AMD Unlocked FX Processors Announced

[zithe]

Originally Posted by reverze

unless you beat the fastest cpu on the market in every single benchmarkmark while being half the price its considered fail these days.

To think that an underdog company with less money, less resources, etc. will trump a technology giant like intel is just asking for someone to assume you're retarded.

I really don't get the big disappointment here. It's not a surprise at all.

[YautjaLord]

Originally Posted by nt300

Good point, there was a 3 x HD 6970 Crossfire review and it seems Bulldozer did quite well. The SB was Overclocked 430MHz more than Bulldozer and yet Bulldozer stood it's ground just losing on a few game benchies. Now where is that link?

Actually 2xHD 6870 CFX & FX-8150 (don't remember which mobo, might be Crosshair V Formula), think it was PureOverclock on TPU's front page reviews on Wednesday; the 1st f***load of reviews that popped up on the day Dozer launched (Wednesday ).

P.S. When i say i'm hungry for FX-8150 review with multi-GPU setup i mean that i am not satisfied with the only review like that in PureOverclock; i want more & prefferrably with rev. B2/C0 FX-8150/8120 in such setup.

2cadaveca:

Yeah, i thought bout that too (that some show up as ES cause the CPU-Z wasn't updated to 1.58.7), but the way i remember the reviews, most of them had FX-8150 listed in CPU-Z as FX-8130P; might be wrong, though.

[damric]

Can't wait to see some BD reviews on the older 800 series boards, and to see if 4100 and 6100 chips can unlock disabled modules.

[entropy13]

Originally Posted by zithe

To think that an underdog company with less money, less resources, etc. will trump a technology giant like intel is just asking for someone to assume you're retarded.

I really don't get the big disappointment here. It's not a surprise at all.

Even where it COULD have "won", price per performance, it failed miserably. Using Tech Report's scatter plot (for the performance points) and Newegg.com's prices, it's 425 percentage points for the i7 2600k ($315) and 355 percentage points for the FX-8150 ($280). The i5 2500k ($220) has 360 percentage points while it's 330 percentage points for the FX-8120 ($220).

So their price/perf:
i7 2600k - $0.7412 per percentage point
i5 2500k - $0.6111 per percentage point
FX-8150 - $0.7887 per percentage point
FX-8120 - $0.6667 per percentage point

So 2600k v. 8150, AMD loses. Even with 2500k v. 8150. 2500k v. 8120, same story. It's only the 2600k v. 8120 wherein AMD "wins" in terms of price/perf. But then again it's 425 percentage points in performance v. 330.


(Using Tech Report's figures)
And there is still the power consumption to talk about. Core i7 2600K and i5 2500K both idles at 64W. Peak power consumption is 144W and 132W respectively. The FX-8150 has an idle power consumption at 76W and peaks at 209W. There is also a "task energy" graph for them; 8.5W and 9.9W respectively for the two Intel CPUs while it's 14.4W for the FX-8150. Comparing the 2600K with the 8150, $315:$280 means you saved just $35, AND you end up using more power (12W more at idle, 65W more peak, 5.9W more task energy).

[u2konline]

I still use a q6600 with my 5750 and can pretty much play anything out there with no issues.
On another note, my next upgrade or secondary computer is a amd six core with gtx 550.

just saying.

[Super XP]

Originally Posted by entropy13

Even where it COULD have "won", price per performance, it failed miserably. Using Tech Report's scatter plot (for the performance points) and Newegg.com's prices, it's 425 percentage points for the i7 2600k ($315) and 355 percentage points for the FX-8150 ($280). The i5 2500k ($220) has 360 percentage points while it's 330 percentage points for the FX-8120 ($220).

So their price/perf:
i7 2600k - $0.7412 per percentage point
i5 2500k - $0.6111 per percentage point
FX-8150 - $0.7887 per percentage point
FX-8120 - $0.6667 per percentage point

So 2600k v. 8150, AMD loses. Even with 2500k v. 8150. 2500k v. 8120, same story. It's only the 2600k v. 8120 wherein AMD "wins" in terms of price/perf. But then again it's 425 percentage points in performance v. 330.


(Using Tech Report's figures)
And there is still the power consumption to talk about. Core i7 2600K and i5 2500K both idles at 64W. Peak power consumption is 144W and 132W respectively. The FX-8150 has an idle power consumption at 76W and peaks at 209W. There is also a "task energy" graph for them; 8.5W and 9.9W respectively for the two Intel CPUs while it's 14.4W for the FX-8150. Comparing the 2600K with the 8150, $315:$280 means you saved just $35, AND you end up using more power (12W more at idle, 65W more peak, 5.9W more task energy).

If you already have an Socket AM3 and AM3+ mobo, Bulldozer is the better buy.

[entropy13]

Originally Posted by Super XP

If you already have an Socket AM3 and AM3+ mobo, Bulldozer is the better buy.

There are a lot of "if's" to satisfy for Bulldozer to be "the better buy."

If you have the mobo already, it's a better buy.

If you don't pay for electricity, it's a better buy.

If you are already using software from the future, it's a better buy.

etc.

[techtard]

If Someone at Intel touched you in your no-no spot, it's a better buy.

Honestly, only benchers and hardcore overclockers should be plunking down their hard earned cash in an FX chip.
I get that some of you have a burning passion for AMD and a serious hate-on for Intel, but buying out of brand loyalty is pretty dumb if you can get an Intel rig that will demolish your AMD for around the same price, or less.

Sell your mobo and get Intel. Or stick with a Thuban or Deneb. Bulldozer should be avoided until it starts to perform better. If it can.

[naoan]

I think Thuban is a better buy than FX if you already have AM3+ board, otherwise Sandy all the way.

[Super XP]

Originally Posted by entropy13

There are a lot of "if's" to satisfy for Bulldozer to be "the better buy."

If you have the mobo already, it's a better buy.

If you don't pay for electricity, it's a better buy.

If you are already using software from the future, it's a better buy.

etc.

You're kidding me right? Your electricity lol, for a few extra watts. Anyhow to each his own. I still admire AMD for putting out innovation. And as soon as they iron out any issues it should perform better.

In the meantime, check out this review, this guy does a great job in how he does them. Everything is fresh, formated and Windows Installed with it's full line of updates etc....
http://www.hardwareheaven.com/review...thodology.html

[YautjaLord]

Yup, saw this review, was good but few more gaming benchies wouldn't hurt; was ace nevertheless.

The only thing i didn't found was CPU-Z screen dump; best way to know which version & which CPU was used; plus, being represented by AMD as gaming CPU i missed AvP3 & Crysis 2 DX11, but otherwise was great review nevertheless (not that other reviews wasn't great too).

Hope rev. B2/C0 will be benched too & besides the way i see it i'll have all components in my system (Sabertooth 990FX, AX1200W, 2x4GB DDR3 1600MHz RAM) & wait for rev. C0 FX-8150; but not before the rev. C0 review here.

[Aleksander]

Don't really get it, why some reviews are putting intel and some amd?

[Horrux]

Originally Posted by Super XP

If you already have an Socket AM3 and AM3+ mobo, Bulldozer is the better buy.

The problem with that, is if you have an X6 1100t on that same AM3+ mobo, Bulldozer is a sidegrade at best. So it's a no-buy. Can you imagine it, every rabid AMD fan ALREADY HAS the fastest chip in the previous generation.

That is, IMO, very ouch.

[jamesy]

AMD today unleashed the AMD FX family of CPUs, delivering a fully unlocked and customizable experience for desktop PC users. The AMD FX series of desktop CPUs includes the first-ever eight-core desktop processor, enabling extreme multi-display gaming, mega-tasking and HD content creation for PC and digital enthusiasts – all for less than $245 (suggested U.S. retail price). This marks the first retail availability of processors that use AMD’s new multi-core architecture (codenamed “Bulldozer”), which is included in AMD’s upcoming server CPU (codenamed “Interlagos”) and the next-generation of AMD Accelerated Processing Units.

This WHOLE thing should be in quotes. Wasn't this just copy/pasted in from their press conference?

[jamesy]

Originally Posted by Super XP

You're kidding me right? Your electricity lol, for a few extra watts. Anyhow to each his own. I still admire AMD for putting out innovation. And as soon as they iron out any issues it should perform better.

In the meantime, check out this review, this guy does a great job in how he does them. Everything is fresh, formated and Windows Installed with it's full line of updates etc....
http://www.hardwareheaven.com/review...thodology.html

I'm pretty sure he was referring to heat...not the actual electricity.

[entropy13]

Originally Posted by jamesy

I'm pretty sure he was referring to heat...not the actual electricity.

No, it's the actual energy consumption.

http://techreport.com/articles.x/21813/16

Originally Posted by Horrux

The problem with that, is if you have an X6 1100t on that same AM3+ mobo, Bulldozer is a sidegrade at best. So it's a no-buy. Can you imagine it, every rabid AMD fan ALREADY HAS the fastest chip in the previous generation.

That is, IMO, very ouch.

Yeah, as you can see from the graph, the X6 1100T with a 990FX board uses slightly less energy over rendering the same scene. And is just slightly behind it in terms of "performance" on it.



So if you have a 990FX board and an 1100T, buying the FX-8150 would mean getting a more expensive processor with a slight performance advantage but use up more energy. Do rendering multiple times a day and of course that "slight" doesn't become slight anymore.

[Super XP]

Bulldozer's Architecture has a lot of potential, despite it being quite immature.
Theoretically it could have amazing performance and hopefully we can see it with the upcoming Piledriver.

I am done with the Back & Forth Bulldozer Talks. I will be posting in the Bulldozer's OC'ing thread once I get my copy.

[YautjaLord]

^That's the spirit.

Well, 85% of it, close but quite not at 90%; gonna wait for either rev. C0 or the actual Piledriver; just like Dozer is also designated for AM3+. Hope that rev. B2/C0 will be before end of this year; i still willing to buy Sabertooth 990FX & DDR3 1600MHz RAM to back up the CPU.

[jamesy]

Originally Posted by entropy13

No, it's the actual energy consumption.

Energy consumption= heat.

[EarthDog]

Originally Posted by Super XP

In the meantime, check out this review, this guy does a great job in how he does them. Everything is fresh, formated and Windows Installed with it's full line of updates etc....
http://www.hardwareheaven.com/review...thodology.html

What reviewer doesnt do that???

[Super XP]

Originally Posted by EarthDog

What reviewer doesnt do that???

What about these sites? Do they follow the proper Benchmarking rules? Check it out and let me know.

- Anandtech.com
- Hothardware.com
- Xbitlabs.com
- Hardwarecanucks.com
- Kitguru.net
- Legitreviews.com
- Hexus.net
- Neoseeker.com
- Pcekspert.com

[YautjaLord]

If only there was one review that did following: 1) had the latest revision CPU; 2) installed latest BIOS, app versions & drivers; 3) used more than one GPU, had DDR3 1600MHz & higher RAM & SSDs stead of HDDs; that would be the best way to do a review of this CPU. Stead, the way i remember, there were reviews that partially used some out of all stuff i mentioned above but with ES CPU, or B2 CPU with low-end components & not all apps were up-to-date; might be wrong but that was the way i remember. Nevermind, once rev. C0 comes out it should sort out how all quad-, hex- & octo-cored parts perform; bet not night & day difference but somehow better than how they perform now, definitelly better than rev. B0 (ES).

One thing is obvious, nevertheless: purchase - say in my case - Sabertooth 990FX, Patriot Viper Extreme rev. II 2x4GB DDR3 1600MHz, Corsair AX1200W & stay for now (& til rev. C0 FX-8150 comes out) with 965BE @ 4.0GHz (or even 40-60MHz higher) - that one still ace in 3DMark Vantage/11 & AvP3/Crysis 1 & 2 (in case of Crysis 2 965BE @ 4.0GHz+ is ace in DX11 as well). Stead of buying CPU buy better PSU & OC GPU(s) stead, that'll net you additional 2, probably 3 more fps to already great framerate (on hardware like i mentioned above & with OC'd 965BE Crysis 2 DX11 scores 50+ fps in 1920x1200 DX11), though in my case it's 2xGTX 460s.

[Super XP]

Originally Posted by jamesy

Energy consumption= heat.

For those cold winter gaming nights. Sounds good to me

Seriously though, it would be nice to see Bulldozer Benchmarked with 16GB DDR3-1866, SSD 120GB x 4 in RAID 10 or 0, HD 6970 Crossfire & NVIDIA's high end GPU for SLI. I mean, yes AMD needs to fix/tweak the hell out of Bulldozer and try hard to convert this Server/Workstation CPU into a Desktop CPU. But the above should be considered when Benching.

[erocker]

Originally Posted by Super XP

For those cold winter gaming nights. Sounds good to me

Seriously though, it would be nice to see Bulldozer Benchmarked with 16GB DDR3-1866, SSD 120GB x 4 in RAID 10 or 0, HD 6970 Crossfire & NVIDIA's high end GPU for SLI. I mean, yes AMD needs to fix/tweak the hell out of Bulldozer and try hard to convert this Server/Workstation CPU into a Desktop CPU. But the above should be considered when Benching.

You really need to just get one. No amount of anything is going to make this chip any good. Believe me, people who have this chip (myself included) know what it is. Reading your posts, you have no idea. Please, get one.

[jmcslob]

Originally Posted by erocker

You really need to just get one. No amount of anything is going to make this chip any good. Believe me, people who have this chip (myself included) know what it is. Reading your posts, you have no idea. Please, get one.

I have to ask:
Is it really that bad?
How do you personally think it compares to Thuban?
and where do you have that list of AM3+ board power phases at? can't find it anywhere...