AMD Bulldozer - FX 8150 Performance Review @ Rage3D.com

[Lupine]

AMD's hotly anticipated FX processors are here with unlocked multiplier and 8 cores of new architecture! Our investigation puts two generations of AMD and Intel CPU's to the test, to see how far a Bulldozer can drive itself up a crack in a Sandy Bridge.

AMD Bulldozer - FX 8150 Performance Review @ Rage3D.com

[pax]

Anand is lot more critical but seems his benches are off... Hard to believe the phenom 2 970 can beat it easily.

I suppose we should look for more multi threaded games to test...

[noko]

Amazon.com are already sold out of 8150 and 8120s . Newegg doesn't have any listed yet. Hopefully this is just the initial entries for sells problem.

[poohbear]

all the sites are alot more critical of Bulldozer, your review reads like a bloody commercial. My phenomII X6 actually beats Bulldozer in alot of gaming benchmarks (which are the only ones that really matter to alot of us). How on EARTH can you say "well done AMD" at the end of the review despite the fact its previous gen CPU outperforms its next gen CPU??? Its a friggin disaster. I'm happy i didnt buy an AM3+ while waiting for this thing, it'd be a downgrade. *sigh*, well, guess ivy bridge is my upgrade path then.

[noko]

Originally Posted by poohbear

all the sites are alot more critical of Bulldozer, your review reads like a bloody commercial. My phenomII X6 actually beats Bulldozer in alot of gaming benchmarks (which are the only ones that really matter to alot of us). How on EARTH can you say "well done AMD" at the end of the review despite the fact its previous gen CPU outperforms its next gen CPU??? Its a friggin disaster. I'm happy i didnt buy an AM3+ while waiting for this thing, it'd be a downgrade. *sigh*, well, guess ivy bridge is my upgrade path then.

hmmm, hardwareheaven.com gave it a performance award and all game benchmarks the FX 8150, cough cough won. I expect some review test systems to not be 100% right so best to see how this plays out. It doesn't look to be a 2600K killer but then I don't see the 2600K killing the FX 8150 either.

[aop]

Yeah, Rage3D review is like AMD commercial compared to most of the other reviews.

HardwareHeaven? Has anyone taken that site seriously in long, long time? I hope Rage3D doesn't fall to same level with them.

[larkin]

This review ran down some very useful OC settings. Other sites and end users could learn from this. What I'd like to know is what RAM was used in the 8150 OC2 setup?

[Crisler]

Hey guys jkust a quyick note the temps you showed for the Phenom are off if you where using AMD Overdrive to measure. In a discussion I had with AMD while doing my own reivew I found that the Asus software was showing temps about 12C to 15C higher than AOD. AMD did confirm for me that the Asus software was a more accurate temperature read. So take the numbers you got and add about 12C for a more accurate temperature number.

[poohbear]

Originally Posted by noko

hmmm, hardwareheaven.com gave it a performance award and all game benchmarks the FX 8150, cough cough won. I expect some review test systems to not be 100% right so best to see how this plays out. It doesn't look to be a 2600K killer but then I don't see the 2600K killing the FX 8150 either.

u dont see the 2600k killing it? look at the gaming benchmarks HERE. the 2600k @ 3.4ghz gets 85 fps in my fav game DoW2, the BD gets 51fps @ 3.6ghz, while an X6 phenomII gets 61fps @ 3.3ghz. that's just 1 example. its a complete & utter embarassement for AMD!! this is what we waited for all those months??? lets just be honest, i've owned AMD for the past 13 years, but this is a mess!

[Mangler]

You should really replace that ****** sapphire p67 mainboard, a i920 should not beat a 2600k.

[Ratchet]

:embarrased:

[Kombatant]

Originally Posted by Ratchet

:embarrased:

[Maze]

What a biased review (in favor of AMD). It doesn't surprise me one bit, that this review was so positive (or should i say WAAAAAYYYY to positive) and was written by caveman-jim.

That guy would give a turd that has AMD written on it a 9.9/10 And in his opinion AMD can do nothing wrong! This processor sucks and the only thing that is preventing jim from saying it, is the thick fat paycheck and unlimited AMD goodies he (and rage3d) get!

october 12th: the day rage3D became biased!

[Kombatant]

Originally Posted by Maze

What a biased review (in favor of AMD). It doesn't surprise me one bit, that this review was so positive (or should i say WAAAAAYYYY to positive) and was written by caveman-jim.

That guy would give a turd that has AMD written on it a 9.9/10 And in his opinion AMD can do nothing wrong! This processor sucks and the only thing that is preventing jim from saying it, is the thick fat paycheck and unlimited AMD goodies he (and rage3d) get!

october 12th: the day rage3D became biased!

I should ban you on sight for what you said, but I'll say this. Rage3D doesn't receive a "paycheck" and "goodies" from anyone. The way James reviews hardware is his and his alone, and nobody from the site ever tried to influence him in any way. You can argue all you like if the review is good, or bad, or ugly, or whatever else. But I will not tolerate accusations like that, either for the site, or the staff.

[Ryoko]

Originally Posted by Maze

This processor sucks

i'm quite honestly tired of hearing that. this processor does not suck, your expectations were too high.

[AlexV]

Originally Posted by Ryoko

i'm quite honestly tired of hearing that. this processor does not suck, your expectations were too high.

Probably the best way to rationalize non-achievement in general. When you don't succeed, just assume you expected too much! That will help progress along nicely!

[Kombatant]

Originally Posted by AlexV

Probably the best way to rationalize non-achievement in general. When you don't succeed, just assume you expected too much! That will help progress along nicely!

I think the new processor can be summarized in just one word: Meh.

[Ryoko]

Originally Posted by AlexV

Probably the best way to rationalize non-achievement in general. When you don't succeed, just assume you expected too much! That will help progress along nicely!

how is the FX not an achievement? it's overall on par with a 2500k...

[nycdarkness]

Review was a bit OVERLY AMDISH. While I don't think it read like a commercial it does look like one. Reading the review it is perceivable that one would draw the reviewer as somewhat bias.

[nycdarkness]

Originally Posted by Ryoko

how is the FX not an achievement? it's overall on par with a 2500k...

So is the 1100T, and that's been out.

[spyre]

If it had been 4.5Ghz stock and overclockable to 5Ghz easily on air then it would have been a decent contender for the most part. As it is it is just a disappointment and won't be my next purchase to replace my aging Phenom 2 940. Especially not with the crazy amount of power it needs and that they are only offering the same heatsink & fan as usual.

[caveman-jim]

Originally Posted by Maze

What a biased review (in favor of AMD). It doesn't surprise me one bit, that this review was so positive (or should i say WAAAAAYYYY to positive) and was written by caveman-jim.

That guy would give a turd that has AMD written on it a 9.9/10 And in his opinion AMD can do nothing wrong! This processor sucks and the only thing that is preventing jim from saying it, is the thick fat paycheck and unlimited AMD goodies he (and rage3d) get!

october 12th: the day rage3D became biased!

I don't mind criticism. I encourage feedback. If you've got a point to show where I'm wrong, or how I'm missing something, take the time to elucidate your point.

That said, look at what you wrote. What in that encourages me to take you seriously? What makes it in any way a valid criticism? You offer no rebuttal, just personal attacks.

I'm sorry you don't like the review. AMD did some hard work here, and they went from being a non-option for an enthusiast desktop platform, to being competitive again. Did they win the 'arms race'? No. Did they put out the best performance product for the segment they could, power be damned? Yes.

As Kombatant said, meh. That doesn't make a good review however, so if you read the whole thing then you'll see why it sits where it does. Everybody expected a Sandy Bridge killer, we got a Sandy Bridge sissy fight.

[caveman-jim]

Originally Posted by AlexV

Probably the best way to rationalize non-achievement in general. When you don't succeed, just assume you expected too much! That will help progress along nicely!

[caveman-jim]

Originally Posted by Ratchet

:embarrased:

For the product or the review?

[Mangler]

I guess it does not really matter, but you should really redo some of the i7 920 and 2600k numbers, in medal of honor a stock i7 920 beats the overclocked 2600k.

[AlexV]

Originally Posted by Ryoko

how is the FX not an achievement? it's overall on par with a 2500k...

That's like asking how is not getting knocked out in the first round an achievement. It's probably pretty neat as long as you don't figure that the goal of the match is a bit more...involved. Ask yourself how BD is an achievement when it's overall on par or slightly under an 1100T.

[SIrPauly]

Imho,

I don't think the processor sucks and AMD did work hard on it. It is what it is though and AMD has to price it right to sell them. Hopefully, the lessons learned here may improve future products from AMD though.

[aRandomRobot]

What is with people lately? This is like the Rage thread all over again: something is released that doesn't perform as well as expected = the most worst product since ever made.

Seriously AMD, you should have just overclocked the Doom 3 engine and released that instead

[BackToPC]

Seems AMD devoted too much engineering to Fusion...

Review states AMD was targeting performance/watt, but the darn thing uses 125W and doesn't get performance on par with Intel.

Ok fine, it doesn't have the performance, so the cost probably reflects that right? Nope.

The intel chips have more performance, use less power, and cost about the same.

What is AMD's competitive advantage here? Long time AMD fan here and I honestly want to know...

I think AMD as a company will be fine, they are selling Fusion APU's faster than they can make them. But this new CPU arch worries me

[caveman-jim]

Originally Posted by BackToPC

Seems AMD devoted too much engineering to Fusion...

Review states AMD was targeting performance/watt, but the darn thing uses 125W and doesn't get performance on par with Intel.

Ok fine, it doesn't have the performance, so the cost probably reflects that right? Nope.

The intel chips have more performance, use less power, and cost about the same.

What is AMD's competitive advantage here? Long time AMD fan here and I honestly want to know...

Very good question. So, in the review, I said the engineers targeted performance per watt. But, that was with a server workload bias - the basic bulldozer architecture is for server products. AMD made a desktop CPU out of it by cranking up the clocks.

So what's AMD's competitve advantage? Future software that leverages the new extensions and instructions. That'll mostly be on the server side, too.

For right now, it's an alternative to Core i5, which it outperforms at stock and uses more power doing so. If you're overclocking then you care less about power use, but still probably consider it and its still in Intel's favor as you can see in the power charts.