Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

AMD FX-8150 Tested with Latest Windows Hotfixes, Still No Improvement

Last response: in CPUs
Share
a b à CPUs
January 13, 2012 1:08:59 PM

German tech website TweakPC did a before-after comparison of applying Microsoft's recently-released KB2645594 + KB2646060 Windows updates, which intend to improve performance of systems running AMD FX processors, by improving the way in which the OS deals with Bulldozer cores, using a top-of-the-line FX-8150 processor. The reviewer put FX-8150 through synthetic tests such as AIDA64 (CPU benchmarks, FPU benchmarks), Cinebench 11.5, MaxxPi (multi-threaded PI calculations), WPrime, Twofish AES, 3DMark (Vantage and 11), ComputeMark; and some real-world tests such as WinRAR, Resident Evil 5, and Battleforge. Barring Resident Evil 5, where the patched FX-8150 produced 4% higher performance and WinRAR, where it produced 3% higher performance, there were no significant performance gains noticed. The review can be accessed at the source.


http://www.tweakpc.de/hardware/tests/cpu/amd_bulldozer_...
http://www.techpowerup.com/158623/AMD-FX-8150-Tested-wi...



a b à CPUs
January 13, 2012 1:43:43 PM

Small improvements does not mean no improvement. Nobody should really have expected that this fix would give a stunningly huge boost. Take it for what it is.
a b à CPUs
January 13, 2012 1:54:50 PM

we had AMD fan boys posting 20% improvements
a b à CPUs
January 13, 2012 2:07:12 PM

And now they look like tools. But that site lying\hyperboling with that headline is stupid as well. If I could get up to 4% increase in some selected programs, I'd gladly take it.
January 13, 2012 3:09:00 PM

I gave up on AMD already. I find it sad that they are trying to scapegoat the horrible IPC of their new chips which was something they knew was a problem but didn't focus on it.
a b à CPUs
January 13, 2012 4:25:44 PM

Like I said 100 times, you won't see the potential until Win8. Even with Hotfixes the scheduler cannot make efficient use of BD's module architecture or core parking.

a b à CPUs
January 13, 2012 4:29:33 PM

dirtyferret said:
we had AMD fan boys posting 20% improvements



What makes you different fanboy? You should be praying AMD doesn't leave the cpu market, instead your bashing the only competition. That makes you a not so smart fanboy.
January 13, 2012 4:38:00 PM

grumbledook said:
And now they look like tools.

It isn't just now.
a b à CPUs
January 13, 2012 4:44:27 PM

geekapproved said:
Like I said 100 times, you won't see the potential until Win8. Even with Hotfixes the scheduler cannot make efficient use of BD's module architecture or core parking.


Question: Since Win8 is based on the Win7 kernal, why should we expect any farther improvement?
a b à CPUs
January 13, 2012 5:50:07 PM

geekapproved said:
What makes you different fanboy? You should be praying AMD doesn't leave the cpu market, instead your bashing the only competition. That makes you a not so smart fanboy.


simple, I don't have a favorite dog in the race. I know you lack the simple intelligence to check out my specs under my name but if you did have at least a second grade education you could see I have both an AMD/ATI and Intel/Nvidia PC. I prefer the best PC part performance for my money rather then cheer whatever company happens to be in my PC at the time in order to make myself feel better on my part decisions.
:pfff: 
a b à CPUs
January 13, 2012 11:20:39 PM

AMD is a dead horse at this point and we all know that Intel is the big blue in this segment of the overall industry much like IBM was back in the day which isn't going to change any time soon. Intel can get away with it if they jacked prices now if they wanted while playing the harp by putting the blame on a superficial issue. The problem with AMD is that it is poorly organized and has no real leadership while corporate culture is like a boat with a hole in the bottom. I wouldn't want to work there either knowing how people think after BD ruined almost all it's chances of surviving for another few years. They could have gotten another year out of Stars but left it to rot and whoever suggested that it was a good idea to share a FPU between two cores and other limited resources per module is crazy. Their almost total reliance on automated design software for their cpus is what has doomed them in the end and will catch up to Intel someday.
January 13, 2012 11:45:29 PM

AMD should not and probably will not leave the CPU market, seriously, despite faildozer their Phenom II line is pretty successful in the budget pc market. Also if they did, expect CPUs to fall behind rapidly as intel devotes less to R&D as they now have no competition.
a b à CPUs
a b À AMD
January 14, 2012 12:00:58 AM

@OP
I don't see how you can look yourself in the eye and say you aren't a fanboy but I digress.

4% for a hotfix doesn't seem bad. The people taunting 20% boosts looks just as bad as those who disregarded the possibility of software optimization of the scheduler.

window 8 will most likely be able to do it better, I don't see why it wouldn't as they will get more time with the hardware as well as most cooperation with AMD to fix it.

@nforce4max
bulldozer's failure isn't do to the design from AMD. everything they put up should work on paper, its the premature 32nm node and the forced launch on unoptimized software that really broke bulldozer. Neither of which is 100% under AMD's control but they should have tested better. The module design saved a lot of die area and would see no detrimental effects in general computing if done correctly.
January 14, 2012 12:03:26 AM

Bulldozer is still a new architecture.
I hope they can bring it up to an acceptable level to compete against Intel with the next generations but there is definitely no guarantee that this will be the case.
But if it is, it means more competition and lower prices for us all =D
January 14, 2012 12:07:39 AM

nforce4max said:
AMD is a dead horse at this point and we all know that Intel is the big blue in this segment of the overall industry much like IBM was back in the day which isn't going to change any time soon. Intel can get away with it if they jacked prices now if they wanted while playing the harp by putting the blame on a superficial issue. The problem with AMD is that it is poorly organized and has no real leadership while corporate culture is like a boat with a hole in the bottom. I wouldn't want to work there either knowing how people think after BD ruined almost all it's chances of surviving for another few years. They could have gotten another year out of Stars but left it to rot and whoever suggested that it was a good idea to share a FPU between two cores and other limited resources per module is crazy. Their almost total reliance on automated design software for their cpus is what has doomed them in the end and will catch up to Intel someday.

I dont understand how AMD is getting based for having performance = and better than 2500K in some instances.
January 14, 2012 12:09:14 AM

^--Probably in heavily threaded applications, even with the unoptimised design. more threads = more processing power. However most applications dont multithread, whcih is where they fail.
a b à CPUs
January 14, 2012 12:34:34 AM

esrever said:
@OP
I don't see how you can look yourself in the eye and say you aren't a fanboy but I digress.



easy i posted the truth. I linked an article from a review and I stated "AMD fan boys where stating 20% on this site". If would be no different if I linked benchmarks from tests of Intel, Nvidia, Cooler Master, Antec, etc., If you don't like the review I linked so be it and stick your head in the sand and pretend it does not exist. I'm sure that strategy has served you well in..."life" :lol: 
a b à CPUs
January 14, 2012 12:40:10 AM

That sounds familiar, like someone posting a decent review for BD while someone else saying the results are fake because BD can't be good no matter what.
a b à CPUs
January 14, 2012 1:16:35 AM

BD is not a bad chip at all nor is it a failure in the sense that it doesn't perform well, just doesn't perform as well as AMD's aggressive marketing campaign would have had you believe. I realize that Intel is a slightly better performer, but in real world everyday use the differences are very minute.
January 14, 2012 1:27:07 AM

programmargorp said:
^--Probably in heavily threaded applications, even with the unoptimised design. more threads = more processing power. However most applications dont multithread, whcih is where they fail.

Dude an OCed 8150FX is doing just as well as or even better than an i5 2500K in all tests and the trade blows and in gaming OCed 8150fx pwns just as much as 2500K so .....
a c 146 à CPUs
a b À AMD
January 15, 2012 4:53:04 AM

Does it surprise you that there was pretty much no increase in performance. As people have said on here a million times Bulldozer is a failure and a Windows 7 patch or Windows 8 isn't really going to do jack. The only hope they have is with Pile Driver.
January 15, 2012 5:05:53 AM

rds1220 said:
Does it surprise you that there was pretty much no increase in performance. As people have said on here a million times Bulldozer is a failure and a Windows 7 patch or Windows 8 isn't really going to do jack. The only hope they have is with Pile Driver.

Misinformation ^
a c 146 à CPUs
a b À AMD
January 15, 2012 5:08:39 AM

No it's not. The Windows patch didn't do anything and it's not going to. Windows 8 isn't going to be any better. You have all the AMD fanboys on here boasting a 20% increase with Windows 8 and guess what it's not going to be anywhere near that. Again they their only hope is Pile Driver.
January 15, 2012 5:50:14 AM

rds1220 said:
No it's not. The Windows patch didn't do anything and it's not going to. Windows 8 isn't going to be any better. You have all the AMD fanboys on here boasting a 20% increase with Windows 8 and guess what it's not going to be anywhere near that. Again they their only hope is Pile Driver.

8150FX still offers 2500K performance as it stands today and that's plenty more than enough for me now if the price will just come down to that of 2500K it's all good.
a c 116 à CPUs
a b À AMD
January 15, 2012 6:32:20 AM

where? it managed to beat a 2500k in 1 test out of 30 and in the other tests it lost by 6-30 percent... seriously climb out of that bubble coz your not doing your cred any god with that fanboy crap...

it passmark put it ahead of the 2500k but only just and it has 4 more cores..

seriously do you want to be embarrassed with benchmarks...?

http://static.techspot.com/articles-info/452/bench/Memo... oops! thats 1
http://static.techspot.com/articles-info/452/bench/Memo... thats 2
http://static.techspot.com/articles-info/452/bench/Synt... it cant even match the 4170 so it looses out to its own lesser brother.
http://static.techspot.com/articles-info/452/bench/Synt...... seriously do you want me to go on....

these are results from just 1 site... if i could be botherd to drive this home i would post more...
but i guess you wouldnt listed so i wont bother. just know if you spend your money on the 8140fx your wasting your money when you can have more performance for less cash...

January 15, 2012 7:13:30 AM

HEXiT said:
where? it managed to beat a 2500k in 1 test out of 30 and in the other tests it lost by 6-30 percent... seriously climb out of that bubble coz your not doing your cred any god with that fanboy crap...

it passmark put it ahead of the 2500k but only just and it has 4 more cores..

seriously do you want to be embarrassed with benchmarks...?

http://static.techspot.com/articles-info/452/bench/Memo... oops! thats 1
http://static.techspot.com/articles-info/452/bench/Memo... thats 2
http://static.techspot.com/articles-info/452/bench/Synt... it cant even match the 4170 so it looses out to its own lesser brother.
http://static.techspot.com/articles-info/452/bench/Synt...... seriously do you want me to go on....

these are results from just 1 site... if i could be botherd to drive this home i would post more...
but i guess you wouldnt listed so i wont bother. just know if you spend your money on the 8140fx your wasting your money when you can have more performance for less cash...

Funny how when you Overclock a CPU like 8150fx it performs allot better and funny how you are basing 8150fx on its stock clock performance not overclocked.
January 15, 2012 7:15:15 AM

HEXiT said:
where? it managed to beat a 2500k in 1 test out of 30 and in the other tests it lost by 6-30 percent... seriously climb out of that bubble coz your not doing your cred any god with that fanboy crap...

it passmark put it ahead of the 2500k but only just and it has 4 more cores..

seriously do you want to be embarrassed with benchmarks...?

http://static.techspot.com/articles-info/452/bench/Memo... oops! thats 1
http://static.techspot.com/articles-info/452/bench/Memo... thats 2
http://static.techspot.com/articles-info/452/bench/Synt... it cant even match the 4170 so it looses out to its own lesser brother.
http://static.techspot.com/articles-info/452/bench/Synt...... seriously do you want me to go on....

these are results from just 1 site... if i could be botherd to drive this home i would post more...
but i guess you wouldnt listed so i wont bother. just know if you spend your money on the 8140fx your wasting your money when you can have more performance for less cash...

Funny how nobody uses those software's.
a c 81 à CPUs
a b À AMD
January 15, 2012 8:33:28 AM

the best way to get efficient, better performance out of an fx 8150 is to undervolt it and keep everything else at stock settings. otherwise, the ever-so-slight performance increase from overclocking to 4.5-something ghz goes away because of the very, very high power consumption.
currently available fx cpus do underperform significantly for what they promised and what they should be capable of.
may be the next revisions and windows 8 will improve their situation a bit. by then, fx might have to compete with amd's own trinity and intel's ivy bridge. i'll believe their performance increase with windows 8 when windows 8 comes out...next year..? (latest i heard was october 2012..)
a b à CPUs
January 15, 2012 2:52:51 PM

Gordon Freeman said:
8150FX still offers 2500K performance as it stands today and that's plenty more than enough for me now if the price will just come down to that of 2500K it's all good.


I think BD is badly overpriced CPU that shows little improvement over the phenom II to warrant an upgrade. As a new CPU it's capable enough but there are better options for the price and intel currently shows a better upgrade path. Stating the 8150 is equal to the i5-2500k is a flat out lie though. If you need to state that in order to convince yourself it's as good (to defend your purchase) so be it but it makes you sound a like a fool.


Any objective person will tell you that starting from scratch on new build, the i5-2500k is the way to go and most of the PCs I build include AMD processors including several built just for me.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/288?vs=434
January 15, 2012 8:27:23 PM

dirtyferret said:
I think BD is badly overpriced CPU that shows little improvement over the phenom II to warrant an upgrade. As a new CPU it's capable enough but there are better options for the price and intel currently shows a better upgrade path. Stating the 8150 shows i5-2500k is a flat out lie though. If you need to state that in order to convince yourself it's as good (to defend your purchase) so be it but it makes you sound a like a fool.


Any objective person will tell you that starting from scratch on new build, the i5-2500k is the way to go and most of the PCs I build include AMD processors including several built just for me.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/288?vs=434

Well generally 2500K and 8150fx will be strong for at leased another 4 years abd 8150fx will come down in price where did 2500K start at price wise ? and to think that AMD will not have something else to upgrade to by then is just stupidity and ignorance on your end. PS I could give a **** about some upgrade path I have been on various Phenom II x4 CPUs since 09 and its been great to me so tone it on the Intel MANTRA please.
a b à CPUs
January 15, 2012 8:32:56 PM

Gordon Freeman said:
Well generally 2500K and 8150fx will be strong for at leased another 4 years abd 8150fx will come down in price where did 2500K start at price wise ? and to think that AMD will not have something else to upgrade to by then is just stupidity and ignorance on your end. PS I could give a **** about some upgrade path I have been on various Phenom II x4 CPUs since 09 and its been great to me so tone it on the Intel MANTRA please.


1. "I could give a **** about some upgrade path"

preceded

2. "and to think that AMD will not have something else to upgrade to by then is just stupidity"

so pick one, either you care or you don't. seems to me you are just defending your purchase against, clearly, a superior product.

I actually like the phenom II CPUs and have one in one of my builds.
January 15, 2012 8:46:37 PM

dirtyferret said:
1. "I could give a **** about some upgrade path"

preceded

2. "and to think that AMD will not have something else to upgrade to by then is just stupidity"

so pick one, either you care or you don't. seems to me you are just defending your purchase against, clearly, a superior product.

I actually like the phenom II CPUs and have one in one of my builds.

If you read my post I am on a Phenom II build today and stop trying to pick apart and troll a post it just make you look the fool and the ass. Fact is when you actual do the research on BD it is a good Upgrade from Phenom II and BD just got a bad rap from the media and fan boys just because BD is an a decent CPU people had to pick apart all its short comings but did not bother to bring to light it's greatness like try and OC any Phenom II chip to 5ghz like you can on BD. I really dont care about your geek nerd strategies just leave me alone unless you want to talk hard facts in which you are not.
a c 116 à CPUs
a b À AMD
January 15, 2012 9:04:12 PM

the only 1 trolling is you gordon... you dont deserve to wear them tags...
i think a little troll best back off with his ignorance and stupidity remarks... or he may find the only ignorant and stupid person he can point his fingers at is himself...

i said you wouldn't listen. and you didnt. i use 3dsmax which cinibench models.
you obviously didnt get the first 2 which are just measures of memory band width and cache latency 2 of the more important aspects of a cpu... because the memory bandwidth is so low it means it will bottleneck gfx crads quicker, and the cache is slow it means it cant repeatedly read small instruction code as efficiently... grow up little boy or better still go play at the kiddies table and let the adults talk in piece.
January 15, 2012 9:44:41 PM

HEXiT said:
the only 1 trolling is you gordon... you dont deserve to wear them tags...
i think a little troll best back off with his ignorance and stupidity remarks... or he may find the only ignorant and stupid person he can point his fingers at is himself...

i said you wouldn't listen. and you didnt. i use 3dsmax which cinibench models.
you obviously didnt get the first 2 which are just measures of memory band width and cache latency 2 of the more important aspects of a cpu... because the memory bandwidth is so low it means it will bottleneck gfx crads quicker, and the cache is slow it means it cant repeatedly read small instruction code as efficiently... grow up little boy or better still go play at the kiddies table and let the adults talk in piece.

BD is a beast and i5 is beast leave me alone troll I have done the research.
a c 186 à CPUs
a b À AMD
January 15, 2012 10:00:58 PM

Gordon Freeman said:
Dude an OCed 8150FX is doing just as well as or even better than an i5 2500K in all tests and the trade blows and in gaming OCed 8150fx pwns just as much as 2500K so .....

Now if you oc the 2500k....
a c 186 à CPUs
a b À AMD
January 15, 2012 10:02:07 PM

Gordon Freeman said:
BD is a beast and i5 is beast leave me alone troll I have done the research.

bd is not a beast, however the i5 is! :ange: 
January 15, 2012 10:23:42 PM

amuffin said:
bd is not a beast, however the i5 is! :ange: 

BD is as fast over all as 2500K so ya they are both beasts.
a c 186 à CPUs
a b À AMD
January 15, 2012 11:07:41 PM

No...fx 4100 and 6100 = stomped on by intel
a b à CPUs
January 15, 2012 11:42:24 PM

Gordon Freeman said:
If you read my post I am on a Phenom II build today and stop trying to pick apart and troll a post it just make you look the fool and the ass. Fact is when you actual do the research on BD it is a good Upgrade from Phenom II and BD just got a bad rap from the media and fan boys just because BD is an a decent CPU people had to pick apart all its short comings but did not bother to bring to light it's greatness like try and OC any Phenom II chip to 5ghz like you can on BD. I really dont care about your geek nerd strategies just leave me alone unless you want to talk hard facts in which you are not.


when you read/hear actual facts (not fan boy make believe) about BD, do you look like this in the mirror?

a c 146 à CPUs
a b À AMD
January 16, 2012 12:21:59 AM

Gordon Freeman said:
BD is a beast and i5 is beast leave me alone troll I have done the research.


All yout post show you have your head so far stuck up your rear you don't know if you're coming or going.

Quote:
BD is a beast and i5 is beast leave me alone troll I have done the research.


Wow really. Are you Schizophrenic or something? I would love to see what so called research you've done because every benchmark I've looked at the I5 2500K beats the Bulldozer. The I5 and Bulldozer equal..yea right. The I5 and Bulldozer are not anywhere near equal even when the Bulldozer is overclocked. You really need to do some research because you are completely clueless.

Quote:
BD is as fast over all as 2500K so ya they are both beasts


This is so wrong in so many ways it's beyond belief that someone can possibly be that blind unless they have a serious mental problem. The Bulldozer is in no way as fast as the I5 and it never will be because the micro architecture is so screwed up.

Quote:
If you read my post I am on a Phenom II build today and stop trying to pick apart and troll a post it just make you look the fool and the ass. Fact is when you actual do the research on BD it is a good Upgrade from Phenom II and BD just got a bad rap from the media and fan boys just because BD is an a decent CPU people had to pick apart all its short comings but did not bother to bring to light it's greatness like try and OC any Phenom II chip to 5ghz like you can on BD. I really dont care about your geek nerd strategies just leave me alone unless you want to talk hard facts in which you are not.


If anyone is a troll around here it's you. You flat out lie with un supported facts and AMD fanboy garabage that is no where near factual. No the fact is when you actually do research and look at benchmarks you see that the Bulldozer especially the 8150 is slow, hot and over priced sub standard hardware. There is no point in talking hard facts with you because when someone shows hard facts you ignore them and spew out delusional Fanboy lies that are beyond belief because you don't have a clue on what you're talking about.
January 16, 2012 12:30:36 AM

rds1220 said:
All yout post show you have your head so far stuck up your own butt you don't know if you're coming or going.

Quote:
BD is a beast and i5 is beast leave me alone troll I have done the research.


Wow really. Are you Schizophrenic or something? I would love to see what so called research you've done because every benchmark I've looked at the I5 2500K beats the Bulldozer. The I5 and Bulldozer equal..yea right. The I5 and Bulldozer are not anywhere near equal even when the Bulldozer is overclocked. You really need to do some research because you are completely clueless.

Quote:
BD is as fast over all as 2500K so ya they are both beasts


This is so wrong in so many ways it's beyond belief that someone can possibly be that blind unless they have a serious mental problem. The Bulldozer is in no way as fast as the I5 and it never will be because the micro architecture is so screwed up.

Quote:
If you read my post I am on a Phenom II build today and stop trying to pick apart and troll a post it just make you look the fool and the ass. Fact is when you actual do the research on BD it is a good Upgrade from Phenom II and BD just got a bad rap from the media and fan boys just because BD is an a decent CPU people had to pick apart all its short comings but did not bother to bring to light it's greatness like try and OC any Phenom II chip to 5ghz like you can on BD. I really dont care about your geek nerd strategies just leave me alone unless you want to talk hard facts in which you are not.


If anyone is a troll around here it's you. You flat out lie with un supported facts and AMD fanboy garabage that is no where near factual. No the fact is when you actually do research and look at benchmarks you see that the Bulldozer especially the 8150 is slow, hot and over priced sub standard hardware. There is no point in talking hard facts with you because when someone shows hard facts you ignore them and spew out delusional Fanboy lies that are beyond belief because you don't have a clue on what you're talking about.

This is to effect me how and I will get BD when the price comes down a bit and it will be good for playing games and surfing the net end of story troll.
January 16, 2012 12:35:21 AM

dirtyferret said:
when you read/hear actual facts (not fan boy make believe) about BD, do you look like this in the mirror?

http://curtislowe.files.wordpress.com/2008/04/fingers-in-ears.jpg

The real facts are in and BD is not nearly as terrible as the media/fan bouys made it out to be and for me it will be a good upgrade from Phenom II for what I do. I will wait until the price come down a bit and make an upgrade from Phenom II 955 to BD 8150fx and it plays all my games and surfs the net end of story troll so just leave me alone please.
a c 146 à CPUs
a b À AMD
January 16, 2012 12:36:25 AM

It shows you don't have a clue of what you're talking about, you lie with unsupported claims and how many times you can be wrong in a single thread. I'm still waiting for the so called proof that the Bulldozer is just as fast as the I5 as you claim. Since it doesn't exist I doubt you'll come up with any real proof so once again fanboy rage with no actual facts. Good get a Bulldozer if you like buying sub standard hardware that runs slow and hot that's your problem.
January 16, 2012 12:39:52 AM

rds1220 said:
It shows you don't have a clue of what you're talking about, you lie with unsupported claims and how many times you can be wrong in a single thread. I'm still waiting for the so called proof that the Bulldozer is just as fast as the I5 as you claim. Since it doesn't exist I doubt you'll come up with any real proof so once again fanboy rage with no actual facts. Good get a Bulldozer if you like buying sub standard hardware that runs slow and hot that's your problem.

Enough with the Intel Mantra AMD still makes a decent CPU it's just not as good as Intels best END OF STORY
January 16, 2012 12:53:05 AM

rds1220 said:
It shows you don't have a clue of what you're talking about, you lie with unsupported claims and how many times you can be wrong in a single thread. I'm still waiting for the so called proof that the Bulldozer is just as fast as the I5 as you claim. Since it doesn't exist I doubt you'll come up with any real proof so once again fanboy rage with no actual facts. Good get a Bulldozer if you like buying sub standard hardware that runs slow and hot that's your problem.

I guess this shows BD 8150 showing a solid performance. http://www.overclockers.com/amd-fx-8150-bulldozer-proce...
a c 146 à CPUs
a b À AMD
January 16, 2012 1:04:17 AM

You keep posting that same one review over and over. One cherry picked review doesn't prove the Bulldozer either way. For every review that you post that shows the Bulldozer in a postive way I can post 10 that show how bad it is.
a b à CPUs
January 16, 2012 1:13:30 AM

At some stage people are going to realise that nothing will be achieved by trying to convince either side that Bulldozer is superior or inferior to Sandy Bridge.

After all it's your money.

For all I care you could say that an air guitar plays better than a real guitar. I'm going to buy the real guitar tho.
January 16, 2012 1:14:13 AM

rds1220 said:
You keep posting that same one review over and over. One cherry picked review doesn't prove the Bulldozer either way. For every review that you post that shows the Bulldozer in a postive way I can post 10 that show how bad it is.

The proof is in the putting and this is the first time I have read and posted that review but nice try bud. BD is decent it just did not live up to the hype and extravagant claims but it shot for the moon and ended up a good competitor for i5 2500K so good step forward for AMD and Intel is still a the top with 2600K and 990X.
a c 146 à CPUs
a b À AMD
January 16, 2012 1:22:55 AM

Gordon Freeman said:
The proof is in the putting and this is the first time I have read and posted that review but nice try bud. BD is decent it just did not live up to the hype and extravagant claims but it shot for the moon and ended up a good competitor for i5 2500K so good step forward for AMD and Intel is still a the top with 2600K and 990X.


Ok buddy whatever you say, BTW its pudding not putting, genius. I know I've seen that review before and I'm almost 100% sure your're the one who posted it. A good competitor for the I5? lay off the crack. Price to performance is a joke. The 8150 is perfect for this. It cost more than the I5 and doesn't come close to performance.
a b à CPUs
January 16, 2012 1:30:08 AM

gamerk316 said:
Question: Since Win8 is based on the Win7 kernal, why should we expect any farther improvement?


It is called moving the goal posts further. He's talking out of his proverbial a$$. :D 
!