Therion_IOnly has the 8150.

Well that is all any one has just yet. I would guess.

Would be nice to see some benches on the FX-6200 but I don't really need them....

I bought one a few weeks ago and put it to work in my main rig- it is a beast for multi-tasking :pimp: I've got a slight o/c to 4.0ghz and NB@2400 and am doing the following w/no slow downs:

- WCG crunching- All 6 cores @90%
- Web browsing w/multiple windows open
- Looking at photos
- Watching the news on my TV tuner

All that with temps at 44-47C Max on air with the case fans on quiet :toast:

I've even ran a DVD in addition to all of the above and no slow downs, hiccups, or stutters on anything.

Overall it's better than the 960T I was running at 3.6Ghz

Give these chips work to do and you will see them shine!! :cool:

So your saying the CPU is too complex for simple tasks such as games and benchwhores. Yet is a heavy lifter when given work to do.

NortonWould be nice to see some benches on the FX-6200 but I don't really need them....

I bought one a few weeks ago and put it to work in my main rig- it is a beast for multi-tasking :pimp: I've got a slight o/c to 4.0ghz and NB@2400 and am doing the following w/no slow downs:

- WCG crunching- All 6 cores @90%
- Web browsing w/multiple windows open
- Looking at photos
- Watching the news on my TV tuner

All that with temps at 44-47C Max on air with the case fans on quiet :toast:

I've even ran a DVD in addition to all of the above and no slow downs, hiccups, or stutters on anything.

Overall it's better than the 960T I was running at 3.6Ghz

Give these chips work to do and you will see them shine!! :cool:

tricksonOh man this is reminiscent of the P4 days when Intel thought that speeding up the core was the way to compete, Not with true architecture change! LOL! Looks like AMD is out of ideas. Jack up the core to 8GHz that will teach them Intel folks LOL. :roll::laugh:

Yeah, I don't even know why they bother putting new models out, they have to spend more money slapping a name on it, binning tighter, more validation testing for more models...:laugh:

They really need to focus on getting their "Piledriver" to the market.

The only CPU worth buying is the 8120, and that is if you ignore the fact that you cant overclock an i5 2400

And You dont think they are Already Focusing on PileDriver!? Peh

You gotta realize they have to sell what they have to maintain market and profit shares. This is a Company after-all.

And Honestly Intel and AMD are in the market to make money, they dont care about the end user, they Care about Big business buying their stuff

BeepBeep2Yeah, I don't even know why they bother putting new models out, they have to spend more money slapping a name on it, binning tighter, more validation testing for more models...:laugh:

They really need to focus on getting their "Piledriver" to the market.

The only CPU worth buying is the 8120, and that is if you ignore the fact that you cant overclock an i5 2400

Is everyone forgetting that when you push the 8150 100% on all threads (like with media encoding,) that it keeps up with the 2600k just fine? Bulldozer is built to multitask, not to eat single-threaded benchmarks for breakfast. Go convert some video, do some folding, and play a video game and you will see where bulldozer shines. Just because a CPU doesn't dominate single-threaded benchmarks, doesn't mean it isn't a good chip. Also, the IPC might be crap, but that just means AMD has that much more to work with, unlike Intel who has already squeezed a lot of IPC out of their current lines of CPUs (Intel CPU architecture hasn't changed a whole lot since C2D and C2Q, with the exception of the IMC and PCI-E lanes on the CPU.)

eidairaman1Also constant socket changes like they have been doing since P3. Only Socket that may have had a Good Chance was 775 but after that nope. I felt 1366 was the Ideal Socket but Intel Abandoned it for 1155 and 2011 and now 1155 will be replaced by 1150

True, but sticking to one socket can sometimes hold performance back. It depends on what Intel does with the new socket, and in comparison to 1366 and 2011, that is a 645 pin difference. That's PCI-E lanes, CPU power, more memory channels, etc. I think that Intel should try to keep their mainstream platform the same socket, but enthusiasts will always be willing to keep their computer up to date. Once again, that would benefit the consumer, and right now, Intel must be doing something right considering how much of the market they control.

AquinusTrue, but sticking to one socket can sometimes hold performance back. It depends on what Intel does with the new socket, and in comparison to 1366 and 2011, that is a 645 pin difference. That's PCI-E lanes, CPU power, more memory channels, etc. I think that Intel should try to keep their mainstream platform the same socket, but enthusiasts will always be willing to keep their computer up to date. Once again, that would benefit the consumer, and right now, Intel must be doing something right considering how much of the market they control.

if they would just look at older designs and reuse them they can become so much faster and efficient it wouldnt be funny.

Same With AMD. It was literally a Kick in the teeth to x58 users, now they are stuck

xenocideThe Intel name sells more chips. AMD may compete by having substantially lower prices, but OEM's will still buy more from Intel because they have history and a name for themselves. Even in the segments AMD excels at, I see substantially more Intel offerings.

So we're now past the "Nuh uh, Bulldozer is AWESOME" phase into the "JUST LEAVE BULLDOZER ALONEEEEE" phase? AMD has nobody to blame but themselves for crushed expectations. They hyped it up, and marketted it as an enthusiast chip, and bragged about better efficiency, power consumption, and higher clock speeds. Intel did the same thing with Netburst, and it was a lost cause, because at the end of the day it was still an inferior product.



Really? Giving people choice? Is that what we're going with?

Intel Releases i7-2700k: Profiteering off a pointless release.
AMD Releases FX-6200 and FX-4170: Giving the Consumer Choice!

That kind of perception confuses and annoys me. Just like I thought the 2700k was a pointless release, I think these are. They should just continue to offer Phenom II X4\X6 since they are better in terms of performance. Doing that would REALLY benefit the consumer. Lowering the price on the FX-8120 was a great move, and I think they should have also lowered the price on the FX-8150, since now there is really no reason to ever buy that thing.

Honestly your first quote isnt true because Military tries to go with the best bang for the buck, they could careless what name is on the product aslong as it meets requirements and doesnt break budget.

Other major corporations are following suit

AquinusIs everyone forgetting that when you push the 8150 100% on all threads (like with media encoding,) that it keeps up with the 2600k just fine? Bulldozer is built to multitask, not to eat single-threaded benchmarks for breakfast. Go convert some video, do some folding, and play a video game and you will see where bulldozer shines. Just because a CPU doesn't dominate single-threaded benchmarks, doesn't mean it isn't a good chip. Also, the IPC might be crap, but that just means AMD has that much more to work with, unlike Intel who has already squeezed a lot of IPC out of their current lines of CPUs (Intel CPU architecture hasn't changed a whole lot since C2D and C2Q, with the exception of the IMC and PCI-E lanes on the CPU.)

Also constant socket changes like they have been doing since P3. Only Socket that may have had a Good Chance was 775 but after that nope. I felt 1366 was the Ideal Socket but Intel Abandoned it for 1155 and 2011 and now 1155 will be replaced by 1150

Only a few here Dont forget how the CPU operates. It was the same situation when the First Dual and then Quad and Hex Core CPUs came out. Not enuf work to go around the CPU would chew through the single thread task that it wouldnt even register on the CPU load and CPU would idle on end

I am only using AMD on work builds anymore as bang for the buck you get more, and its quieter without the shit HS/F Intel sends in cheaper cpu box sets.

I run AMD at home as this is the third processor to run in the motherboard and now hits 4.2Ghz under load easily.

SteevoI am only using AMD on work builds anymore as bang for the buck you get more, and its quieter without the shit HS/F Intel sends in cheaper cpu box sets.

I run AMD at home as this is the third processor to run in the motherboard and now hits 4.2Ghz under load easily.

ya my bros machine i built back in September last year runs a 555 BE unlocked to 955 BE with the stock Cooling and he dont have any complaints at all.

AquinusIs everyone forgetting that when you push the 8150 100% on all threads (like with media encoding,) that it keeps up with the 2600k just fine? Bulldozer is built to multitask, not to eat single-threaded benchmarks for breakfast. Go convert some video, do some folding, and play a video game and you will see where bulldozer shines. Just because a CPU doesn't dominate single-threaded benchmarks, doesn't mean it isn't a good chip.

www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/434?vs=287

3 situations are all the FX-8150 beats the i7-2600k in. x264 Second Pass (by 1.5 fps), SYSmark 2007 E-Learning (whatever that is), and 7-Zip. The i7-2600k sweeps the gaming benchmarks (with upwards of 30-40% more fps, 300% in one of the Civ V benchmarks), rendering benchmarks, productivity benchmarks, and most of the encoding benchmarks. I don't think it keeps up that well. Maybe if you overclock it, but then you are adding extra expenses, and you could just overclock the i7 to be even further ahead.

The FX-8120 is a good value, but almost the entirety of the FX line outside of that isn't worth a purchase.