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

Review Consensus: AMD FX Processor 8150 Underwhelming

Discussion in 'News' started by btarunr, Oct 12, 2011.

  1. _JP_

    _JP_

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2010
    Messages:
    2,681 (1.71/day)
    Thanks Received:
    734
    Location:
    Portugal
    YautjaLord is fine reading the reviews and he is noticing that many of the reviews are either using ES chips, or B1/B2 chips. I still stand by my opinion, for now, but I'm going to wait for reviews using retail chips, to make up my mind about this.
    Last edited: Oct 12, 2011
  2. TheMailMan78

    TheMailMan78 Big Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2007
    Messages:
    20,901 (8.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    7,487
    What? Whos using ES chips for review?
  3. _JP_

    _JP_

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2010
    Messages:
    2,681 (1.71/day)
    Thanks Received:
    734
    Location:
    Portugal
    Is your avatar related in any way with the emotion you had when you wrote that?
    Just wondering...
    ...for my safety...

    Anyway, it's here, just scrool down a little until you see his post.
  4. TRWOV

    TRWOV

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2011
    Messages:
    3,421 (3.16/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,953
    Location:
    Mexico
    Currently AMD needs to:
    - Get the 6100 and 4100 out and review the heck of them. I think they will do fine against the SB Pentiums and i3s plus they can be overclocked.
    - Lower prices on the 8100s, specially the 8150.
    - Work with MS on the kernel patch to get it out as soon as possible.

    Not everything is lost but AMD has to react quickly and get the word out.
    Proph3t, HXL492 and Super XP say thanks.
    Crunching for Team TPU
  5. repman244

    repman244

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2011
    Messages:
    1,099 (0.91/day)
    Thanks Received:
    450
    It's probably better if they don't review the 4100 models:

    [​IMG]
    http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...amd-bulldozer-fx-8150-processor-review-3.html

    I also don't believe any software "patch" could fix this, if it could It would already be used for reviews. Only way to get better performance is to wait for the process to mature and start squeezing out the clock speed.
    And Piledriver could end up being delayed as well.
  6. xenocide

    xenocide

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2011
    Messages:
    2,127 (1.74/day)
    Thanks Received:
    458
    And if you checked the reviews you'd see that some of the reviews allegedly using ES are similar results as those that aren't. AMD probably sent out a special batch to reviewers that shows up similar as ES' in CPU-Z.
  7. _JP_

    _JP_

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2010
    Messages:
    2,681 (1.71/day)
    Thanks Received:
    734
    Location:
    Portugal
    Or both processors (ES and non-ES) preform about the same.
  8. xenocide

    xenocide

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2011
    Messages:
    2,127 (1.74/day)
    Thanks Received:
    458
    Also a strong possibility.
  9. LordJummy

    LordJummy New Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2011
    Messages:
    1,406 (1.20/day)
    Thanks Received:
    248
    Location:
    US of A
    I am so disappointed, but I can't say I truly expected them to be much better than this. I did expect a bit more out of them, though.

    However, I am remembering a particular guy on another forum who told me how BD was going to crush Intel's performance with SB.
  10. HalfAHertz

    HalfAHertz

    Joined:
    May 4, 2009
    Messages:
    1,886 (0.99/day)
    Thanks Received:
    378
    Location:
    Singapore
    Seems like 4100s should be able to compete with the dual and triple core AthlonII's quite nice. The only problem is that the 4100 has about 3 - 4 times more silicon, uses twice the power and costs twice as much :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: Even the first Phenom was faster than the A64's :(
    Last edited: Oct 12, 2011
  11. dirtyferret

    dirtyferret New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2011
    Messages:
    93 (0.08/day)
    Thanks Received:
    22
    Location:
    plains
    techspot's review has the 4170 and it get's beat the 500mhz slower phenom II x4 980

    http://www.techspot.com/review/452-amd-bulldozer-fx-cpus/page10.html
  12. xenocide

    xenocide

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2011
    Messages:
    2,127 (1.74/day)
    Thanks Received:
    458
    Yeaaaaaa... about that...
  13. v12dock

    v12dock

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2008
    Messages:
    1,541 (0.75/day)
    Thanks Received:
    299
    Clock speed up and power consumption down is a must with this chip
  14. naram-sin

    naram-sin New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2009
    Messages:
    103 (0.05/day)
    Thanks Received:
    10
    Location:
    Zagreb, Croatia
    Dammit, AMD...
    [​IMG]

    Unless you've got a big fat furry, super fast, gonna-kill-the-turtle-now rabbit in your ginormous hat, I'll be forced to skip this bull-crap of yours during next couple of years....
  15. HalfAHertz

    HalfAHertz

    Joined:
    May 4, 2009
    Messages:
    1,886 (0.99/day)
    Thanks Received:
    378
    Location:
    Singapore
    The only good news today for AMD is that they'll be in the next fastest super computer. The catch is that it won't be the fastest thanks to the 6200 opertons but the Nvidia Tesla GPUs that'll be accompanying them.

    http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/...400-processor-20-petaflop-successor-to-jaguar

  16. johnnyfiive

    johnnyfiive

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2008
    Messages:
    3,891 (1.70/day)
    Thanks Received:
    876
    Location:
    Tucson, AZ
    I believe this to be 100% true. This was my claim/belief all along. It makes sense, no doubt.
  17. CDdude55

    CDdude55 Crazy 4 TPU!!!

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

    [​IMG]
  18. D4S4

    D4S4

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2008
    Messages:
    697 (0.30/day)
    Thanks Received:
    75
    Location:
    Zagreb, Croatia
    all of this looks like an epic fail on amd's behalf but the truly multithreaded performance seems up to par - from my point of view, amd went ahead of its time with this architecture, it's focused on multithreading performance and hence sucks @ anything running <= threads than modules. if this doesn't kill amd (very doubtful), they could be delivering some royal ass kicking in the future (when some 16 - 32 cores are considered mainstream).

    nevertheless, all of this kinda sucks for everyone not using heavily multithreaded software.

    ps i didn't read any of the posts since i saw there were some 200 so if somebody stated this before me, this post is kinda redundant.

    edit - well, not quite up to par, i didn't read the review carefully... anyhow, for a such radical architecture change it could have gone worse. that part that johnnyfive underlined there is what i was trying to say, amd just went a bit ahead of themselves with bulldozer. :ohwell:
    Last edited: Oct 12, 2011
  19. techtard

    techtard

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2009
    Messages:
    930 (0.52/day)
    Thanks Received:
    204
    It isn't really Epic level fail. More like crushed under a mountain of hype. You can blame the fanbois for that.
    I and other users have pointed out that desktop software is still too old school. We're being held back by Microsoft, and other vendors still using legacy code and not optimizing for multithreading.

    I doubt a software patch will help much. Sounds like Microsoft would have to do some heavy duty hacking to get the scheduler sorted.

    What with Windows 8 being on the horizon, they might just say to hell with FX performance on Windows 7.
  20. jmcslob

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2009
    Messages:
    2,888 (1.47/day)
    Thanks Received:
    452
    Location:
    Internet Heaven
    MicroCenter Has listed

    For $279 FUCK YOU AMD

    My AMD Fanboism is dead.
    [H]@RD5TUFF says thanks.
  21. CDdude55

    CDdude55 Crazy 4 TPU!!!

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2007
    Messages:
    8,179 (3.18/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,277
    Location:
    Virginia
    Launch prices are always much more then the actual price just wait a bit and they will go down.

    And good to hear your fanboyism is dead.;)
    jmcslob says thanks.
  22. GAR

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2008
    Messages:
    84 (0.04/day)
    Thanks Received:
    7
    LOL, wtf? the gtx 480 came out in March 2010, the 5870 came out in september of 2009, the gtx 480 was faster than the 5870, the gtx 570 came out about the same time, and again, the gtx 500 series is faster than the 6900, not by much, but it is.
  23. mtosev

    mtosev New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2005
    Messages:
    1,463 (0.43/day)
    Thanks Received:
    145
    Location:
    Maribor, Slovenia
    I do believe that ppl at Intel are laughting off their asses at AMD and its super duper cpu.
    Last edited: Oct 12, 2011
  24. mtosev

    mtosev New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2005
    Messages:
    1,463 (0.43/day)
    Thanks Received:
    145
    Location:
    Maribor, Slovenia
  25. ShiBDiB

    ShiBDiB

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2008
    Messages:
    4,066 (1.85/day)
    Thanks Received:
    755
    Location:
    Clifton Park, NY
    If only techtard's will die....

    How does it performing badly when compared to older chips on the same software make it the softwares fault.. AMD went all in with a 7-2 off suit and their paying for it with awful performance.

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

Share This Page