The total run time of our threaded benchmarks is not as devastating to AMD's FX-8150 as the single-threaded collection. AMD is beaten by Intel's six-core Gulftown design (Core i7-980X), and it cannot hold off the Core i7-2600K. It's close to several other processors, though.
Taking a look at average power consumption, the FX-8150 finishes in last place. Even its predecessors were more energy efficient.
It's a bummer that this represents a best-case scenario for AMD, where its architecture's resources are best-utilized.
This isn't as bad as the single-threaded application benchmarks, though. And while the average power draw is high, the benchmark does not run for that long and the resulting total power consumption in watt-hours is quite low. With that said, Intel's processors offer better efficiency, regardless of the CPU model.
- Testing The Efficiency Of AMD's Bulldozer
- AMD CPUs: Phenom II X4 980 BE And X6 1100T
- Intel CPUs: Core i5-750 And Core i5-2500K
- Intel CPUs: Core i7-870, Core i7-975 Extreme, Core i7-980X Extreme, And Core i7-2600K
- AMD’s Challenger: FX-8150
- Test Setup And Benchmarks
- Benchmark Results: Audio/Video
- Benchmark Results: Office And Data Archiving
- Benchmark Results: Professional Applications
- Benchmark Results: Matlab
- Power Consumption: Idle/Load
- Single-Threaded Efficiency
- Multi-Threaded Efficiency
- Efficiency Round-Up
- Bulldozer: Improvements Are Urgently Needed