Hardware AMD FX-8150 Review

We only have the FX-8150. Unfortunately, with Turbo Core (and Turbo Boost for Intel CPUs), it's impossible to replicate a CPU's performance by tinkering with another CPU of the same family, as they will boost to different frequencies in an unpredictable way.

For example, the FX-4100 has the same TDP as the FX-8150 but is roughly half the CPU, so you'd expect it to boost to its maximum frequency for more time than the FX-8150 can. The FX-4100 also has a lower maximum boost frequency than the FX-8150 though, so it's impossible to say exactly how an FX-4100 performs unless you get one and test it. Anything else is guesswork and estimates.

We're agreed with the various other posters that have stated an interest in the other launch models of the FX series - it will be interesting to see how they stack up in a price-performance way.

 

Hopefully the lower end chips can prove themselves.

 

Yeah I know right, should be way below that =P

 

Oh dear.... Next build is going to be an intel one then.

 

...............

That's how I feel.



That's how AMD bosses feel.

I only hope that further improvements yield a good processor, hopefully it has promise, and AMD just released something to get it out the door, like Phenom 1 to 2. With a bit of luck, these FX CPUs will be good for servers, allowing AMD to make some sort of money from them, because lets be honest, they aren't great in a home environment. And they can spend that money improving Bulldozer.

We all need AMD to get back into the game

 

bulldozer - knocking down the towers of expectation.

I'd have put up with slightly lower performance than the equivilent intel just in the interest of supporting competition but this is no improvement over their existing chips let alone any competition for intel. Glad im not an AMD shareholder.

 

To the guys saying that other sites have more positive reviews (especially Anand). I don't think that is really the case. I think what most people are saying is that once Win8 is out and programmers move on to take advantage of the parallelism of the new CPU then it might be a good product. For a CPU released in Q4 2011, a statement that it might come good because of software released in Q4 2012 is not a ringing endorsement. And frankly I wouldn't be surprised if a year from now we get to hear that we have to wait for service pack 1 to see the true improvement etc.

As for the score, I was always under the impression that to score below 50% components have to be actively detrimental to your system. Coolers that can't keep up with cooling, fans that are so loud the make your rig sound like a combine harvester, and so on. In most real life scenarios (which are not CPU limited most of the time) you probably won't notice how bad this CPU is, it won't turn your rig into a pile of crap. But it's still a terrible choice and offers poor value.

 

talk about a **** launch.

 

I think AMD's biggest mistake has been in referring to the integer processing units as "cores" as this has immediately set massive expectations that it cannot and I gather, is not even trying to actually match. (noting that an FX-8150 + AM3+ board costs about the same as an i5 2500k +P67 board over on scan right now)

Had they instead referred to the modules as "cores" then the view would have been that of a four "core" CPU with always-on super-hyperthreading which allowed it to pull away in highly threaded applications even if it wasn't really a clear i5-2500k beater. I could see such a unit being attractive for a "desktop" workstation computer and the 8120 with it's lower TDP might do even better here if it pulls lower power use again.

 

*Sigh*

See you next gen then, AMD.

 

AMD fanboys back in July:

"Oh, these motherboards are just awesome, and they've got SO much potential. Just you wait till the processors come out in October and make them EVEN MORE AWESOME!"

The rest of the world back in July:

"Err, yeah, these motherboards look alright for some things, but there's no real improvement over the last set. What makes you think new processors will change them from mediocre to fantastic?"

AMD fanboys today:

"Oh, these processors are just awesome, and they've got SO much potential. Just you wait till Windows 8 comes out in a year and makes them EVEN MORE AWESOME!"

The rest of the world today:

"Err, yeah, these processors look alright for some things, but there's no real improvement over the last set. What makes you think a new OS will change them from mediocre to fantastic?"

I'm sensing a pattern...

 

I don't think it's bias, more a statement of fact.

Bulldozer can't even compete with X58! Considering how long it's been in development, and the resultant performance, if think the review is more than fair.

 

AMD definitely designed a bulldozer here... and then drove it off a cliff.

 

At this rate, Intel are going to have to prop AMD up to keep the antitrust people off their backs .

 

Feeling justified in starting my i7 2600k build last month now : )

 

This is really disappointing. I was really hoping bulldozer would be a success. I wanted to justify replacing my 1090T in my rendering rig but I don't think I can after that review. Even with the higher Overclock and 2 extra cores it seems like the power consumption and overall poor performance is hardly worth upgrading my motherboard and CPU.

Bummer....

 

Such a shame, We need AMD to be competitive with Intel.

 

No surprised given the code-name really. A Bulldozer is a big, powerhungry, slow vehicle with limited use, except in very specific applications and then it has an expensive pricetag.

 

I think that sums it up perfectly..lol +rep for that.

 

I held off upgrading for a long time in the hope that Bulldozer, with a brand new architecture, would pull something special out of the bag. Sadly, at least for now, it looks like the Engineers Big Bag of Really Smooth Moves, is empty. It has potential, but until more software is coded with the new instructions, and they mature the process and architecture itself, it's a dead duck.

I'll still be upgrading to an AMD, but it will sit in a G34socket, not an AM3. The extra year I waited to upgrade has seen me save a significant amount over my original budget, so I'll be buying something that *does* live up to the hype... if You can give it enough work to do.