AMD FX-8150 Review: From Bulldozer To Zambezi To FX

[mapesdhs]

[citation][nom]cangelini[/nom]... I'm 31, so I don't want to sound too old here, ...[/citation]

I'm 41... pardon me while I brush off my dust & cobwebs! 😀

Ian.

 

[cangelini]

[citation][nom]reynod[/nom]It performs more like a quad core ... basically. Chris, thanks for the comprehensive article.Would you mind doing a bit of a performance comparision on the whole range and give us some feedback on which is the best bang for your buck ... as there are heaps of AM3+ people out there who are probably keen to see what BD CPU to go for?Can you couch that in terms of OC and non-OC too?Cheers ... now you probably need some sleep after the last week benching and trying to work out the weird results you have been getting.Good work.[/citation]

Hey rey,

Soon as we can get our hands on some of the other models, I'd be happy to make sure they get tested. Some of this will likely happen in SBMs, but the plan is to figure out if there are any real gems in the lineup, value-wise.

Couple of hours of sleep and now I'm back up ;-)

Cheers,
Chris

 

[DjEaZy]

... why there still are single threaded 32Bit applications??? We have AMD64 in 2003 i think... we have multicore and hypertrending... but there are still 32Bit single threaded applications??? The programmers on windows platform are lazy, or MS don't give enough tools, to make use of the technology... common... It's 2011!!! Still we test 32bit single threaded applications...

 

[cangelini]

[citation][nom]mapesdhs[/nom]I'm 41... pardon me while I brush off my dust & cobwebs! Ian.[/citation]

LOL Ian, but you're younger at heart 😉 I sit in a lab all day, benchmarking, benchmarking, benchmarking...

 

[CaedenV]

[citation][nom]rex86[/nom]I'm quite happy with these new processors. It's a fact, AMD does not have the same resources as Intel, and that's why they can't create something that can destroy Intel processors. But, do they have to? They've again shown that they're capable of creating excellent processors with reasonable price-tags. Although, there's still room for improvement.[/citation]
Intel has always been much larger than AMD, but that did not stop AMD from killing intel through the P4/PD years. They are simply grasping at straws, and not able to innovate as well as intel lately on performance (and surprisingly loosing in the TDP area as well in spite of all their low power tech in their awesome mobile lineup).
[citation][nom]cangelini[/nom]It's at -1600 for the FX-8150 platform, -1333 for the 1100T/980 platforms, and -1333 for Sandy Bridge. I pulled the high-density modules out for memory scaling testing on page 21 so you could see what difference the higher-clocked modules would make (-1866 using a completely different kit). All the best,Chris[/citation]
That is even more sad for AMD. Much faster ram and still not able to keep up...
Must have killed you reviewing something new that barely keeps up with it's own predecessor, but good job all the same.

 

[dextermat]

A reason why Ivy bridge is delayed : Bulldozer is no threat to sandy bridge.... too bad.

 

[Guest]

I'm rather disappoint and why is the contest only in the USA?

 

[stingstang]

I didn't think I would say this..
"AMD projects 10 to 15 percent performance gains per year for the next several years. "
AMD CPUs are going to die.

 

[cangelini]

[citation][nom]SlickR[/nom]I'm rather disappoint and why is the contest only in the USA?[/citation]

Taxes, friend. You have to know that, if it were up to me, our worldwide audience (and RI) would have access to every single one of these contests. But our convoluted laws (and the laws of other countries) are all different when it comes to how prizes are charged. As such, the lawyers tell us where the goodies can go :-/

 

[wingartz]

well after reading this, im still happy with my 920 and x58, knowing that it still rocks, amd see you in your next processor review, maybe then you can beat nehalem

 

[njt]

well, i wish i could say i was disappointed - and in a way i am, it's worse than i was expecting - where's the incentive in moving from the old phenoms to the brand new fx? as usual now, and for the last few years, amd is predictably late, predictably slower - this time more than usual, predictably low-end cpus with a degree of redeemability in their server incarnations. why do they keep making cpus in the first place? might as well concentrate on making great graphic cards.

 

[Why_Me]

It would be pretty cheap and childish of me to LMAO here and say something like HA HA HA I told ya so.

For all you peeps that have been telling all the new builders on here since last January to hold off on a SB build and wait for BD...hang your heads in SHAME! And would I say something so cheap as; "I told you so?" You betcha.

Remember the 300+ page thread on here about BD being the second coming of christ? Ya it wasn't. It was the dud I figured it would be. It's an over priced paper weight is what it is.

But don't feel too bad AMD fans... Ivy Bridge is right around the corner.

And let's not see the lame excuses like Intel has more money to work with. AMD had a ton of money in their coffers when Intel came out with the C2D in '06 yet AMD has failed to come out with anything that could catch an Intel since then.

Just remember AMD owners...you peeps own the "lower end of the market"...or at least that's what you keep telling yourselves. Personally I would have to say the 1155 i3 owns that piece of the pie.

Iv'e waited for over a year for this thread, and I plan on making the most of it. 😀

 

[genghiskron]

[opens side panel, kisses 7 mo old i5-2500k, smiles]

 

[10hellfire01]

I knew either BD was going to fail or at least make a considerable improvement-considerable improvement not. Seems like nothing has changed except for 32nm trans's, and more cores.

I always said if BD is a flop, which so far is, I would wait to upgrade my 1050T to an Ivy Bridge. Looks like I'm doing that >.>

 

[gerhardb]

I would really like to know why an Intel 980x or 990x are not in this list?

 

[srgess]

they should change the name of the product to ( the new amd lastest cpu fx-8150 Dual core )

 

[bildo123]

[citation][nom]mattjargon[/nom]core i5 2500k here i come. will be my first intel cpu as i've been using amd since 1999![/citation]

Bingo. That's the first thing that came to mind after seeing the anemic chip "Bulldozer" really is. Really, the 2500k is faster, more efficient, and has a lower price (though it could be the "just out" pricing on the Egg). Disappointing though I have to admit I'm not that surprised. What's killer though is that it took so long for "this".

 

[halcyon]

[citation][nom]bildo123[/nom]Bingo. That's the first thing that came to mind after seeing the anemic chip "Bulldozer" really is. Really, the 2500k is faster, more efficient, and has a lower price (though it could be the "just out" pricing on the Egg). Disappointing though I have to admit I'm not that surprised. What's killer though is that it took so long for "this".[/citation]

Exactly. All this wait. All this talk. All these fanboys. How are they feeling now? Was that a pin drop I just heard?

 

[mapesdhs]

[citation][nom]gerhardb[/nom]I would really like to know why an Intel 980x or 990x are not in this list?[/citation]

Given the price points of the 2500K, 8150 and 2600K, including the 980X
and 990X would be a moot point. Performance wise, there are already
numerous articles comparing SB to 980X/990X, so one can just extrapolate
results to compare to 8150 if need be.

If Intel wanted to hammer AMD badly (not that they need to), they could
just slash the price of the 990X down to a chunk above the 2600K - the
990X would fly off the shelves.

Ian.

 

[srgess]

[citation][nom]halcyon[/nom]Exactly. All this wait. All this talk. All these fanboys. How are they feeling now? Was that a pin drop I just heard?[/citation]

they are all hiding, they have no rumor argument to discuss, the benchmark are on the table. I guess they turned into intel fanboism religion.

 

[j3ff86]

I waited since June to upgrade my e8400 for this?

 

[dealcorn]

No problem. Tell Scotty to crank up the RDF engines 2 notches and for God's sake, whistle a happy tune.

 

[m8x776]

I wonder if there's a bug that's effecting these Bulldozer processors? For AMD's sake I hope so. I was always concerned that Bulldozer looked good on paper but it wouldn't effectivly take advantage of today's programs. The long pipelines were an area of concern as well.

I already have the 2600k and I was never going to buy a FX processor. Still, this is a huge disappointment to any of us who value competition and getting the most out of your money.

I look foward to spending $600 on an Ivy Bridge processor next March.

My hat's off to tomshardware. I've read a few reviews this morning and this one is by far the best and most fair.

 

[larkspur]

Ouch. I use an overclocked 920 from a couple years ago. Amazing that the top Zambezi part actually performs worse - I was even thinking about an upgrade soon.

Intel no longer has anyone pushing them to make more powerful chips. Now they can slow down and just milk what they have. They could delay Ivy and just rebadge Sandy Bridge for 3 more years and AMD won't have caught up. Intel's chips are going to get more expensive methinks. Arrrrrrrrrghh! What happened to you AMD?

 

[spookyman]

Hmm might have to buy one because its in a cool box