AIDA 64 Memory And CPU Tests
AIDA64 Extreme Edition is a streamlined Windows diagnostic and benchmarking software for home users. AIDA64 Extreme Edition provides a wide range of features to assist in overclocking, hardware error diagnosis, stress testing, and sensor monitoring. It has unique capabilities to assess the performance of the processor, system memory, and disk drives. AIDA64 is compatible with all current 32-bit and 64-bit Microsoft Windows operating systems, including Windows 8 and Windows Server 2012. AIDA64 implements a set of 64-bit benchmarks to measure how fast the computer performs various data processing tasks and mathematical calculations. Memory and cache benchmarks are available to analyze system RAM bandwidth and latency. Processor benchmarks utilize MMX, SSE, XOP, FMA, AVX and AVX2 instructions, and scale up to 32 processor threads. For legacy processors all benchmarks are available in 32-bit version as well. AIDA64 Disk Benchmark determines the data transfer speed of hard disk drives, solid-state drives, optical drives, and flash memory based devices. Available Here.
As you say it’s something that an everyday user doesn’t need and those who do buy them, will all be about willy waving. The price of the chip coupled with the archaic X79 chipset renders it redundant anyway.
I agree to an extent, the lack of SATA III and USB 3.0 isn’t ideal. But then PCIe goes through the CPU so thats up to date. Board vendors can add marvell/asmedia SATA III/USB 3.0 implementations so its not really redundant.
It is useable but for the price you’re expected to pay, it really requires a new chipset. Marvell & Asmedia chips are just stopgaps at best.
For the price you’re expected to pay it should come with a Butler who sets the new CPU up for you and provides you with free ice cold beer.
That being said, It could be a cheaper, more cost effective alternative to Intel’s Xeon’s.
Why use a $200 AMD cpu against a $1000 intel one? why not use a 9590? or even a 12 core socket G34 AMD cpu for similar price?
The FX-8350 at 4.8GHz is better than an FX-9590. Why? Because the FX-9590 is 4.7GHz base clock and 5GHz turbo. It only goes to 5GHz turbo on one module, maybe you’ll get two if you’re lucky. Most of the time when all four modules are used the clock speed is 4.7GHz. As far as the socket G34 goes they are industrial/business grade CPUs. Not meant for consumers, it would be a pointless venture. Plus we’ve already established that anything more than four cores is barely utilised except in productivity. So 12 cores at 2.3GHz (on the top of the line Opteron 12 core model) will probably fare worse than 8 cores at 4.8GHz IMO.