Jump to content

FX-8120 @ 4.4 GHz versus 2600K @ 3.4 GHz


Recommended Posts

http://3dmark.com/compare/3dmv/3637734/3dmv/3595598

 

 

Yeah. I think that explains itself. The only difference between the two systems is the 2600K system is running x8/x8 CrossfireX and the 8120 system is running x16/x16 CrossfireX.

 

 

A 1 GHz advantage...and it's nowhere near the 2600K at stock. Another fun link: http://3dmark.com/compare/3dmv/3637734/3dmv/3599061 That's my Phenom II X3 running as a quad at 3.4 GHz versus the 2600K at stock.

 

Note the GPU scores on their own in particular. The FX-8120 is the slowest (at 4.4 GHz), the Phenom II (at 3.4 GHz) is slightly faster, and the 2600K (at 3.4 GHz) is MUCH faster.

 

 

Slaughter. That's the word you're looking for. As in "the 2600K slaughters both the Phenom II and the FX-8120". :teehee:

 

 

Dammit why can't my waterblock bracket get here so I can OC this biotch?!?!?

Edited by Waco

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When did you get your FX-8120 working? ;)

Right before I sent it back when I realized it wasn't going to push my 4870x2s any better than my Phenom II. :lol: I double-checked my CPU scores compared to a lot of reviews and other users and they were all in line with what I was seeing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol, damn. How much time did you spend trying to get that thing to work?

 

Crazy score results. Even the unlocked Phenom II x3 720BE you have almost competes better than the FX-8120.

I spent about 2.5 weeks screwing with it. :lol:

 

 

The unlocked X3 was actually faster in games than the FX-8120 at 4.4 GHz. The turbo core stuff on the Bulldozer CPUs really obscures the low IPC in games that don't stress a lot of cores. The thing was a complete and utter dog with turbo core disabled. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...