Sign up for a new account or log in here:
AMD has continued to improve the Phenom II range to this day, with the Phenom II X4 980 Black Edition leading the charge for the quad-cores, and the six-core Phenom II X6 1100T Black Edition remaining as the flagship offering. The Phenom II has had to deal with the Intel Core i7 on multiple platforms, as well as the Core i5 and Core i3 processors, for almost 3 years now.
After all this time, is the pain finally coming to an end for AMD? A code-name has been tossed around for years now that is meant to do exactly that, that name is Bulldozer. Today AMD is launching its new FX processor lineup comprised of the flagship FX-8150 along with the FX-8120, FX-6100 and FX-4170 processors.
The fastest of the bunch, the FX-8150 will retail for $245, making it 20+% cheaper than the popular Sandy Bridge-based Core i7-2600K. Keep reading as we explore the inner details of AMD's new FX series and we benchmark all four new processors being launched today.
User Comments: 172
Got something to say? Post a comment-
WARNING
Many reviews contain common error to make a conclusion about the speed of video encoding.
it's two-pass video encoding. That's why the total speed should be:
(1/fps1)+(1/fps2) = (1/fps_total).
The correct results for x264 4.0 Benchmark for this review (Summary two passes):
i7 2600K - 29.4 fps
FX 8150 - 28.4 fps
i5 2500 - 27.1 fps
T1100 x6 - 25.7 fps
-
Relic said:Welcome to TechSpot
Thank you
HardOCP & Anandtech tackled Civ V if you're interested in the results, but ya I would've liked to see some other games too.
seems like the difference is not enough to justify FX power consumption.
@Relic : so what do you think, should i wait for ivy bridge or just go with 2600k ?
-
seems like the difference is not enough to justify FX power consumption.
what i meant is after i saw those benchmark on other site, and seems like on Arma, it only had 1fps lead over 1100T, very disappointing.
maybe AMD should have scrapped BD, and try to make a new architecture, cos it seems like AMD is pulling a case similar to Intel with Pentium 4, and look at what Intel achieved when they scrapped the Pentium architecture.
i guess piledriver will be disappointing also, if AMD used BD as a base for it.
-
[link]
Note: an issue with the Steam version of Shogun 2 and the FX-8150 caused the system to crash when it tried to load the level. AMD is looking into the situation.
seems like the issues with FX is piling up.
-
I have to admit I have always like how AMD have designed integrated core solutions (compare Intel's quad core = 2x dual core when AMD was real quad core or AMD innovating with first on-die memory controllers), but even as smart and cool as this new AMD architecture is it just wound up being such a let down after reading the test reviews. I don't care for "the road ahead". When Intel popped out Sandy Bridge it was a performer from day one. Bulldozer, with all the hype for so long, should have come in guns blazing ... but it feels like they're using a .22.
I've been an underdog supporter for many years now, but my future computing will need be Intel in order to get performance.
What's it going to take to bring back AMD's glory days?
-
spydercanopus said:
When did AMD become a year or more behind Intel? This is shocking to me.
-
i wonder if these cores/modules can be unlocked like with phenoms and athlons..
-
The writing has been on the wall for some time. With all the people leaving AMD I was not expecting a great chip. But I was hoping for more. I just upgraded my motherboard to am3+ for this? To use a sports metaphor...This is like Greg Norman on the back 9 of the Masters.
-
The FX 4170 not being able to beat the X4 980 is very shocking. A lot of people here are calling it a beast of a budget processor, but why?
-
Such a great looking board this one too
Looks like something red would buy. -
When did AMD become a year or more behind Intel? This is shocking to me.
AMD went from performance leader to second place (even if you count AMD's performance FX chips) when Intel introduced Conroe in 2006. AMD were officially more than a generation behind when Intel launched Yorkfield (QX9650) in November 2007.
AMD (or Globalfoundries) are a lot more than a year behind Intel. AMD are just introducing 32nm - Intel are six months away from retiring it and have had working silicon on the next process (22nm) for some time.
Such a great looking board this one too Looks like something red would buy. -
Seraphim401 said:
I'm so bummed out right now,was hoping for BD to pressure Intel into lowering the price of the i7 970.
-
Seraphim401 said:
Sorry for double posting,but I have to get this of my chest:
I'm so glad that bastard Dirk Meyer got booted out of AMD!
-
The real loser here is the consumer (gamer's perspective). Intel can ride this gap for another 1-2 years and by then AMD will be bankrupt or stuck in the GPU market, unless they can pull off a Bulldozer type APU by year's end, which I doubt. Intel will have the APU gap closed by early 2012 most likely.
I really hope that the ARM64 architecture will bring some form of competition to the market when Windows 8 comes along; or potentially a shift in game developers' approach to support Android on the PC as well, whenever that comes along.
R.I.P. AMD (CPU Division)
May your best engineers be drafted by Nvidia and ARM and your project managers shot.
-
Its a shame looking at these results (excellent review btw!) but I also think most of us come to expect this was going to happen due to the continual delays in its release, and the rumours circulating.
Seeing these results just re-enforces to me that I made the right decision in deciding to go the Sandybridge route for my next gaming build. At least my AM3+ board won't go to waste now, as can couple it with the 1055T when it comes back from RMA at AMD and use it for my everyday computer build. Given the results of even the fastest FX 8 core, its just absolutely pointless upgrading in my opinion.
Going back to AMD, I really don't know how they can recover from this. They're too far behind and Intel are showing no signs of slowing down with advancements enough for AMD to catch up. It almost feels like AMD has thrown in the towel and made the conscience decision to offer products second to Intel's in the hope the lower price will win over customers.
-
Seraphim401 said:Guest said:
The real loser here is the consumer (gamer's perspective). Intel can ride this gap for another 1-2 years and by then AMD will be bankrupt or stuck in the GPU market, unless they can pull off a Bulldozer type APU by year's end, which I doubt. Intel will have the APU gap closed by early 2012 most likely.
I really hope that the ARM64 architecture will bring some form of competition to the market when Windows 8 comes along; or potentially a shift in game developers' approach to support Android on the PC as well, whenever that comes along.
R.I.P. AMD (CPU Division)
May your best engineers be drafted by Nvidia and ARM and your project managers shot.
Dude (don't care if your are a woman/girl), Intel will never let AMD go bankrupt!
They will have to prop them up some how to avoid antitrust lawsuits.
-
a quad core FX @ 4.2ghz has less gaming performance then a phenom II x4 @ 3.7ghz...AMD knows you makes the chip smaller not the benchmark result, right?
anyone want to buy my 970 mobo??
-
I was really hoping that the Bulldozer series would at least be competitive with the i7, let alone the i5. However, it seems that at that price point I would be better off investing in one of the Intel chips. I completely prefer AMD to Intel, but I also want solid performance for my games. Intel it is.
-
Bulldozer performance is good overall but gaming performance is it's weak point. And most of the enthusiasts are gamers so thats a big problem for AMD. I am sure programmers ,designers & people who encode videos alot will be pleased with the bulldozer performance.
-
Disapointing...... very disappointing. Core i5 2500K- Core i7 2600K still better, actually lets say only i5 2500K which is MUCH CHEAPER than FX 8150, and still performs better. Let's say that FX 8150 wins i5 2500K (benchmarks say other things but let's just say). intel will release its Ivy Bridge. 22nm! They will replace i5 2500k-2600k with better products. SO now AMD released their High end cpus, and cannot beat the high end cpus of intel previous generation cpus (when Ivy bridge comes), so ivy bridge will DOMINATE AMD in my opinion. There is just no need to buy a lower-end AMD CPU. Buy the BEST and that's still inadequate. So Intel is just better for me
-
For what it cost I would think it would make for a nice VM host.
-
DanUK said:
I would say I'm disappointed but that would be a lie. I've always used intel processors.. and this is precistly why.
AMD still haven't "got it".
-
You hoping for AMD to fail don't understand how a successful marketplace works. If AMD fails & we are left with a monoply things will only get worse.
-
Well at this this ends, what, two years of hype?
-
It's disapointing but i think people go a little bit too far when sugesting that AMD will go bankrupt because of that.
It's sad people already forgot the days AMD decided to name their CPU 2000+ and such (poor marketing i'll agree on that) because those CPUs was capable of doing as good as an Intel CPU while clocked 15-20% lower (and back then clock speed was the only thing people cared about) ?
Pentium D was lagging behind Athlon X2 in gaming. Pentium 4 had hard time beating Athlon XP CPU with 15-20% lower clock speed.
Since Conroe AMD is definately lagging behind and Intel clearly without any doubt took back the performance lead. It's disapointing to see AMD 1 or 2 gen behind Intel. Amd needs to go back to drawing board and do what Intel did with Conroe arch in 2006.
Of course AMD will never please haters who buy Intel and nVidia all the time even when there's better deal elsewhere (and there's lot of them) but i think they can definately rise back from this epic fail.
Most Popular
| Trending | Featured |
Featured on Cases
Subscribe to TechSpot
Get free exclusive content, learn about new features and breaking tech news.