Wednesday, October 12th 2011
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
You are using "software of the future" that is yet to be released, much less coded and compiled. :laugh:
the two or three video games i play are all multi-threaded games, and i heavily use my machine for CAD rendering...
the only single threaded software i can think of iTunes.... and i really don't see BD coming to a crawl with iTunes haha
guys these CPU's may not be for you but they are still very good at what they are designed to do... multithreaded software apps, and there is plenty of software out there supporting multi core setups... if there weren't we would still be in the single-dual core era, but we aren't
But I actually agree that BD is not much a fail "as is", but if you have read my previous posts, you would have seen that:
#1 - because of the price, it has an awful price/performance ratio
#2 - because of the power consumption AND worse performance, it uses up more power to finish a certain task AND takes longer as well
#3 - it only becomes a "good buy" IF you already have a compatible board and you have specific usage that would fully use its "advantages"; if power consumption is NOT an issue, it's a "good buy." In other words, there's a lot of if's to satisfy just for it to become a "good buy"
Socket AM3+ is not tired, the original Bulldozer was already meant to work on it, it is only the 10-Core Piledriver that was suppose to switch to the FM2.
This IMO is a good idea, keeping Socket AM3+ alive and kicking for much longer than planned, then release Socket FM2.
Though mark my words, if Bulldozer was indead as fast as rumours suggested, 10-Core Piledriver would have gotten released in Q1 2012 under Socket FM2 Guaranteed :D
I mean, I could go back through the BD threads and find my posts expecting basically everything BD has been revealed to be. Although the "internet marketing" may have portrayed a different picture, the stuff that AMD had on their website seems to pretty accurately reflect the CPU that was released.
But it's not THAT underwhelming compared to the Intel chips...for nearly a year we've had the 1100T vs the 2600K, and AMD still managed to sell many chips, when the 1100T could never really approach the 2600K. Now, in multithreading, the 8150 excels over the 2600K, but because most apps aren't multithreaded, few benefits can be noticed, overall.
BD gets some extremely bad press and all the fan boys who were holding out decide to go with the next best option available....X6 1100T.
any retailer that jacks up prices of older chips to take advantage of the situations like these deserves to be shutdown.
I don't think it's as simple as supply vs. demand in this case. Has AMD made any kind of announcements to halt P2 x6 production? I thought that was just a rumor.
I am being dramatic but this is what's happening and why prices have risen
:banghead:
You'd think people would get it by now...
:laugh:
:rockout:
Do you have the AMD sales figures?
Also, people who have BD compatible motherboards and are buying phenom II chips are making poor decisions, IMHO.
Here is a QUOTE from another site.
Something is going on with the Motherboards and the Bulldozer CPU.
This quote seem to make a load of sense. Also no reason to buy a PII when Bulldozer is out.
Funny
The BF3 benchmark was the only game that really showed BD in a good light considering it's multithreaded, it also only showed that the peak framerate was better but the average framerate was still only about 3.8% better then Sandy Bridge.
Again, i think it's just people trying to make up excuses again to justify the chips existence/performance.
I think that a lot of benchmarks and game results simply showed that a lot of games and benchmarks are old and poorly made. The CPU is doing exactly what it was designed for, and I believe it will continue to improve over the next several months and following years.
The chip has strengths and weaknesses. It's not a total failure. It is actually a really neat CPU. It just has a ton of negative hype all around it, and if people aren't intelligent enough to cut through the crap and see the chip for what it is then that's their problem.
I have one on back order myself. I didn't read too many reviews because I want to try it for myself.
AMD took a brave risk with the new design, i just think it was executed poorly.
With that said as ive said in the past, i too am planning to go Bulldozer at some point, either with the second iteration or if the current line gets better in the future. I'm already running a 990FX board, so im ready when AMD is ready to do better then their current gen Phenom II chips.