Overclock.net › Forums › AMD › AMD CPUs › AMD FX 8150 all the good !
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

AMD FX 8150 all the good ! - Page 14  

post #131 of 513
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fatalrip View Post
The energy efficiency is too low for the server market....
I think someone said the server chips are downclocked and don't run at nearly the wattage desktop BD does.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD PII 955 X4 3.8 ASRock 990FX Extreme4 Sapphire 2GB Radeon HD 6950 CORSAIR Vengeance DDR3 8GB 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 64-bit Dell 24" Logitech G15 Corsair TX650 
CaseMouse
Lian Li K60 Razer Copperhead 
  hide details  
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD PII 955 X4 3.8 ASRock 990FX Extreme4 Sapphire 2GB Radeon HD 6950 CORSAIR Vengeance DDR3 8GB 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 64-bit Dell 24" Logitech G15 Corsair TX650 
CaseMouse
Lian Li K60 Razer Copperhead 
  hide details  
post #132 of 513
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vagrant Storm View Post
Go read the final thoughts and conclusions for each of those reviews in the OP. Hardware Heaven is the only reviewer to actually have anything positive to say about the CPU...most just try to be neutral and say it is a decent CPU but they recommend a 2500k, and some reviewers get down right mean. Then go look at the final thoughts of all the reviewer not in the OP and see if you see a similarity.

Plus, you can't mix and match tests from different reviews. You need to keep all the variables the same if you group tests together. It ruins the whole point of the test if you pick and choose.
And something i find interesting: Hardware Heaven is the only review site i have seen to use anything other than the ASUS Crosshair 990FX board. And that ASRock board has a new BIOS, i read, that features "Bulldozer Enhancements."
post #133 of 513
Good thread, I have felt like a one legged butt-kicker at a jerk convention the past couple of days here. It is good to have somewhere to relax for a moment.

All of the FX bashers want to ignore how well it is performing in things that people do, meaning Gaming. I know, some people "encode video" (whatever that means) and a few other tasks on their computers, but lets get real, the biggest task an average computer user (even an "enthusiast") does regularly is gaming, and the FX is looking just fine when tested in actual game environments. Here is an example showing FX 8150 performance in the latest and greatest game, BF3. I think that the #1 question being posed by computer hardware shoppers these days is "How will it do in BF3?". In the case of FX CPUs the answer is clear: It Kicks Butt at BF3.



    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX-4170 @ 4.86 Ghz ASUS M5A97 EVO 2 x PowerColor AX6790 Crossfire 16GB (4 x 4GB) SAMSUNG MV-3V4G3D @1890 Mhz 8-9-9 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
2x Corsair Force 3 120 GB SSD External USB AMD stock cooler Win7 Ultimate 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
ASUS 23" DVI Fullsize, solid. OCZ ModXStream Pro 500W CM Praetorian 730 Black 
Mouse
Has red light on bottom 
  hide details  
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX-4170 @ 4.86 Ghz ASUS M5A97 EVO 2 x PowerColor AX6790 Crossfire 16GB (4 x 4GB) SAMSUNG MV-3V4G3D @1890 Mhz 8-9-9 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
2x Corsair Force 3 120 GB SSD External USB AMD stock cooler Win7 Ultimate 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
ASUS 23" DVI Fullsize, solid. OCZ ModXStream Pro 500W CM Praetorian 730 Black 
Mouse
Has red light on bottom 
  hide details  
post #134 of 513
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malcom28 View Post
check this review..there is lot of tests and benchmarks.

http://www.kitguru.net/components/cp...te-990fxa-ud7/
and as I said read the final thoughts...The review says that it is priced to high for its performance

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevlo View Post
And something i find interesting: Hardware Heaven is the only review site i have seen to use anything other than the ASUS Crosshair 990FX board. And that ASRock board has a new BIOS, i read, that features "Bulldozer Enhancements."
I have noted that too and made mention of it. This really needs to get looked at in more detail. if this turns out to be the problem...heh, I hate to be an ASUS employee right now. Though the ASUS boards had a new BIOS at the same time as the ASRock. Hopefully by this evening we will get OCN user reviews starting to trickle in...I assume at least some people paid for overnight shipping
Edited by Vagrant Storm - 10/13/11 at 10:17am
My System
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
2600K @ 4.7GHz Asus P8P67 B3 GTX 580 EVGA Hydro Copper 2 GTX 580 EVGA  
RAMHard DriveOptical DriveOS
4x4GB G.Skill Ripjaws bunch of 'em Blu-Ray For movies Windows 8.1 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
24.4" Hans G HH251 X2 Yamakasi DS270  Blah 1000watt Super Flower 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Built into Desk Microsoft SideWinder X8 Comfy one... Creative Extreme Gamer 
  hide details  
My System
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
2600K @ 4.7GHz Asus P8P67 B3 GTX 580 EVGA Hydro Copper 2 GTX 580 EVGA  
RAMHard DriveOptical DriveOS
4x4GB G.Skill Ripjaws bunch of 'em Blu-Ray For movies Windows 8.1 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
24.4" Hans G HH251 X2 Yamakasi DS270  Blah 1000watt Super Flower 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Built into Desk Microsoft SideWinder X8 Comfy one... Creative Extreme Gamer 
  hide details  
post #135 of 513
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jagged_Steel View Post
Good thread, I have felt like a one legged butt-kicker at a jerk convention the past couple of days here. It is good to have somewhere to relax for a moment.

All of the FX bashers want to ignore how well it is performing in things that people do, meaning Gaming. I know, some people "encode video" (whatever that means) and a few other tasks on their computers, but lets get real, the biggest task an average computer user (even an "enthusiast") does regularly is gaming, and the FX is looking just fine when tested in actual game environments. Here is an example showing FX 8150 performance in the latest and greatest game, BF3. I think that the #1 question being posed by computer hardware shoppers these days is "How will it do in BF3?". In the case of FX CPUs the answer is clear: It Kicks Butt at BF3.
im not bashing the FX, im bashing the company that spent five years making it, see my above post. and you posting those images again and again dosnt change the fact that its a gpu limited test, theres a reason theyre all within the margin of error. at least bring something logical to the table, please.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
I5 2500K 4.7ghz 1.36v MSI Z68A-GD80 (G3) MSI GTX 680 TFIII 4GB SLI 1248mhz core 6.5ghz mem 16GB Patriot Viper X Div 2 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
2xM4 64 GB Raid 0 4x5900rpm Baracuda Raid 0 Pioneer BDR Windows 7 Home Premium Triple Asus 27" monitors 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Tt Challenger Ultimate Corsair AX-1200 NZXT Switch 810 Mionix Naos 5000 
Mouse Pad
Mionix Propus 380 
  hide details  
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
I5 2500K 4.7ghz 1.36v MSI Z68A-GD80 (G3) MSI GTX 680 TFIII 4GB SLI 1248mhz core 6.5ghz mem 16GB Patriot Viper X Div 2 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
2xM4 64 GB Raid 0 4x5900rpm Baracuda Raid 0 Pioneer BDR Windows 7 Home Premium Triple Asus 27" monitors 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Tt Challenger Ultimate Corsair AX-1200 NZXT Switch 810 Mionix Naos 5000 
Mouse Pad
Mionix Propus 380 
  hide details  
post #136 of 513
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jagged_Steel View Post
Good thread, I have felt like a one legged butt-kicker at a jerk convention the past couple of days here. It is good to have somewhere to relax for a moment.

All of the FX bashers want to ignore how well it is performing in things that people do, meaning Gaming. I know, some people "encode video" (whatever that means) and a few other tasks on their computers, but lets get real, the biggest task an average computer user (even an "enthusiast") does regularly is gaming, and the FX is looking just fine when tested in actual game environments. Here is an example showing FX 8150 performance in the latest and greatest game, BF3. I think that the #1 question being posed by computer hardware shoppers these days is "How will it do in BF3?". In the case of FX CPUs the answer is clear: It Kicks Butt at BF3.



Jagged you keep posting up that BF3 beta like it matters. That benchmark used 1 6970. It's gpu limited. An Athlon II could pull the same frames as an 8150 in that test
post #137 of 513
here jagged, so its not such an overly taxing task for you to go back and read ill just do it myself

Quote:
Originally Posted by microfister View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mygaffer View Post
Bulldozer wasn't as bad as everyone says. Just watch, in 6 months a new revision will be out that will clock higher and have better power consumption.
did you see amd's plan? 10-15% performance increase each year. not a very large boost from bulldozer to piledriver to steamroller. ivy bridge with same power consumption as Sandy bridge with up to 37% performance boost coming very soon(or same performance with 50% less power consumption) either one is a much much larger improvement on the same architecture along with support for pcie 3.0 and three monitors.



Quote:
Originally Posted by http://www.insideris.com/amd-spreads-propaganda-ex-employee-speaks-out/
What did happen is that management decided there SHOULD BE such cross-engineering ,which meant we had to stop hand-crafting our CPU designs and switch to an SoC design style. This results in giving up a lot of performance, chip area, and efficiency. The reason DEC Alphas were always much faster than anything else is they designed each transistor by hand. Intel and AMD had always done so at least for the critical parts of the chip
seems like they've decided to take shortcuts in the design phase of their chips. quite disappointing really.

and they still have SB-E to consider in the future competition. the enthusiast line of intel hasn't been weak for sometime. pushing the SB architecture to 6 cores with 3d transistors is going to be something that is hard to match. specially when you take shortcuts in designing your architecture.
im not an intel fanboy by any means, i have an amd rig and an intel rig, and i too had high hopes for the BD. theyve taken the enthusiast's edge out of the design aspect of the architecture. intel has performance down (for now) and so they are working on power consumption(which in my opinion has already made a drastic improvement from gen 1 i7s to gen 2 i7s) and better IGP. the 2700k will even have its own 3 monitor setup and support for pcie 3.0. amd however has turned to shortcuts in their designs and thus brought the same level of performance with more cores, and a pretty large increase to power consumption, with no new features to be had. 10-15% performance increase from year to year is a joke to the competition, and gives them no reason to make bold moves when they are still ahead. its depressing.
Edited by microfister - 10/13/11 at 10:23am
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
I5 2500K 4.7ghz 1.36v MSI Z68A-GD80 (G3) MSI GTX 680 TFIII 4GB SLI 1248mhz core 6.5ghz mem 16GB Patriot Viper X Div 2 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
2xM4 64 GB Raid 0 4x5900rpm Baracuda Raid 0 Pioneer BDR Windows 7 Home Premium Triple Asus 27" monitors 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Tt Challenger Ultimate Corsair AX-1200 NZXT Switch 810 Mionix Naos 5000 
Mouse Pad
Mionix Propus 380 
  hide details  
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
I5 2500K 4.7ghz 1.36v MSI Z68A-GD80 (G3) MSI GTX 680 TFIII 4GB SLI 1248mhz core 6.5ghz mem 16GB Patriot Viper X Div 2 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
2xM4 64 GB Raid 0 4x5900rpm Baracuda Raid 0 Pioneer BDR Windows 7 Home Premium Triple Asus 27" monitors 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Tt Challenger Ultimate Corsair AX-1200 NZXT Switch 810 Mionix Naos 5000 
Mouse Pad
Mionix Propus 380 
  hide details  
post #138 of 513
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malcom28 View Post
yesterday i post a thread with these likns and it was removed because all of the intel fanboys insulting and starting stupid fight ..
i just showing that BD is not a failure at all..sure lot's of ppl expected much more , but the FX 8150 doing a great job against 2500k&2600k.
You're kidding yourself if you think it's doing good against the 2500k and 2600k. Bulldozer is losing to both of those CPUs in about 80% of all tests and games, and those are 9-month old CPUs. Additionally Bulldozer is barely holding it's own and is consuming about 30-50% more power at load, so it's very inefficient. And finally the 2500k costs less than Bulldozer, so BD should be beating 2500k is just about everything, rather than losing.

I've been building computers for over 20 years, and this is among the worst CPU launches I've ever seen, right up there with the initial Pentium 4s that were worse than the Pentium 3s, and the original Phenoms. As is stands right now Bulldozer appears to be AMDs P4 Prescott CPU, and that's not a good thing...
Foldatron
(17 items)
 
Mat
(10 items)
 
Work iMac
(9 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
i7 950 EVGA x58 3-way SLI EVGA GTX 660ti GTX 275 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
3x2GB Corsair Dominator DDR3-1600 80GB Intel X25-M SSD 2TB WD Black 150GB WD Raptor 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
2x 150GB WD V-raptor in RAID0 Win7 Home 64-bit OEM 55" LED 120hz 1080p Vizio MS Natural Ergonomic Keyboard 4000 
PowerCase
750W PC P&C Silencer CoolerMaster 690 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Intel Core i5 2500S AMD 6770M 8GB (2x4GB) at 1333Mhz 1TB, 7200 rpm 
Optical DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
LG 8X Dual-Layer "SuperDrive" OS X Lion 27" iMac screen Mac wireless keyboard 
Mouse
Mac wireless mouse 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
i7-2600K AMD 6970M 1GB 16GB PC3-10600 DDR3 1TB 7200rpm 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
256GB SSD 8x DL "SuperDrive" OS X 10.7 Lion 27" 2560x1440 iMac display 
Monitor
27" Apple thunderbolt display 
  hide details  
Foldatron
(17 items)
 
Mat
(10 items)
 
Work iMac
(9 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
i7 950 EVGA x58 3-way SLI EVGA GTX 660ti GTX 275 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
3x2GB Corsair Dominator DDR3-1600 80GB Intel X25-M SSD 2TB WD Black 150GB WD Raptor 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
2x 150GB WD V-raptor in RAID0 Win7 Home 64-bit OEM 55" LED 120hz 1080p Vizio MS Natural Ergonomic Keyboard 4000 
PowerCase
750W PC P&C Silencer CoolerMaster 690 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Intel Core i5 2500S AMD 6770M 8GB (2x4GB) at 1333Mhz 1TB, 7200 rpm 
Optical DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
LG 8X Dual-Layer "SuperDrive" OS X Lion 27" iMac screen Mac wireless keyboard 
Mouse
Mac wireless mouse 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
i7-2600K AMD 6970M 1GB 16GB PC3-10600 DDR3 1TB 7200rpm 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
256GB SSD 8x DL "SuperDrive" OS X 10.7 Lion 27" 2560x1440 iMac display 
Monitor
27" Apple thunderbolt display 
  hide details  
post #139 of 513
Quote:
Originally Posted by microfister View Post
its a gpu limited test, theres a reason theyre all within the margin of error.
Agreed. It will perform well in games because the games are GPU limited and most of the CPUs out now do well enough in games when paired with a decent GPU. You will see more of a performance increase switching to a better GPU than you would with a CPU. Common sense.

That being said, if people want to get a BD for whatever reason work, play, games, etc then they will be just fine. The price however, is a problem. I was waiting for BD (had to upgrade mobo bc of other circumstances) with my 990fx board, but I won't upgrade it until the very last AM3+ proc comes out in an effort to squeeze the maximum life out of my mobo. I won't see enough of a performance increase in gaming, which is mostly what I do, for $270.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD PII 955 X4 3.8 ASRock 990FX Extreme4 Sapphire 2GB Radeon HD 6950 CORSAIR Vengeance DDR3 8GB 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 64-bit Dell 24" Logitech G15 Corsair TX650 
CaseMouse
Lian Li K60 Razer Copperhead 
  hide details  
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD PII 955 X4 3.8 ASRock 990FX Extreme4 Sapphire 2GB Radeon HD 6950 CORSAIR Vengeance DDR3 8GB 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 7 64-bit Dell 24" Logitech G15 Corsair TX650 
CaseMouse
Lian Li K60 Razer Copperhead 
  hide details  
post #140 of 513
To OP - are you going to buy one?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: AMD CPUs
This thread is locked  
Overclock.net › Forums › AMD › AMD CPUs › AMD FX 8150 all the good !