Wednesday, October 12th 2011

Review Consensus: AMD FX Processor 8150 Underwhelming

It's been in the works for over three years now. That's right, the first we heard of "Bulldozer" as a processor architecture under development was shortly after the launch of "Barcelona" K10 architecture. Granted, it wasn't possible to load close to 2 billion transistors on the silicon fab technology AMD had at the time, but AMD had a clear window over the last year to at least paper-launch the AMD FX. Delays and bad marketing may have cost AMD dearly in shaping up the product for the market.

After drawing a consensus from about 25 reviews (links in Today's Reviews on the front page), it emerges that:
  • AMD FX-8150 is missing its performance expectations by a fair margin. Not to mention performance gains in its own presentation, these expectations were built up by how AMD was shaping the product to be a full-fledged enthusiast product with significant performance gains over the previous generation
  • AMD ill-marketed the FX-8150. Hype is a double-edged sword, and should not be used if you're not confident your offering will live up to at least most of the hype. AMD marketed at least the top-tier FX-8000 series eight-core processors as the second coming of Athlon64 FX.


  • FX-8150 launch isn't backed up by launch of other AMD FX processors. This could go on to become a blunder. The presence of other FX series processors such as the FX-8120, six-core and four-core FX processors could have at least made the price performance charts look better, given that all FX processors are unlocked, buyers could see the value in buying them to overclock. TweakTown took a closer look into this.
  • There are no significant clock-for-clock improvements over even AMD's own previous generation. The FX-8150 drags its feet behind the Phenom II X6 1100T in single-threaded math benchmarks such as Super/HyperPi, the picture isn't any better with Cinebench single-threaded, either.
  • Multi-threaded data streaming applications such as data compression (WINRAR, 7-ZIP) reveal the FX-8150 to catch up with competition from even the Core i7-2600K. This trend keeps up with popular video encoding benchmarks such as Handbrake and x264 HD.
  • Load power draw is bad, by today's standards. It's not like AMD is lagging behind in silicon fabrication technologies, or the engineering potential that turned around AMD Radeon power consumption figures over generations.
  • Price could be a major saving grace. In the end, AMD FX 8150 has an acceptable price-performance figure. At just $25 over the Core i5-2500K, the FX-8150 offers a good performance lead.
  • Impressive overclocking potential. We weren't exactly in awe when AMD announced its Guinness Record-breaking overclocking feat, but reviewers across the board have noticed fairly good overclocking potential and performance scaling.
In all, AMD FX-8150 has almost become another example to cite at a marketing class, of how to effectively handle hype. It is sure to underwhelm some. If it's any compensation, Duke Nukem Forever is still the most underwhelming development this year for the gamer-overclocker community.
Add your own comment

450 Comments on Review Consensus: AMD FX Processor 8150 Underwhelming

#1
nt300
Bulldozer has great power controlling restraints and runs cool. It is when you start Overclocking the processor and upping its core voltage is where you find it sucking back power. The same can be said for SandyBridge and other similarly priced CPU's. We are talking about a very large 2 Billion Transistor CPU with 8-Cores. Run it stock and you got yourself a power saving processor. If you plan on overclocking this processor, then there shouldn't be complaints about power usage.

Sure AMD could have done a lot better overall with this Bulldozer Micro-Architecture, but unfortunately they've catered the design for the full server/workstation market. According to recent news via the blogosphere, AMD plans on a complete molestation (Overhaul) of the Bulldozer design for the forthcoming Piledriver Core. This in turn should be enough to keep them quite competitive overall and reclassify Bulldozer II (Piledriver) for the high performance desktop segment.
Here is the link,
http://www.amazon.com/review/RV7ZTITV8B968/ref=cm_cr_rev_detup_redir?_encoding=UTF8&cdForum=FxJHU1JA6RGBGI&cdPage=1&asin=B005UBNKZG&newContentNum=7&store=electronics&cdThread=Tx11VIXKGCH4PMP&newContentID=MxWIFRARWE6PHD#Mx26OZ7SIVR3DOZ
Posted on Reply
#3
LordJummy
If you were waiting all that time for BD, and now you are going to keep waiting again for PD you are basically the definition of insanity.

This thread should definitely be closed down. I just keep watching the exact same comments back and forth, and it's giving me deja vu to be honest.
Posted on Reply
#4
Damn_Smooth
LordJummy said:
If you were waiting all that time for BD, and now you are going to keep waiting again for PD you are basically the definition of insanity.

This thread should definitely be closed down. I just keep watching the exact same comments back and forth, and it's giving me deja vu to be honest.
You do realize that you have complete freedom not to click on the thread right? With Piledriver and IB launching around the same time, I have no problem stretching out my Phenom II until then.
Posted on Reply
#5
naoan
LordJummy said:
If you were waiting all that time for BD, and now you are going to keep waiting again for PD you are basically the definition of insanity.

This thread should definitely be closed down. I just keep watching the exact same comments back and forth, and it's giving me deja vu to be honest.
Every Bulldozer thread give me that :laugh:

Well, once there's one with link to bigfoot sighting, that was pretty fresh actually :roll:
Posted on Reply
#6
Covert_Death
same here... i have an 990FX board so i will get the best chip that will fit it, and PD is pretty close, what i won't do is buy another MOBO anytime soon, but im not going to buy BD then a few months later want PD... that is insanity
Posted on Reply
#7
LordJummy
Covert_Death said:
same here... i have an 990FX board so i will get the best chip that will fit it, and PD is pretty close, what i won't do is buy another MOBO anytime soon, but im not going to buy BD then a few months later want PD... that is insanity
You are just further proving what I said. You wait for BD which fails (in so many ways), you continue to wait for the next release from the same company expecting different results. What makes you think the next release is going to be all good when their last several releases were mediocre at best? Interesting...

Do you ever want to stop waiting and start doing?
Posted on Reply
#8
BrooksyX
LordJummy said:
You are just further proving what I said. You wait for BD which fails (in so many ways), you continue to wait for the next release from the same company expecting different results. What makes you think the next release is going to be all good when their last several releases were mediocre at best? Interesting...

Do you ever want to stop waiting and start doing?
Agreed playing the waiting game is just an endless cycle. Either get a current bulldozer or sell your stuff and jump to sandybridge.
Posted on Reply
#9
erocker
BrooksyX said:
Agreed playing the waiting game is just an endless cycle. Either get a current bulldozer or sell your stuff and jump to sandybridge.
..or buy a 1090t. Dirt cheap 6 core and it will do what you need.
Posted on Reply
#10
CDdude55
Crazy 4 TPU!!!
erocker said:
..or buy a 1090t. Dirt cheap 6 core and it will do what you need.
Already have a 1055T, and already have a 990FX board so i'm waiting for PD or current gen BD revisions.

I don't have money to spend on both a BD and SB platform like you do.
Posted on Reply
#11
erocker
CDdude55 said:
Already have a 1055T, and already have a 990FX board so i'm waiting for PD or current gen BD revisions.

I don't have money to spend on both a BD and SB platform like you do.
Okay... a 1055T is fine :confused:
Posted on Reply
#12
CDdude55
Crazy 4 TPU!!!
erocker said:
Okay... a 1055T is fine :confused:
lol, just throwing it out there that i pretty much have to stick with the platform i picked, so i'm still in hopes BD will get better.
Posted on Reply
#13
erocker
CDdude55 said:
lol, just throwing it out there that i pretty much have to stick with the platform i picked, so i'm still in hopes BD will get better.
I don't think I was talking to you. Maybe I was. Bah, I don't care. This thread is stale anyways man. :laugh:
Posted on Reply
#14
Covert_Death
CDdude55 said:
lol, just throwing it out there that i pretty much have to stick with the platform i picked, so i'm still in hopes BD will get better.
this^

this is why i don't mind waiting for PD, im not playing the waiting game, im just waiting for the best option for my MoBo... i upgraded to a 990FX because i needed a new MoBo but couldn't really afford another CPU at the same time so i had to get something that would work with my PII, now that things are settling down for me a bit i would like to eventually upgrade my CPU but i don't want to have to replace my MOBO to do that since i just got this one, BD seemed like the right choice before it released but its just not enough to push me to do it at this time, so maybe when PD is released in a few months it will be, or a revision of BD...

either way i want to use my AM3+ board so whatever chip entices me the most i will get
Posted on Reply
#15
LordJummy
Covert_Death said:
this^

this is why i don't mind waiting for PD, im not playing the waiting game, im just waiting for the best option for my MoBo... i upgraded to a 990FX because i needed a new MoBo but couldn't really afford another CPU at the same time so i had to get something that would work with my PII, now that things are settling down for me a bit i would like to eventually upgrade my CPU but i don't want to have to replace my MOBO to do that since i just got this one, BD seemed like the right choice before it released but its just not enough to push me to do it at this time, so maybe when PD is released in a few months it will be, or a revision of BD...

either way i want to use my AM3+ board so whatever chip entices me the most i will get
Either way, what do these thinking out loud posts have anything to do with "Review Consensus: AMD FX Processor 8150 underwhelming" ?
Posted on Reply
#16
Covert_Death
LordJummy said:
Either way, what do these thinking out loud posts have anything to do with "Review Consensus: AMD FX Processor 8150 underwhelming" ?
lol absolutely nothing.

unless you consider the fact that since reviews were underwhelming it gives motivation to possibly wait for PD if waiting for a AM3+ chip haha
Posted on Reply
#17
Super XP
AMD plans on a complete molestation (Overhaul) of the Bulldozer design for the forthcoming Piledriver Core. This in turn should be enough to keep them quite competitive overall and reclassify Bulldozer II (Piledriver) for the high performance desktop segment.
It would be nice to get some confirmation about this overhaul. Are they talking about the Socket AM3+ 8-Core Piledriver or the 10-Core Piledriver for Socket FM2 that is said to get released sometime in 2013?
Posted on Reply
#18
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
Super XP said:
It would be nice to get some confirmation about this overhaul. Are they talking about the Socket AM3+ 8-Core Piledriver or the 10-Core Piledriver for Socket FM2 that is said to get released sometime in 2013?
AMD in its own presentation told us to expect just about 10% performance improvement overall between Bulldozer and Piledriver.
Posted on Reply
#19
Completely Bonkers
... and that 10% gain was speculative and shown as a performance/watt improvement. Therefore, raw performance might be less than 10%, ie, could be as low as 0%

Posted on Reply
#20
nt300
btarunr said:
AMD in its own presentation told us to expect just about 10% performance improvement overall between Bulldozer and Piledriver.
You mean 10% increase not including Bulldozer's fixes that it needs. If they mean 10% after BD's fixes then they call this Piledriver, then Houston, we have a problem.
Posted on Reply
#21
Super XP
nt300 said:
You mean 10% increase not including Bulldozer's fixes that it needs. If they mean 10% after BD's fixes then they call this Piledriver, then Houston, we have a problem.
I bloody hope not, it better be Bulldozer fixes, make it run the way it was meant to run, then only then squeeze out ANOTHER 10% gto 15% and call that Piledriver. If not then I am afraid of Intel once again :nutkick: AMD :rolleyes:
Posted on Reply
#23
Athlonite
8 out of 11 etailers here are saying out of stock

AMD FX-Series FX-8150 3.6GHz Socket AM3+ Box $394.44

AMD FX-Series FX-8120 3.1GHz Socket AM3+ Box $328.43

AMD FX-Series FX-6100 3.3GHz Socket AM3+ Box $277.14

AMD FX-Series FX-4100 3.6GHz Socket AM3+ Box $195.00
Posted on Reply
#24
Neuromancer
Robotguts said:
As of Today....26/10/11

:cool: BulDozer PCCG has now on for sale 1st Batch,

AMD FX-8120 8-Core Processor $259.00
AMD FX-6100 6-Core Processor $215.00


:cry:
link
Fixed that for you.

Next time no point in giant sizing the font or changing the color (lol changing hte color of hyperlinks tee hee) All you succeeded in doing was making a large font broken looking hyperlink.

Though I gotta admit why was the end colon of your emoticon orange instead of red???
Posted on Reply
#25
Neuromancer
Super XP said:
I bloody hope not, it better be Bulldozer fixes, make it run the way it was meant to run, then only then squeeze out ANOTHER 10% gto 15% and call that Piledriver. If not then I am afraid of Intel once again :nutkick: AMD :rolleyes:
No need to be afraid.

Intel is usually the performance king. those people that cry "AMD better produce or are dead in 2 years" have been saying the same thing for 30 years. Ignore the morons.


With the reintroduction of RISC based processing and the improvements in GPGPU usage, it will be interesting to see how computers evolve over the next decade TBH.

Will we be running 80 core processors in 10 years? I think so, of course they will be risc based ARM driven units that require a .5W of power at load per core. And another 50-80W for interface. No to little cache as RAM will again be circumstantially pushed to new levels and looser timings. DDR6 running at 8,000 mhz effective (1,000 mhz actual) at 10-10-10 and latencies still in the 40-50ns range in octachannel unit running on a 256bit bus.. (cuz it will be intel powering it and we know they love bus limiting their stuff)

*sigh
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment