FX 8120 vs FX 8150

[Coolbreeze74]

Hey All,

Which CPU should I go with for gaming? (FSX) I plan on marrying this CPU with an ASUS Sabertooth 990FX Mobo. I'd like to slightly overclock with be using Coolmaster fans to replace the stock CPU fan.

Any Memory recommendations, I'm considering Patriot Viper Xtreme Series Divison 2 8GB1866MHz 9-11-9-27

Thanks!!

 

[whatsthatnoise]

In before: "GO INTEL FFS!!!11"

As for the question ... if you go AMD, go all the way, aka 8150, it has a quite higher default clock speed. Pair it with a good aftermarket cooler and OC to a safe 4.2GHz.

 

[stingstang]

The difference is a simple binning process to find the higher stable clock rates for the chips. They will both overclock within ~150mhz of each other, which you will never notice in games. Go for cheaper.

 

[Ichy]

8120 all the way, just as Stingstag said they OC to with 150 mhz of each other, so go for the cheaper- 150mgz is negligible once you reach the 4.0ghz+

 

[Coolbreeze74]

8120 all the way, just as Stingstag said they OC to with 150 mhz of each other, so go for the cheaper- 150mgz is negligible once you reach the 4.0ghz+

Is that your system spec's, why did you go with the FX 8150? Do you think it is worth the additional cost for the slightly faster stock chip?

I plan to overclock to 4GHz, I hear it runs quite stable & strong there. Thoughts?

 

[Coolbreeze74]

The difference is a simple binning process to find the higher stable clock rates for the chips. They will both overclock within ~150mhz of each other, which you will never notice in games. Go for cheaper.

I'm running Windows 7 64bit, is the patch from Microsoft for AMD 8 cores worth applying or even still available? Looks like Windows 8 will be a bigger performace jump with the OS and 8 core chips?

Thanks!

 

[stingstang]

Most go to 4.4 ghz without a fuss. I set my 4-core there just changing the multiplier, and never had problems, even using the stock cooler.
I would say ichy bought that for the vastly higher stock clocks, since he doesn't list an overclocked speed.

 

[Coolbreeze74]

Most go to 4.4 ghz without a fuss. I set my 4-core there just changing the multiplier, and never had problems, even using the stock cooler.
I would say ichy bought that for the vastly higher stock clocks, since he doesn't list an overclocked speed.

WOW! Thanks man, I am leaning to the FX 8120 because of exactly what you did with your 8120, but wasn't sure how it handled OC and stable it is? But sounds like it runs strong & fast.

Any updates with Win7 you had to do to get it use all 8 cores?

 

[sarinaide]

Go with the FX 8120, not only is there a $50 difference between the two price wise, the performance is negligible.

 

[thently]

Surprised no one is trying to talk him down from AMD Hmmm to OP the second you mention Game Intel is the only way to go. You can go dual core and cheap and still get higher FPS. I would feel bad if I had a bad ass 8 core monster of a computer and Jo momma could get higher FPS on her i3 2100 (assuming same video card).. Just sayin..

Thent

 

[Goodeggray]

Microcenter has the FX8120 with the Asus sabertooth MB for $260.

 

[sarinaide]

Good price that!

 

[computernewb]

Surprised no one is trying to talk him down from AMD Hmmm to OP the second you mention Game Intel is the only way to go. You can go dual core and cheap and still get higher FPS. I would feel bad if I had a bad ass 8 core monster of a computer and Jo momma could get higher FPS on her i3 2100 (assuming same video card).. Just sayin..

Thent

you may want to check this video out. the 8150 comes pretty close to the i5-2500k
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1kd4dvLJQP4

 

[iam2thecrowe]

you may want to check this video out. the 8150 comes pretty close to the i5-2500k
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1kd4dvLJQP4

and you may want to read all the reviews which show the i3 2100 beating the pants off the 8150 in most gaming situations http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/289?vs=434 and then compare it with an i5 2500k http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/288?vs=434 . You would have to be incredibly ignorant of facts to chose an AMD cpu for gaming.

 

[maui67]

I would recommend saving some cash and going with the 8120. Especially since you seem comfortable with overclocking.

As far as a recommendation on RAM, you are definitely right in going with 1866MHz as the memory controller on the FX chips will handle that. The Kingston should be good. Personally I prefer Crucial or G-Skill, but that's because I have good history with those 2 brands. Maybe something like these:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820148559

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231474

 

[computernewb]

and you may want to read all the reviews which show the i3 2100 beating the pants off the 8150 in most gaming situations http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/289?vs=434 and then compare it with an i5 2500k http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/288?vs=434 . You would have to be incredibly ignorant of facts to chose an AMD cpu for gaming.

lol..

1) the guy in the video works for ncix, tests every product on the market, has the videos to prove them, and gives his honest opinion on every product.

2) He clearly shows that the fx-8150 comes within 1-5 fps of many popular games played at settings common to many gamers.

I have every reason to believe him over a parrot who just repeats popular mantra.. "squak AMD sucks.. SQUAK"

 

[maui67]

and you may want to read all the reviews which show the i3 2100 beating the pants off the 8150 in most gaming situations http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/289?vs=434 and then compare it with an i5 2500k http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/288?vs=434 . You would have to be incredibly ignorant of facts to chose an AMD cpu for gaming.

It took a little longer than I expected for the Intel folks to chime in. There really is no need to call someone ignorant. Respect a person's decision. We could throw benchmarks at each other until our fingers bled. Your preferences do not have to be dictated on everyone else.

Is the i5-2500K better than FX-8120/8150? Yes, in most cases but not by the "pants off" margins everyone like to think.

 

[willard]

Is the i5-2500K better than FX-8120/8150? Yes, in most cases but not by the "pants off" margins everyone like to think.

The real question, I think, is this. Why would you buy the 8150 when you know the 2500k is faster (even if not by a huge margin) when the 8150 costs more? Why pay more for less?

I'm no Intel fanboy, I'm a value fanboy. The FX series are just not good value in my book. If you're going to argue that the performance doesn't matter in games, you should be suggesting they get a Phenom II, not an 8120/8150. Might as well take the argument to the logical conclusion and only get as much power as is needed, which a $100 Phenom II provides.

I just think that if you're spending $200+ on a CPU, Intel is the only logical choice.

 

[computernewb]

The real question, I think, is this. Why would you buy the 8150 when you know the 2500k is faster (even if not by a huge margin) when the 8150 costs more? Why pay more for less?

I'm no Intel fanboy, I'm a value fanboy. The FX series are just not good value in my book. If you're going to argue that the performance doesn't matter in games, you should be suggesting they get a Phenom II, not an 8120/8150. Might as well take the argument to the logical conclusion and only get as much power as is needed, which a $100 Phenom II provides.

I just think that if you're spending $200+ on a CPU, Intel is the only logical choice.

youre right. the i5-2500k is a better buy. its faster and cheaper. If i was building a system now i would go with the i5-2500k.

However, thats not the point. Im trying to refute the claim that the 8150 is a "bad" cpu. The video i posted shows that the 8150 comes pretty close to the i5-2500k in gaming. The test setup was clearly shown and done by a knowledgeable and respectable person. Any cpu that comes close to the i5-2500k is not a "bad" cpu.

 

[willard]

youre right. the i5-2500k is a better buy. its faster and cheaper. If i was building a system now i would go with the i5-2500k.

However, thats not the point. Im trying to refute the claim that the 8150 is a "bad" cpu. The video i posted shows that the 8150 comes pretty close to the i5-2500k in gaming. The test setup was clearly shown and done by a knowledgeable and respectable person. Any cpu that comes close to the i5-2500k is not a "bad" cpu.

And I'm not trying to say it's a bad CPU. I'm just saying it's not a good buy. Our opinions are totally compatible, no need to argue about anything.

 

[nosnitrousx]

Not only all of the above....also power consumption and heat...I believe the 2500k uses less power right??

(Correct me if I'm wrong...)

 

[DJDeCiBeL]

I think you're all missing the fact that the game in question (FSX) can use as many cores as you throw at it. I haven't seen any benches comparing the 2500K to 8120/8150 in FSX, but given that it loves more cores (even if the 8120/8150 aren't "true" 8 core processors), it will probably perform on par and possibly better than the 2500K. FSX is the only game I would recommend the 8120/8150 for ATM, though.

 

[noob2222]

If your overclocking, there is no reason to look at the 8150 unless your gunning for 5+ ghz. Most 8120 will reach 4.4 to 4.8 with a few capable of 5+.

 

[teh_gerbil]

Oustanding, you guys actually managed 9 posts WITHOUT resorting to flame wars.

Thently, I believe if someone asks the difference 2 very similar AMD processors you can be fairly safe to presume he's done his homework and narrowed it down to these 2 CPU's.

The OP DID not ask AMD OR INTEL, he ask AMD or AMD. Keep your opinions to yourself, you've ruined a good thread.

 

[palladin9479]

@OP,

If you must go AMD, then the 8120fx is a good buy for it's price. Then 8150fx is overpriced and doesn't offer a good value.

I'm not going to go into an AMD vs Intel debate as that's out of topic and incredibly rude to the OP, what I will say is that the single player timed loop demos show an i3 matching an i5 and i7. Think long and hard about that for a moment. The i3 has two CPU cores, the i5 has literally double the CPU power and the i7 has the same power as the i5 but has HT turned on (HT just allows more efficient use of cores in poorly coded applications). Any benchmark that shows two CPU's as being equal when one has 100% more processing power is a poor benchmark to use.

Also, something many people completely forget to consider is that CPU's don't exist in a vacuum. They plug into motherboards, and those motherboards are not cheap (the good ones anyway). If the customer already has an AM3+ Mobo then they would only be spending $190 USD for the CPU. I5 is @220 USD + another $150~200 for a new performance board, so $370 ~ 420 USD price tag to "upgrade" to the I5. $190 vs $400 for largely the same performance level.