• What
    is this?

    You've landed on the AMD Portal on AnandTech. This section is sponsored by AMD. It features a collection of all of our independent AMD content, as well as Tweets & News from AMD directly. AMD will also be running a couple of huge giveaways here so check back for those.

    PRESENTED BY

General Performance: SYSMark 2007

Our journey starts with SYSMark 2007, the only all-encompassing performance suite in our review today. The idea here is simple: one benchmark to indicate the overall performance of your machine. SYSMark 2007 ends up being more of a dual-core benchmark as the applications/workload show minimal use of more than two threads.

SYSMark 2007

Adobe Photoshop CS4 Performance

To measure performance under Photoshop CS4 we turn to the Retouch Artists’ Speed Test. The test does basic photo editing; there are a couple of color space conversions, many layer creations, color curve adjustment, image and canvas size adjustment, unsharp mask, and finally a gaussian blur performed on the entire image.

The whole process is timed and thanks to the use of Intel's X25-M SSD as our test bed hard drive, performance is far more predictable than back when we used to test on mechanical disks.

Time is reported in seconds and the lower numbers mean better performance. The test is multithreaded and can hit all four cores in a quad-core machine.

Adobe Photoshop CS4 - Retouch Artists Benchmark

Introduction Video Encoding Performance
POST A COMMENT

78 Comments

View All Comments

  • DMisner - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - link

    Part of me hopes BD gets delayed so AMD will release a Phenom II X4 @ 4GHz Reply
  • tipoo - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - link

    ...But why? It would just look good on paper, BD is where their real performance aspirations are. Reply
  • DMisner - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - link

    for the sheer novelty of it. Thats all. Reply
  • Belard - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - link

    There is no novelty to these issues. Its business. Buy any AMD X4 965+ and OC to 4Ghz.... thats the Novelty part.

    Having ALL your best products - even those costing almost $300 that is slower than the competitions $200 lower-end CPUs is not fun.

    I have a #2 desktop that is rendering videos daily (converting my OLD VHS) - and I'll need to upgrade its mobo/CPU to speed up the process. A NEW CPU will speed things up at lest 4-6x. (Its an OLD AMD X2).

    The Intel's use less power, there is that odd-ball combination that allows the GPU of the intel be used to help render video faster.

    So yeah, when looking at a $150~200 CPU, its performance that counts - not MHz.

    Still, for most people - any $75~100 CPU will DO just fine. Including gaming.
    Reply
  • GullLars - Wednesday, May 04, 2011 - link

    With a $20-30 aftermarket cooler, you can hit 4GHz while undervolting a x50+ Phenom II. I haven't tried Athlon II's, but i'll be upgrading my father's Athlon X2 7550 to an Athlon II x4 645 and donate my old 1066 CL5 DDR2 sticks to it, so i guess i'll try hitting 4GHz on that too just for fun with a Cooler Master Hyper 212 Plus.
    My 1090T runs F@H smoothly at 4GHz with stock volt (Noctua NH-D14 cooler).
    Reply
  • JonnyDough - Thursday, May 05, 2011 - link

    I agree.

    Considering that the AMD Phenom II X6 1100T is only $54 more and beats the new chip in most benchmarks while using less power under load (using max turbo @ 3.7, same clocks as the new 980 BE) I'd say that this new 4 core is a poor value comparatively.
    Reply
  • StrangerGuy - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - link

    I'm sure the PhII is already stuck at 3.8GHz at reasonable voltages and has been this way for a long time.

    I wonder how AMD feels when the mobile i7-2820QM is just as fast as their 4.2GHz OCed Phenom II X4. Bulldozer single-threaded performance and power consumption has to be at least the same as Nehalem to stand a fighting chance.
    Reply
  • khimera2000 - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - link

    probably the same way Intel feels about AMD's video cards. Reply
  • Belard - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - link

    You ARE kidding, right?!

    You can already OC to 4Ghz. And it will STILL be slower than i5-2400 ($190) which runs at 3.1Ghz.

    Clock Speed doesn't mean then end-all. Remember the says of AMD64 vs P4? Even at 3~4Ghz, the $1000 P4 Extreme Editions were still SLOWER than AMD's 2.0~2.4Ghz $200~300 CPUs.

    The performance wouldn't be so much an issue *IF* that i5-2400 was selling for $400, but its not. Its selling at the same price with a actual performance benefits.

    The i3-2100 (I hate these stupid intel model numbers) = $125 and puts it on par with the AMD-PII 955 ($140) - which is an upper end AMD part... going against an intel bottom end Core X CPU.

    Bulldozer needs to be OUT NOW. AMD makes great products, but they are late to the party.
    Reply
  • Sivar - Tuesday, May 03, 2011 - link

    In "Gaming Performance", the last two charts show Core i5 frame rates which are a little on the low side.
    Thanks for saving the images in PNG format though. You'd be surprised how many technical authors save images which have large areas of flat color in JPG format. :)
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now