It will barely match an FX6350 and still be beaten in a number of games. Istanbul is based on the AMD 64-bit K10 architecture, and is available for 2-, 4-, and 8-socket systems, with clock speeds ranging from 2. 3 The Lost Island/test/crysis3 proz 2.jpgĪt 4GHZ you get around a 20% improvement in multi-threaded peformance and under a 10% improvement in lightly threaded performance with the Phenom II X6. In April 2009 AMD announced the first 6-core Opteron processor, codenamed Istanbul1 delivery began in June 2009, four months ahead of schedule. The FX6300 and FX6350 are faster in all games when compared to the Phenom II X6 1100T,even in lightly threaded games where the clockspeed difference between the Phenom II X6 and FX CPU is around 10% or thereabouts. Individual scores from the German review: The FX6300 which runs at 3.5GHZ to 4.1GHZ,is around 10% faster than a Phenom II X6 1100T at 3.3GHZ to 3.7GHZ. PD thrashes the Phenom II in those games(yes,Intel is faster,but the improvement with PD is massive over the previous generation). Based on the new NVIDIA Turing architecture and packaged in an. Even with all cores enabled the clockspeed differences are not massive. We compared the characteristics of NVIDIA Tesla K80 and AMD Radeon R7 M350 and compiled. To make a right choice for computer upgrading, please get familiar with the detailed technical. AMD Phenom II X6 1100T contains 6 processing cores. Its base clock speed is 3.30 GHz, and maximum clock speed in turbo boost - 3.70 GHz. So for lightly threaded games,the Phenom II X6 will be running at 3.7GHZ and the FX6350 at 4.2GHZ(the same as the FX8350). The processor AMD Phenom II X6 1100T is developed on the 45 nm technology node and architecture Thuban (K10). The FX6350 runs at 3.9GHZ to 4.2GHZ,the FX6300 at 3.5GHZ to 4.1GHZ and the Phenom II X6 1100T at 3.3GHZ to 3.7GHZ. I would like to see a direct comparison: Piledriver vs Bulldozer, but from what I remember the FX-8150 needed all 8 just to keep up with my 圆, I think Piledriver is quite a ways better.Ĭlick to expand.Probably not in many cases. Is it worth the FX-6350 if you have an x4? Yes, if you have an 圆? it might be, people upgraded from a 2500K to a 3570K for less performance increase, an FX-8350? for £150 it would be if 8 cores are of use to you. When FurMark was added to the mix to push the GPU, the system consumed 24W more, more than twice that of the i5-2500K HD 5450/HD 3000 configurations. I would think with 2 extra cores the FX-8350 would be (30% at stock and 40% overclocked vs overclocked) faster than the 圆 with all cores loaded up. The relative energy inefficiency of AMD’s K10 architecture rears its ugly head it appears that the die shrink to 32 nm hasn’t helped much in this department. Keep in mind also that 4Ghz is the best the x4 will do on air and about 4.2Ghz on water, while the Piledriver chips will do 4.6 on air and 4.8 on water, so in the end they are about ~15% faster. so overall Piledriver is a little faster than Phenom II clock for clock / core for core. So for the 6 cores (圆 vs FX-6350) it will be the same, just that the FX-6350 runs at 3.9Ghz out of the box. Click to expand.The FX-4350 4.2Ghz (stock) is 2% slower to 15% faster than a Phenom II x4 4Ghz in gaming, clock for clock its probably going to be about 5% slower to 10% faster to the FX-4350, those are the 4 cores. Inside AMD64 Architecture(K8 architecture).