Well if there is a specific application you have in mind, dig around for some benchmarks. There are a few times where the FX might have a slight edge and a bunch of others where it might be worse.
Of the two choices I'd rather go for 6 full fat cores than 8 skinny lattes.
If you are still on the stock cooler I'd perhaps try the 212 Evo, it's fairly cheap for the performance on offer and can probably get a bit more performance out of your current cpu. If you wanted to jump ship it fits current intel cpus too and if you wanted to go FX well a new cooler is a must really (stock one barely adequate and is about as quiet as a combine harvester let loose in a cattery...)
I would not recommend "upgrading" to an FX-8150 in general unless there are programs you use that can actually take advantage of all 8 cores like some video encoding programs with specific video codecs.
When it comes to games, it will be a sidegrade / downgrade. The vast majority of games only use 2 cores, very few games in comparision can use 4 cores. The last time I saw a multi core CPU scaling benchmark was early last year; I believe the game was Mafia II (but I could be wrong). Benchmarks were taken with 2 cores activated, 3 cores activated and 4 core activated (I do not recall if it was an AMD or Intel CPU); 2 cores performance was used as the baseline. With 3 cores activated, performance increased by around 25%, which is pretty good. With all 4 cores activitated, performance only increased by about another 6% (above 3 cores).
I would wait for PileDriver before doing anything.
Be happy with the 1100T and OC the heck out of it. I ran a 1100T in my Asus Sabertooth 990Fx mb @ 4 Ghz solid and now have the 8150 Bulldozer @ 4.2 Ghz. The 8150 has better memory scores but the 1100T at present has better single thread scores. Even if your mb is capable of using it, you'll likely not notice any difference unless you clock the 8150 to @4.5 Ghz. Then you have serious power draw and thermal concerns. I hope this info helps.
Love my 1100T as well but I also love to play around with my PC. I actually bought an 8150 not even an hour ago from frys Clock per clock, 1100T is a better chip for gaming and so forth but you also cannot run 4.5-4.8ghz on an 1100T. My best is 4.2ghz stable on my 1100T.
More than anything, it is just a curiosity of mine to try it out. I have my benchmarks documented for the following games at 4.2ghz / 2600NB / running at 1600 8-8-8-16-24-1t under an H80 which is as far as I could push my setup with the 1100.
- Dirt Showdown
- Batman Arkham City
- Heaven 3.0
- Still working on the civ v benchmark - trying to get it to work at all, not pc related. But for sure with the last update, the game uses all 6 cores on my 1100T
All benchmarks run at max res - settings to keep things consistent.
I am going to toy around with the 8150 and push it as far as I can this week. Once I get it as far as I can go, I will re-run the same benchmarks and will post back since you are interested in the same change and see what percentage, if any that I see between the two, for better or worse when they are both pushed on the same system (sys info in my profile)
If I have time, I will also benchmark them at stock speeds, In which I feel the 1100T will probably be the winner per others tests. Overclocked however, from what I read, the 8150 is definitely not a downgrade but we will see.
Not about what is faster or who is fastest... Always someone with more expensive gear or faster gear, I just like to play around and benchmark / overclock. Expensive hobby but oh well
8150 is a lot of fun to play with but definitely a lateral pass to the 1100T. So far I was able to take it straight to 4.6ghz stable. However it hits a brick wall at 4.7ghz on my system. Barely any increase / to equal frame rates to my 1100T (1100/4.2ghz - 8150/4.6ghz. Gameplay and watching benchmarks, everything visually looks smoother than my 1100T. Frame rates do not show that however but there is a difference.
Some issues I am running into though, my mobo refuses to even post at 1833 no matter the timings. Ram is good - pc2000 corsair. Runs at awesome timings at 1600. So I think it is a bios issue or mobo issue. Not really a hotrod board (890gxm-g65) Also on the NB, I know BD does not benefit from higher NB frequencies like the 1100T does, however I also run into a brick wall past 2200. At 2400 I start getting a lot of errors. Used to run 2600 on stock voltage with the 1100T. Will work on voltage settings tonight.
Still toying with it and I am sure I can squeeze more out of it. For sure, not an upgrade when it comes to gaming but it is not a downgrade or some horribly slow processor like some try to make it out to be.
Will report back if I can get her to perform any better with a fresh installation. Will be next week before I can get to that however.