Skip to main content

AMD Bulldozer Review: FX-8150 Gets Tested

Benchmark Results: F1 2011

I’ve highlighted FX-8150’s performance because the delta between lowest and highest is much greater.

Intel’s Sandy Bridge-based chips take the top two spots at all three resolutions—and not by a small margin. Bloomfield scores third place up and down the spectrum. Meanwhile, FX-8150 takes second-to-last in the three resolutions.

Now, we had some serious issues with AMD processors in F1 2010. Those performance limitations seem to carry over here, too. In essence, we’re seeing them run into CPU-bound ceiling at 1680x1050 and, even at 2560x1600, the graphics load isn’t great enough to shift the bottleneck.

The two Sandy Bridge-based chips show us why: easily achieving greater than 80 frames per second at 1680x1050 and 1920x1080, it takes 2560x1600 with 8xAA and Ultra quality settings to knock performance down to the 60ish FPS mark. That’s still higher than what Zambezi manages, though, causing the AMD processor to hold up the show.

  • btto
    yeah finaly, now i'll read it
    Reply
  • ghnader hsmithot
    nOT Bad AMd!
    Reply
  • jdwii
    Been so long and i'm kinda sad.
    Reply
  • compton
    Not many surprises but I've been waiting for a long, long time for this. I hope this is just the first step to a more competitive AMD.
    Reply
  • ghnader hsmithot
    At least its almost as good as Nehalem.
    Reply
  • gamerk316
    Dissapointing. Predicted it ages ago though. PII X6 is a better value.
    Reply
  • As I expected - failure.
    Reply
  • AbdullahG
    I see the guys from the BD Rumors are here. As many others are, I'm disappointed.
    Reply
  • iam2thecrowe
    for the gaming community this is a FLOP.
    Reply
  • phump
    FX-4100 looks like a good alternative to the 955BE. Same price, higher clock, and lower power profile.
    Reply