AMD Steamroller FX 9650 – 4.5 Ghz / 4.8 Ghz Turbo Benchmarks!

[Atomfix]

Due to the 20% difference in single core performance when compared to Haswell, the FX 9650 will perform on par with a 2nd gen intel i7 2600k in gaming, still falling behind the 4770k by a hair when paired with two high end graphics card solutions. For games, like Crysis 3, that take advantage of more than 4 cores, the FX 9650 will perform on par with its intel counter parts. The 32 % performance increase comes with a 20% increase in IPC (vs Piledriver) and around a 10% Clock boost.
The only downside with these chips is the overclockability. AMD generally pushes their stock clocks high enough to not leave any room for overclocking. Although AMD has put alot of effort into making these chips less power hungry, they only succeeded in allowing for higher clocks and typically higher overclock under the given TDP. The total power consumption is only 5-8% less than its FX 8350 counterpart. Unlike with the 4770k, which can handle a hefty +43% overclock from 3.5 Ghz to 5.0 Ghz , while the AMD FX 9650 will only handle a 20% overclock from 4.5 Ghz to 5.4 Ghz.

Source: http://amdoverclock.net/?p=4221

If true, then AMD is back in the game for sure!

[badass]

That's a load of hypothetical benchmarks created from performance claims by AMD.
Not real benchmarks!
I.e. that has about as much bearing on likely reality as Bulldozer having more IPC than it's predecessor and we all know how that turned out

[kalniel]

Check your sources. Check your dates..

This 'news' comes from Theo, in 2012.

http://vr-zone.com/articles/amd-push...ses/17088.html