Why is fx8150>fx4170 in gaming?

[mahin1islam]

okay. this is technically a continuation of my other thread.

so, looking at the bechmarks, the octacore fx performs better than the superclocked quad core in gaming. the quadcore one is pretty much the same as the octacore one, except 4 cores are turned off (correct me if im wrong). plus the quad core one has a much higher clockspeed, and octacores are irrelevant in gaming because games dont utilize all 8 cores. so why is it that the octacore is better in gaming??? am i the only one confused?

 

[Brett928S2]

Hi

Dont forget the very powerful 6 core cpus....just to add to your confusion...

All the best Brett

 

[mahin1islam]

okay.... anyone else gonna help me out on this one??? its been a while.

 

[clutchc]

Where have you seen that the fx8150 is a better gamer than the fx4170 ? Tom's seems to think the opposite: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-cpu-review-overclock,3106-5.html

 

[popatim]

I suppose if you were able to turn off 1 core in each BD module on the 8150 you'd have quite a nice true 4 core that overclocks like a ...

 

[Haserath]

The 4 core FX processors really only have 2 FPUs while the 8 cores have 4 FPUs. As long as the games use more than 2 threads with heavy FPU, the 8 core should be better since it doesn't have to share the FPUs between threads.

 

[nekulturny]

The 4 core FX processors really only have 2 FPUs while the 8 cores have 4 FPUs. As long as the games use more than 2 threads with heavy FPU, the 8 core should be better since it doesn't have to share the FPUs between threads.

This sounds accurate to me.

Where have you seen that the fx8150 is a better gamer than the fx4170 ? Tom's seems to think the opposite: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-cpu-review-overclock,3106-5.html

Tom's also doesnt go very in depth, at least that I've seen. Benchmarking only a handful of games in a single resolution does not to me constitute a substantial investigation. Don Woligroski is an intelligent man I'm sure, and hes entitled to his opinion, but thats what it is, an opinion. Ironically, thats my opinion of his opinions :lol:


On the topic of picking between the two, I would suggest looking at an 8120 if you want to go the bulldozer route. The 8150 is essentially identical to the 8120, its just clocked higher. Since both of them have unlocked multipliers, its unnecessary to pay more for the 8150. And the 8120 currently is not much more in cost than a 4170. From newegg, the prices are 140 and 170 respectively.

 

[mahin1islam]

This sounds accurate to me.




Tom's also doesnt go very in depth, at least that I've seen. Benchmarking only a handful of games in a single resolution does not to me constitute a substantial investigation. Don Woligroski is an intelligent man I'm sure, and hes entitled to his opinion, but thats what it is, an opinion. Ironically, thats my opinion of his opinions :lol:


On the topic of picking between the two, I would suggest looking at an 8120 if you want to go the bulldozer route. The 8150 is essentially identical to the 8120, its just clocked higher. Since both of them have unlocked multipliers, its unnecessary to pay more for the 8150. And the 8120 currently is not much more in cost than a 4170. From newegg, the prices are 140 and 170 respectively.

Thank you very much, this has helped me alot. so how far can the fx8120 oc? how good would it perform with high oc, compared to fx 8150 and the sandy bridges?

 

[mahin1islam]

Best answer selected by mahin1islam.