CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 4670K vs 8120

Performance

Benchmark performance using all cores

Passmark, GeekBench (32-bit) and GeekBench (64-bit)

Single-core Performance

Individual core benchmark performance

Passmark (Single Core)

Overclocking

How much speed can you get out of the processor?

Passmark (Overclocked), Unlocked, Maximum Overclocked Clock Speed (Air) and 2 more

Value

Are you paying a premium for performance?

Performance Per Dollar

CPUBoss Score

Performance, Single-core Performance, Overclocking and Value

Winner
Intel Core i5 4670K 

CPUBoss recommends the Intel Core i5 4670K  based on its single-core performance.

See full details

Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?

Thanks for adding your opinion. Follow us on Facebook to stay up to date with the latest news!
VS

Intel Core i5 4670K

CPUBoss Winner
Front view of Intel Core i5 4670K

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Core i5 4670K

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i5 4670K

Report a correction
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
Newer manufacturing process 22 nms vs 32 nms A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Higher clock speed 3.4 GHz vs 3.1 GHz Around 10% higher clock speed
Much better PassMark (Single core) score 2,220 vs 1,219 More than 80% better PassMark (Single core) score
Significantly lower typical power consumption 68.25W vs 117.5W More than 40% lower typical power consumption
Much higher Maximum Operating Temperature 72.72 °C vs 61 °C Around 20% higher Maximum Operating Temperature
Significantly better performance per watt 12.9 pt/W vs 5.75 pt/W Around 2.2x better performance per watt
Better PassMark (Overclocked) score 5,198.5 vs 2,844.6 Around 85% better PassMark (Overclocked) score
More l3 cache per core 1.5 MB/core vs 1 MB/core 50% more l3 cache per core
Better 3DMark11 physics score 6,830 vs 5,220 More than 30% better 3DMark11 physics score
Better geekbench (64-bit) score 12,673 vs 10,527 More than 20% better geekbench (64-bit) score
Better PassMark score 7,723 vs 6,602 More than 15% better PassMark score
Much lower annual home energy cost 20.24 $/year vs 46.87 $/year 2.3x lower annual home energy cost
Marginally newer Apr, 2013 vs Oct, 2011 Release date over 1 years later
Significantly lower annual commercial energy cost 73.58 $/year vs 109.5 $/year Around 35% lower annual commercial energy cost
Front view of AMD FX 8120

Reasons to consider the
AMD FX 8120

Report a correction
Much more l2 cache 8 MB vs 1 MB 8x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
More cores 8 vs 4 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
Higher turbo clock speed 4 GHz vs 3.8 GHz More than 5% higher turbo clock speed
More l3 cache 8 MB vs 6 MB Around 35% more l3 cache; more data can be stored in the l3 cache for quick access later
More threads 8 vs 4 Twice as many threads
Much more l2 cache per core 1 MB/core vs 0.25 MB/core 4x more l2 cache per core
Better performance per dollar 5.14 pt/$ vs 4.61 pt/$ More than 10% better performance per dollar

Benchmarks Real world tests of Core i5 4670K vs FX 8120

GeekBench (32-bit)

Core i5 4670K
11,552
FX 8120
8,617

GeekBench (64-bit)

Core i5 4670K
12,673
FX 8120
10,527

GeekBench

Core i5 4670K
12,673
FX 8120
10,527

3D Mark 11 (Physics)

FX 8120
5,220
Core i5 4670K FX 8120 @ community.futuremark.com

Passmark (Single Core)

FX 8120
1,219

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Core i5 4670K  vs
FX 8120 
Clock speed 3.4 GHz 3.1 GHz
Turbo clock speed 3.8 GHz 4 GHz
Cores Quad core Octa core
Is unlocked Yes Yes
Is hyperthreaded No No

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has vitualization support Yes Yes
Instruction-set-extensions
MMX
SSE
SSE4.2
AVX
XOP
SSE3
FMA3
SSE2
FMA4
EM64T
F16C
ABM
Supplemental SSE3
SSE4.1
SSE4
SSE4a
AVX 2.0
AES
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

gpu

GPU GPU None
Label Intel® HD Graphics 4600 N/A
Number of displays supported 3 N/A
GPU clock speed 350 MHz N/A
Turbo clock speed 1,200 MHz N/A

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
DDR3-1600
DDR3-1333
DDR3
Channels Dual Channel Dual Channel
Supports ECC No Yes
Maximum bandwidth 25,600 MB/s 12,800 MB/s

details

Core i5 4670K  vs
FX 8120 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 4 8
L2 cache 1 MB 8 MB
L2 cache per core 0.25 MB/core 1 MB/core
L3 cache 6 MB 8 MB
L3 cache per core 1.5 MB/core 1 MB/core
Manufacture process 22 nms 32 nms
Max CPUs 1 1
Operating temperature Unknown - 72.72°C Unknown - 61°C

overclocking

Overclock popularity 57 228
Overclocked clock speed 4.52 GHz 4.49 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.61 GHz 4.73 GHz
PassMark (Overclocked) 5,198.5 2,844.6
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.52 GHz 4.49 GHz

power consumption

TDP 84W 125W
Annual home energy cost 20.24 $/year 46.87 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 73.58 $/year 109.5 $/year
Performance per watt 12.9 pt/W 5.75 pt/W
Typical power consumption 68.25W 117.5W

bus

Architecture DMI HyperTransport 3.1
Number of links 0 1
Transfer rate 5,000 MT/s 5,200 MT/s
Intel Core i5 4670K
Report a correction
AMD FX 8120
Report a correction

Read more

Comments

Showing 1 comment.
Worth an upgrade?
comments powered by Disqus