Originally Posted by t00sl0w;15484993
i was more surprised with how low the CPU usage was on the fx-8150.
it was just under 50%...so would that mean that four cores are getting nearly maxed out with not much on the others? I would have liked to see the whole task manager.
Edit: LOL...click on the Utilization bar for the full screen shot of task manager...bah! To early for me to be reading appearently. The usage is all over the place...nothing really makes sense, but it does seem that on the 2600k and the 1100T that five threads are runing fairly heavily, but on the FX6120 and the FX8150 only two cores are loaded heavily with a small amount going to each other core...and they scale up as you look across the task manager. Really strange stuff as it makes a perfect ramp up.
Originally Posted by Hyoketsu;15485504
Errr, am I misunderstanding something, or are some of you folks simply overlooking the CPU utilization chart?
While the FPS didn't change much, the 2600k used 34% - crudely put, less than one-and-a-half cores, while the 8150 utilized 46%, which makes it almost 4 cores. Even the 920 utilized only 40% - just above one-and-a-half cores.
How is this "BD doing well"?
Am I missing something here?
It looks like the Bulldozer performance is hinging around one module. One module is doing most of the load. If that doesn't change than BD is not doing well at all. Once that one module gets maxed out then there is nothing left.Edited by Vagrant Storm - 10/28/11 at 6:47am