AMD FX8150 CPU Review
- Thread starter tinytomlogan
- Start date
Ghosthud1
New member
im quiet sad :/
I jumped ship after hearing so many bad things about the performance.
Lucky escape I guess, my 2600k will do me just fine for many months to come.
you can couple a 2600k with a z68 for cheaper then the 8 core line up AMD has, death of a giant tbh.
http://www.aria.co.uk/Products/Comp...oard+w/+FREE+Voucher+DiRT+3!+?productId=46424
and
http://www.aria.co.uk/SuperSpecials...t+LGA1155+Processor+-+Retail+?productId=43214
will secure you a good 2 years of solid performance with ivy bridge coming next year.
I jumped ship after hearing so many bad things about the performance.
Lucky escape I guess, my 2600k will do me just fine for many months to come.
you can couple a 2600k with a z68 for cheaper then the 8 core line up AMD has, death of a giant tbh.
http://www.aria.co.uk/Products/Comp...oard+w/+FREE+Voucher+DiRT+3!+?productId=46424
and
http://www.aria.co.uk/SuperSpecials...t+LGA1155+Processor+-+Retail+?productId=43214
will secure you a good 2 years of solid performance with ivy bridge coming next year.
Murdolator
New member
I've been planning an upgrade and was hoping for something with a bit more bite from AMD. Seems i'll be bowing down to the might of SB though, only the second intel build i've done in over 10 years of self builds.
Price/performance just isn't what i'd hoped for.
OH SWEET BABY JESUS! That would be a dream! XD Then just think, I can see there lineup now.
The Rog Gladius Quad Core"No HT"
The Rog Gladius Extreme Quad Core"HT"
OR
The Rog Zeus Hex Core"Locked Multiplier"
The Rog Zeus Extreme Hex Core"Unlocked Multiplier"
XD Ahhhh, a mad man can dream!
Scoob
New member
You know, my expectations were that Bulldozer would enter the market at an eye-catching price-point, trade blows with Intels 2500 and 2600k, edge ahead in some tests, trail a little behind in others, all while using a little less power for the level of performance on offer.
Ok, I fully expected SB-E to come along and take the pure performance crown but, equally, Intel would have had a good scare in the lucrative mid-range market.
Now I am not quite neutral when it comes to AMD/Intel, this is because I was first so blown away by my Q6600 when new, how it performed out of the box and how it over-clocked! Really, it was a revelation after my perfectly decent AMD x2 processor. Again with my 2500k I had the same degree of bliss...both processors cost me circa £150 at the time...much bargainatiousness
I hope that this is maybe a bit of a stumble for AMD, maybe things weren't quite mature enough at release despite te delays (and the pressure that would arise from that to release ASAP I imagine) so some BIOS and windows driver updates will liberate some more performance from these chips.
Assuming there is an issue of some description and these results aren't as good as the 8150 gets, a 15-20% boost in performance along with a price-drop would potentially make the 8150 more attractive. If Windows 8 does indeed liberate more performance by making better use of multiple cores (I thought the Windows 7 scheduler was already quite an improvement over Vista and a larger one over XP personally) then that is GOOD news for the new architecture going forward, however it's not really that useful right now.
There was a time when Intel rested on its laurels & AMD beat them to 1ghz and generally offered the enthusiast so much more than Intel. This triggered Intel to start taking the "fight" seriously and with their sheer size financial muscle, set about not letting it happen again.
I really wish AMD the best, both with their CPU and GPU business as Intel and nVidia NEED to be pushed by a competitor and suffer the odd bloody nose, to force inovation and value for money for us customers if nothing else. On the GPU side AMD are doing well, I feel their 6000 series didn't move the game on quite as much as some hoped and nVidia really did (finally!) nail it with the 500 series, but generally I think you'd be happy with your purchase from either camp at the moment. For the record I'm currently and Intel/nVidia user and have been happy with my purchase. However if next upgrade time AMD/AMD are giving me more for my hard-earned then that's where my money will be going.
In summary my mood is...Disappointed. AMD, we did both hope and expect more, and you really needed to deliver more with this new architecture - even if it was pure bang for buck rather than outright performance.
Final thought...Bulldozer (specifically the 8150 reviewed of course), while disappointing, like any modern CPU gives a so much power that it's quite amazing really. Still, when your competitor gives even more and your prior generation isn't that far behind...well, something's not quite right. If Bulldozer had been slightly more competitive performance-wise and was launched at say ~£150 then I think it would have been easier to like it. I do worry though, AMD might be forced to massively revise the price of there Bulldozer range, but that will squeeze their profits - profits needed for R&D methinks.
Nice review Tom.
Scoob.
Ok, I fully expected SB-E to come along and take the pure performance crown but, equally, Intel would have had a good scare in the lucrative mid-range market.
Now I am not quite neutral when it comes to AMD/Intel, this is because I was first so blown away by my Q6600 when new, how it performed out of the box and how it over-clocked! Really, it was a revelation after my perfectly decent AMD x2 processor. Again with my 2500k I had the same degree of bliss...both processors cost me circa £150 at the time...much bargainatiousness
I hope that this is maybe a bit of a stumble for AMD, maybe things weren't quite mature enough at release despite te delays (and the pressure that would arise from that to release ASAP I imagine) so some BIOS and windows driver updates will liberate some more performance from these chips.
Assuming there is an issue of some description and these results aren't as good as the 8150 gets, a 15-20% boost in performance along with a price-drop would potentially make the 8150 more attractive. If Windows 8 does indeed liberate more performance by making better use of multiple cores (I thought the Windows 7 scheduler was already quite an improvement over Vista and a larger one over XP personally) then that is GOOD news for the new architecture going forward, however it's not really that useful right now.
There was a time when Intel rested on its laurels & AMD beat them to 1ghz and generally offered the enthusiast so much more than Intel. This triggered Intel to start taking the "fight" seriously and with their sheer size financial muscle, set about not letting it happen again.
I really wish AMD the best, both with their CPU and GPU business as Intel and nVidia NEED to be pushed by a competitor and suffer the odd bloody nose, to force inovation and value for money for us customers if nothing else. On the GPU side AMD are doing well, I feel their 6000 series didn't move the game on quite as much as some hoped and nVidia really did (finally!) nail it with the 500 series, but generally I think you'd be happy with your purchase from either camp at the moment. For the record I'm currently and Intel/nVidia user and have been happy with my purchase. However if next upgrade time AMD/AMD are giving me more for my hard-earned then that's where my money will be going.
In summary my mood is...Disappointed. AMD, we did both hope and expect more, and you really needed to deliver more with this new architecture - even if it was pure bang for buck rather than outright performance.
Final thought...Bulldozer (specifically the 8150 reviewed of course), while disappointing, like any modern CPU gives a so much power that it's quite amazing really. Still, when your competitor gives even more and your prior generation isn't that far behind...well, something's not quite right. If Bulldozer had been slightly more competitive performance-wise and was launched at say ~£150 then I think it would have been easier to like it. I do worry though, AMD might be forced to massively revise the price of there Bulldozer range, but that will squeeze their profits - profits needed for R&D methinks.
Nice review Tom.
Scoob.
dugdiamond
New member
listen guys - you have such short memories!!!
only after a month, or so, decent AM3 mobos got released!!!!
deja-vu!!!!
these BD chips' architectures are completely new, and were not designed to efficiently run on AM3 mobos.
the AM3+ FX mobos are cross-architecture 'fillers' until the full BD FM mobos come out.
the hefty price tag has come about through the hype that has surrounded them, and the sales of the 990FX boards.
highly anticipated reviews have left many dissappointed.
i warned many people months ago, that AMD would pull this stunt again, and no-one listened, and they went ahead and bought a 990FX mobo anyway
you lose
only the next FM mobos will utilise they BD's architecture fully
WAIT
- remember AM2?
- remember the PhenomII x6 launch... before the mobos were released?
- remember the old AM2 boards getting BIOS updates to enable them to work?
- remember pre-flashed mobos being released as AM2+?
- remember the T-series performance being strangled on the AM2+?
only after a month, or so, decent AM3 mobos got released!!!!
deja-vu!!!!
these BD chips' architectures are completely new, and were not designed to efficiently run on AM3 mobos.
the AM3+ FX mobos are cross-architecture 'fillers' until the full BD FM mobos come out.
the hefty price tag has come about through the hype that has surrounded them, and the sales of the 990FX boards.
highly anticipated reviews have left many dissappointed.
i warned many people months ago, that AMD would pull this stunt again, and no-one listened, and they went ahead and bought a 990FX mobo anyway
you lose
only the next FM mobos will utilise they BD's architecture fully
WAIT
Scoob
New member
Hi Dugdiamond,
Yeah, you're right of course. I'd totally forgotten that we've not really got the proper motherboards yet... I've been a little out of touch with AMD since my old x2 if I'm honest. It's GOOD to know there's hope!
Also, I'm glad it is something that can be "fixed" - ok, it's via using the correct, designed properly for the job, motherboard, which doesn't help people NOW, but it's good news for the architecture hopefully.
Still, pretty poor that ALL new new kit we would need to get the best out of these isn't available...again.
Scoob.
Yeah, you're right of course. I'd totally forgotten that we've not really got the proper motherboards yet... I've been a little out of touch with AMD since my old x2 if I'm honest. It's GOOD to know there's hope!
Also, I'm glad it is something that can be "fixed" - ok, it's via using the correct, designed properly for the job, motherboard, which doesn't help people NOW, but it's good news for the architecture hopefully.
Still, pretty poor that ALL new new kit we would need to get the best out of these isn't available...again.
Scoob.
SieB
New member
It doesn't matter that they were not made to run to their full potential on 990FX boards and if that is the case then AMD shouldn't have released BD until they did. It's the performance of today that matters not tomorrow.
I don't see why they would release them knowing they wouldn't run to their full potential on 990FX boards because it doesn't make good business sense AMD are being slaughtered over this and you can guarantee this is going to affect sales, reputation and market shares hugely.
The 990FX motherboards are AM3+ and BD is a AM3+ socket CPU and these boards were brought out with BD in mind. New boards aren't going to give a massive leap in performance nothing for Intel to worry about anyway, plus by next year SB-E will be out and so will be 22nm Ivy Bridge, so even if AMD do manage to gain some performance with new boards Intel will still have the better performing CPUs and the prices of SB will be lower as well making BD even less worth it.
I don't see why they would release them knowing they wouldn't run to their full potential on 990FX boards because it doesn't make good business sense AMD are being slaughtered over this and you can guarantee this is going to affect sales, reputation and market shares hugely.
The 990FX motherboards are AM3+ and BD is a AM3+ socket CPU and these boards were brought out with BD in mind. New boards aren't going to give a massive leap in performance nothing for Intel to worry about anyway, plus by next year SB-E will be out and so will be 22nm Ivy Bridge, so even if AMD do manage to gain some performance with new boards Intel will still have the better performing CPUs and the prices of SB will be lower as well making BD even less worth it.
dugdiamond
New member
has anybody actually bothered to look at the AMD site and read it "properly" ???
the BD architecture is not specifically designed for gaming, but more for web-based ("cloud")/office-app performance, etc...
at-the-end-of-the-day... it's a real good GPU that will make the BIG difference in gaming, rendering, etc...
Cuda-based software is the way forward, and having the best components to communicate with them is a win hands-down.... BD-Fx will fail at this..... but..... server-BDs/opterons (terramar, etc.)may bring back some faith in AMD (and even then, it will not be pocket-money).
Cuda-based GDKs are being developed, as we speak, that will kill Unreal and CryTek.
if you want to render/raytrace/video-edit, get an i7 with a tesla card, and a hi-end gtx.
if you want to game, and play bejellewed blitz on faceblock, get a 2500K and and hi-end gpu.
if you want a media centre, get an APU.
sorted!
the BD architecture is not specifically designed for gaming, but more for web-based ("cloud")/office-app performance, etc...
at-the-end-of-the-day... it's a real good GPU that will make the BIG difference in gaming, rendering, etc...
Cuda-based software is the way forward, and having the best components to communicate with them is a win hands-down.... BD-Fx will fail at this..... but..... server-BDs/opterons (terramar, etc.)may bring back some faith in AMD (and even then, it will not be pocket-money).
Cuda-based GDKs are being developed, as we speak, that will kill Unreal and CryTek.
if you want to render/raytrace/video-edit, get an i7 with a tesla card, and a hi-end gtx.
if you want to game, and play bejellewed blitz on faceblock, get a 2500K and and hi-end gpu.
if you want a media centre, get an APU.
sorted!
dugdiamond
New member
huh?
SieB
New member
Bulldozer has failed on pretty much every level, there really is no reason to buy a 8150. It has failed on Power consumption, performance, price to performance, overclocking and single thread performance which bare in mind most things still are single thread.
Even with the full 8 cores the 2600k is still better and you can't OC the 8150 properly without disabling some of the cores. The amount of power consumption makes it bad for a server as well, you might as well just buy a 1090T.
It is bad all over for AMD at the moment not one positive review on the internet and they are being slated.
Even with the full 8 cores the 2600k is still better and you can't OC the 8150 properly without disabling some of the cores. The amount of power consumption makes it bad for a server as well, you might as well just buy a 1090T.
It is bad all over for AMD at the moment not one positive review on the internet and they are being slated.
Solidarity
New member
I'm hoping all the bad reviews will amke AMD pull their finger out and actually produce something that can be described as good.
nothingspecial
New member
The worst thing about this is the 990FX boards are so much better than the Z68 ones! More PCIe lanes, all SATA3 etc.
The best thing AMD could do now is confirm whether or not the next round of BD/Piledriver chips will be AM3+ or FM2, which as far as I've read is for Llano/Trinity. That or call them quad-core chips and rush out some chips with 8 "bulldozer modules" by April. Let's just hope for them this new architecture is as scalable as they say it is!
If they'd confirm that, I'd be willing to buy a 990FX board and either a 1100T or a 8100/8120, and be happy with it until Piledriver. As it is, I'll be waiting for Ivy Bridge and the Z68 replacement in April.
The best thing AMD could do now is confirm whether or not the next round of BD/Piledriver chips will be AM3+ or FM2, which as far as I've read is for Llano/Trinity. That or call them quad-core chips and rush out some chips with 8 "bulldozer modules" by April. Let's just hope for them this new architecture is as scalable as they say it is!
If they'd confirm that, I'd be willing to buy a 990FX board and either a 1100T or a 8100/8120, and be happy with it until Piledriver. As it is, I'll be waiting for Ivy Bridge and the Z68 replacement in April.
wotevajjjj
New member
guess they just couldn't beat intel's huge budget..
ruthless_villain
New member
damn... me and hitler think alike
