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
kid41212003
I was expecting it to be faster than Phenom II 25% clock vs clock...
Posted on Reply
#2
Whilhelm
Did you read on Hardware Canucks where they tested 1333 and 1866 memory performance and it made no difference at all.
Posted on Reply
#3
CDdude55
Crazy 4 TPU!!!
alexsubri said:
It amazes me how many Intel Fanboy's are glamoring themselves over AMD's performance. A good example is when nVidia's 4xx line up came along and ATI 6xxx series were pounding them. Heck, even some 5xxx were pounding them. Yet, the tide changed when the 5xx series came out!

I personally think that the next line up from AMD (Piledriver) will refute my statement. However time will tell. As for me, I am disappointed with FX-8150. Where is the damn press release from AMD?!
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Ox0Uwwd1f8s/TZwAQplkQRI/AAAAAAAAByc/aUTX1xqsTBc/s1600/Tissue-Box-Cry-Baby.jpg
The chips came out and sucked against the current line of Intel chips, facts are facts, it has nothing to do with fanboyism. It was the same way with the GTX 400 series, they ran hot as hell, consumed buckets of power and where only around 10% or so faster then the 5800 series and people criticized it.

Im still debating whether to go with an 8 core BD or not though.
Posted on Reply
#4
KainXS
I believe that about it being a server cpu, pushed to the desktop market, more money for less work, theres always going to be someone to buy the cpu just because its Intel or AMD, suckers if you ask me but hey.

are there any double precision benchmarks on it yet.
Posted on Reply
#5
alexsubri
DigitalUK said:
did anyone actually read the HardOCP reviews, yes the bulldozer lost out in single thread performance sythetic benchmarks (SuperPi) but it was never run at its native 1866 memory speed instead cripled with 1333 or 1600, every overclock the intel system was running at 4.8Ghz and the bulldozer given 4.6Ghz with the i7's also given extra on the memory as well as clock speed (and on encoding and heavy multi thread gaming the bulldozer either came out exactly the same or in some cases ahead of i7 and i5).
its release day today so prices are abit higher but still pretty good, if they drop the price £30-£40 which will deffo happen over the next month or so ,it looks very tempting indeed.
to me thats a hell of an achevement, apart from the single thread side of things.
It's all about strategics right now. AMD is in a chess game with Intel right now. AMD had Intel in check (will lower prices causing Intel to lower their prices , as well. ). Intel's next move will be Piledriver vs i7 2700k ...
Posted on Reply
#6
kid41212003
DigitalUK said:
did anyone actually read the HardOCP reviews, yes the bulldozer lost out in single thread performance sythetic benchmarks (SuperPi) but it was never run at its native 1866 memory speed instead cripled with 1333 or 1600, every overclock the intel system was running at 4.8Ghz and the bulldozer given 4.6Ghz with the i7's also given extra on the memory as well as clock speed (and on encoding and heavy multi thread gaming the bulldozer either came out exactly the same or in some cases ahead of i7 and i5).
its release day today so prices are abit higher but still pretty good, if they drop the price £30-£40 which will deffo happen over the next month or so ,it looks very tempting indeed.
to me thats a hell of an achevement, apart from the single thread side of things.
With 4 less cores -_-.
Posted on Reply
#7
[H]@RD5TUFF
cddude55 said:

im still debating whether to go with an 8 core bd or not though.
don't do it!
Posted on Reply
#8
DigitalUK
i didnt get to read the Hardware Canucks review but didnt seem to change much but they did go from cas 7 1600 to cas 9 1866.
the 4 cores thing is a strange one with these , as this is 8 threads BD vs 8 threads i7 2600k.
Posted on Reply
#9
mtosev
[H]@RD5TUFF said:
don't do it!
What he said. Get Ivy Bridge :D
Posted on Reply
#10
CDdude55
Crazy 4 TPU!!!
mtosev said:
What he said. Get Ivy Bridge :D
I already have a 990FX board, it's going to be hell trying to switch over to Intel again. I'd need a new mobo and CPU and i'd have to go through selling the 990FX board if i do.
Posted on Reply
#11
dirtyferret
CDdude55 said:
I already have a 990FX board, it's going to be hell trying to switch over to Intel again. I'd need a new mobo and CPU and i'd have to go through selling the 990FX board if i do.
i'm in the same boat. there will be little demand for AM3+ mobos
Posted on Reply
#12
naram-sin
OMG, AMD, this sucks for me... was a fan-boy, now I'll be just a blower... :(



EDIT: BTW, didn't AMD boast with their single threader performance a while a go?! Not HT but anyway double the processing power?! I dunno... I feel let down although still a fan-boy... :(
Posted on Reply
#13
alexsubri
mtosev said:
What he said. Get Ivy Bridge :D
That FX-1850 is faster than that Dell CPU you got running :p
Posted on Reply
#14
mtosev
I have a dell cpu? didn't know that
Posted on Reply
#16
mtosev
CDdude55 said:
I already have a 990FX board, it's going to be hell trying to switch over to Intel again. I'd need a new mobo and CPU and i'd have to go through selling the 990FX board if i do.
sell it before it losses when more value. You will be able put an ivy bridge cpu on current LGA1155 chipsets/mobos
Posted on Reply
#17
Thefumigator
KainXS said:
I believe that about it being a server cpu, pushed to the desktop market, more money for less work, theres always going to be someone to buy the cpu just because its Intel or AMD, suckers if you ask me but hey.

are there any double precision benchmarks on it yet.
No double precision benches but take a look at this, it doesn't look bad as server cpu:

Posted on Reply
#18
KainXS
mtosev said:
I have a dell cpu? didn't know that
Dell makes cpu's o.O:wtf:

anyway maybe you can trade somebody for a decent 1156 board CD?

yea it really dosen't look bad in that light, . . . . . . in that
Posted on Reply
#19
CDdude55
Crazy 4 TPU!!!
mtosev said:
sell it before it losses when more value. You will be able put an ivy bridge cpu on current LGA1155 chipsets/mobos
Ya ive been thinking about grabbing a 2500K possibly and moving over to Z68. Then again i might just upgrade my GPU to a GTX 570 or 6970 and stick my overcooked X6 1055T.

So many choices.
Posted on Reply
#20
erocker
I got a Bulldozer n' stuff... Just because...:p
Posted on Reply
#21
mtosev
CDdude55 said:
Ya ive been thinking about grabbing a 2500K possibly and moving over to Z68. Then again i might just upgrade my GPU to a GTX 570 or 6970 and stick my overcooked X6 1055T.

So many choices.
Or you can wait for AMD to release Bulldozer 2. maybe they get it right with B2:)
Posted on Reply
#22
TheMailMan78
Big Member
erocker said:
I got a Bulldozer n' stuff... Just because...:p
Balla's gotta ball!
Posted on Reply
#23
brandonwh64
Addicted to Bacon and StarCrunches!!!
Can me consolidate bulldozer threads? there is like 4 going non-stop :)
Posted on Reply
#24
Jizzler
brandonwh64 said:
Can me consolidate bulldozer threads? there is like 4 going non-stop :)
No! That where BD's strength lies! ;)
Posted on Reply
#25
CDdude55
Crazy 4 TPU!!!
mtosev said:
Or you can wait for AMD to release Bulldozer 2. maybe they get it right with B2:)
Ya that's another option, it would save me money to stick with the 990FX platform. I really wanted BD, but ahh, it's not seeming worth the money over my current 1055T.:(

Guess ill just move over to a GTX 570.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment