm process technology. The TDP level is limited to 95 watts. The operating frequency of the processor is 2.
2 GHz. The HT 3.0 bus runs at the same 1800 MHz. The L2 cache is 512 KB per core, the total L3 cache, like the tri-core models, is 2 MB. Stepping B3, which is clearly indicated by the ending in the name of the processors, is 50, which was added to Phenom X4 9500 and Phenom X4 9600 specifically in order to distinguish new versions with a fixed TLB error from old ones.
The overclocking of the processor hit almost the same bus value as the Phenom X3 8450. We managed to achieve stable operation only at a processor frequency of 2.5 GHz.
Overclocking seems to be small, but so far serial Phenoms have a maximum frequency of 2.6 GHz (Phenom X4 9950 model), so there is very little left to the «technological» limit. Although, as mentioned above, enthusiasts squeeze out 3 GHz on Agena processors. Although we did not succeed with overclocking, we will compare the reviewed processors with Core 2 Duo at the same frequency.
Test Configuration and Test Features
The Phenom was tested using the following configuration:
- Cooler: Thermalright Ultra-120 eXtreme;
- RAM: 2×1 GB GoodRam PC6400
- Motherboard: ASUS M3A78-EMH-HDMI;
- Video card: Gigabyte Radeon HD 3870 512 MB GDDR4;
- Hard drive: 160GB Samsung HD161HJ;
- Power supply: Chieftec 650W.
In the nominal mode of processors, the memory worked at a frequency of 800 MHz with timings of 5-4-4-12-20-2T, with overclocking — 760 MHz with delays of 4-4-4-12-18-2T for Phenom X3 8450 by 2, 4GHz and 756MHz with 4-4-4-12-2T for Phenom 64 9550 at 2.5GHz.
For comparison with the Intel platform, we took the Core 2 Duo E4400 processor. This processor is based on the old Allendale core and is cheaper than the tested copies. We will compare it at the nominal frequency and overclocking.
In order not to discriminate against the Phenom, we will test the E4400 at 2.5 GHz (10 x 250 MHz), just like the Phenom 64 X4 9550 in acceleration. In order to see the potential of the dual-core Core, the E4400 will also be tested at 3.2 GHz (10 x 320 MHz).
Test configuration for Intel was as follows:
- Cooler: Thermalright Ultra-120 eXtreme;
- RAM: 2×1 GB GoodRam PC6400
- Motherboard: Gigabyte P35-S3;
- Video card: Gigabyte Radeon HD 3870 512 Mb GDDR4;
- Hard drive: 160GB Samsung HD161HJ;
- Power supply: Chieftec 650W
The selected frequencies of the Core 2 Duo E4400 made it possible not to change the memory frequency, only by changing the dividers during overclocking. As a result, in all three modes, the memory worked at 800 MHz with timings of 5-4-4-12-2T.
Processor comparison:
| Phenom X3 8450 | Phenom X4 9550 | Core 2 Duo E4400 | |
| Core | Toliman | Agena | Allendale |
| Process technology, nm | 65 | 65 | 65 |
| Frequency, MHz | 2100 | 2200 | 2000 |
| Multiplier | x10. 5 |
x11 | x10 |
| HT (HTT)/FSB, MHz | 3600 (200) | 3600 (200) | 800 |
| L1 cache, KB | 128×3 | 128×4 | 32×2 |
| L2 cache, KB | 512×3 | 512×4 | 2048 |
| L3 cache, KB | 2048 | 2048 | — |
| TDP, W | 95 | 95 | 65 |
| Number of transistors, million | 450 | 450 | 167 |
| Crystal area, sq. mm | 285 | 285 | 111 |
Synthetic Tests and Application Software
Futuremark’s popular synthetic tests come first.
PCMark 2005
The set of processor tests in PCMark is well optimized for multithreading, as a result, we see a 15% advantage of Phenom X3 8450 over Phenom X4 9550 at nominal frequencies, with a minimal difference in their frequencies.
The Core 2 Duo E4400 is only slightly inferior to the tri-core processor. At the same frequency of 2.5 GHz, the advantage of Phenom X4 over Core 2 Duo is only 9%, and this despite twice the number of cores.
But the test of the memory subsystem brought unexpected surprises. Despite the built-in memory controller, the Phenom X4 9550 performed worse than the Core 2 Duo E4400 at the same frequency. And in general, the performance of the memory subsystem in Core 2 Duo increases significantly with bus overclocking. Interestingly, at 2.5 GHz, the bus was only 1000 MHz. But Intel also has low-cost processors on a 1333 MHz bus. One can imagine how the considered Phenom would look nondescript against the background of such a processor.
3DMark 2006
Although the 3DMark test is designed primarily for a video system, the final result strongly depends on the processor, and this can be seen on the diagram.
The tri-core Phenom slightly outperforms the Core 2 Duo in this test. Interestingly, even overclocking the E4400 to 3.2 GHz gives almost the same result as on the Phenom X4 9550 at 2.5 GHz.
CineBench
Cinebench for working with 3D graphics is one of the most popular tests for comparing processor performance, in particular due to its good optimization for multi-core CPUs. We’ll look at the results of both the single-threaded test and the multi-core test.
In this test, the advantage of the old Core 2 Duo based on Allendale over the new Phenom is quite impressive, at the same frequency it is almost 20%.
But in the multi-threaded rendering test, Phenom, which have more cores, immediately take up. A strange result shows the Phenom X4 9550 overclocked. Despite the improvement in the results in another test, its performance was slightly below par in this one, and the repeated test showed the same values.
But in this test, the Core 2 Duo does not give up, with overclocking to 3.2 GHz, it overtakes the three-core competitor and is only 7% inferior to the quad-core one.
POV-Ray
This is a 3D graphics application that has a built-in test.
Phenom’s results in this program are, to put it mildly, not impressive. Core 2 Duo E4400 outperforms overclocked AMD processors even at the nominal frequency. In fairness, it should be noted that the program does not seem to be optimized for multi-core processors.
x264 HD Benchmark
Special HD video encoding benchmark. Perfectly optimized for multi-core processors. The results were based on the data of the minimum and average fps, which are given by the program at the end of the test. From the data obtained, the average values were calculated, which are shown in the diagram.
Additional cores give Phenom an advantage, although the difference between them is not very big — 20%.
The Core 2 Duo E4400 processor can reach the level of the tri-core Phenom overclocking up to 3.2 GHz.
Fritz Chess Benchmark
This benchmark emulates the work of artificial intelligence in the Fritz Chess chess game. The charts are based on calculated moves per minute (kilo nodes per second).
Everything is typical in the «single-core» version of the test. Core 2 Duo is again in the first place, and Phenom even with overclocking shows worse results than the E4400 processor at only 2 GHz. But in the multi-core test, both Phenoms are already outperforming the competitor. With overclocking, the E4400 overtakes only the Phenom X3 8450.
SuperPi 4M
This benchmark does not like AMD processors, and additional cores do not affect the result. So it is quite expected Core 2 Duo copes with the calculations in less time. And again Phenom cannot compete with it even in overclocking.
WinRAR 3.71
This application used a built-in test that depends on the performance of the processor and memory subsystem.
The archiver makes excellent use of both three and four cores, and this helps Phenom confidently overtake the competitor.
VirtualDub
A popular video decoding program. The test was carried out when decoding one 700 MB file to avi using the DivX 6.6.1 codec. This version of the codec can use more than two cores during operation.
In this program, Phenom gets the job done a little faster. But at one frequency of 2.5 GHz, the Core 2 Duo E4400 already overtakes the Phenom X3 8450 and is only a few percent behind the older Phenom X4 9550. The best result is obtained by the Intel processor in overclocking to 3.2 GHz. By the way, although the program loads both three and four cores during operation, their loading is uneven. Perhaps newer versions of the DivX codec distribute the workload more efficiently across the cores, which will result in a big difference between multi-core processors.
Gaming Applications
Devil May Cry4 Benchmark DX9
Capcom’s game has a built-in test that we used. And although earlier we were convinced of the minimum processor dependence of this test, it will be interesting to look at the results in it on weaker models.
The results are almost identical. And, given the small error, they can generally be equalized. Except perhaps the Core 2 Duo E4400 at the nominal frequency. Although overclocking this processor to 2.5 GHz already allows it to «fit» into the overall picture.
Flatout Ultimate Carnage
New game with great graphics. The Timberlands 1 track was replayed five times for the test.
The results of Phenom X3 8450 and Phenom X4 9550 do not differ much, and it is clear that the game still has three or four cores.
On the other hand, the Core 2 Duo not only shows excellent results at nominal and outperforms competitors at 2.5 GHz, but leaves them no chance at 3.2 GHz. Unlike the previous game, here we see just a huge processor dependence of the application at a not so high FPS level. Overclocking your Core 2 Duo by 60% increases in-game performance by 57%!
World in Conflict DX9
Popular strategy. A game that, judging by our past tests, is highly sensitive to processor power and additional cores even at high resolutions. We used the built-in test at medium graphics settings.
Multi-core game optimization allows the Phenom X4 9550 to perform faster than the younger three-core model. However, neither three nor four cores help Phenom compete with the Core 2 Duo E4400. Only two cores, but at the same time, at the same frequency of 2.5 GHz, the processor managed to outperform the quad-core AMD processor, even if by one frame.
And this situation is actually very sad, if you remember how in our recent Core 2 Quad Q9 test300 at 2.5GHz performed better than the Core 2 Duo E8500 at 3GHz at 1280×1024 high resolution! And here, at the same frequency, Phenom X4 could not overtake the old Core 2 Duo E4400. The results in this game make you think about giving up on AMD as a gaming platform.
Crysis DX9
Our last game test is traditionally the most sensational game of the last year. For tests, a demo version of the game and a native CPU test were used.
The CPU test shows more CPU dependency than the standard GPU test in the game. Four cores help the Phenom X4 9550 outperform the competition. But 4% advantage is somehow not very commensurate with a twofold superiority in the number of cores. Yes, and these 4% fade against the background of the results of the Core 2 Duo E4400 at a frequency of 3.2 GHz.
Conclusions
Based on the results of testing, you can see that AMD processors perform best in applications optimized for multithreading.
Here they compensate for the weaker architecture with more cores. But, true, this is in comparison with the old and cheaper Core 2 Duo E4400. Yes, and if you do not consider the possibility of overclocking. If we are talking about overclocking, then everything is not so simple.
Before making a general conclusion, I would like to say a few words about the price ratio. If we consider the Phenom X3 8450 and Phenom X4 9550 as budget processors and choose an inexpensive motherboard for them, then we can forget about significant overclocking. If you take our kit from an AMD 780G motherboard with our processors, then for the same money you can buy a Core 2 Duo E4600 (2.6 GHz), Core 2 Duo E4700 (2.6 GHz) or newer Core 2 Duo E7300 (2.66 GHz, 3MB L2 cache), Core 2 Duo E8200 (2.66 GHz, 6MB L2 cache) bundled with motherboard based on P35 chip. It may not be the most successful board, but it will not be difficult to reach 3.2 GHz or more on it. And the potential of new processors based on the Wolfdale core (which in itself is faster than the Allendale reviewed) is at around 3.
8-4 GHz, and it is quite possible to reach it on P35 and inexpensive 800 MHz memory. But from Phenom, no matter how you dance with a tambourine, it is unlikely that you will be able to squeeze anything above a stable 3 GHz. Yes, and for this you need a good motherboard, for example, based on AMD 790FX, which are still worth over $100 (or even all 130-150 dollars). With the budget spent on such a board and Phenom X4 9550, you can buy a more powerful kit for Intel.
Why are we distracted by such a comparison? And besides, AMD seems to need to continue its price cuts. Yes, in some multi-core synthetic benchmarks, the Phenom outperforms the dual-core Core 2 Duo quite well. But where this optimization is absent, these processors take the place of an outsider. It’s nice that almost all applications of the Phenom X3 used all three cores. Even in everyday programs such as WinRAR and VirtualDub, all cores worked, and this allows you to show results better than Core 2 Duo. But still, only those who are not going to overclock at all should consider Phenom for purchase.