AMD Releases FX Series of Bulldozer-Based CPUs

[fuzzykiss]

OH YEAH BABY!!
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2394505,00.asp#fbid=5vMQh8Ik3oX
maybe I should have said "oh no baby"
after waiting so long...today is almost a day of mourning for me.

 

[AdrianPerry]

Well.....It's about time....

 

[fuzzykiss]

you got that right

 

[Chirag Borawake]

Its a disappointment.
Have a look at it..!

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/fx-8150-zambezi-bulldozer-990fx,3043.html

http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/315688-28-bulldozer

http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/315706-28-worth-bulldozer

http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/315689-28-bulldozer-expected

 

[fuzzykiss]

Its a disappointment.
Have a look at it..!

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/fx-8150-zambezi-bulldozer-990fx,3043.html

http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/315688-28-bulldozer

http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/315706-28-worth-bulldozer

http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/315689-28-bulldozer-expected

unfortunately you are right, i've seen my own favorite sites as well and it doesn't really blow away the 2500 at all, speak nothing of the 2600, and thats just sad really, being an AMD fan, because i know the rest of this post will be filled up with all the intel fans shouting their 'i told ya so' rants.

 

[Chirag Borawake]

unfortunately you are right, i've seen my own favorite sites as well and it doesn't really blow away the 2500 at all, speak nothing of the 2600, and thats just sad really, being an AMD fan, because i know the rest of this post will be filled up with all the intel fans shouting their 'i told ya so' rants.

Even I am an Intel fan, but I never thought that AMD is 'not good'.
What I thought was, from the rumors, that for a month, or at least for couple of days, AMD Bulldozer will lead the market, calling itself 'The fastest CPU on the planet' or something like that. Just like the way they released the ATI Radeon HD6990, and it was the fastest GPU, until GTX 590 came out.

 

[fuzzykiss]

Even I am an Intel fan, but I never thought that AMD is 'not good'.
What I thought was, from the rumors, that for a month, or at least for couple of days, AMD Bulldozer will lead the market, calling itself 'The fastest CPU on the planet' or something like that. Just like the way they released the ATI Radeon HD6990, and it was the fastest GPU, until GTX 590 came out.

and yes, even intel fans should be saddened at this news..for without competition intel has no need to improve what it has currently..they don't need to push the envelope, just sit back a few years and cash in on what they already have.

 

[ScrewySqrl]

well, other than some serious issues with FPU (Less than thuban in SuperPi?) It competes with sandy, which means its at least competitive now.

which is better than 2 generations behind.

I suspect some software tweaks will improve performance a little. My bet is the 6100 will be close to a 2300/2400 in performance, which will make it the best budget deal at $180.

 

[fuzzykiss]

well, other than some serious issues with FPU (Less than thuban in SuperPi?) It competes with sandy, which means its at least competitive now.

which is better than 2 generations behind.

I suspect some software tweaks will improve performance a little. My bet is the 6100 will be close to a 2300/2400 in performance, which will make it the best budget deal at $180.

possibly, hopefully, they will do a bios upgrade maybe. i dunno, after all the fanfare..highest overclocking..blah blah..all the hype..this was really a do or die situation for AMD and they came up short..
the intel fans don't even need to rant, i'll do it for them...sigh

 

[bucknutty]

I have been thinking about a new CPU and board, for gaming. I have been waiting and waiting to see what bulldozer was going to do and I am little disappointed. Looking strictly at a price to performance ratio it’s hard to see any positives in the 8150.

I can get an i5 for 210 and a x68 board for 100, total update would be $310.

Or I can get a 8150 for $260 (that’s the cheapest I have seen it) and a 990-fx board for 140. Total update costs $400.

So for 90 bucks extra I get a computer that will some times be better in heavily threaded tasks but will often be the same or slower, and will always be slower in single threaded tasks.

I feel sad.

 

[coffeecoffee]

and yes, even intel fans should be saddened at this news..for without competition intel has no need to improve what it has currently..they don't need to push the envelope, just sit back a few years and cash in on what they already have.

My thoughts exactly - although I have to admit - there is a lot of future potential and as AMD said it's a design in it's Infant stages. The current results may be disappointing but with the new architecture a few updates might be all it needs to turn the tables and turn this into a heated tie.

~Coffee

 

[Mastervivi10]

I suspect some software tweaks will improve performance a little. My bet is the 6100 will be close to a 2300/2400 in performance, which will make it the best budget deal at $180.

I Don't think there exist such a Magical Bios update or Microcode or whatever kind of programing that will help the situation simply because: There is no way to reverse the CPU from consuming about twice as an Intel I5 or i7 for a 4.5-4.6 OC on Air.

 

[Mastervivi10]

So yeah, I'm not recommending Any BD CPU's to no one.

 

[striker410]

It was a big dissappointment. I wished AMD could have pulled it off, but alas. They must have run into some severe problems in development for it to have taken THIS LONG and is THIS CRAPPY. I'm really disappointed, I am(was) an AMD fan myself.

 

[ScrewySqrl]

well, the 6100 in the few items I've seen is on par with a 2300 stock (no one has OCed it yet), and the 4100 matches a i3-2100.

so again, AMD seems to be a value chip, not a game breaker.

 

[fuzzykiss]

It was a big dissappointment. I wished AMD could have pulled it off, but alas. They must have run into some severe problems in development for it to have taken THIS LONG and is THIS CRAPPY. I'm really disappointed, I am(was) an AMD fan myself.

well...i'm STILL an AMD fan albeit a severely disappointed one...

 

[mxsix]

I use Intel CPUs so I haven't really been keeping up with this Bulldozer stuff, but from these Tom's benchmarks it's a little bit of a letdown. Please excuse my lack of knowledge on the subject but I thought it was supposed to give Intel a run for its money.

 

[bucknutty]

In my mind the only way the FX-8150 would make sense to the average consumer would be if it costs around $150. It is a pretty impressive CPU but the value is not there when a cheaper CPU, or even a last generation cpu can outperform it.

Maybe we will get lucky and in a few months there will be a newer revision that will address the lack of ability to handle single threaded tasks, and maybe the new revision will be less expensive to manufacture.

Maybe a magic unicorn will appear in my back yard and befriend me and I can name him and take him on adventures.

 

[fish_86]

I feel that AMD needs to come up with a whole new architecture. Take what they know and redesign and build off that. I seems they are trying to keep things compatable with older models and just modify and tweak. I say start fresh and start a new beginning. I feel AMD is getting to far behind with there CPUs and it needs a major overhaul. We need some competition. Every personal computer that I own is AMD and I plan to stay loyal, but this was a big disappointment.

 

[ScrewySqrl]

apparently no one else is listening to OUR grumbling:

Sold out already.

 

[DoomsWord89]

"I'm just as excited to see how BD performs as the next guy. But losing your mind over a single article that says nothing at all about the overall performance of the CPU seems a bit pre-mature and overly optimistic."

"Don't you think?"

Sound familiar, Fuzz?

 

[bucknutty]

"I'm just as excited to see how BD performs as the next guy. But losing your mind over a single article that says nothing at all about the overall performance of the CPU seems a bit pre-mature and overly optimistic."

"Don't you think?"

Sound familiar, Fuzz?

Not just one article. A few of the other posters put links to real world benchmarks and comparisons. This new chip just cant hang with i5 or i7, and is beat by the old phenom x4 in a few of the tests.

bulldozer = weaksauce

 

[DoomsWord89]

Not just one article. A few of the other posters put links to real world benchmarks and comparisons. This new chip just cant hang with i5 or i7, and is beat by the old phenom x4 in a few of the tests.

bulldozer = weaksauce

Indeed, I was simply referring to what I told the OP several months ago in one of his past posts about BD.

 

[bucknutty]

oh... I see the quotes now.....

well then carry on, and good day to you sir.

 

[geekapproved]

I think the issue is that games and programs are not seeing a module as 2 cores which is a problem with this architecture right now and my be fixed in the future, but that doesn't help now.

Anandtech:

AMD also shared with us that Windows 7 isn't really all that optimized for Bulldozer. Given AMD's unique multi-core module architecture, the OS scheduler needs to know when to place threads on a single module (with shared caches) vs. on separate modules with dedicated caches. Windows 7's scheduler isn't aware of Bulldozer's architecture and as a result sort of places threads wherever it sees fit, regardless of optimal placement. Windows 8 is expected to correct this, however given the short lead time on Bulldozer reviews we weren't able to do much experimenting with Windows 8 performance on the platform. There's also the fact that Windows 8 isn't expected out until the end of next year, at which point we'll likely see an upgraded successor to Bulldozer.