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

AMD FX 8120 Listed on Ukrainian Store

That is an engineering sample.
The engineering samples that were supposedly benched earlier on were showing in cpu-z as 8130P and 8120 (ES).
Also take note of the TDP at 1.5xx Volts -- 200+ watts, ultra high wattage just like the engineering samples. That doesn't mean that's what the wattage IS, just what it's showing. But that doesn't change the fact that it's being identified as an engineering sample
 
dickobrazzz said:
yes, but as you can see aida64 said that it is fx8120
cpu-z sometimes lying.. e.x. core voltage on all giga mb for SB
Click to expand...

CPU-Z will sometimes post incorrect numbers, I will give you that. CPU-Z does not make up names for products. If it didn't know what it was, it would have listed it like AIDA64 did and it would have said something like "AMD Octacore CPU Socket AM3+." I don't think it would have just pulled a name out of nowhere.

Why would anyone test a Bulldozer processor with 1333 MHz RAM when you are not comparing it to anything else? Just this is what you get, so I will use RAM far below the processors specs cause that is realistic numbers. If that is the case, he should compare the performance to an i7 2500K running some 1066 MHz RAM.
 
TheLaughingMan said:
CPU-Z does not make up names for products.
Click to expand...

Actually it sometimes does "make them up". My CPU was named 1095T in CPU-Z when it came out.

But I agree that all these leaks can't be trusted prior to launch.
 
repman244 said:
Actually it sometimes does "make them up". My CPU was named 1095T in CPU-Z when it came out.

But I agree that all these leaks can't be trusted prior to launch.
Click to expand...

That is different. The 1095T actually exists. The FX-8130P is made up.
 
Who told you the the FX-8130P is made up? I would really like to know. Becouse if you look up the specs, it says it is a OEM/tray microprocessor. It isnt made up, it was a sample.
 
Dent1 said:
That is different. The 1095T actually exists. The FX-8130P is made up.
Click to expand...

If it's not listed on Newegg, then it's not real :)
 
That superpi mod is from xtreme systems web site
I tried it out, and it took 38 seconds on my Phenom 9550,
Or 1 minute 17 seconds using power saving profile (when this profile is active the 9550 runs at 1Ghz)

Considering that BD can underclock to less than 1Ghz in powersaver profile, this could prove the low score, if that profile was used during the test.
 
In Ukrainian store Bulldozer weak!
 
Asking price : 53 perogies.
 
Not news.
 
WarraWarra said:
Hopefully AMD would release all versions of the FX / BD at the same time or at least the usable ones.

http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Bulldozer/AMD-FX-Series FX-8130P.html
http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Bulldozer/AMD-FX-Series FX-8170.html

I presume most people would like to get their hands on the FX-8170 or at least the FX-8150
Click to expand...

I guarantee the FX-8150 is included in the initial release. As the flagship (until it is replaced by the FX-8170 next year), it has to lead the way. As for everything else I would expect another 8-core and one or two of the 6-core chips to be released at launch. The 4-cores are going to be budget minded so I think those will be 3 to 4 weeks after the initial launch as they always do. Gotta get all the money you can from early adopters.
 
Wow! what news lol! :laugh:

Any body have this CHV figured out yet?

Im @ 4.5GHz on the Crosshair V Mobo....

1090T X6 Proc.
 
I work for a PC wholer in NZ, we have them in stock but cannot sell (or test them) before the release date
 
If this is true, BD is just a big fail. Revolutionary architecture my ass. It has higher clocks, bigger cache and still lags behind Intel. Not to mention SB is almost a year old now. Weak.
 
If is the key word here. Wait for official release and benches. This guy could have an engineering sample or something.
 
These guys are supposed to be legit. They won the MSI OC challenge a couple of weeks ago.
 
Lab501 is as legit as they get. I'm really disappointed to see these results, I would have wanted AMD to be more competitive.
 
Maybe these guys are getting a little bonus to provide some smoke and mirrors before launch.
 
This thread is a perfect example of teh fact that anyone, no matter how silly can be on the internets.

How many of you posting benchmarks that you claim to be absolute in this thread would stake $5 on them?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top