AMD FX-8150, FX Series Review - Bulldozer makes debut

[dividebyzero]

If the object of the exercise is to review the relative merits of the two best gaming systems from Intel and AMD then it does seem more than a little strange how the FX-6100 enters the final conclusion...other than to garner page hits for a tangentally- at best- related article...although to be fair, I do see Shane's point about leading with your strongest suit (price/perf.).Can't help but think that if the four and six core were reviewed as well as the top SKU, the reviews would have helped the overall situation for AMD.

 

[LinkedKube]

If the object of the exercise is to review the relative merits of the two best gaming systems from Intel and AMD then it does seem more than a little strange how the FX-6100 enters the final conclusion...other than to garner page hits for a tangentally- at best- related article...although to be fair, I do see Shane's point about leading with your strongest suit (price/perf.).Can't help but think that if the four and six core were reviewed as well as the top SKU, the reviews would have helped the overall situation for AMD.

Pretty soon intel fan boys are going to have to go protest at amd because they'll get tired of paying top buck for cpu's.

 

[dividebyzero]

I'm pretty much there already.
AMD could have sat on the 8150 until they had a respun 8170 ready for market. That they didn't pretty much says AMD have ceded the upper-mainstream to Intel.
AMD obviously haven"t got shedloads of these CPU's- and probably never will have- so whats the point of releasing it? Shelve the desktop and push out the server parts.

My guess is that AMD reached a point where no one was buying their current Athlon II/Phenom II line (production probably ceased some time back to retool for 32nm) and needed something/anything to stop people migrating to Intel. AMD built up to much expectation, too many bogus performance claims and basically painted themselves into a corner

well done
/golf clap

:suspiciou The other alternative is that St. Rory and the AMD board decided to green-light BD regardless of performance/availability to help crater AMD's share price and soften up shareholders for a nice intimate takeover by ATIC.....I don't suppose the board of directors hold stock options...maybe they traded them in for Intel shares :suspiciou

 

[red1776]

So newegg notified me that they ran out of stock after I placed my order...and I wasn't sure how I felt about that. Then they quickly notified me that they did have BD's back in stock and it was on it's way...and I wasn't sure how I felt about that either...:haha:

 

[Guest]

Actually I was talking about this review on this site - sorry for not making that clear ;-)
Seriously though, minimum framerates say more to me than maximum ones anyway - I game with v-sync on (looks way better and any more than 60fps is a waste of resources) so the maximums mean almost nothing to me. Looking at all the minimum framerates AMD wins everywhere. Also the encoding benches that are being posted -- like here - are only compared by first pass on a two pass test where if you combine the times the AMD processors sometimes move upa notch or two in that ranking. There's bias in most of these reviews whether intentional or not. Legit reviews has a pretty fair comparison IMHO.

 

[Leeky]

@guest,

Most people, me included would argue that fast paced games need a minimum of 60FPS to be playable. Having more than 60FPS at intense moments of a particular game is not a "waste" as you put it -- in my opinion anyway.

While I agree running with V-sync on and a constant 60FPS makes for an enjoyable experience generally speaking, I think its wrong to suggest any more isn't actually beneficial.

 

[LinkedKube]

So newegg notified me that they ran out of stock after I placed my order...and I wasn't sure how I felt about that. Then they quickly notified me that they did have BD's back in stock and it was on it's way...and I wasn't sure how I felt about that either...:haha:

Your initial response happened because in the back of your mind you know you thought "At least I didnt waste my money."

 

[Leeky]

So is the general consensus agreeing that the FX8120 is the better deal over the FX8150 for those overclocking then?

 

[Mizzou]

So is the general consensus agreeing that the FX8120 is the better deal over the FX8150 for those overclocking then?

If the results turn out to be what we're hoping for the FX-8120 would have to be considered the better deal. My personal metric for that will be acheiving at least a 4.4GHz+ stable overclock. Guess we'll know a whole lot more sometime Monday evening, if you don't hear from me ... it didn't go well

 

[dividebyzero]

Looking at all the minimum framerates AMD wins everywhere.

Yup, everywhere:

Except there I suppose...or here, or here, or here for example

Also the encoding benches that are being posted -- like here - are only compared by first pass on a two pass test where if you combine the times the AMD processors sometimes move upa notch or two in that ranking.

There are actually a number of sites that provide x264HD benches (Pass 1 and 2). Firstly, being competitive in few benchmarks doesn't change the overall picture.
Secondly, the benchmarks that the 8150 excels in are mostly the same apps that Phenom II does likewise.
Thirdly, AMD are marketing the FX brand primarily as a gaming CPU and platform

The simple facts remain: Bulldozer is on a smaller node that Thuban, it has a smaller die, it is clocked lower but uses more power, produces more heat, is more expensive, and doesn't offer a performance increase commensurate with its power requirement. Bumping up a few scores (some of them artificially since Phenom doesn't support some instruction sets) doesn't alter the fact.

@Mizzou
C'mon! Go for broke

 

[Leeky]

If the results turn out to be what we're hoping for the FX-8120 would have to be considered the better deal. My personal metric for that will be acheiving at least a 4.4GHz+ stable overclock. Guess we'll know a whole lot more sometime Monday evening, if you don't hear from me ... it didn't go well

I don't think my Asus M5A78L LE is going to give me the best chance of hitting max overclock anyway, but if I can break the 4GHz barrier it would make for a worthwhile consideration.

At the end of the day BD is cheaper than a full upgrade (mobo and CPU) to SB - Regardless of the route I choose I'll see worthwhile increases from my current Q6600 so I need to consider it.

I'm disappointed AMD didn't do better with BD, but its still an upgrade, and will save me £200 over my intended route to an i5 2500K. That saving is nearly enough to pay for a GTX570 or HD6970.

 

[red1776]

So is the general consensus agreeing that the FX8120 is the better deal over the FX8150 for those overclocking then?

Yeah, It's shaping up to be that they both go to the same place. if you want a usable OC day to day, the 8120 makes sense. if you want to go high voltage and exotic, the 8150 is what you want. If Mizzou disappears in a CPU depression :wave:, Mine will be here on Wed. I will let you know how I make out.

 

[Steve]

Actually I was talking about this review on this site - sorry for not making that clear ;-)
Seriously though, minimum framerates say more to me than maximum ones anyway - I game with v-sync on (looks way better and any more than 60fps is a waste of resources) so the maximums mean almost nothing to me. Looking at all the minimum framerates AMD wins everywhere. Also the encoding benches that are being posted -- like here - are only compared by first pass on a two pass test where if you combine the times the AMD processors sometimes move upa notch or two in that ranking. There's bias in most of these reviews whether intentional or not. Legit reviews has a pretty fair comparison IMHO.

But we didn't show the "maximum" frame rate?

Also accidental bias is a new one.

When there are 50+ reviews released on the same day at the same time and they all say pretty much the same thing there is only one possibility, giant conspiracy!

 

[Leeky]

Yeah, It's shaping up to be that they both go to the same place. if you want a usable OC day to day, the 8120 makes sense. if you want to go high voltage and exotic, the 8150 is what you want. If Mizzou disappears in a CPU depression :wave:, Mine will be here on Wed. I will let you know how I make out.

I've never really messed with voltages... Just crank up the multiplier etc til I hit unstable, then back it off a couple to keep it stable. If I decide to order it will be put in a dedicated gaming rig anyway, and the Q6600 will remain as a everyday computer, so not bothered if it uses tons of power as it'll only be used if I wanna game and left off the rest of the time.

I'll see how you guys get on before deciding I think, but I know its unlikely I'll be able to push the OC as high as you and Mizzou due to my board. If I can hit 4-4.2GHz on air with my board I'd go for it I think - even stock it will leave my 2.4GHz Q6600 standing. :haha:

 

[red1776]

I'll see how you guys get on before deciding I think,

Thats cool, I will be the Guinea pig before you fire it up.......that was unfortunate.

 

[Leeky]

Thats cool, I will be the Guinea pig before you fire it up.......that was unfortunate.

No worries. Then I can demonstrate the best "method" for char-grilling it! :haha:

 

[dividebyzero]

When there are 50+ reviews released on the same day at the same time and they all say pretty much the same thing there is only one possibility, giant conspiracy!

Damn right. It's a well known fact that the internet is wholly owned by Intel. To get the REAL truth you have to subscribe to the AMD telepathic newsletter...
Step 1: Place index fingers into ears
Step 2: Close eyes tightly
Step 3: Chant "lalalalalalalalalalalalala" until you're patched into Sunnyvale Central.

(Tinfoil hat will allow for higher bandwidth)

 

[red1776]

If you have the right fillings, you can pick up the podcast.

In other news, O.J. has joined John Fruehe in the search to find the other 30%

 

[dividebyzero]

It's probably buried somewhere with Jimmy Hoffa

 

[Guest]

Why didn't the reviewer use an AMD 6970 as a Graphics card?! This would prove the theory of the AMD graphics card being used with an non ASUS board, producing better results is false! Ugh!

 

[Steve]

Why didn't the reviewer use an AMD 6970 as a Graphics card?! This would prove the theory of the AMD graphics card being used with an non ASUS board, producing better results is false! Ugh!

Umm that's a theory?

But to answer your question we wanted to use the fastest single GPU graphics card, right now thats the GTX 580.

 

[Mizzou]

According to UPS tracking my FX-8120 is on schedule for delivery tomorrow

When there are 50+ reviews released on the same day at the same time and they all say pretty much the same thing there is only one possibility, giant conspiracy!

I can't think of any other rational explanation for it

I've never really messed with voltages... Just crank up the multiplier etc til I hit unstable, then back it off a couple to keep it stable.

Aw c'mon ... there's always a first time, some modest voltage bumps can make a difference.

I presume you'll be recording all your proposed benchmarks with your current CPU for comparison

Started running off some benchmarks yesterday for comparision at my max stable overclock for the 1100T of 4.2GHz. Will try and knock out a few more later today so we'll have a good range of results to compare. When I have some free time would also like to run these benchmarks with the same graphics configuration on my 965EE ... but that'll be a little later.

@Mizzou
C'mon! Go for broke

~ Adds Koolance CPU-LN2-V2 Liquid Nitrogen Evaporator to Wish List ~

 

[Leeky]

You been hunting through my arsonist photo collection again, Mizzou? :haha:

Well, if it makes a difference I might consider it this time, as it won't be in use 18 hours a day like my every day computer is, so I'd probably be a lot more comfortable about doing it this time around.

I don't pretend to know a whole lot about overclocking though.....

 

[Mizzou]

With an unlocked CPU multiplier it's pretty straight forward, for the FX-8120 just setting the multiplier to 22.5 will clock the processor to 4.5GHz. Then it's just a question of how good the chip is and how much voltage it takes to stabilize it. As long it doesn't take too much vCore and temperatures stay in check you're in pretty good shape.

 

[red1776]

With an unlocked CPU multiplier it's pretty straight forward, for the FX-8120 just setting the multiplier to 22.5 will clock the processor to 4.5GHz. Then it's just a question of how good the chip is and how much voltage it takes to stabilize it. As long it doesn't take too much vCore and temperatures stay in check you're in pretty good shape.

Whoa,whoa,whoa..Miz, this is a guy who set fire to pudding. Don't encourage him!
:haha:

BTW, Newegg finally got it worked out. Mine should be here on wed. When I was talking to the guy at Newegg, he referenced an 8150 when talking about my order. we will see what shows up.