Review Consensus: AMD FX Processor 8150 Underwhelming

[CDdude55]

Your opinion is a bit extremist. There are quite a few benchmarks and games that put it in a favorable light. I think you've made your thoughts on it clear throughout the threads.

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.

I have seen a few benchmarks and games where Bulldozer does pull ahead, but not enough to make a difference for me to switch CPUs and that's really my only grief, but overall it's not completely terrible. It has been shown over and over again that these chips aren't very good in single threaded applications and that it doesn't get better until the workload gets spread across the cores. You could argue that BD will get better as software starts getting designed with multiple cores/threads in mind, but im still not sure if BD is strong enough to matter by then.

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.

 

[Super XP]

I really don't see what you're saying, those benchmarks are just again proving that if you have a 6 core Phenom II chip you might as well stick with it.

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 know Bulldozer is very imature at the moment, my point in that post was websites are starting to re-test Bulldozer and it's performing better than first thought. Is there an issue with the ASUS Crosshair V Formula? Don't know, but what I do know is every single review site got the same package from AMD which included that motherboard, the motherboard I also have pending my Bulldozer purchase.

I suppose in about 2 to 3 weeks we will see more reviews go up with newer updated bioses and different system config's.

Anyhow in regards to those review links, check out the benchmarks, Bulldozer was right up the 2600's alley.

 

[entropy13]

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.

Following your reasoning then, since there's a slight increase in performance of using an ASUS Maximus IV Extreme-Z over the Z68A-GD65 (which was the Sandy Bridge motherboard in the [H] review) they should also retest everything, but with a different board for the AMD and Intel CPUs?

 

[CDdude55]

I know Bulldozer is very imature at the moment, my point in that post was websites are starting to re-test Bulldozer and it's performing better than first thought. Is there an issue with the ASUS Crosshair V Formula? Don't know, but what I do know is every single review site got the same package from AMD which included that motherboard, the motherboard I also have pending my Bulldozer purchase.

I suppose in about 2 to 3 weeks we will see more reviews go up with newer updated bioses and different system config's.

Anyhow in regards to those review links, check out the benchmarks, Bulldozer was right up the 2600's alley.

I think you're trying to find excuses for the chip since you seem like a heavy AMD fan (just basing it off your past posts), you can't cope with the idea that they won't be as good as Intel's current line of chips so you try to find anything to push the illusion that it's still a good buy against the competition.

Again, saw all those benchmarks, the only thing that is wrong is the CPU their using, the boards are fine. Naturally a different motherboards/BIOS will perform differently, but it still doesn't do anything of significance for the chip, you'd STILL be better off with an old Phenom II or if you really want performance, go Intel.

My system is all AMD, so no bias here, i see the reviews and it's crap. Will it improve?, maybe in the future, but it will take a while, it won't be an overnight BIOS update or motherboard replacement, thats a bunch of bullshit.....

 

[Damn_Smooth]

I think you're trying to find excuses for the chip since you seem like a heavy AMD fan (just basing it off your past posts), you can't cope with the idea that they won't be as good as Intel's current line of chips so you try to find anything to push the illusion that it's still a good buy against the competition.

Again, saw all those benchmarks, the only thing that is wrong is the CPU their using, the boards are fine. Naturally a different motherboards/BIOS will perform differently, but it still doesn't do anything of significance for the chip, you'd STILL be better off with an old Phenom II or if you really want performance, go Intel.

My system is all AMD, so no bias here, i see the reviews and it's crap. Will it improve?, maybe in the future, but it will take a while, it won't be an overnight BIOS update or motherboard replacement, thats a bunch of bullshit.....

I think with lower prices and a power consumption fix, we could have a contender. I can't see that happening any time before the 8170 though. If even then.

 

[Goodman]

any retailer that jacks up prices of older chips to take advantage of the situations like these deserves to be shutdown.

Twice... just to be sure

The computer store around here price of the PIIx6 is just under the FX8120 but it cost more then the FX6100 (except for the 1055T) , why am i not surprise?

 

[CDdude55]

I think with lower prices and a power consumption fix, we could have a contender. I can't see that happening any time before the 8170 though. If even then.

I agree.

Anyways keep in mind, i wrote that post that brash mostly cause i'm tired, got home late, so im mad, and then i go on my favorite tech site to find more crap about how there's ''untapped potential'' in Bulldozer. More bullshit about how ''if you make this small tweak, it will change the entire performance of the chip.'' when back in reality it performs like shit and will be shit until they actually focus on the chips themselves, stop blaming the motherboards, stop blaming Windows 7.

Damn i need to sleep, still a bit angry. Be back in the mourning!!

 

[Damn_Smooth]

I agree.

Anyways keep in mind, i wrote that post that brash mostly cause i'm tired, got home late, so im mad, and then i go on my favorite tech site to find more crap about how there's ''untapped potential'' in Bulldozer. More bullshit about how ''if you make this small tweak, it will change the entire performance of the chip.'' when back in reality it performs like shit and will be shit until they actually focus on the chips themselves, stop blaming the motherboards, stop blaming Windows 7.

Damn i need to sleep, still a bit angry. Be back in the mourning!!

I definitely see where you're coming from man. I expected more from BD too. I still think they have the potential to make something good with the architecture but I would have preferred another delay over what they released.

Have a good night.

 

[Goodman]

More bullshit about how ''if you make this small tweak, it will change the entire performance of the chip.'' when back in reality it performs like shit and will be shit until they actually focus on the chips themselves, stop blaming the motherboards, stop blaming Windows 7.

Damn i need to sleep, still a bit angry. Be back in the mourning!!

No! man you're not sleepy you're well awake , that is what i think also...

 

[wolf]

these CPU's should have never been called FX, that name is now forever tainted by this release. the could have done all the dev work and named the chip's just a month or two before release, I have a feeling if it had been done that way they wouldn't be FX CPUs.

 

[Goodman]

I found a funny AMD Bulldozer video (not really a Bulldozer still funny )

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQWWbr6qKM0&feature=related

 

[Super XP]

Following your reasoning then, since there's a slight increase in performance of using an ASUS Maximus IV Extreme-Z over the Z68A-GD65 (which was the Sandy Bridge motherboard in the [H] review) they should also retest everything, but with a different board for the AMD and Intel CPUs?

No why should they, Sandy Bridge is not Brand New Built from the ground up. Bulldozer is. The company to blame for the inconsistenty in performance and incompatability via mobo's and such is AMD period. My issue is people are not giving them credit for putting out innovation and trying something new.

We all now know the history about why Bulldozer was not as good as we thought. Upper Management made stupid decisions and now AMD is paying for them, hopefully in the short term until Piledriver comes out.

Bulldozer is far from being a wash though, they may not outperform as much as we would have liked, it's still a great CPU. And it still holds it's ground in gaming along with many other apps, it just needs to be priced about $50 less right now.

As for most of the reviews on October 12, 2011, most if not all need to re-Benchmark Bulldozer with proper updates from scratch.

 

[AsRock]

http://i.imgur.com/aLPRd.png

RIP AMD

You better hope that don't happen..

 

[CDdude55]

No why should they, Sandy Bridge is not Brand New Built from the ground up. Bulldozer is. The company to blame for the inconsistenty in performance and incompatability via mobo's and such is AMD period. My issue is people are not giving them credit for putting out innovation and trying something new.

We all now know the history about why Bulldozer was not as good as we thought. Upper Management made stupid decisions and now AMD is paying for them, hopefully in the short term until Piledriver comes out.

Bulldozer is far from being a wash though, they may not outperform as much as we would have liked, it's still a great CPU. And it still holds it's ground in gaming along with many other apps, it just needs to be priced about $50 less right now.

As for most of the reviews on October 12, 2011, most if not all need to re-Benchmark Bulldozer with proper updates from scratch.

I still disagree, i believe they will need to revise the actual chip design to make a difference in performance, updating the BIOS and swapping out the motherboards isn't the solution for the problem, because the chip is the problem. I commend them on trying a new design, i'm so glad they did cause K10 was ancient.

I'm personally waiting till Piledriver, but if they revise the current generation BD chips, that'd be great too.

I don't see a point in having all reviewers re-benchmark Bulldozer.

 

[HalfAHertz]

Well the best you could hope for is a CPU driver like for the old Athlon x2's and a new stepping. If each of those gave you 3-5% perf. then at least BD would be in the same ballpark as the PhII x6...

 

[CDdude55]

Well the best you could hope for is a CPU driver like for the old Athlon x2's and a new stepping. If each of those gave you 3-5% perf. then at least BD would be in the same ballpark as the PhII x6...

True that would help, still wouldn't be a enough to warrant an upgrade from a Phenom II just yet though.

If they can manage to make BD better then their current Phenom II chips at least in multi-threaded applications, only then would that warrant an upgrade for me. If they can keep the price down too along side that, i'd be a winner.

The TDP is also fairly high with BD, i'd also be great if they can lower the power consumption and heat output.

I would of bought one a few days ago at launch if they had done such things.

 

[cadaveca]

updating the BIOS and swapping out the motherboards isn't the solution for the problem, because the chip is the problem.

Erocker put it best...it IS a bulldozer....massive amounts of power possible, but very slow.

Put ia big pile of work in front of it, it will push right on through, but small pile isn't going to move any faster than big one.


It almost seems to me like perhaps AMD hoped for something like 5 GHz stock clocks, but fabrication issues prevented that goal from being reached.

To me this makes sense considering that the rumour is that a recent firing @ AMD was due to AMD not securing other foundries i ncase a situation like this happened...plain and simple, AMD didn't have a backup plan.


That said, I'm not going to expect as much as you are from revisions. I expect a die shrink will up clocks, and only at that point will AMD have a good chip, as SKT1155 products won't be the top performer for Intel, SKT2011 will.

So, Intel needs to be SKT1155 only, for the desktop space. Recent news says that Intel is lowering the TDP of 1155 with ivybridge, which could possibly mean that the clocks will not go up much more on 1155, for fear of outshadowing SKT2011.

 

[Super XP]

I still disagree, i believe they will need to revise the actual chip design to make a difference in performance, updating the BIOS and swapping out the motherboards isn't the solution for the problem, because the chip is the problem. I commend them on trying a new design, i'm so glad they did cause K10 was ancient.

I'm personally waiting till Piledriver, but if they revise the current generation BD chips, that'd be great too.

I don't see a point in having all reviewers re-benchmark Bulldozer.

Well yes I can see them taking Bulldozer's Design and manipulating it with massive tweaking for Piledriver.

 

[Covert_Death]

all i gotta say is i really wanna see piledriver more focused on desktop enthusiasts and released Q1 of next year for AM3+

i get that BD was more server focused and thats totally fine but they need to give us desktop enthusiasts something to upgrade too and i really hope it is a much better upgrade when PD comes rolling in to town

 

[ensabrenoir]

5....4...3,,,,2...1

let the over hyping of pile driver begin! What harm could it do?
yep.... intels going down... hard!!!!( going down a road made of cold hard cash cause when you make a Ferrari u can charge Ferrari prices)

 

[eidairaman1]

let the over hyping of pile driver begin! What harm could it do?
yep.... intels going down... hard!!!!( going down a road made of cold hard cash cause when you make a Ferrari u can charge Ferrari prices)

Problem is this is not a ferrari

 

[Covert_Death]

lol im not saying PD is gonna smoke intel... honestly i don't care, but i have an AM3+ board and would like to actually upgrade to something "competitive" if PD offers that on AM3+ then i will get it, if BD gets revised and looks better then i'll upgrade to that, i really don't care how it preforms to intel but how it performs with what i currently have

 

[Neuromancer]

Well AMD wont be going anywhere, they still have a strong GPU division.

As for CPUs, they wont be going anywhere either, in both VLPU and Server segments they have a strong enough base.

Having said that, I hope that they take the criticism, both from review sites, readers, owners and past employee testimony to redouble their efforts and make the next architecture more worthy. In the mean time they can try and improve on the design issues of the current gen.

The design of BD could be a success if for low threaded say up to for, it actually did use the 256bit FP, and saw a marked increase in performance as a result.

Perhaps it is up to using the right applications to take advantage of the design, as well as fixing the threading issues, I do not know enough. For now at least, until more useful information is out about it, I am holding off and sticking with my Thuban.

What would be interesting is if they released a good 4 core version not based on 2 modules but on 4 modules with 4 of the integer units designed out. (Or is that Llano? I will know soon enough anyway, FM1 board is here and CPU should be soon )

 

[Super XP]

Posted by seronx

New things in Piledriver that may be in some or all Piledriver CPUs:
Input/Output Memory Management Unit Version 2
Fused Multiply-Add 3
Converged Bit Manipulation Instructions
Trailing Bit Manipulation Instructions
Increased L1 DTLB size 32 entries to 64 entries
IPC & Power Management Improvements
Turbo Core Version 3

Piledriver CPUs:
Trinity
Viperfish(Sepang/Terramar/Vishera?)

What to expect:
10-15% increase in performance ( I think they can squeeze out a lot more with additional Tweaking of the original Bulldozer with the above updates. I say approx: 20% to 25%)
or
5-7.5% increase in performance and 5-7.5% decrease in power usage
or
10-15% decrease in power usage

 

[Athlonite]

Why's everyone comparing the power consumption of a 4core to an neutered 8core that's like comparing apples to bananas ofcourse it's going to use more power it's got more actual cores DUH

evan if it does perform worse watt for watt (that's just bad design)