Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

AMD Launches Two Bulldozers, Reduces Price of FX-8120

By - Source: AMD | B 70 comments

AMD quietly announced the release of two new FX processors with Bulldozer core.

The company will be gradually rolling out the FX-4170 as well as the FX-6200.

The quad-core 4170 breaks through the 4 GHz mark with a base clock speed of 4.2 GHz (4.3 GHz Turbo) and complements the 4100 (3.6 GHz/3.8 GHz) on the lower end of the FX series. It is AMD's first processor that offers a base clock speed of more than 4 GHz. The 6-core 6200 will come with a base clock of 3.8 GHz (4.1 GHz Turbo). Both processors are rated at a TDP of 125 watts. The manufacturer did not reveal the prices of these two CPUs, but mentioned that their availability "is happening on a rolling timeline, so availability will vary by market."

With the introduction of these two new processors, AMD has also reduced the price of its FX-8120. The chip is now offered for a suggested retail price of $185, down from $205.

Display 70 Comments.
This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 25 Hide
    Anonymous , February 28, 2012 5:08 AM
    With Windows 8 Beta going public literally tomorrow, does Tom's Hardware have any planes to test Bulldozer on that OS? I remember reading that Windows 8 properly utilizes it during talks of a possible Windows 7 fix for the processor that didn't pan out.
  • 19 Hide
    SteelCity1981 , February 28, 2012 6:26 AM
    These FX processors really aren't bad cpu's. People tend to want to stack them up against Intel's latest and greatest and if they aren't as good or better people want to act like they are worthless. Worthless to what, because it can't beat Sandy Bridge? So what that doesn't make them worthless by any means and then you get those that are very dissapointing. Lol Why, because Sandy Bridge is a few seconds faster than Bulldozer on avg that most people won't even notice the diff. The problem is people look at bechmarks down to seconds and come to the conclusion, instead of basing it on the overall productivity of a product itself to actually see a real diff in real world apps and not some Super PI or any of the non real world apps that no one in the real world uses let alone effects in what they will actually do in their everyday life. These FX chips are fine. Hell the vast majority of people complaining about these chips not being faster than Sandy Bridge are the same vast majority of people that these FX chips will suit their needs and then some without them noticing a diff between them and an Sandy Bridge cpu. Just be lucky AMD is still making cpu's or else Intel Core i3's would be over 200+ dollars right now let alone Core i5's or Core i7's prices none the less.
  • 15 Hide
    randomkid , February 28, 2012 4:45 AM
    Nothing new... Its just OC'd versions of the 4100 & 6100. Nothing you can't do yourself...
Other Comments
  • 0 Hide
    de5_Roy , February 28, 2012 4:42 AM
    i hope these new fx cpus along with now-cheaper fx 8120 gets tested in the next sub-$200 cpu round up. may be some tests with crossfired radeon hd 7850s. :) 
  • 13 Hide
    azathoth , February 28, 2012 4:43 AM
    4.2Ghz Base clock? Very interesting indeed. However I have a feeling that the overclocking headroom is minimal at best.
    I wonder what the pricing range will be?
  • 15 Hide
    randomkid , February 28, 2012 4:45 AM
    Nothing new... Its just OC'd versions of the 4100 & 6100. Nothing you can't do yourself...
  • 15 Hide
    amuffin , February 28, 2012 5:06 AM
    Well clock speed isn't everything...
  • 25 Hide
    Anonymous , February 28, 2012 5:08 AM
    With Windows 8 Beta going public literally tomorrow, does Tom's Hardware have any planes to test Bulldozer on that OS? I remember reading that Windows 8 properly utilizes it during talks of a possible Windows 7 fix for the processor that didn't pan out.
  • 5 Hide
    tomhrxbfg , February 28, 2012 5:11 AM
    nice, can't wait this price in combination with microcenter mobo deal!
  • 9 Hide
    pedro_mann , February 28, 2012 5:13 AM
    Good news. Prices are coming down a little :) 
  • 5 Hide
    theuniquegamer , February 28, 2012 5:20 AM
    4.2ghz base is very very good for overalockers to get it jump beyond 8.5 ghz record speed by previous bulldozer on LN2 . I hope they'll give proper aircooler with fx 4170 .Price will also be lower after launch of ivy bridge in june.
  • 13 Hide
    Ragnar-Kon , February 28, 2012 5:29 AM
    Still going to wait for 2nd Gen Bulldozer-based chips, but glad to see the price is dropping a little regardless. Something priced higher than an Intel chip and yet performs worse in 80% of the tasks is a bad thing.
  • 1 Hide
    kinggremlin , February 28, 2012 5:41 AM
    theuniquegamer4.2ghz base is very very good for overalockers to get it jump beyond 8.5 ghz record speed by previous bulldozer on LN2 . I hope they'll give proper aircooler with fx 4170 .Price will also be lower after launch of ivy bridge in june.



    You're making the assumption that these higher clocked chips are actually better than the same chips currently being sold with lower clock speeds, which is a dubious assumption to be making. Everyone knows that the 2600k can consistently be overclocked about 1.5Ghz higher than the base clock of 3.4Ghz. If Intel decided to sell a SB CPU tomorrow with a base clock of 4.4Ghz, it can pretty much be guaranteed that Intel did nothing to the current 2600k CPU except clock it higher, taking advantage of the headroom available with the current design. You're not going to be able to consistently clock them to 5.9Ghz just because the base clock speed was bumped 1Ghz.
  • 2 Hide
    Shin-san , February 28, 2012 5:41 AM
    This is getting a little better.
  • 19 Hide
    SteelCity1981 , February 28, 2012 6:26 AM
    These FX processors really aren't bad cpu's. People tend to want to stack them up against Intel's latest and greatest and if they aren't as good or better people want to act like they are worthless. Worthless to what, because it can't beat Sandy Bridge? So what that doesn't make them worthless by any means and then you get those that are very dissapointing. Lol Why, because Sandy Bridge is a few seconds faster than Bulldozer on avg that most people won't even notice the diff. The problem is people look at bechmarks down to seconds and come to the conclusion, instead of basing it on the overall productivity of a product itself to actually see a real diff in real world apps and not some Super PI or any of the non real world apps that no one in the real world uses let alone effects in what they will actually do in their everyday life. These FX chips are fine. Hell the vast majority of people complaining about these chips not being faster than Sandy Bridge are the same vast majority of people that these FX chips will suit their needs and then some without them noticing a diff between them and an Sandy Bridge cpu. Just be lucky AMD is still making cpu's or else Intel Core i3's would be over 200+ dollars right now let alone Core i5's or Core i7's prices none the less.
  • 1 Hide
    jdwii , February 28, 2012 7:01 AM
    Quote:
    Worthless to what, because it can't beat Sandy Bridge?


    The 8150 can barley beat the 6 core Phenom!
  • 11 Hide
    joytech22 , February 28, 2012 7:46 AM
    jdwiiThe 8150 can barley beat the 6 core Phenom!

    If your a video editor like me, the 8150 smashes the 6-Core Phenoms.

    It really depends on the scenario.
  • 6 Hide
    muy , February 28, 2012 8:32 AM
    and if you play the same games like me (rift, shogun 2), you have 1 core that can't cope and 7 cores that do nothing.
  • 13 Hide
    punnar , February 28, 2012 9:24 AM
    That's right! Not everyone play the same games and applications. What's a bad system for you may not be bad for another. That's why I thank TH and others that do these tests for us so we're better informed when making our next purchase. Save me lots of headaches and regrets. Thank you TH. I can't wait for you report on these new chips.
  • 4 Hide
    AidanJC , February 28, 2012 9:40 AM
    Bring on the benchmarks!! :) 
  • 3 Hide
    billybobser , February 28, 2012 9:55 AM
    I'm not excited, but I want to be impressed.

    Price/performance wins would be nice for the broader consumer market instead of useful for only a few tasks.
Display more comments