Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

AMD FX-8150 Review: From Bulldozer To Zambezi To FX

Tags:
  • Bulldozer
  • AMD
  • Processors
Last response: in Reviews comments
Share
October 12, 2011 4:00:03 AM

Perhaps the most hotly-anticipated launch in 2011, AMD’s FX processor line-up is finally ready for prime time. Does the company’s new Bulldozer architecture have what it takes to face Intel’s Sandy Bridge and usher in a new era of competition?

AMD FX-8150 Review: From Bulldozer To Zambezi To FX : Read more

More about : amd 8150 review bulldozer zambezi

October 12, 2011 4:13:43 AM

yeah finaly, now i'll read it
Score
-25
Related resources
October 12, 2011 4:14:47 AM

Been so long and i'm kinda sad.
Score
51
October 12, 2011 4:16:12 AM

Not many surprises but I've been waiting for a long, long time for this. I hope this is just the first step to a more competitive AMD.
Score
43
October 12, 2011 4:16:24 AM

At least its almost as good as Nehalem.
Score
29
October 12, 2011 4:17:18 AM

Dissapointing. Predicted it ages ago though. PII X6 is a better value.
Score
40
Anonymous
October 12, 2011 4:18:17 AM

As I expected - failure.
Score
26
October 12, 2011 4:18:54 AM

I see the guys from the BD Rumors are here. As many others are, I'm disappointed.
Score
25
a b À AMD
October 12, 2011 4:20:32 AM

for the gaming community this is a FLOP.
Score
33
October 12, 2011 4:22:05 AM

FX-4100 looks like a good alternative to the 955BE. Same price, higher clock, and lower power profile.
Score
25
October 12, 2011 4:25:06 AM

Why bring back the FX brand for something like this?
Score
40
October 12, 2011 4:25:09 AM

What I learned: the 2.5 year old i7-920 is still a beast.
Score
47
October 12, 2011 4:28:28 AM

This is sad, I'm still getting it as its my only option i'm getting a 8120 Toms why did you only review a 8150 when they have all of them on other sites?
Score
-25
October 12, 2011 4:28:37 AM

What I've learned is...AMD=FAIL!!!!!
Score
-31
October 12, 2011 4:31:47 AM

As I said before, it won't come close to beating Intel in performance or price. Now let's hear the fanboys whine.

Buh-bye AMD, buh-bye!
Score
-35
October 12, 2011 4:36:53 AM

Looks like solid chips, but I'll admit that the price point isn't low enough to compete in the gaming world with Intel.

I am rather curious how the FX-4100 will stack up against the current Phenom II X4 chips.

And even though the FX is a slight disappointment, I am rather impressed by the Windows 8 benchmarks. Having said that, by the time Windows 8 is ready for release I'm sure Intel will have an even better solution.
Score
25
October 12, 2011 4:37:13 AM

So Bulldozer is AMD's version of NetBurst?
Score
25
October 12, 2011 4:38:22 AM

killerclickAs I said before, it won't come close to beating Intel in performance or price. Now let's hear the fanboys whine.


Everyone should cry, even the Intel fanboys, this is bad news for everyone, now Intel has absolutely no incentive to lower prices or accelerate Ivy Bridge.
Score
54
October 12, 2011 4:40:27 AM

homeboy2Everyone should cry, even the Intel fanboys, this is bad news for everyone, now Intel has absolutely no incentive to lower prices or accelerate Ivy Bridge.


Intel shouldn't lower prices, they should raise them. I'll gladly pay more to reward competent product development and nothing would please me more than AMD going down in flames for all their flops in the past 5 years. Intel doesn't need AMD to push them forward.
Score
-36
October 12, 2011 4:41:02 AM

killerclickAs I said before, it won't come close to beating Intel in performance or price. Now let's hear the fanboys whine.


Waaaahhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!

Bah, well, been with AMD since my first pc like 8 years ago...Guess I'll be going intel for the first time ever especially since I can get an overkill cpu for just 300 bucks. Hell that's how much I payed for my phenom II 955...
Score
12
October 12, 2011 4:43:59 AM

ARE YOU KIDDING ME.......
Score
16
October 12, 2011 4:49:11 AM

Funny, how if you enter to win the test rig it says

"Please Enter The Text Exactly As Displayed"

and proceeds to give you a basic math problem. Yet, if you follow directions and enter it exactly as displayed it says it says it failed and you may not be human. But if you ignore the directions and solve the basic math problem and enter the answer, it lets you enter.

Fail.
Score
-4
October 12, 2011 4:53:33 AM

leeashtonwait for tpu benchmark, toms has always been an Intel fan site
Talk to Don and Paul, the AMD fans. Chris doesn't care either way. But wait, two against zero would make this an AMD fansite wouldn't it?
Score
23
October 12, 2011 4:58:10 AM

leeashtonwait for tpu benchmark, toms has always been an Intel fan site

how long have you been around? in the thunderbird-athlon xp/barton days intel was getting bashed left and right by toms.
Score
24
October 12, 2011 4:58:38 AM

Makes me sad, I use to use AMD exclusively. I really wish AMD would come up with something competitive. I guess I'll stick with my i7 930.
Score
17
October 12, 2011 5:02:12 AM

I am gathering from the benchmarks that the people who need blurry photos in a hurry should take a very close look at this new AMD offering at it's current price point. Also, why would AMD put their newest product up against a 2 and half year old Intel chip in it's own promotional publications? Seriously ... should I just file that under a "lack of confidence" or "self-defeatism"?
Score
11
October 12, 2011 5:02:45 AM

Great review as usual, Mr. Chris!

Well, then the FX8150 looks more of a sidegrade to the PhII965 @4Ghz than an upgrade, huh...

AMD, I AM DISAPPOINT.

Oh well, let's wait for Piledriver to be a FXII-8150 or some name like that, lol.

What about some OC testing, Mr. Chris? I'm curious as to the FX making up for it's incompetence to beat steadily the 2500k with more Hertz under the hood.

Cheers!
Score
20
October 12, 2011 5:02:46 AM

i waited almost 3 years to upgrade guess i'll upgrade my phenom ii 940 one of these days. Ivy bridge it is i guess.
Score
18
October 12, 2011 5:03:12 AM

WOW~ Its like constipation, stress for it to come out and right before you are relieved of it, it stinks.
Score
11
a b À AMD
October 12, 2011 5:05:25 AM

phatbuddha79Why bring back the FX brand for something like this?


Thats a very good question. The last FX whomped the Pentium 4 EE series. This just is not FX. Its barley even BE worthy.

Tamz_mscSo Bulldozer is AMD's version of NetBurst?


I thought that was Phenom I.

homeboy2Everyone should cry, even the Intel fanboys, this is bad news for everyone, now Intel has absolutely no incentive to lower prices or accelerate Ivy Bridge.


Thats what i have been saying. Intel needs the competition, BUT they have been doing well for 5 years without any true competition, releasing new CPUs every year with betetr performance and decent prices. I hope Intel keeps going even with this let down.

In order for BD to be a success, it had to meet or beat the 2600K. Thats the only way.
Score
18
October 12, 2011 5:07:36 AM

This is a sad day for users... No real competition for Intel...

May be these models will do better....
http://www.cat.com/equipment
cheers
Score
20
October 12, 2011 5:07:41 AM

I feel sad, I was really hoping AMD could compete with the i5 2500k and the i7-2600k, Alas I must make an intel build.
Score
20
October 12, 2011 5:08:17 AM

jimmysmittyThats what i have been saying. Intel needs the competition, BUT they have been doing well for 5 years without any true competition, releasing new CPUs every year with betetr performance and decent prices.
Right now Intel has competition near the top, itself. They're pushing people to keep upgrading on a continuous three-year cycle just like the old days. When Intel slows down, people hold onto their old machine longer and Intel loses sales to its own older equipment.
Score
16
Anonymous
October 12, 2011 5:09:06 AM

Oh amd you disappoint me so...

didn't you learn anything from intels crappy ht crap years ago.. :( 
Score
-2
October 12, 2011 5:12:56 AM

not worth for the premium price and very long waiting times....sorry amd i have to switch to intel side now....:( 
Score
21
October 12, 2011 5:17:00 AM

Disappointed, but not giving up... Intel was in a similar position a few years back. I hope things will change again some time sooner rather than later. Perhaps the engineers should focus on making the chip a good performer in one specific area, like they did with their K7 back in the days (great FPU). That would at least throw them back in the game and they would excel in some areas and make their product attractive to at least part of the market. I think they tried too much getting a chip that would do everything and... it does something... but nothing particularly well.
Score
9
October 12, 2011 5:19:18 AM

ok... now show me the review about Bulldozer!! I can't believe that this review is about Bulldozer...
Score
10
October 12, 2011 5:20:25 AM

Bulldozer is more like man with a shovel. I'm completely underwhelmed at the performance of Bulldozer. You know it's pretty bad when even a 4-core, ~3 year old Phenom is beating a 8-core Bulldozer processor in some of the tests. The performance of Bulldozer is so erratic. It'll beat most of the others in some tests, but end up at the back of the pack in others. I was seriously considering getting a Bulldozer processor at some point so I would have a machine with a high core count, well, I've decided that I probably won't go that route now. I had a lot of enthusiasm for Bulldozer, but I'm completely disappointed. Another poster commented that Bulldozer is AMD's Netburst, and I have to agree.
Score
22
October 12, 2011 5:20:36 AM

[thinks handbrake/ media server]
Score
-2
October 12, 2011 5:22:29 AM

Only winner from the BD release is Intel, especially if they release the rumored i7 2700K and lower the prices of the rest of the Sandy Bridge lineup of chips (and basically slam the door on a huge chunk of sales from AMD).

In saying that; I almost thought AMD were never going to release these chips =/

phatbuddha79Why bring back the FX brand for something like this?


Marketing, and AMD are going to need a lot of it now for Bulldozer (their Llano and in future Trinity chips might help them weather the storm for the CPU division though, well until Piledriver comes along).

Score
14
October 12, 2011 5:25:50 AM

I wanna see the FX-4100 review.

Edit: 18?
Score
4
October 12, 2011 5:26:59 AM

::facepalm::

I was all ready to get a new CPU and this, heart-breaking utterly disappointing piece of silicon, will not be it. Ivy Bridge I'm waiting for you.

I want a kick ass CPU deserving of the "FX" moniker , not some server oriented chip that performs worse than the last generation in half of the benchmarks.

AMD: you need to compete to keep the market alive!!!!! Please do better!!!!

EDIT: Good review, thanks!
Score
23
October 12, 2011 5:28:38 AM

Man, what a disappointing turn of events. Why bother with the FX branding AMD? I have ♥ AMD for a long time, but I feel that they are simply not a large enough company to compete with Intel, Intel has about 5x the number of employees.

THIS IS BAD FOR EVERYONE. Intel has no competition and is 5x larger, sad days. Intel can charge $1,000 for a processor and people will buy it simply b/c there is no competition for processors at that level.

I would like to say, that the 4xxx processor looks promising to me, may be worth an upgrade from my 955BE.

Another thing to note, WHY does AMD stress the importance of extra cores? We are not at a point where anything is optimized to use these cores, so whats the point. If I were to get an Intel K process, I could disable HT.

Man I have been searching the web for BD news and rumors for the last 3 months, and this is what I get? Yes, its an improvement, but not much.

:( 
Score
8
October 12, 2011 5:28:39 AM

Ya I agree, seems like intel is gaining more and more ground in the processor market. Soon, they'll have the monopol of the chip industry =/ Bad bad thing, even for intel fans. There is nothing better than competition to push technologies forward.
Score
12
a c 192 À AMD
October 12, 2011 5:30:16 AM

well..back to phenom classic era..
there's must be bug inside the prossesor..

So..anyone know when bulldozer 2 will release..? :D 
___________

Ok..for the first time in 12 years, i'll build intel pc..
Score
12
October 12, 2011 5:31:53 AM

I know Mr. Angelini's review is a rollercoaster ride, but AMD faithful shouldn't be losing their lunches. Overall, it's not as bad as it seems, but I know that those who've been waiting month after agonizing month were hoping for more. Still, there's some good stuff here and who knows how it will perform in another metric: fun. Last year I bought 3 AMD processors. I truly hoped that Bulldozer would drop in the spring, and it didn't, but I whiled away the time by tweaking Phenoms, unlocking cores, undervolting them and overvolting them. It's a lot of fun, an important measure. Only two Sandy Bridge processors are any fun at all. Given the fact that the other 8 "core" Bulldozer will be more like $200 and could probably be as fast as the flagship with a multiplier bump, you get more value there. So they'll still be fun when paired with a great motherboard, and still pretty reasonable in price. Better power management helps efficiency, and while the best case performance scenario is good, the worst case isn't that bad either. It's not as fast as SB much of the time, but don't take that to mean BD is bunk; rather SB is just really, really good. Throughout all of the leaked slides and rumors and delays, I and many others said if it could come close to SB it would be a win, and I still think that's a case. AMD is still more flexible in some ways and still believes catering to the enthusiast is important. I still think I'll buy into BD even though I upgraded to a SB system this spring when BD was nowhere in sight. I don't think I'll be disappointed either. There are many other metrics that aren't covered in Mr. Angelini's thorough article anyway. Those will come out, and then we can see the whole platform as a package. It's still a net win.
Score
-9
October 12, 2011 5:34:18 AM

I think AMD succeeded for only 1 reason. AMD chipsets. If AMD can touch Sandy Bridge then thats good enough to make it a good bargain. The chipsets on AMDs are just way better then on Intels. Much more support for new tech, and more PCI-e lanes.
Score
-6
a b À AMD
October 12, 2011 5:35:05 AM

Good review;
thanks for pulling it together for us.
Score
13
Anonymous
October 12, 2011 5:37:05 AM

AMD should really take what they have now and work on making a standard clock of 5GHz. The architecture is great, AMD has always had great ideas, but they haven't been able to follow through with the performance this time.

I think if Bulldozer had a clock of 5GHz, within the 125W, then it would be good enough.

What a shame though ... looks like I will be getting an i5 at the end of the month.
Score
-6
    • 1 / 11
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
    • More pages
    • Next
    • Newest
!