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

AMD Gives Bulldozer 6-core a Speed-Bump with FX-6200

Discussion in 'News' started by btarunr, Dec 14, 2011.

  1. btarunr

    btarunr Editor & Senior Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2007
    Messages:
    28,219 (11.38/day)
    Thanks Received:
    13,580
    Location:
    Hyderabad, India
    AMD launched its AMD FX processor family with two eight-core parts (FX-8150, FX-8120), a six-core part (FX-6100), and a quad-core one (FX-4100), apparently a newer, slightly faster six-core FX processor is just around the corner, the FX-6200. Since all AMD FX processors are unlocked out of the box, the FX-6200 is essentially a speed-bump. Out of the box, it is clocked at 3.80 GHz, with 4.10 GHz maximum TurboCore speed. It features six cores, 6 MB total L2 cache, and 8 MB total L3 cache. Its TDP is rated at 125W. In a presentation to retailers sourced by DonanimHaber, AMD pitched the FX-6200 to have about 10% higher performance at Mainconcept HD to Flash conversion, than the FX-6100 (3.30 GHz nominal, 3.90 GHz max. turbo).

    [​IMG]

    Source: DonanimHaber
  2. AthlonX2

    AthlonX2 HyperVtX™

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2006
    Messages:
    7,135 (2.50/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,642
    Quite a bump considering model numbers
  3. mayankleoboy1 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2011
    Messages:
    12 (0.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    6
    bump

    yeah.
    was expecting something like 100mhz and meh performance increase.
    but a 3.8 ghz is great
  4. entropy13

    entropy13

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2009
    Messages:
    4,893 (2.49/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,182
    How much? $170? $175? $180?
  5. RejZoR

    RejZoR

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2004
    Messages:
    4,430 (1.24/day)
    Thanks Received:
    873
    Location:
    Europe/Slovenia
    I'm not gonna mock at AMD, i wish they'd get a breakthrough. We need a good battle between both rivals so prices go down. All for the benefit of us, the users.
  6. bacan New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2010
    Messages:
    15 (0.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2
    It is strange that it's called model FX-6200 instead of FX-6120. Could this be the first stepping OR-B3 CPU?
  7. Dj-ElectriC

    Dj-ElectriC

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2010
    Messages:
    2,138 (1.49/day)
    Thanks Received:
    813
    DonanimHaber, you have proven to be trustworthy. Today (for some reason i can't explain :X) you bought my trust
  8. GenTarkin New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2008
    Messages:
    24 (0.01/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3
    Would be nice if it was B3 but at same time, if its B3 and released as a 125watt part, that doesnt say much for their process refinement =/
  9. repman244

    repman244

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2011
    Messages:
    1,099 (0.91/day)
    Thanks Received:
    450
    The 6100 has a TDP of 95W, this 6200 has a TDP of 125W. So I guess the process didn't improve much...
  10. Zubasa

    Zubasa

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Messages:
    3,980 (1.40/day)
    Thanks Received:
    457
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    What you need to consider is that everything 96W and up must be marked with the 125W TDP envelope.
    So we really don't know how much more power does it use with a ~15% clock increase.
    So until a full review is up we won't know if there are any improvements.
    Last edited: Dec 14, 2011
    repman244 says thanks.
  11. btarunr

    btarunr Editor & Senior Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2007
    Messages:
    28,219 (11.38/day)
    Thanks Received:
    13,580
    Location:
    Hyderabad, India
    $175.
  12. CDdude55

    CDdude55 Crazy 4 TPU!!!

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2007
    Messages:
    8,179 (3.18/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,277
    Location:
    Virginia
    A 500MHz increase over the FX 6100 and 4GHz+ turbo is great, but still not significant enough for me to consider going BD just yet. A lot needs to improve.
    hellrazor says thanks.
  13. Zubasa

    Zubasa

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Messages:
    3,980 (1.40/day)
    Thanks Received:
    457
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    I guess at lease for people that don't OC, The FX-6200 should be a worthy replacement for the PII X6s, so they don't have to find the older products.
  14. AphexDreamer

    AphexDreamer

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2007
    Messages:
    7,079 (2.73/day)
    Thanks Received:
    912
    Location:
    C:\Program Files (x86)\Aphexdreamer\
    I'm loving my BD at 4.5Ghz with 6 cores.
    I think I can take it to 5Ghz with 4 core but haven't messed around a lot in that department.
    Super XP says thanks.
  15. Zubasa

    Zubasa

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Messages:
    3,980 (1.40/day)
    Thanks Received:
    457
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    Might as well grab the 4100, those overclock very well and is quite cheap.
    I am half tempted to grab one to play around with it if there they release a FX-4200.
  16. AphexDreamer

    AphexDreamer

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2007
    Messages:
    7,079 (2.73/day)
    Thanks Received:
    912
    Location:
    C:\Program Files (x86)\Aphexdreamer\
    Sure, if I didn't pay $100 for mine during Black Friday. :D
  17. CDdude55

    CDdude55 Crazy 4 TPU!!!

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2007
    Messages:
    8,179 (3.18/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,277
    Location:
    Virginia
    I agree that as the Phenom II's are phased out these chips will be seen as a good replacement, granted, they do not perform very well compared to the current Phenom II X6 chips you'd be better off sticking with an overclocked Phenom II chip then going over to BD if possible, i think these are good ''last resort'' chips.
  18. EpicShweetness

    EpicShweetness

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2011
    Messages:
    307 (0.32/day)
    Thanks Received:
    30
    Location:
    Ft Gordon
    Amazing a 6 core 125watt 3.8GHz CPU competing with a 4 core 95 watt 3.1GHz CPU :rolleyes:
    Seriously its not a bad product, just as a "high performance" product it's kinda a joke.

    Is it me or is K10.5 "Stars" the best core/watt/performance they've made?
  19. pantherx12

    pantherx12 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2009
    Messages:
    9,714 (4.79/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,699
    Location:
    ENGLAND-LAND-LAND
    There's only a 10% ipc difference betwen phenom and fx.

    So my fx 8120 @ 4.4 is like a phenom x 8 ( theoretically) @ 4ghz.

    That might not be true across the board but certainly in all the apps I use.

    Super pi is a lot slower though :laugh: ( super pi is ancient code though)

    If you have the cooling a BD chip will got a lot higher than a thurban core though.


    I had a 1055t before this by the way.
  20. Hustler New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2010
    Messages:
    100 (0.07/day)
    Thanks Received:
    39
    6 cores my ass...

    Try 3 cores with a pimped up AMD type hyperthreading.
  21. Casecutter

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2011
    Messages:
    1,126 (0.95/day)
    Thanks Received:
    82
    Location:
    So. Cal.
    Well, basically matches the 1100T, shouldn't be more than $160, especially as not any better on power. Looks like they're yields still have bad core/modules, but might have more faith in raising the frequency, can’t say it from any real process improvements just have attained more confidence. I don’t see them given any BD anything like B2 stepping improvements, they leave that all for Piledrivers’ glory.
  22. newtekie1

    newtekie1 Semi-Retired Folder

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,695 (6.22/day)
    Thanks Received:
    5,858
    Releasing higher clocked processors is pointless on a product line that has fully unlocked multipliers, unless this is a revision, and I don't think it is.
    Crunching for Team TPU 50 Million points folded for TPU
  23. CDdude55

    CDdude55 Crazy 4 TPU!!!

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2007
    Messages:
    8,179 (3.18/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,277
    Location:
    Virginia

    It's definitely a case by case thing, an FX 8150/8120 does excel by a pretty good margin in software that will put the extra cores/threads to use as expected. I don't see how it's a good thing to say that it's practically like a Phenom with 8 cores though when clocked higher, as doesn't that still indicate that you'd be better off with a Phenom II chip if you don't use heavily threaded software?, so what would justify going with BD?
  24. blibba

    blibba

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2009
    Messages:
    829 (0.47/day)
    Thanks Received:
    183
    Location:
    Oxford, UK
    It doesn't quite work like that.

    Yes, Bulldozer has 8 "cores", but it shares a lot of resources between them. So, in workloads reliant on those shared resources, it'll perform like a quad. This is why you see Phenom x6 beating it in some threaded applications. In workloads that aren't so reliant on those shared resources, or that are a bit more balanced (e.g. real world multitasking), BD can start to behave more like an 8 core. However, the end result in benchmarks is the power consumption of an 8 core and often the performance of a hyperthreaded quad, and a lot of the bad press on launch was because of this.

    Also, while you might be right about the IPC, it remains the case that for whatever reason BD's single threaded performance, clock for clock, is diabolical in certain programs.

    If you forced me to buy an AMD rig tomorrow, I'd definitley go Phenom II - pretty much everything I do is limited by per-core performance. What I'd really like though (what I'd go out and buy voluntarily, in fact) is a 32nm Phenom.
  25. EastCoasthandle

    EastCoasthandle New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2005
    Messages:
    6,889 (2.04/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,505
    Benchmarks??

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page