- Jan 2, 2009
- 9,820 (2.23/day)
- Suffolk/Essex, England
|System Name||Joseph's Laptop|
|Processor||And 3900 3.1 base / 3.6 boost multi /4.3 boost single|
|Cooling||Heatpipes, lots of them.|
|Video Card(s)||Rtx 2070 8gb|
|Storage||2tb intel nvme and 2tb generic ssd|
|Power Supply||300w power brick|
|Benchmark Scores||Cinebench r20 6222 multi / 473 single|
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?
Well depends how in to over-clocking you are.
Like I said by IPC matches a phenom @ 4ghz ( cept in some older software)
If I ran 1.45 volts through this chip I could probably hit 5ghz a good phenom can maybe get to 4.5 so again single core performance ends up the same but with 2 extra cores.
You have to bare in mind an 8120 is 20-30 pound more than a 1100t, for it's price it does perfectly.
The 8150 is completely waste of time though
"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.
Can you give me a few examples please, I'd like to try it out
It certainly doesn't effect cine-bench ( I can disable one core per module with my motherboard and it didn't really make a difference compared to disabling the last 2 modules)
But if you name what software is effected I can try and see if it really doesn't get an extra performance from those extra cores.
I think people forget that two extra cores( over a phenomx6) doesn't necessarily mean 33% extra performance.
Like going from single to dual didn't give us the 100% boost people would of expected.
Now just to before I get barrages of " fan boy" If I was doing this build from scratch I would go with a 2600k set up.
How ever I already had the 990fxa board so went with BD. But compared to my 1055t most things are quite a lot quicker .
For example you would expect a 50 performance difference between a phenom 965 and 1100t stock at cinebench, but the actual performance difference is closer to 28% .
It seems the hype killed these chips more then anything else.