- Joined
- Nov 3, 2008
Can you explain how a smaller process, that usually uses less power, can be blamed on the fab plant?
Could just be a leaky chip revision and that is why all the heat and the ability to take the volts.
-
Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!
FRONTPAGE AMD FX-8150 - Bulldozer - Processor Review
- Thread starter Overclockers.com
- Start date
Could just be a leaky chip revision and that is why all the heat and the ability to take the volts.
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2007
FX8150 for $280 at NewEgg
No way I could suggest one to someone when the 2600K is only $20-35 more...
Completely agree; they just priced it out of competition. At $245, I'm ok with them. At $280, definitely not.
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2011
- Location
- Chaparral, New Mexico
A qucik question for you guys. What about gamers. How does the fx comare to our Thubans and Deneb?
For a lot of people, they want to know how the fx compares to there current AMD setups. When can we see benches comparing to 9xx and 1100t?
For a lot of people, they want to know how the fx compares to there current AMD setups. When can we see benches comparing to 9xx and 1100t?
FYI, for server side, the Bulldozer CPUs will have more advanced power gating on the cores. Not sure how much better it will be, but it should result in better power saving. Also, the BIOS may not fully support the CPU's power gating just yet. We could see improvement in the future.
@SuperTuner12010
All the tests were run on a 990FX system. You can see the comparison of the 1100T and the FX8150. Pretty much if you have a Deneb you can go for FX8150, for Thuban users, you probably will not see a difference. But I wonder how it would look with games like Tanks or Total War.
All the tests were run on a 990FX system. You can see the comparison of the 1100T and the FX8150. Pretty much if you have a Deneb you can go for FX8150, for Thuban users, you probably will not see a difference. But I wonder how it would look with games like Tanks or Total War.
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2008
Well they could be designed that way: yes. If it is a crappy fab setup for the rev then it is a facility issue not a design issue. Think Twkr
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2004
- Location
- Calgary, Alberta
Nice job, glad to see some sub-zero in there. Talk about epic fail for AMD though, this is almost laughable. Not sure why anyone would buy BD over 2500k or 2600k now and when IB and 2011 comes out..
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2011
- Location
- Chaparral, New Mexico
Reason I ask is in most current games a 970 will beat an 1100t in all games exceptf for those better optimized for multi core. But then again I believe the 2500k kills denebs and thubmans in all games. And if the 8150 can match the 2500k in games why not.
Ahhh... ok...so assuming Intel uses this fab plant, their chips should yield the same results?
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2010
Part is they might not know better. Also for some like me it wasn't buying BD over SB but me getting bored of SB and getting BD too.
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2011
- Location
- Chaparral, New Mexico
Well already have an AM3+ capapble board. Spend $280 on an 8150, or $500+ for a new 2600k or IB and a new board? When I wouldnt see any increase in performance in any invironment I use. Thats what its going to come down too. Not everyone wants the top of the line when what they have is already more than enough.
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2008
Not necessarily. Every arch. is diffrent (you already know that) and depending on the actual design, process, materials and QC they might be able to produce perfect intel chips.
I am going to go out on a limb here and say it is because of the module design. I am probably wrong but sometimes I am right.
- Joined
- May 29, 2005
It looks like from what I have read in very gpu-limited situations it performs right on par with the others. In CPU-limited situations it doesn't do that great.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4955/the-bulldozer-review-amd-fx8150-tested/8
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2004
- Location
- Calgary, Alberta
Ok fine if you have an AMD board already I can see buying BD but if you are building a system from scratch why would anyone build a BD system? Other than BD being new and interesting or having a preference toward AMD I can see no reason.
I was really hoping to see BD come out with performance at least ON PAR with a 2600k. For the benches most interesting to me it is not even in the same ballpark.
I was really hoping to see BD come out with performance at least ON PAR with a 2600k. For the benches most interesting to me it is not even in the same ballpark.
That is simply not true. Here is the scenario. You want a gaming rig that can also be a workstation where you virtualize all your development environments. If you want VT-d then there are only a few good choices. The 2500 and 2600 ( non K series ) or a 6 core i7 are the only good intel options. The Phenom II x6 is the only other good option.
So it is pointless, in this scenario, to buy a 2600k or even 2500k. So its all about the performance per $. AMD clearly wins. You get the gaming performance that is very similar to a current x6, sometimes even as good as a 2500k, and great thread peformance for virtualization duties.
AMD has a clear win. You can dual boot a Win7 / Xen Server machine and have a beast. And if you don't care about VT-d you still get 8 cores for VirtualBox loving.
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2008
Well I am thinking of all the issues they have had with this CPU and the 32nm fab that it uses: http://www.anandtech.com/show/4894/amd-confirms-32nm-yield-issues-at-global-foundries
The actual design may not call for such high voltage and they simply raised the bar to get these out to market. I think the TWKR processors were simply rejects that would run at higher voltage. I think the BD is also one step away from being a reject.
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2008
I have some work to do. I will just hang out.
Similar threads
- Sticky
