Saturday, September 24th 2011

AMD FX 8150 Looks Core i7-980X and Core i7 2600K in the Eye: AMD Benchmarks

The bets are off, it looks like Intel is in for a price-performance shock with AMD's Bulldozer, after all. In the press deck of AMD FX Processor series leaked by DonanimHaber ahead of its launch, AMD claims huge performance leads over Intel. To sum it up, AMD claims that its AMD FX 8150 processor is looking Intel's Core i7-980X in the eye in game tests, even edging past it in some DirectX 11 titles.

It is performing on par with the Core i7-2600K in several popular CPU benchmarks such as WinRAR 4, X.264 pass 2, Handbrake, 7Zip, POV Ray 3.7, ABBYY OCR, wPrime 32M, and Bibble 5.0. AMD FX 8150 is claimed to be genuinely benefiting from the FMA4 instruction set that Sandy Bridge lacks, in the OCL Performance Mandelbrot test, the FX 8150 outperforms the i7-2600K by as much as 70%. Lastly, the pricing of the FX 8150 is confirmed to be around the $250 mark. Given this, and the fact that the Core i7-2600K is priced about $70 higher, Intel is in for a price-performance shock.
Source: DonanimHaber
Add your own comment

854 Comments on AMD FX 8150 Looks Core i7-980X and Core i7 2600K in the Eye: AMD Benchmarks

#401
eidairaman1
The Exiled Airman
If the Board has the black slot on it, it will support BD but I suspect a bios update in the works for MSI
InceptorI'm sure you do know what you said and what was said to you, I have no way of questioning that, since it's so vague...

But what I do know is that the AM3+ motherboard from Gigabyte, that I own, IS a BD compatible board; Gigabyte just released another BIOS update for it, to tweak BD support...
... which is consistent with all reports and news so far... and that is not at all vague...

www.gigabyte.com/products/product-page.aspx?pid=3894#ov
"To enable AM3+ AMD FX-Series CPU support, please update your motherboard with the most current BIOS found in your motherboard’s download section. "

[that's the third update.]

From what I can see only MSI isn't listing the FX series. Asus, Asrock, Gigabyte, Biostar, all have FX support.

www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-bulldozer-cpu-fx-series-motherboard,13342.html

At least for Gigabyte, the support is there, and the F4 BIOS is currently the latest update for their 990FX boards (As of Aug 31st/Sept 1st). Any problems with a change in board requirements would have been communicated months before to the board manufacturers, since that is the lead time they work with, from AMD or Intel. The chips are manufactured, and in the process of being shipped, the final engineering took place quite some time ago. The boards are manufactured and have been updated with the needed BIOS/UEFI settings.
So, either the MSI representative you spoke to did not understand what you were asking and gave you another piece of information (whatever it was that you specifically asked...). Or, MSI made a serious error in their board designs that have since gone to market, something that isn't correctable with a BIOS/UEFI update...
Posted on Reply
#402
Frick
Fishfaced Nincompoop
My €55 Asus board supports BD.
Posted on Reply
#403
Volkszorn88
FrickMy €55 Asus board supports BD.
Ye, but how are the OC abilites on that board? Unless you don't plan on doing any OC.
Posted on Reply
#404
Frick
Fishfaced Nincompoop
Volkszorn88Ye, but how are the OC abilites on that board? Unless you don't plan on doing any OC.
Eh, good enough. Looks exactly like the 785G board I had and that was pretty good. I have not tried it out a lot though, I don't really need more CPU power than I already have..
Posted on Reply
#406
v12dock
Block Caption of Rainey Street
And how did I miss this...
Posted on Reply
#407
Inceptor
You know, I'm wondering...
Originally, AMD was saying that BD chips would use HyperTransport 3.1 (6400MT/s).
According to the Tom's hardware link I gave in my last post, the models slated for first release are using HyperTransport 3.0 (5200MT/s). And current AM3+ boards only support up to HT 3.0. It can't be because the technology is not available for the boards.
So, maybe the BD cpus with HT 3.1 support are Q1 or Q2 2012 -- meaning the FX-8170, FX-4170, etc.
An improved IMC?
This puts into perspective the mysterious MSI comments communicated to springs113 about new boards coming in the new year.
And PCI-E 3.0?

Just speculation.
Posted on Reply
#408
springs113
InceptorYou know, I'm wondering...
Originally, AMD was saying that BD chips would use HyperTransport 3.1 (6400MT/s).
According to the Tom's hardware link I gave in my last post, the models slated for first release are using HyperTransport 3.0 (5200MT/s). And current AM3+ boards only support up to HT 3.0. It can't be because the technology is not available for the boards.
So, maybe the BD cpus with HT 3.1 support are Q1 or Q2 2012 -- meaning the FX-8170, FX-4170, etc.
An improved IMC?
This puts into perspective the mysterious MSI comments communicated to springs113 about new boards coming in the new year.
And PCI-E 3.0?

Just speculation.
I was curious as to what should be my next build, the MSI agent did specifically state that the 990 chipset was not built for BD and that the new boards were in fact coming out next quarter. He did say AMD made some changes but he was not specific but maybe it was what you noticed. I'm not backing him at all but I wanted to build now with a decent upgrade path and wanted the best possible solution which was Intel.

All I want is a competitive BD and my 7980 I'll be good for atleast 3 more years
Posted on Reply
#409
Ahhzz
All I know, is a 980x is about a grand. An FX-8150 is about a quarter that. I'll take two, please, and thank you.
Posted on Reply
#410
Bronan
newtekie1That isn't what AMD says. From their own marketting slide: "4 extra cores"...



I don't think there is a single app today that HT has to be turned off in. In fact I had one of the first HT processors, a 478 P4, and never had to turn it off. There were some apps that ran slightly better with it off, but nothing that was really noticeable.
LoL you yell alot but its nonsense when you use power programs like me which heat up those crappy intel cpu's alot.
All my amd's run cooler then the intel counterparts, you should try to run GIMPS on your so called 8 cores and then come back and tell me what the real performance of your so called cores is....... Indeed 4 times a joke.
In fact programs which search for the biggest primes and such (scientific work) benefit from and are in fact most of the time faster on amd machines.
Its HT not a core at all you just try to run another thread (program) on a fake cpu.
The way amd has made the module even though some parts are shared they look to me are real cores for programs, but untill i have one for testing here i can not say if its a good solution when it comes to the programs which i use.
Believe me they stress the real cpu cores at their max, like furmark does on your videocard.
As i do want them lazy cpu's to work :D

Ofcourse intels new toy is not bad, but intel does use tricks to improve performance often.
For instance when you watch bluray in full hd the intel solution skips frames to speed up the visual appearance while amd really does show all frames and not skip them, yes its hard to see cause most people will not see it only people like me see the flikkering as i see with tl lights.
Still its just cheating the big mass who do not notice it directly
Posted on Reply
#413
ivicagmc
repman244No offense but OBR is a joke. He himself admitted of creating fake scores, so why should we still trust him?
I just found that on another forum: I hope it is a fake, because I already bought AM3+ motherboard for bulldozer, it better not disappoint me again, or I go to intel, forever...
Posted on Reply
#415
repman244
ivicagmcI just found that on another forum: I hope it is a fake, because I already bought AM3+ motherboard for bulldozer, it better not disappoint me again, or I go to intel, forever...
Just stop and think about it, would you spend a truckload of money to make something that is slower than you already have?
It's just silly, BD has higher IPC and higher clock which leads to higher performance.

So don't worry, it will be a nice upgrade.
Posted on Reply
#416
ensabrenoir
:o
BronanLoL you yell alot but its nonsense when you use power programs like me which heat up those crappy intel cpu's alot.
All my amd's run cooler then the intel counterparts, you should try to run GIMPS on your so called 8 cores and then come back and tell me what the real performance of your so called cores is....... Indeed 4 times a joke.
In fact programs which search for the biggest primes and such (scientific work) benefit from and are in fact most of the time faster on amd machines.
Its HT not a core at all you just try to run another thread (program) on a fake cpu.
The way amd has made the module even though some parts are shared they look to me are real cores for programs, but untill i have one for testing here i can not say if its a good solution when it comes to the programs which i use.
Believe me they stress the real cpu cores at their max, like furmark does on your videocard.
As i do want them lazy cpu's to work :D

Ofcourse intels new toy is not bad, but intel does use tricks to improve performance often.
For instance when you watch bluray in full hd the intel solution skips frames to speed up the visual appearance while amd really does show all frames and not skip them, yes its hard to see cause most people will not see it only people like me see the flikkering as i see with tl lights.
Still its just cheating the big mass who do not notice it directly
I have a i7 860. Its a four core with ht. Never seen intel market any of its cpus as having extra cores because of ht. A for core is a four core. A duo core is 2 cores. Ht is ht we all know what it does. I love amd gpus and really want 2 give their cpus a chance. It perfectly fine you feel so passionately for amd but that's just venom . Don't go superman because of marketing slides. Even if bd lives up to its claims intel being intel already has one in the chamber and a whole new. Machine in the holster. This is indeed interesting times
Posted on Reply
#417
eidairaman1
The Exiled Airman
AhhzzAll I know, is a 980x is about a grand. An FX-8150 is about a quarter that. I'll take two, please, and thank you.
Build an Opteron Setup, last you longer 16core Power
Posted on Reply
#418
Ahhzz
Thought about that, and before I changed my system specs in drooling anticipation, a Denmark 170 was listed. However, the only boards I'm finding for the Opty's are server, and the vast majority of those are dual proc boards, which I REALLY don't need.....
Posted on Reply
#419
Goodman
ivicagmcI just found that on another forum: I hope it is a fake, because I already bought AM3+ motherboard for bulldozer, it better not disappoint me again, or I go to intel, forever...
Or you could buy a PII x6 & overclock the hell of it , should last you for a good year or so...
As PII x6 should get a price cut after bulldozer is out
Posted on Reply
#420
Ahhzz
Hmmm... buy a year-old-plus proc, and get a year out of it.... or buy a new proc, and get 3-5...... hmmmmmm..
Posted on Reply
#421
erocker
*
There is no new AMD processor. There isn't even an official release date yet. No, the Dominhaber article doesn't count.
Posted on Reply
#422
Ahhzz
LIES!!!!!!! he LIES!!!!!!!!
Posted on Reply
#423
erek
We have been informed that the ordered product has an updated estimated time of arrival (ETA) into our warehouse of November 24.


...
Posted on Reply
#424
erocker
*
erekWe have been informed that the ordered product has an updated estimated time of arrival (ETA) into our warehouse of November 24.


...
Link or just troll. Even if troll, need link to be successful.
Posted on Reply
#425
erek
erockerLink or just troll. Even if troll, need link to be successful.


Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Nov 23rd, 2024 02:25 EST change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts