Jump to content


Photo
* * * * * 2 votes

AMD FX-8150 'Bulldozer' Reviews


  • Please log in to reply
13 replies to this topic

#1 Jatin

Jatin

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • 4,867 posts

Posted 12 October 2011 - 07:41 AM

AMD has pulled back the curtain on the new Bulldozer multicore processor line, which will come in four varieties, ranging from a $115 entry-level model to a $245 high-end configuration.

The FX-8150 heads up the pack, and features an 8-core design that has a base clocking speed of 3.6GHz, which can be turbocharged to 4.2GHz. Dropping down to the FX-8120 affords you the same eight cores, but a base clocking speed of 3.1GHz and a max of 4.0GHz. The FX-6100 will provide users with six cores and a base clocking speed of 3.3GHz, which can be boosted to 3.9GHz. Finally, there's the four core FX-4100, which yields 3.6GHz base speeds and a max of 3.8GHz.

The FX-8150 and FX-8120 will cost $245 and $205, while the FX-6100 has a $165 MSRP and the FX-4100 will retail for $115.

Posted Image

AMD FX-8150 Reviews:

Tomshardware
Guru3D
Anandtech
Techspot
Bit-tech
Techreport

Bottom line from Tomshardware:

"So, let’s say someone puts Core i5-2500K and FX-8150 in front of you. The Core i5 costs $220 bucks, and the FX runs $245. Which one do you buy?
If it’s me, I’m going with the Core i5."


:mellow:

#2 Munkypoo7

Munkypoo7

    Proud WinMatrix Member

  • Member
  • 1,015 posts

Posted 12 October 2011 - 10:31 AM

Yup, it fails. Way to ruin the FX line AMD.

Guess the FX60 was the last FX product AMD ever gave a damn about, glad it still works in my backup PC.

Absolutely pathetic AMD. After all the delays, hype etc etc you pull something that can't even beat the 2500K, let alone the 2600K. Pathetic.

To make things worse, I've always had a soft spot for AMD, now they can go shove it, too many years of hoping, trying to see their side. Screw it. Intel, 'til death do us part.

#3 Maximum Payne

Maximum Payne

    Active WinMatrixian

  • Member
  • 351 posts

Posted 12 October 2011 - 11:10 AM

I am sorry how this is a fail ?
I5 have 4 cores vs fx-8150 which have 8 cores .
Only fanboy could make such a comparison...

#4 Darren 54

Darren 54

    Active WinMatrixian

  • Member
  • 548 posts

Posted 12 October 2011 - 11:54 AM

Not as good as I expected..

#5 xsever

xsever

    ECE

  • Member
  • 996 posts

Posted 12 October 2011 - 01:20 PM

It's definitely not as performing as people expected from AMD with all their slides, comparisons, and hype.

#6 Bogdan

Bogdan

    LA all day!

  • Member
  • 180 posts

Posted 12 October 2011 - 07:24 PM

This new cpu is awesome. Read the articles and you'll see why.

#7 InlineSkate

InlineSkate

    WinMatrix Addict

  • Member
  • 3,182 posts

Posted 12 October 2011 - 08:14 PM

I am sorry how this is a fail ?
I5 have 4 cores vs fx-8150 which have 8 cores .
Only fanboy could make such a comparison...


Only someone who has no comprehension of core utilization and architecture would make an assumption that more cores = better.

Programs barely utilize more than 4 cores to begin with and Intel's architectures wipes the floor with AMD's.

#8 ThunderROM

ThunderROM

    Super WinMatrixian

  • Member
  • 2,637 posts

Posted 12 October 2011 - 08:57 PM

Not bad, I must say. Most of the games are optimized for 4 CPU cores currently.

#9 Maximum Payne

Maximum Payne

    Active WinMatrixian

  • Member
  • 351 posts

Posted 12 October 2011 - 09:33 PM


I am sorry how this is a fail ?
I5 have 4 cores vs fx-8150 which have 8 cores .
Only fanboy could make such a comparison...


Only someone who has no comprehension of core utilization and architecture would make an assumption that more cores = better.

Programs barely utilize more than 4 cores to begin with and Intel's architectures wipes the floor with AMD's.

Agree but again no one is denying that intel's platform is better but it also cost much more.Intel i7 with 6 cores cost like almost like $900 which is better but not for pricing of 3 amd's cpu !
And who want 8 core, def is not going to use to for games then for lot of multitasking and hard rendering.

#10 pcHuntqwerty

pcHuntqwerty

    QWERTY

  • Member
  • 1,999 posts

Posted 13 October 2011 - 09:59 AM

8 cores are waste for now! No games, no optimized programs, and AMD is not as stable as Intel for gaming.

Buy Intel i5-2500k. It's cheaper and performs better in many cases.

#11 Guest_Anon_*

Guest_Anon_*
  • Guest

Posted 14 October 2011 - 09:19 PM

what if you want to run a shitton of programs at once while triple screening or more.

#12 maxxxem1

maxxxem1

    New WinMatrixian

  • Member
  • 25 posts

Posted 16 October 2011 - 01:52 PM

finally amd gets it together! i5 and i7 they are just pat of the past now :no:

#13 USG Ishimura

USG Ishimura

    Super WinMatrixian

  • Member
  • 1,787 posts

Posted 16 October 2011 - 03:17 PM

Dude, i5 2500k performs better than AMD FX-8150.

#14 Guest_ben_*

Guest_ben_*
  • Guest

Posted 18 October 2011 - 05:12 PM

ive always been an amd fan and never given in to intel, but after this release amd failed to make one useful step forward. the majority of users will be better off going intel for the next few years now, even with cost considered.

Want to comment?

Register or Sign In to go completely ad-free!