Wednesday, October 12th 2011
![AMD](https://tpucdn.com/images/news/amd-v1723408558483.png)
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:
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.
450 Comments on Review Consensus: AMD FX Processor 8150 Underwhelming
Not sure if POV Ray is multi threaded, but FX 8120 @ 4.6GHz seems on par with the i5/i7 series @ 4.8GHz.
www.hardocp.com/article/2011/10/11/amd_bulldozer_fx8150_desktop_performance_review/8
Anyway, I'm not buying another pII when I already have one,, I wannt great multithread use since that's all I do basically ... I THINK bd is the answer for me, again unless pd comes quickly and is am3+
Just go look at their financials... :cry:
Sometimes you have to break some eggs to make an omlette.
I personally think that all this backwards compatibility limited their options. They had to design a brand new architecture, but force it to work with some old and tired components.
Look at all the tinkering the motherboard makers are having to do to try to get this chip to run properly.
Defending the performance of a product based on where the majority of it's sales are based, does not make it a well performing product.
BD = underperforming, period. Wrong. BD does not support DDR2. SO unless those boards sprouted DDR3 slots, AM2/AM2+ is out, period. Those chipsets can be made compatible if built on the AM3/AM3+ socket, not on current AM2/AM2+ boards. I have to agree. I really think it's time for them to move to a newer platform. Not if you buy carton eggs. :D
I will send my 940 to my parents and get their X2 back for a cheapo build for a friend.
Edit....I ordered it. $189.00 with free shipping....
When 90% of the chips sold aren't intended for users like you, you bet it's a viable excuse. You're just disappointed because AMD didn't have the capability of meeting the needs of both markets, but the market where the real numbers of chips sell do not have the same expectations that enthusiast do. Catering to those with the big bucks ensures they can have the funds to further reiterate on the product, as they have done countless times in the past.
Don't forget, the Athlon/Phenom core design stuck around for like 8 years. BD will most likely last just as long as well.
I mean really now, if AMD really had enthusiasts in mind, would enthusiasts be presented with a very limited supply of chips? I wouldn't be surprised to see AMD barely release any to retail as PileDriver is expected very soon. Where are teh BD chips AMD has been making, after all? Who got shipped chips first as a customer? Definitely not the retail space!!
sooooo based on what your saying, if it excels in test that you would use on a daily basis then it is good for you. most of the test where PII did better was single threaded... and if you don't care for single threaded performance then why would you not buy it based on tests that don't pertain to your usage ?
It's just especially underwhelming when compared to the Intel offerings.