Jump to content
SceptreCore

AMD conFusion? Forget the hype!

Recommended Posts

Anyone else read some reviews yet? From what ive seen its not too bad although I expected a leetle bit moar. Atleast power consumption is on track

Edited by alkahest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow that's pretty bad. Disappointed.. Unless they have some sort of major improvements they can squeeze out of it, that architecture is never going to be competitive with Sandy-Bridge. AMD are still stuck in the budget-midrange section.

 

Basically they may as well have just strapped two Phenom II X4's together.

I don't see why. They landed it smack dab between the two top end SB processors from Intel. That's a huge step for them and a bloody good effort.

 

Overall I'm content with Bulldozers performance. Namely the FX-8150. It fell short in some areas and made up in others. And with AMD putting the FX brand on it, it certainly hasn't disappointed as a gaming CPU. Which is usually the enthusiasts playground.

 

We'll see drivers mature, the process mature, steppings, and Windows. In time it should gain here there marginally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, most of the reviews seem to test the FX-8150 (8 core). We don't know what the slower 6 core and 4 cores are going be like.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am however disappointed with power consumption. That shouldn't be happening with HKMG.

 

Something hasn't gone according to plan... something firmware/software related... or AMd and GloFo haven't worked out this new process yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am however disappointed with power consumption. That shouldn't be happening with HKMG.

 

Something hasn't gone according to plan... something firmware/software related... or AMd and GloFo haven't worked out this new process yet.

Maybe that's why it was released late, they had to release something or else Bulldozer would become the Duke Nukem of CPU world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

bunch of reviews

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showth...ulldozer-Thread

 

i normally like hardwarecanucks but using a gtx460 to test a high end cpu in gaming tests? lol

and pcper is even worse using a GeForce GTX 285

with old gpu hardware like that the only thing they are benching in games is the gpu why not just enable vsync and be done with it

oh look athlon II and 2600k perform the same as do gtx460 and gtx580 sli :S

Yeah that confused. Why the hell wouldn't you be testing with the latest cards?

 

I'm not going to start favouritism allegations... but some methods do make me wonder sometimes.

 

I am however disappointed with power consumption. That shouldn't be happening with HKMG.

 

Something hasn't gone according to plan... something firmware/software related... or AMd and GloFo haven't worked out this new process yet.

Maybe that's why it was released late, they had to release something or else Bulldozer would become the Duke Nukem of CPU world.

 

There is no doubting AMD has been running into some hurdles. But the architecture from results seems sound in principal.

 

It's new though. How many architectures have we seen improve over time?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
still some very gpu bottlenecked tests

they oc the cpus to 4.8ghz the 2500k and 2600k fps drop and the 8150 stays the same in the bf3 hardocp review there other tests have almost no change

not sure what is going on in the legit review re5 test its clearly only using 3-4 cores yet somehow the 990x is smashing the 2600k basically not enough consistent tests to draw any conclusion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like this bit 4.6ghz oc

 

At these settings, the system is is idling at around 195W at idle, but when running the aforementioned Prime95 stress test, it pulls an immense 550W from the socket. If we also add a fully loaded GeForce GTX 460 1GB, that number spikes up to almost 800W

 

all I can say is lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given proper drivers, some OS fixes and games drivers tweaking, I'm sure things will get better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i think waiting for the next steping is the best move...that way all the issues would be hopefully be fixed by then..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like this bit 4.6ghz oc

 

At these settings, the system is is idling at around 195W at idle, but when running the aforementioned Prime95 stress test, it pulls an immense 550W from the socket. If we also add a fully loaded GeForce GTX 460 1GB, that number spikes up to almost 800W

 

all I can say is lol.

Have a look at Toms Hardware's review... and take note at the bit about Intels power usage in Windows Vista.. then 7.

 

Scheduler goes a long way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be honest, I'm not surprised at the single threads benchies as I was expecting them to be equal or slower than the Phenom II. However, overall, I think AMD has done a great job bridging the gap. AS Jeruselem said, some optimisations in both OS and BIOS and games will lift performance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

still some very gpu bottlenecked tests

they oc the cpus to 4.8ghz the 2500k and 2600k fps drop and the 8150 stays the same in the bf3 hardocp review there other tests have almost no change

not sure what is going on in the legit review re5 test its clearly only using 3-4 cores yet somehow the 990x is smashing the 2600k basically not enough consistent tests to draw any conclusion

An HD 6970 @ 1024x768 is not really all that GPU bound IMO. Agree there are some weird results in most of the reviews, but dismissing those, there are still plenty of good ones to form reasonable conclusions from. As far as I can see it looks like the FX-8150 does pretty well in IRL gaming (which is admittedly usually CPU ambivalent above a certain level) albeit still not quite as well as the Intels in terms of spare horsepower. It's not a shining light of awesome given it uses almost twice as much (CPU) die area as the 2600K to get those results, but at the price it isn't too bad, particularly as a lot of those games aren't hugely multi-threaded.

 

 

EDIT: Anandtech review

 

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4955/the-bul...d-fx8150-tested

Edited by philo-sofa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've read PCpers review and as it stands today i would have still purchased the 2600K. The FX-8150 is "Just ok" in my eyes, it keeps Intel honest and all the processors are unlocked which is also nice, but it just doesn't cut the mustard when compared to the i5-2500(k) which i think is a better buy at this point in time for the majority of consumers.

Edited by smakme7757

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haven't read any reviews yet, about to go home and do that, but regarding older graphics cards in CPU benches, in the good ol' days the done thing was to put graphics res and quality at the lowest possible and see how many frames you'd push then. If they didn't do that with those cards it's a bit of a review fail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL philo-sofa, you're profile pic pretty much sums up the way I feel about it

 

My upgrade plans have halted, I'm not buying an AMD FX CPU for the foreseeable future. As far as I see it, they should do well in the server space, but for desktops...

 

I was hoping for an Athlon 64, and I got a Pentium 4 :-/

 

EDIT: Actually, I was hoping for a Core 2 Quad. 2x Core 2 Duo chips basically, with 2x2 COMPLETE cores!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

And I will lol if the FX-4xxx can't beat my Phenom II X4 :P

 

AMD, you've done the FX icon no justice. Good work

Edited by nobody813

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose they'd be great for servers atleast. Surely the chip will mature in to something better in the near future. Remember Intel Core Duo on desktop? :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×