AMD FX-8150 performing slower than it should?

audioe

Honorable
Apr 27, 2012
4
0
10,510
Hi all,

I've had my Crosshair Formula V for 6 months or so now and I've noticed that my system just doesn't seem to be performing as well as it should. Firstly, here are my Specs:

Crosshair Formula V
FX-8150 @ 4.8Ghz (5.2Ghz Turb-Core)
2 x XFX HD 6870 in crossfire
8GB (2 x 4GB) Mushkin 2133Mhz RAM
Corsair F60A 60GB SSD
Corsair TX850 V2 850w PSU

Now my problem. I've noticed for a while now that fairly intensive games I play (BF3, GTA IV, Skyrim) are only getting about 20 - 40 fps Average with almost everything on Ultra at 1080p whereas my friend with a similar setup gets considerably more. This got me thinking and i ran a 3DMark Vantage benchmark and decided to compar my results with people with a similar system

Now i know i shouldn't care about benchmarking stats and stuff as they're mainly for bragging rights, but there are some worrying differences between my system and otheres with the same/similar setup.

A comparison between my system and another which is almost identical:

Mine
CPU: AMD FX-8150
Processor clock: 4816Mhz
Physical/Logical Processors: 1/4
# of cores: 2
CPU Score: 10695.26

Other:
CPU: AMD FX-8150
Processor clock: 4305Mhz
Physical/Logical Processors: 1/8
# of cores: 4
CPU Score: 21954.63

So you can probably guess what my question is... Why does this other system show 1/8 physical/logical processors and 4 cores? The asnwer to that will probably explain why their score is almost double mine despite mine being clocked another 500Mhz. I assume it's something to do with Turbo Core perhaps... I have this enabled on my system, do I really need to? I'm a gamer, and i don't know if it's really necessary for me.
 

noob2222

Distinguished
Nov 19, 2007
2,722
0
20,860
If your overclocking Disable turbo core. It adds an extra voltage increase when it tries to activate.

as for the number of cores, does windows task manager show 8 cores under the performance tab? If not then check your bios settings carefully, especially for "core control" options.

BF3 should definately be getting ~ 90 fps with that video card setup, getting ~ 80-120 on 2 6970s.
 

audioe

Honorable
Apr 27, 2012
4
0
10,510
Thanks for the answers guys. @noob2222, it's funny you should say that as I'm almost sure (i'm not at home to test at the minute, but will do when i get chance) that under the performance tab it only shows 4, but i assumed that due to the bulldozer architecture (all that "modules" stuff). Is this incorrect? Do other people with Bulldozer Fx-81xx's see 8 here?
 

noob2222

Distinguished
Nov 19, 2007
2,722
0
20,860
yes, there will be 8. 40-60 fps sounds about right for running as a quad core.

35kr7tu.jpg
 

audioe

Honorable
Apr 27, 2012
4
0
10,510
Thanks for that, that clarifies things then...

@photonboy, i manually enabled all of my cores within the BIOS which is why I assumed it would definitely definitely definitely use all 8, it seems I was wrong :-S I'll double check again tonight and post the outcome. Fingers crossed, i can't be bothered having to reaplce a faulty part :(
 

audioe

Honorable
Apr 27, 2012
4
0
10,510
Well, it seems my Boot Manager was having me over. I upgraded from a Quad Core to a Bulldozer and thanks to you responses I found elsewhere on the net that in rare cases your previous processor can kind of tattoo some info into the boot manager.

So i went to msconfig > Boot tab > Advanced Options, and lo and behold, the "Number of Processors:" check box was ticked, and "4" was selected in the drop down. Strangely, it only went up to 4, so i couldn't select 8. But i simply unticked it and rebooted and bam! 8 Graphs in task manager and 100FPS in Battlefield :) Can't believe i've been running it half-assed all this time. What an idiot...

Thanks a million for the assistance guys :)
 

tulx

Distinguished
May 17, 2009
220
0
18,690


Glad it's solved and you're happy with your CPU. :)