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
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.
854 Comments on AMD FX 8150 Looks Core i7-980X and Core i7 2600K in the Eye: AMD Benchmarks
Far as im concerned if these CPU's are about as fast as intels then thats good enough for me, who here would love to have the performance of a 980X but just cant afford it. Yes i know the 2600K is there and it would be one to go to for sure, but for the AMD users this is awesome realy.
And for the new SB-E been 50% faster? i call BS on that right now, as not even SB was 50% faster then Skt 1366. It was just cheaper and more affordable, performance wasnt a big difference.
Really, it's just simple math: 4 cores with HT in SB i7, and 6 cores with HT in SB-E's top offerings (and hopefully 8 core offerings on refresh).
I think that you'll find, aside from flaming fanboys, what people interested in Bulldozer like is not that gaming benchmarks might lag behind Sandybridge, but that overall, it looks to be a well rounded cpu at a reasonable price, with an interesting architecture.
We're not all hardcore gamers.
It will be an increase that's for sure, but it wont be 50% no way, regardless if it gets 50% more cores.
Ok to me if its going to be a 50% increase i would expect the new SB-E to be 50% faster then there current 980/990X CPU's ( both 6 cores of course) , if not then its not going to be anything to write home about in my eyes. As SB vs the old 1366 975 isnt much different in performance at all if any. Just more affordable.
But that's off topic and not even in the same performance category as the FX processors.
I doubt a published magazine would be publishing FUD. What are they, a tabloid?
The relevant pages would be 8 and 9, btw. Which I guess you didn't bother reading.
Heck we dont even know 100% how well BD is going to be against SB, but going by what we have got in this thread its up there.
I think SB-E will be an improvement in performance just not what everyone things it will be, maybe 20% im guessing, hell we all are.
I'm not going to listen to some French moron that won't give any specifics. You can if you want to, but I pity your gullibility.
Honestly if a program is coded well for 8 cores then surely it would perform better then its last gen 6 core? surely????
I admit ignoring the change to naming so if trying to compare the 6870 to a 5870 instead of what should really be 6870 vs 5770 then yes it does not look good but the whole point of the name change i though was to be able to push in another core under the top end but still above 57xx cards leaving them to be re branded.
Did the nvidia fx cards really perform worse than the generation before?
I admit the new architecture could in theory cause a reduction in performance per core but with increased IPC surly AMD's CPU design team would at least aim to keep the same performance per core if not try to increase it?
But as i said, my point is surly it would be unlikely that clock for clock bulldozer would be beaten by the phenom II architecture going by previous CPU releases for as many years as i have been paying attention :laugh:.
a new model does not always mean higher speeds.