- Joined
- Mar 17, 2010
- Location
- Sacramento, CA
I want the belt buckle 
-
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
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2003
- Location
- Austin, TX, USA
Me too.
I'm also curious how well it performs 256-bit FPU operations (or where or how this could be implemented in existing software), considering this is something Intel chips lack entirely. And I'm curious how much the XOP and FMA4 instruction sets will alter performance when software or the environment (Win7) are updated to incorporate these instructions.
I'm already picturing a quad processor setup, each with 32 cores (16 modules) with quad channel memory. The VM capacity per rack capacity is making my head hurt.
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2007
- Location
- Near Toronto Canada
I want the belt buckle
I actually really wanted that tin. Then I realized theres a frickin hole in the side of it for the CPU IHS to peek through.
.A CPU that doesn't live up to the hype and a tin you can't even keep cookies in. I wonder if the belt buckle works.
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2008
I think that part will be for software down the road to take advantage of. Perhaps in 10 years you can dig a BD out of a landfill and watch it fly.
I bet it could work great for custom security software on a custom OS and for hacking
and cracking PW and security with the proper setup.Perhaps cracking z10 security easily?
Last edited:
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2011
I voted it a 7 out of 10. Why? because its just not as bad as everybody is making it out to be.
There are 2 key areas keeping it from competition:
- Sinlge threaded performance
- TDP
The thing that could make up for those two:
- Lower the price
That's it. They have a decent product here, that with some refining to the architecture over the next year, could easily pull ahead. They're just charging about $30 too much for what they have right now.
I bought an 8120, due to the high price of the 8150 and the fact I can just OC the 8120 far above and beyond 8150 stock speeds. That there will make it a great bang for buck upgrade from my 1100t. Sadly, however, until they do drop the prices, this will not be as sweet of a deal to most people - most definitely not for new builds.
There are 2 key areas keeping it from competition:
- Sinlge threaded performance
- TDP
The thing that could make up for those two:
- Lower the price
That's it. They have a decent product here, that with some refining to the architecture over the next year, could easily pull ahead. They're just charging about $30 too much for what they have right now.
I bought an 8120, due to the high price of the 8150 and the fact I can just OC the 8120 far above and beyond 8150 stock speeds. That there will make it a great bang for buck upgrade from my 1100t. Sadly, however, until they do drop the prices, this will not be as sweet of a deal to most people - most definitely not for new builds.
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2011
Why 7/10? because of the price AMD will charge in 6 month? When IvyBridge is out at the 2xxxK serie pricing?
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2008
I honestly think if the poll were redone it may change. Some of the initial votes were votes of emotion not logic. I really had my feelings hurt because this was not what we expected because of the false hope that we built up and the lies we told ourselves. We hate being wrong and I think that is why there is such a negative showing in the poll.
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2011
I'm not sure what you mean... I just said they SHOULD lower the price, and I most certainly hope they do a lot sooner than 6 months from now. And beyond that, the reason I say 7/10 is that it is a decent product, with some shortcomings. If i felt they had knocked it out of the park, I would have said 10/10, which they did not. But I do not feel it's really all that disappointing either. Its just my opinion, though
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2002
- Location
- Rootstown, OH
That's very similar to the way I look at it, and I think its fairly accurate to say. I also don't care about power usage on my systems, as most the time they are sitting idle, and when idle Bulldozer is doing pretty well.
However I'm concerned about the comparison between the 1100T and FX-8150. I already have a 1090T, and I don't know that the performance shown in the benches compels me to upgrade... If I didn't already have a 1090T, then I see the potential for interest in the FX-8150 being greater.
What would you state as your reason for upgrading to an FX-8150 from an 1100T? Not criticizing, just curious about the perspective from someone who has made the jump already... New/shiny counts a lot in my book, so I'm not going to judge your answer.
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2011
That's very similar to the way I look at it, and I think its fairly accurate to say. I also don't care about power usage on my systems, as most the time they are sitting idle, and when idle Bulldozer is doing pretty well.
However I'm concerned about the comparison between the 1100T and FX-8150. I already have a 1090T, and I don't know that the performance shown in the benches compels me to upgrade... If I didn't already have a 1090T, then I see the potential for interest in the FX-8150 being greater.
What would you state as your reason for upgrading to an FX-8150 from an 1100T? Not criticizing, just curious about the perspective from someone who has made the jump already... New/shiny counts a lot in my book, so I'm not going to judge your answer.
You misread- I'm getting an 8120 that I'm hoping to get up to around 4.4ghz on air, with a hefty northbridge overclock (a critical, and often overlooked aspect of overclocking AMD chips). So for $220, I'll be out pacing a stock 8150, paying around $50 less, easily beating my 1100t in all areas and having a good time, since I get to tweak and play more ^^ I've exhausted the overclocking potential of my 1100t and to me, overclocking is every bit as fun as the games I play when I'm done
EDIT: my 1100t has topped out at 4.1ghz w/ 3.0ghz northbridge and 2.0ghz DDR3...Its blistering fast compared to what it is at stock, so it will be a very interesting (but I feel very doable) challenge to get the 8120 to really bulldoze my current scores!
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2002
- Location
- Rootstown, OH
You misread- I'm getting an 8120 that I'm hoping to get up to around 4.4ghz on air, with a hefty northbridge overclock (a critical, and often overlooked aspect of overclocking AMD chips). So for $220, I'll be out pacing a stock 8150, paying around $50 less, easily beating my 1100t in all areas and having a good time, since I get to tweak and play more ^^ I've exhausted the overclocking potential of my 1100t and to me, overclocking is every bit as fun as the games I play when I'm done
EDIT: my 1100t has topped out at 4.1ghz w/ 3.0ghz northbridge and 2.0ghz DDR3...Its blistering fast compared to what it is at stock, so it will be a very interesting (but I feel very doable) challenge to get the 8120 to really bulldoze my current scores!
Thanks, I didn't mean to say 8150 there, you were talking about the 8120 but I slipped up.
Appreciate the insight.I identify with your reasoning. Actually, I don't actually have time for games because the spare time I do have I want to spend it tweaking and seeing what sort of performance I can squeeze out.
- Joined
- Nov 7, 2004
Think I'll keep reading some more on the way BD is going from users on here though I was a little worried that my old 945 is just as good as BD I'll probably still upgrade but now in January maybe March/April time my 945 still has some life left in it just now need a new board as mine below fried,.
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2007
- Location
- Near Toronto Canada
If an 1155 setup thoroughly throttles an 8150 about the face and body, a 2011 setup is going to be like a (for give the term) bulldozer running over an ant. I wonder why AMD would not have simply chosen to nix this iteration in favor of waiting for Piledriver, investing more money in that direction, and saying Bulldozer has been cancelled?
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2011
I'm not sure what you mean... I just said they SHOULD lower the price, and I most certainly hope they do a lot sooner than 6 months from now. And beyond that, the reason I say 7/10 is that it is a decent product, with some shortcomings. If i felt they had knocked it out of the park, I would have said 10/10, which they did not. But I do not feel it's really all that disappointing either. Its just my opinion, though
Really, no aggressivity in there!
I just say that you could have given 7/10 in 4/6 month time, because of a decent pricing, which is not the case right now.
BTW, as I said in some other post, I might get one, never mind the poor performance, just to torture it and see what it gets in the guts!
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2008
For the same reason Ford no longer sells 77 Mustangs. Change the body style and it changes from SOSDD to NSND.
It was time for a refresh for the OEM market dude. I mean how can you keep selling 3.2 ghz processors to the same PPL. They already have one you know.
Put a shiny 8 core in there and they "CHARGE IT" (flintstones)
AMD will probably not lose money over this I mean it is 8 cores and the Intel 4 core costs more money. They run both boxes and see no diffrence and get the sales pitch to boot.
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2010
- Location
- Sunshine State
^^^^ This ... Oh and I fixed that last part for you Archer.
What most people that visit this site and others like it forget is that "we are the minority" target market for these chips. Even if all of us decided to boycott BD and not buy a single chip; AMD would still sell millions of them them to "normal" people through the OEM market. These things will sell without a problem at all of your Best Buy, CompUSA, Microcenter, Circuit City, etc of the world... People that buy "prebuilt" computers don't give a damn about how BD stacks up against SB on benchmarks... They just want to go into the store, hand their credit card over to the cashier and go home to unpack their brand new computer. They will be sold whatever the sales people at the store want them to buy. Period. And a smart salesman will move BD faster than you can blink with the "It's like having 8 computers crammed into one tower" line. I would bet money on that.
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2003
- Location
- Austin, TX, USA
I wish they hadn't called it an 8 core processor. At least call it an 8 thread, 4 module chip like Intel calls their 8 thread, 4 core chips due to Hyperthreading. HT takes up transistor space; so does an extra integer core per module. Conceptually they've achieved the same end result.
Would you trash millions of dollars in research, development and production, not to get at least *some* return? The chip performs between a 2500 and 2600 at stock, save a couple single threaded applications that are arbitrary in relation to real-world application or use. AMD themselves stated, "This chip has features that we will be building a platform from." Though I'm convinced their platform doesn't relate to the desktop platform in the slightest. Also, someone is buying -- Newegg sold out of 8150's in 24 hours.
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2008
Yes and those PPL will go home happier than any intel OEM retail buyer because none of those Intel guys have anything that can match what they have. I mean the most they can have is 6 cores and what the hell is HT?
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2007
Someone elsewhere asked about LN2 vs LN2 since this thing clocks like a madman under LN2. This was my response:
It depends on what you're measuring. The only real reason to go LN2 is for HWBot benches (IMHO). We already know AMD just sucks at SuperPi (and pifast for that matter). That leaves WPrime, which Bulldozer is also horrible at because it lost FP cores relative to Thuban and really sucks compared to a 2600K. Doesn't matter the max multi. Here are just my personal results:
Time------------Frequency-------CPU
4sec 890ms * 6523 MHz * FX-8150 (WP32M wouldn't run any faster on my chip; full LN2 pot)
4sec 708ms * 5644 MHz * Phenom II X6 1100T BE (Also LN2, full pot.)
....and the real kick-in-the-teeth...
4sec 515ms * 5407.3 MHz * Core i7 2600K (On...wait for it... water.)
These things are fun to play with and do well at certain tasks, but don't buy one to go for HWBot global points.
It is good at what it's good at. Regrettably that does not include the older benches used at HWBot.
It depends on what you're measuring. The only real reason to go LN2 is for HWBot benches (IMHO). We already know AMD just sucks at SuperPi (and pifast for that matter). That leaves WPrime, which Bulldozer is also horrible at because it lost FP cores relative to Thuban and really sucks compared to a 2600K. Doesn't matter the max multi. Here are just my personal results:
Time------------Frequency-------CPU
4sec 890ms * 6523 MHz * FX-8150 (WP32M wouldn't run any faster on my chip; full LN2 pot)
4sec 708ms * 5644 MHz * Phenom II X6 1100T BE (Also LN2, full pot.)
....and the real kick-in-the-teeth...
4sec 515ms * 5407.3 MHz * Core i7 2600K (On...wait for it... water.)
These things are fun to play with and do well at certain tasks, but don't buy one to go for HWBot global points.
It is good at what it's good at. Regrettably that does not include the older benches used at HWBot.
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2002
- Location
- Rootstown, OH
I haven't followed the latest quarterly reports out of AMD, but I believe in 2009 they were on a tear of 9 consecutive quarters that they posted a loss in their report. That's been a couple years now, so maybe they aren't doing that every quarter any longer... but the odds are likely not on AMD's side.
Similar threads
- Sticky
