• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

AMD FX 8150 Looks Core i7-980X and Core i7 2600K in the Eye: AMD Benchmarks

newtekie1

Semi-Retired Folder
Joined
Nov 22, 2005
Messages
28,472 (4.25/day)
Location
Indiana, USA
Processor Intel Core i7 10850K@5.2GHz
Motherboard AsRock Z470 Taichi
Cooling Corsair H115i Pro w/ Noctua NF-A14 Fans
Memory 32GB DDR4-3600
Video Card(s) RTX 2070 Super
Storage 500GB SX8200 Pro + 8TB with 1TB SSD Cache
Display(s) Acer Nitro VG280K 4K 28"
Case Fractal Design Define S
Audio Device(s) Onboard is good enough for me
Power Supply eVGA SuperNOVA 1000w G3
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
Chart #1: FX-8150 has a natural clockspeed advantage and the 980X is an old architecture (Gulftown which is based on Bloomfield that is over two years old). Would have been more fair to leave the 980X out of it but, they did it for a reason (cherry picking).

Chart #2: Why is everything normalized to 2500K? I'll tell you why, it makes little differences look bigger. Take with a leathal dose of salt.

Chart #3: Fantastic! AMD processors work with instructions only their software uses. Kind of pointless.

Chart #4: Comparing to the most expensive Intel platform (LGA1356) with the second most expensive CPU (980X) proves nothing that isn't already known (its expensive). If they had a case to argue, they'd be comparing it to the price of a Core i7 2600 system...

Pretty much everything I was going to say. The only reason they picked the 980X for the price compare is because it is an Extreme edition and it is $1000. Compare it to a 2600K build and I bet the numbers are pretty damn close.

And all the talk in the OP about Intel being in for a "Price-performance shock" is hardly accurate. They possitioned the 2700K in a way that allows them to adjust prices on the 2600K as they wish specifically in preperation for this.
 
Joined
Dec 31, 2009
Messages
19,366 (3.72/day)
Benchmark Scores Faster than yours... I'd bet on it. :)
Its as fast as a 2500/2600k Way to catch up!!!
 
Last edited:
Joined
Apr 30, 2008
Messages
4,875 (0.84/day)
Location
Multidimensional
System Name Boomer Master Race
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D 4.2Ghz - 5Ghz CPU
Motherboard MSI B650I Edge Wifi ITX Motherboard
Cooling CM 280mm AIO + 2x 120mm Slim fans
Memory G.Skill Trident Z5 Neo 32GB 6000MHz
Video Card(s) Galax RTX 4060 8GB (Temporary Until Next Gen)
Storage Kingston KC3000 M.2 1TB + 2TB HDD
Display(s) Asus TUF 24Inch 165Hz || AOC 24Inch 180Hz
Case Cooler Master NR200P Max TG ITX Case
Audio Device(s) Built In Realtek Digital Audio HD
Power Supply CoolerMaster V850 SFX Gold 850W PSU
Mouse Logitech G203 Lightsync
Keyboard Atrix RGB Slim Keyboard
VR HMD ( ◔ ʖ̯ ◔ )
Software Windows 10 Home 64bit
Benchmark Scores Don't do them anymore.
Well I know what I will be getting in 3 weeks, fuck yeah I can't wait to sell off my x58 platform + SSD and GTX 580, wooo :rockout::respect:

Stop arguing you fagboys:toast:
 
Joined
Apr 4, 2008
Messages
4,686 (0.80/day)
System Name Obelisc
Processor i7 3770k @ 4.8 GHz
Motherboard Asus P8Z77-V
Cooling H110
Memory 16GB(4x4) @ 2400 MHz 9-11-11-31
Video Card(s) GTX 780 Ti
Storage 850 EVO 1TB, 2x 5TB Toshiba
Case T81
Audio Device(s) X-Fi Titanium HD
Power Supply EVGA 850 T2 80+ TITANIUM
Software Win10 64bit
I'm inclined to wait for real reviews with some real benchmarks. On another note, are these 4 cores going to be the same as the "8" core but without the essentially hyperthreading? Making them like the 2500k? Or are their 4 cores going to be really dual cores?
 
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
393 (0.09/day)
Location
Denmark
System Name Coming up in september
The fact that AMD succeeded to reach this performance, with this price looks promising for 2012, not lacking a whole year behind intel in tech, I'm anxious to see their piledriver vs ivy bridge, we might finally have good price wars again
 
Joined
Feb 3, 2005
Messages
499 (0.07/day)
I'm inclined to wait for real reviews with some real benchmarks. On another note, are these 4 cores going to be the same as the "8" core but without the essentially hyperthreading? Making them like the 2500k? Or are their 4 cores going to be really dual cores?

I agree. No sense in jumping to conclusions so early.

They market them as 4 module / 8 core. This is traditionally known as 4 'cores' running 8 threads.

Hopefully the performance scales almost linearly from single-thread to multi-threaded workloads. The tech makes quite a bit of good sense, just like Intel hyper-threading.
 
Joined
Nov 21, 2007
Messages
3,688 (0.62/day)
Location
Ohio
System Name Felix777
Processor Core i5-3570k@stock
Motherboard Biostar H61
Memory 8gb
Video Card(s) XFX RX 470
Storage WD 500GB BLK
Display(s) Acer p236h bd
Case Haf 912
Audio Device(s) onboard
Power Supply Rosewill CAPSTONE 450watt
Software Win 10 x64
This is great, though this simply brings AMD up to par. Maybe with the next family of chips from BD design they'll push past intel. Though my thinking is Intel has things in their possession that is held back incase AMD ever do break ahead of them. I mean with their income and how they've been baby-stepping performance the last 4 years(allowing AMD to catch up), i'd expect some monster to be waiting in the intel dungeon.
 
Joined
Sep 21, 2011
Messages
499 (0.11/day)
System Name Multipurpose desktop
Processor AMD Phenom II x6 1605T @ 3.75Ghz , NB @ 2.5
Motherboard Gigabyte 990FXA-UD3 (rev 1.0)
Cooling Prolimatech Megahalems Rev. C, 2x120mm CM Blademaster
Memory Corsair Vengeance LP (4x4GB) @1666Mhz 9-9-9-20-24 1T
Video Card(s) ASUS Strix R7-370 4GB OC
Storage 2x WD Caviar Black 500GB Sata III in RAID 0
Display(s) Acer S211HL 21.5" 1920x1080
Case Cooler Master Centurion 534+, 3x 120mm CM Sickle Flow
Power Supply Seasonic X650 Gold
Software Windows 7 x64 Home Premium SP1
So, roughly on par with SB, exactly where AMD needed to be with the 8 core.
AND at a currently cheaper pricepoint than SB, exactly where they needed to be to continue their price/performance buyer aesthetic.
Looks like the right moves have been made.

As for the comparison to the 980X, forget about it, it's just marketing-flashiness ... doesn't matter what field you're in, what industry you're talking about, or what company you're talking about, there's always dumb stuff like that in press packages.
 
Joined
Sep 15, 2007
Messages
3,944 (0.65/day)
Location
Police/Nanny State of America
Processor OCed 5800X3D
Motherboard Asucks C6H
Cooling Air
Memory 32GB
Video Card(s) OCed 6800XT
Storage NVMees
Display(s) 32" Dull curved 1440
Case Freebie glass idk
Audio Device(s) Sennheiser
Power Supply Don't even remember

cdawall

where the hell are my stars
Joined
Jul 23, 2006
Messages
27,680 (4.29/day)
Location
Houston
System Name All the cores
Processor 2990WX
Motherboard Asrock X399M
Cooling CPU-XSPC RayStorm Neo, 2x240mm+360mm, D5PWM+140mL, GPU-2x360mm, 2xbyski, D4+D5+100mL
Memory 4x16GB G.Skill 3600
Video Card(s) (2) EVGA SC BLACK 1080Ti's
Storage 2x Samsung SM951 512GB, Samsung PM961 512GB
Display(s) Dell UP2414Q 3840X2160@60hz
Case Caselabs Mercury S5+pedestal
Audio Device(s) Fischer HA-02->Fischer FA-002W High edition/FA-003/Jubilate/FA-011 depending on my mood
Power Supply Seasonic Prime 1200w
Mouse Thermaltake Theron, Steam controller
Keyboard Keychron K8
Software W10P
Chart #2: Why is everything normalized to 2500K? I'll tell you why, it makes little differences look bigger. Take with a leathal dose of salt.

Price point I am sure AMD will probably drop prices in a week or two to hit the $220 price of the 2500K.

8 cores vs 4 cores i would be surprised they couldn't match the i5 2500k, IMO its bollocks that it needs double the cores to just match it. Im more interested in those 6 core and 4 core bulldozer performance.

Still i call fud on everything until i see multiple random reviewers get their hands on them.

4C/8T these dozer chips are not real 8 core chips.

Paper benchmarks. I wonder why they didn't include SiSoft Sandra benchmarks?

http://www.legitreviews.com/news/11430/ http://i56.tinypic.com/2e1sp3m.gif

because sisoft sandra is a big steaming pile of shit. not to mention that has less proof than the AMD slides thats just a damn graph someone made without mentioning which chips they used what memory they used what motherboard they used.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Rookienoob

New Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2011
Messages
10 (0.00/day)
Location
Denmark
Now... I wonder how many of the FX-8100's that will run at FX-8120 speeds @ 125W TDP...
It's a 11% speed bump, so at 30% TDP increase isn't totally unrealistic, right?

Considering even 8120's are going to run at 95W eventually, I guess it's not at all impossible.
 
Joined
Aug 17, 2009
Messages
2,557 (0.48/day)
Location
United States
System Name Aluminum Mallard
Processor Ryzen 1900x
Motherboard AsRock Phantom 6
Cooling AIO
Memory 8GB
Video Card(s) ASUS Strix 1080Ti
Storage SSD
Display(s) Benq Zowie
Case Cosmos 1000
Audio Device(s) On Board
Power Supply Corsair CX750
Software Win10 Home
Benchmark Scores 31 FPS in Dalaran.
I was gonna buy a Bulldozer chip regardless, just to support AMD. I'm glad initial information shows good performance and I can't wait to see TPU's performance reviews.
 
Joined
Jan 7, 2008
Messages
3,924 (0.66/day)
System Name Main / Home Media Serever
Processor Intel i5 2500k @ 4.75ghz / AMD AM3 5200+ x2
Motherboard ASRock Fatal1ty P67 Performance / Biostar 790GX
Cooling Xigmatek Dark Knight / XIGMATEK Apache
Memory 12gb of G.Skill Value Series DDR3 / 4x 1gb DDR2
Video Card(s) XFX Radeon 6870 1gb / Asus Radeon 5450 512mb
Storage 2x Samsung 830 64gb SSD Raid 0 & 750gb WD Blue HDD / OCZ Vertex II 80GB & 10TB of HDD Space
Display(s) 2x Acer 24" LED / Samsung 50" LED
Case Xigmatek Asgard II / APEX PC-389-C
Power Supply Rosewill 750w / Antec EArthwatts 380w
Software Windows 7 Professional x64 SP1 / Ubuntu 14.04
Glad to see some real numbers and things a looking good. Don't regret going the 2500k route but if I was upgrading today I would definitely consider Bulldozer!!! Go AMD. Let the price war begin.
 
Joined
Feb 18, 2009
Messages
1,825 (0.33/day)
Location
Slovenia
System Name Multiple - Win7, Win10, Kubuntu
Processor Intel Core i7 3820 OC@ 4.0 GHz
Motherboard Asus P9X79
Cooling Noctua NH-L12
Memory Corsair Vengeance 32GB 1333MHz
Video Card(s) Sapphire ATI Radeon RX 480 8GB
Storage Samsung SSD: 970 EVO 1TB, 2x870 EVO 250GB,860 Evo 250GB,850 Evo 250GB, WD 4x1TB, 2x2TB, 4x4TB
Display(s) Asus PB328Q 32' 1440p@75hz
Case Cooler Master CM Storm Trooper
Power Supply Corsair HX750, HX550, Galaxy 520W
Mouse Multiple, Razer Mamba Elite, Logitech M500
Keyboard Multiple - Lenovo, HP, Dell, Logitech
but, will it run crysis ?



:laugh:
 
Joined
Sep 21, 2011
Messages
499 (0.11/day)
System Name Multipurpose desktop
Processor AMD Phenom II x6 1605T @ 3.75Ghz , NB @ 2.5
Motherboard Gigabyte 990FXA-UD3 (rev 1.0)
Cooling Prolimatech Megahalems Rev. C, 2x120mm CM Blademaster
Memory Corsair Vengeance LP (4x4GB) @1666Mhz 9-9-9-20-24 1T
Video Card(s) ASUS Strix R7-370 4GB OC
Storage 2x WD Caviar Black 500GB Sata III in RAID 0
Display(s) Acer S211HL 21.5" 1920x1080
Case Cooler Master Centurion 534+, 3x 120mm CM Sickle Flow
Power Supply Seasonic X650 Gold
Software Windows 7 x64 Home Premium SP1
This is great, though this simply brings AMD up to par. Maybe with the next family of chips from BD design they'll push past intel. Though my thinking is Intel has things in their possession that is held back incase AMD ever do break ahead of them. I mean with their income and how they've been baby-stepping performance the last 4 years(allowing AMD to catch up), i'd expect some monster to be waiting in the intel dungeon.

AMD won't take the CPU crown away from Intel, unless Intel runs into a wall with their CPU architecture, which is not likely to happen again.

Intel hold back quite often... hyperthreading was introduced with their single core Pentium 4s, but not used again until first gen i3/i5/i7. They held it in reserve, in case AMD caught up in performace... it was like the hidden not-so-secret nitro system under the hood ready to kick in if there was ever any threat.

Hyperthreading was reintroduced, producing a very large performance boost.

Marketing.

Intel has the money and resources to 'hold things in reserve'. Tech that we're seeing now, from them, could probably have been produced 2 to 3 years ago.
 
Joined
Jan 13, 2011
Messages
219 (0.05/day)
mmmmm marketing slides, where they slow jerk to their own performance numbers, Still wonder how it will oc(on air and with all the cores on =p), looks like in the multi threaded department they hit the numbers they wanted ie around sb.
 
Joined
Nov 4, 2005
Messages
11,655 (1.73/day)
System Name Compy 386
Processor 7800X3D
Motherboard Asus
Cooling Air for now.....
Memory 64 GB DDR5 6400Mhz
Video Card(s) 7900XTX 310 Merc
Storage Samsung 990 2TB, 2 SP 2TB SSDs and over 10TB spinning
Display(s) 56" Samsung 4K HDR
Audio Device(s) ATI HDMI
Mouse Logitech MX518
Keyboard Razer
Software A lot.
Benchmark Scores Its fast. Enough.
If this is true I will need a new motherboard, RAM, and chip. Will a AM2 bracket fit the newer boards?


Wonder if they have hardened their IMC so it will handle 16GB of RAM with good timings.
 
Joined
Sep 15, 2007
Messages
3,944 (0.65/day)
Location
Police/Nanny State of America
Processor OCed 5800X3D
Motherboard Asucks C6H
Cooling Air
Memory 32GB
Video Card(s) OCed 6800XT
Storage NVMees
Display(s) 32" Dull curved 1440
Case Freebie glass idk
Audio Device(s) Sennheiser
Power Supply Don't even remember
Intel doesn't hold anything back. They are limited by manufacturing and their own big hardheadedness. You can't make chips with 250w TDPs, no one is going to buy them lol.

Hyperthreading was dropped b/c it was crap and didn't work. It was made for marketing since AMD was wiping the floor with them. It still has to be turned off for some apps b/c you'll get negative performance. It was reintroduced once they incorporated it into their uarch and software was optimized.

Intel isn't comfortable enough to "hold back". You don't spend billions using illegal and unethical business strategies to knock AMD down b/c you're so secure with your prowess. You do it b/c you're scared.
 

Benetanegia

New Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2009
Messages
2,680 (0.50/day)
Location
Reaching your left retina.
Wow so they compare gaming performance against the 6 core Extreme chip, which costs 4x more, while being slower than Sandy and they compare multi-threaded performance against 4 core CPUs, where the 6 core chip would be faster, and to top it off it loses in most of them. Really funny. Not.

I knew it would be a dissapointment and that SB-E and Ivy would eat BD alive.

Intel isn't comfortable enough to "hold back". You don't spend billions using illegal and unethical business strategies to knock AMD down b/c you're so secure with your prowess. You do it b/c you're scared.

Intel is definately holding back for the past 2 years at least. There's absolutely no reason they could not release a 3.6-3.8 Ghz SB.

They definately cheated in the P4 era, and I wish they had been punished a lot harder than they were for that, but since Conroe they have been constantly beating AMD over and over.
 

cdawall

where the hell are my stars
Joined
Jul 23, 2006
Messages
27,680 (4.29/day)
Location
Houston
System Name All the cores
Processor 2990WX
Motherboard Asrock X399M
Cooling CPU-XSPC RayStorm Neo, 2x240mm+360mm, D5PWM+140mL, GPU-2x360mm, 2xbyski, D4+D5+100mL
Memory 4x16GB G.Skill 3600
Video Card(s) (2) EVGA SC BLACK 1080Ti's
Storage 2x Samsung SM951 512GB, Samsung PM961 512GB
Display(s) Dell UP2414Q 3840X2160@60hz
Case Caselabs Mercury S5+pedestal
Audio Device(s) Fischer HA-02->Fischer FA-002W High edition/FA-003/Jubilate/FA-011 depending on my mood
Power Supply Seasonic Prime 1200w
Mouse Thermaltake Theron, Steam controller
Keyboard Keychron K8
Software W10P
Intel doesn't hold anything back. They are limited by manufacturing and their own big hardheadedness. You can't make chips with 250w TDPs, no one is going to buy them lol.

thats a dirty lie i would buy several of them.

I knew it would be a dissapointment and that SB-E and Ivy would eat BD alive.

says who? did you already get SB-E and Ivy benchmarks?
 
Joined
Sep 15, 2007
Messages
3,944 (0.65/day)
Location
Police/Nanny State of America
Processor OCed 5800X3D
Motherboard Asucks C6H
Cooling Air
Memory 32GB
Video Card(s) OCed 6800XT
Storage NVMees
Display(s) 32" Dull curved 1440
Case Freebie glass idk
Audio Device(s) Sennheiser
Power Supply Don't even remember

newtekie1

Semi-Retired Folder
Joined
Nov 22, 2005
Messages
28,472 (4.25/day)
Location
Indiana, USA
Processor Intel Core i7 10850K@5.2GHz
Motherboard AsRock Z470 Taichi
Cooling Corsair H115i Pro w/ Noctua NF-A14 Fans
Memory 32GB DDR4-3600
Video Card(s) RTX 2070 Super
Storage 500GB SX8200 Pro + 8TB with 1TB SSD Cache
Display(s) Acer Nitro VG280K 4K 28"
Case Fractal Design Define S
Audio Device(s) Onboard is good enough for me
Power Supply eVGA SuperNOVA 1000w G3
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
4C/8T these dozer chips are not real 8 core chips.

That isn't what AMD says. From their own marketting slide: "4 extra cores"...

Hyperthreading was dropped b/c it was crap and didn't work. It was made for marketing since AMD was wiping the floor with them. It still has to be turned off for some apps b/c you'll get negative performance. It was reintroduced once they incorporated it into their uarch and software was optimized.

I don't think there is a single app today that HT has to be turned off in. In fact I had one of the first HT processors, a 478 P4, and never had to turn it off. There were some apps that ran slightly better with it off, but nothing that was really noticeable.
 

Benetanegia

New Member
Joined
Sep 11, 2009
Messages
2,680 (0.50/day)
Location
Reaching your left retina.
says who? did you already get SB-E and Ivy benchmarks?

Simple math. 4 core SB matches BD even on multi-threaded apps (and on AMD's own cherry picked benchmarks). 6 cores, a 50% increase in resources, will simply obliterate BD.

Ivy Bridge will probably attain higher clocks, even if it doesn't its die size alone will destroy any real option for AMD to undercut Intel's prices, if so Intel wants. Which will not happen anyway, because Intel needs AMD as a competitor to avoid monopoly.
 

nINJAkECIL

New Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2007
Messages
233 (0.04/day)
Processor i7 3770K@4.7ghz
Motherboard MSI Z77A-GD65
Cooling Thermalright Venomous X black
Memory V-GEN 4x4GB DDR3
Video Card(s) Zotac GTX-560Ti
Storage Crucial M4 64GB | WD Green 1TB | Seagate 1TB | Seagate 500GB
Display(s) Viewsonic VA2013WM
Case Corsair Carbide 400R
Audio Device(s) Audigy 2ZS Platinum
Power Supply Corsair AX750W
Software Win7 x64
Benchmark Scores http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc.php?id=371985
4C/8T these dozer chips are not real 8 core chips.

I believe these AMD FX cpus with 4 modules are indeed has 8 integer core, not like hyperthreading. In Hyperthreading, 1 core are able to run 2 threads, while in Bulldozer, each interger core (I wouldn't call them only "core"), has their own L1 data cache, and each integer core has its own integer datapath and integer scheduler, while sharing L2 and L3 cache in one module.
 
Top