AMD K6 and FX-8350 Re-Visited Against Modern CPUs: Ryzen up to 910X Faster
Two tech pundits recently reviewed AMD’s pre-Ryzen CPUs dating back 10 and 26 years to see how they perform compared to today’s latest games and hardware. . Parts reviewed include 2013’s infamous FX-8350 and his 1997 AMD K6.
K6 was benchmarked by Redditor Technologov (via boringtextreviews) It shows how far AMD has come in CPU performance since the K6 was released. Naturally, to find this out he compared the K6 with AMD’s flagship Ryzen 9 7950X and found some really impressive numbers. For example, in the LFK benchmark, the Ryzen 9 7950X single core was 46x faster than the K6, with a score of 1,294 points for him versus just 28 points for the AMD K6.
However, this first benchmark run only considers one core on the 7950X. Against the K6, the Ryzen part with all 16 cores and 32 threads was 910x faster than the K6 with a score of 25,476 points.
Clearly, a nearly 30-year-old CPU would be expected to perform significantly worse than a brand new chip. Still, the fact that the CPU is physically 910x faster than its predecessor is an impressive number.
What this shows is how incredible the development of CPUs has progressed since the 1990s. Of course, CPUs have changed dramatically since then, with transistors operating at the nanometer scale instead of the 0.35 micrometer process used in the K6, the introduction of multi-core CPU technology, 64-bit support, and clock speeds that have increased significantly. Improved. 1 GHz (not to mention 5 GHz), even faster and larger CPU cache. (Not to mention the nearly myriad architectural improvements in CPU logic since the release of K6.)
The K6 was originally launched in April 1997 as a successor to the K-III and a competitor to Intel’s Pentium II. The chip featured just 8.8 million transistors, incredibly large 0.35 micrometer lithography, just 64KB of cache, and clock speeds up to 233MHz. In retrospect, your home blender or toaster probably has a higher clock speed than this CPU.
For more on this CPU, check out our 1997 and 2008 K6 reviews. Now let’s talk about the decidedly more modern, but still somewhat old AMD FX-8350.
FX-8350 outputs playable framerates in Hogwarts Legacy and now
YouTuber RA Tech also revisited another CPU. This time he is the infamous AMD FX-8350 launched in 2012. I compared the CPU Try out some of the latest titles and see how the chip will perform in 10 years.His games of choice include Forza Horizon 5, Dying Light 2, Cyberpunk 2077, Apex Legends, Warzone 2.0, Spider-Man Remastered, and Hogwarts Legacy.
The chip performs surprisingly well after overclocking, delivering extremely playable frame rates even at high settings in most games with frame rates above 60FPS, such as Forza Horizon 5, Apex Legends, and Warzone 2.0. I was able to output. However, on the other three, I found the game to be fairly intensive, resulting in gameplay below 60 fps most of the time at any graphics setting. This was especially true with Hogwarts His Legacy and Spider-Man Remastered, which approached around 30 fps in the most intensive areas.
Based on what we’ve seen with modern gaming CPUs, the FX-8350 in RA Tech’s review holds up surprisingly well, delivering frame rates similar to the console’s 30 fps mode in the worst-case scenario, and a lightweight The game offers more than 60 fps. game. The only problem with the FX-8350 is that the frame times fluctuate a lot and the frame rate is inconsistent over time, which noticeably affects the smoothness of the game. However, with a little ingenuity and frame rate limiting, you can probably fix this problem.
The FX-8350 was launched in 2013 as the successor to the highly infamous FX-8150 that appeared a year earlier. The chip featured 8 cores, 8 threads, a boost clock of 4.2 GHz and a combined L2 and L3 cache of around 16 MB. Despite having eight cores, the chip is either faster or slower (depending on the workload) than Intel’s competing quad-core CPU solutions, mainly for its erratic behavior in multithreaded applications. criticized.
This was due to AMD’s unconventional Piledriver architecture and the way it splits processing power between cores. Physically, the chip had 8 cores, but functionally it could only act like an 8-core part for integer calculations, as the floating point unit was shared between his two cores. The result is a CPU that performs on par with a quad-core CPU under the right conditions. it ultimately Class action lawsuit over FX-8350AMD lost.
Nonetheless, the CPU is still outputting surprisingly good frame rates, and the FX-8350 alone is more than enough. However, if you’re looking to upgrade your CPU, it’s easy to overrun any CPU manufactured in the last 6 years.