AMD FX 8150 Looks Core i7-980X and Core i7 2600K in the Eye: AMD Benchmarks

[Black Hades]

[...]Chart #3: Fantastic! AMD processors work with instructions only their software uses. Kind of pointless. [...]

Intel will introduce hardware FMA3 in 2011 (or later).[link, japanese] These instructions may arrive with the 22 nm process, also slated for march 2012.

FMA4 will be supported in AMD processors from 2011.
AMD will support FMA3 in the future for compatibility reasons if Intel sticks to FMA3 only.[link]

A member of the Intel forum asked:
"I have heard that Sandy Bridge won't have FMA implementation." True?
Answer from an Intel official representative:
"Sandy Bridge will not have FMA, it's targeted for a future processor. I apologize if there is any confusion I (or Intel) caused. In our defense, we did discuss feature timing in the last two Intel developer forums [...]"

 

[HTC]

Oh My....good news More benchmarks please!!

All the slides i found on this topic @ XS:

 

[GSquadron]

Simply insane xD

 

[AMDfur]

Ok, I know now what my next CPU will be. Thanks for sharing the info. Good luck Intel fans.

 

[RejZoR]

Now just release the damn thing...

 

[HTC]

All i want to know now is:

1 - How will it underclock

2 - When will it be available for purchase in my area

 

[legends84]

ok. I'll go for this.. early next year

 

[ViperXTR]

Paper benchmarks. I wonder why they didn't include SiSoft Sandra benchmarks?

http://www.legitreviews.com/news/11430/ http://i56.tinypic.com/2e1sp3m.gif

what processor are they exactly comparing? i see 4C/8T but only 6mb cache, isnt the 2600K 3.4Ghz and 8mb cache?

 

[YautjaLord]

Finally, some paper numbers; hope it'll be the same when you TPU staff guys bench this monster. Plus i wonder what mobo they used; i hope it was either Crosshair V Formula or Sabertooth 990FX.

 

[catnipkiller]

Oh yes it will run crysis.

 

[repman244]

FX-4170 will be a best for gaming IMO, great price and great clock and same amount of L3 cache as the 8 core model.

 

[JrRacinFan]

FX-4170 will be a best for gaming IMO, great price and great clock and same amount of L3 cache as the 8 core model.

Unlockable 8 core? Hmmmm

 

[FreedomEclipse]

In bit-tech.net reviews of a 990x, they said a 2500k was a little faster when both processors were overclocked. but the 990x's saving grace was when it came to heavy multitasking

 

[Recus]

what processor are they exactly comparing? i see 4C/8T but only 6mb cache, isnt the 2600K 3.4Ghz and 8mb cache?

Probably 2500k.

 

[Shihab]

Nah, I'm still sceptic about this. tis hard for me to believe AMD will own intel with a single release. Nope thx, I think I'll wait for a third party benchmarks and reviews.

It would be nice if these benches were accurate though. Wouldn't mind intel pushing down the prices on their sandy bridge to sub $150

 

[TheMailMan78]

Well judging those MARKETING slides I would say AMD hit the spot I figured. About equal with Sandy. Thats about all anyone can ask for honestly. I'm looking forward to the upgrade. Ill take it all with a grain of salt until I see a TPU bench.

 

[MilkyWay]

8 cores vs 4 cores i would be surprised they couldn't match the i5 2500k, IMO its bollocks that it needs double the cores to just match it. Im more interested in those 6 core and 4 core bulldozer performance.

Still i call fud on everything until i see multiple random reviewers get their hands on them.

 

[TRWOV]

Finally. Although I'll likely wait until the socket change before deciding to upgrade to IB or BD these results are promising and Trinity just got more interesting.

 

[TheMailMan78]

8 cores vs 4 cores i would be surprised they couldn't match the i5 2500k, IMO its bollocks that it needs double the cores to just match it. Im more interested in those 6 core and 4 core bulldozer performance.

Still i call fud on everything until i see multiple random reviewers get their hands on them.

One thing ya gotta keep in mind with AMD is they are not real cores as AMD markets them. They are modular. So when you see this whole "8 core vs 4 core" debate its bulls@!t. An AMD 8 core vs a Intel 4 core is equal for all given circumstances.

Even if it was a true 8 core it shouldn't matter to you. All the consumer should care about it bang for the buck. I wouldn't care if it used 50 cores as long as its faster AND cheaper then the last generation.

 

[Crap Daddy]

Nah, I'm still sceptic about this. tis hard for me to believe AMD will own intel with a single release. Nope thx, I think I'll wait for a third party benchmarks and reviews.

It would be nice if these benches were accurate though. Wouldn't mind intel pushing down the prices on their sandy bridge to sub $150

Read again between the lines. This is AMD advertising and we don't know if it's true.
It's under sandy bridge in 6 out of eight multithreaded benches. Plus the cinebench which is awfull if true. Hence the price they're asking. In gaming the comparison are made against phenom II x6 1100 and 980x which is slower than sandy when we talk games. The only good thing is high OC potential - hence the OC record presented to the world -

 

[TheMailMan78]

Read again between the lines. This is AMD advertising and we don't know if it's true.
It's under sandy bridge in 6 out of eight multithreaded benches. Plus the cinebench which is awfull if true. Hence the price they're asking. In gaming the comparison are made against phenom II x6 1100 and 980x which is slower than sandy when we talk games. The only good thing is high OC potential - hence the OC record presented to the world -

I count 4 not 6 and its cheaper. So like I said on par with Sandy. Not above. Exactly where AMD should be.

 

[nINJAkECIL]

One thing ya gotta keep in mind with AMD is they are not real cores as AMD markets them. They are modular. So when you see this whole "8 core vs 4 core" debate its bulls@!t. An AMD 8 core vs a Intel 4 core is equal for all given circumstances.

Even if it was a true 8 core it shouldn't matter to you. All the consumer should care about it bang for the buck. I wouldn't care if it used 50 cores as long as its faster AND cheaper then the last generation.

Couldn't agree more than that.
Although I've used Intel cpus for the past 5 years, I'm ready to jump ship if AMD FX 8150 is on par with 2600K.

 

[TRWOV]

Probably 2500k.

2500K is 4C/4T



The 4170 looks interesting: 4 core with 125w TDP? Am I smelling an unlockable FX?

 

[xenocide]

I always take performance numbers directly from a marketing department with a quarry full of salt.

 

[TRWOV]

Of course, they are cherry picked benchs, maybe at settings that benefit AMD the most but still even if it ends being between Gulftown and Sandy Bridge plus the overclocking potential and the cheaper price, FX is an enticing platform, no doubt, and far from the catastrophic failure that a lot of people though it would be.

Is this keeps up for PD and IB I might buy my first AMD CPU. I'm somewhat tired of having to buy an entire new platform to upgrade.