AMD FX - 8120 OCing/Tuning

[Hatisherrif]

We get a lot of these brand new registered posters who ask for advice, and then they will move the goal posts around constantly trying to prop up an AMD choice when it isn't optimal. It was really bad for a long time. It got extremely curiouser and curiouser. It had tapered off, but this guy is taking a similar path.

The old formula was "what CPU should I get?" and then the poster would keep trying to manufacture the bizarrest claims of their typical use. Things like "I use these two specific programs that are the two that bulldozer happens to perform well at 24x7 and nothing else on my PC". The content originally always said "I want to run VMs". Eventually after pointing out fake core count is less useful in most virtualization scenarios than single-threaded performance and a reasonable number of actual cores, the new regs magically stopped always claiming to run VMs.

This post doesn't have the same feel, but it does have a similar attitude with a little different slant. Brand new registered account, making a post hoping to have good things said about a pretty poor performing product. Refusal to accept that there are much, much better choices, or even that the older AMD architecture is better suited to his professed needs than what he's looking to buy now.

Oh well.

Actually, we get a lot of biased posters who can't tell decisions from questions. If you look at the OP's post, you will see that he had already made his decision and just wanted to ask us what he could expect from the CPU.

It seems you really get unnerved when there is something contradicting your opinion, so you make long posts which are constructed very well and make you look like a credible educated individual, but they only serve one purpose - to back your claims.

Making up conspiracy theories about new posters who manufacture claims about weird uses just so everybody has to suggest AMD proves how much paranoia is taking over your head. Intel is not in danger, don't you worry about that my friend. The consumer is the only one in danger of having outrageous prices for products which could cost much less if there were strong competition.

If someone states clearly his motives and intentions behind buying AMD (supporting the underdog, already having the compatible motherboard) and you still find something wrong with that, I cannot help but wonder: what do you have in all of this?

 

[Gordon Freemen]

Why does anyone bother helping people like this guy? He was told in the very first post by lehtv "Upgrading to FX-8120 won't improve your gaming experience much if at all." Despite this solid advice the OP was abrasive and kind of a dick about it.

OP go here instead:
http://www.amdzone.com/phpbb3/

They will tell you what you want to hear :thumbsup:

I NEVER asked for help I asked for USERS of the 8120 CPUs experiences with it god.

 

[Gordon Freemen]

Actually, we get a lot of biased posters who can't tell decisions from questions. If you look at the OP's post, you will see that he had already made his decision and just wanted to ask us what he could expect from the CPU.

It seems you really get unnerved when there is something contradicting your opinion, so you make long posts which are constructed very well and make you look like a credible educated individual, but they only serve one purpose - to back your claims.

Making up conspiracy theories about new posters who manufacture claims about weird uses just so everybody has to suggest AMD proves how much paranoia is taking over your head. Intel is not in danger, don't you worry about that my friend. The consumer is the only one in danger of having outrageous prices for products which could cost much less if there were strong competition.

If someone states clearly his motives and intentions behind buying AMD (supporting the underdog, already having the compatible motherboard) and you still find something wrong with that, I cannot help but wonder: what do you have in all of this?

They try to make going with AMD over Intel akin to choosing Cancer over Cake LOL. I honestly think the 8120 will end up a good CPU and would like to hear actual end users of this CPU experience with it weather it be good, bad, or nasty I want to hear it all from them. Trouble is I bet all these AMD CPU users have had enough bad experiences and abuse and just don't talk about it anymore for fear of undue reticule and anguish.

 

[Black Mesa]

I have a FX 8120. I have had it since February....and I havent found a game that I cannot run yet at 1080p with a HD 6870. The chip is fine for gaming. So yea, it has ran all of my games perfectly fine. If your heart is set on it, I doubt you will be disappointed.

Thanx for the input man.

 

[Ferzerp]

As a rare poster, I can see you don't frequent the board often enough to have seen what I am talking about, but I am sure that were you to be a common participant in the community here, you would have seen exactly what I am talking about. It happened right after the release of BD, and it eventually became somewhat of a joke. I don't really ascribe it to shady marketing tactics (because it was so laughable that I can't imagine anyone would ever think it would work). I'm not sure what was going on, but there were so many of them it was eerie.

This is an interesting quote "Intel is not in danger, don't you worry about that my friend". You're creating quite the false dichotomy here. I have no attachment to a specific company. This market only happens to have two players. One of those players is currently a joke. That doesn't mean that I'm attached to the other player. In fact, I have extreme criticism for Intel due to the bottom up product delivery methodology that they implemented starting with SB. It has a great negative impact to me in both my personal and professional realms. Personally, it means that my choices at any given time are to buy the "Enthusiast" part, which will soon be followed by a potentially better performing low-end part, where in the past, as the high end was released first, there was always a clear choice in what to buy. If IB-E came out first, for example, then if you want high performance, you buy IB-E. Now you end up with having to wait for IB-E but once it is around, Haswell's mainstream cheaper parts may end up being better, so it creates extreme confusion in the high end space (unless you just want more cores). It's worse in the professional space. Do you realize that the real SB Xeons were not released until May of this year: a full year after the low end was able to get the improvements that the new architecture offered. In effect, Intel put improvements in the server space on hold for a year to flip their delivery direction to bottom-up and the best we all could get was Westmere until May/June this year.

It isn't bias to suggest wasting money on BD is a mistake. That's just being realistic.

 

[Black Mesa]

As a rare poster, I can see you don't frequent the board often enough to have seen what I am talking about, but I am sure that were you to be a common participant in the community here, you would have seen exactly what I am talking about. It happened right after the release of BD, and it eventually became somewhat of a joke. I don't really ascribe it to shady marketing tactics (because it was so laughable that I can't imagine anyone would ever think it would work). I'm not sure what was going on, but there were so many of them it was eerie.

This is an interesting quote "Intel is not in danger, don't you worry about that my friend". You're creating quite the false dichotomy here. I have no attachment to a specific company. This market only happens to have two players. One of those players is currently a joke. That doesn't mean that I'm attached to the other player. In fact, I have extreme criticism for Intel due to the bottom up product delivery methodology that they implemented starting with SB. It has a great negative impact to me in both my personal and professional realms. Personally, it means that my choices at any given time are to buy the "Enthusiast" part, which will soon be followed by a potentially better performing low-end part, where in the past, as the high end was released first, there was always a clear choice in what to buy. If IB-E came out first, for example, then if you want high performance, you buy IB-E. Now you end up with having to wait for IB-E but once it is around, Haswell's mainstream cheaper parts may end up being better, so it creates extreme confusion in the high end space (unless you just want more cores). It's worse in the professional space. Do you realize that the real SB Xeons were not released until May of this year: a full year after the low end was able to get the improvements that the new architecture offered. In effect, Intel put improvements in the server space on hold for a year to flip their delivery direction to bottom-up and the best we all could get was Westmere until May/June this year.

It isn't bias to suggest wasting money on BD is a mistake. That's just being realistic.

Sound like an Intel sentiment to me and spending well north of $300 on an Intel setup vs sticking with AMD for $160 or about half the cost of an equivalent Intel setup is stupid to me.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Well it was obvious a troll. Nice rolled.

 

[Maximilian]

Actually, we get a lot of biased posters who can't tell decisions from questions. If you look at the OP's post, you will see that he had already made his decision and just wanted to ask us what he could expect from the CPU.

It seems you really get unnerved when there is something contradicting your opinion, so you make long posts which are constructed very well and make you look like a credible educated individual, but they only serve one purpose - to back your claims.

Making up conspiracy theories about new posters who manufacture claims about weird uses just so everybody has to suggest AMD proves how much paranoia is taking over your head. Intel is not in danger, don't you worry about that my friend. The consumer is the only one in danger of having outrageous prices for products which could cost much less if there were strong competition.

If someone states clearly his motives and intentions behind buying AMD (supporting the underdog, already having the compatible motherboard) and you still find something wrong with that, I cannot help but wonder: what do you have in all of this?

Ferzerp is right though this stuff does crop up semi frequently after bulldozers release. Nvidia have their focus group, Intel have IntelEnthusiast, other companies have some of their own reps, AMD have ??? a focus group of their own maybe?

Its no huge conspiracy but i highly suspect AMD have their own focus group and haven't told anyone about it. Stick "Return of AMD FX: My OC'd AMD FX 8150 review" into google and tell me that guy dosent have an agenda

It can be tough differentiate between a fanboy/focus group member sometimes but other times it can be obvious like the example i gave.

 

[Black Mesa]

Ferzerp is right though this stuff does crop up semi frequently after bulldozers release. Nvidia have their focus group, Intel have IntelEnthusiast, other companies have some of their own reps, AMD have ??? a focus group of their own maybe?

Its no huge conspiracy but i highly suspect AMD have their own focus group and haven't told anyone about it. Stick "Return of AMD FX: My OC'd AMD FX 8150 review" into google and tell me that guy dosent have an agenda

It can be tough differentiate between a fanboy/focus group member sometimes but other times it can be obvious like the example i gave.

Tinfoil hat ^

 

[Hatisherrif]

As a rare poster, I can see you don't frequent the board often enough to have seen what I am talking about, but I am sure that were you to be a common participant in the community here, you would have seen exactly what I am talking about. It happened right after the release of BD, and it eventually became somewhat of a joke. I don't really ascribe it to shady marketing tactics (because it was so laughable that I can't imagine anyone would ever think it would work). I'm not sure what was going on, but there were so many of them it was eerie.

This is an interesting quote "Intel is not in danger, don't you worry about that my friend". You're creating quite the false dichotomy here. I have no attachment to a specific company. This market only happens to have two players. One of those players is currently a joke. That doesn't mean that I'm attached to the other player. In fact, I have extreme criticism for Intel due to the bottom up product delivery methodology that they implemented starting with SB. It has a great negative impact to me in both my personal and professional realms. Personally, it means that my choices at any given time are to buy the "Enthusiast" part, which will soon be followed by a potentially better performing low-end part, where in the past, as the high end was released first, there was always a clear choice in what to buy. If IB-E came out first, for example, then if you want high performance, you buy IB-E. Now you end up with having to wait for IB-E but once it is around, Haswell's mainstream cheaper parts may end up being better, so it creates extreme confusion in the high end space (unless you just want more cores). It's worse in the professional space. Do you realize that the real SB Xeons were not released until May of this year: a full year after the low end was able to get the improvements that the new architecture offered. In effect, Intel put improvements in the server space on hold for a year to flip their delivery direction to bottom-up and the best we all could get was Westmere until May/June this year.

If you want to have only one PC processor maker on the planet, that is a great idea in theory. You'd have only one company to choose from and it would be easier for the normal user to understand the hierarchy of the product line and make the right decision. The problem with lack of competition is that this one company can dictate the prices and make us suffer financially. But you know all that.

The thing I'm propagating here is, if there is someone who really won't lose that much by going with the underdog, then by all means let him do it. If nobody supports AMD (or any other competitor of any other business), it will be bad for all of us, period. Now, I would never state something untruthful and lie just to make the world a better place (the ends justify the means, huh?), but if one is ready to make this choice and fully aware of what awaits him with it, I won't stop him.

What awaits the OP with this CPU is improved performance and durability, and a good processor for the money. What he can expect: good multithread performance; better gaming; more power consumption and heat; good overclocking; better performance overall. Is it worth the money in my opinion? No, I 'd wait for the Piledriver (which I already stated). The thing is, he already decided what to do, so I won't stop him.

 

[Hatisherrif]

Sound like an Intel sentiment to me and spending well north of $300 on an Intel setup vs sticking with AMD for $160 or about half the cost of an equivalent Intel setup is stupid to me.

I want to believe his intentions are good, just like I want to believe you are not trolling, but this is the internet and everything is possible. Don't make hasty assumptions

Sorry for the double post.

 

[Black Mesa]

If you want to have only one PC processor maker on the planet, that is a great idea in theory. You'd have only one company to choose from and it would be easier for the normal user to understand the hierarchy of the product line and make the right decision. The problem with lack of competition is that this one company can dictate the prices and make us suffer financially. But you know all that.

The thing I'm propagating here is, if there is someone who really won't lose that much by going with the underdog, then by all means let him do it. If nobody supports AMD (or any other competitor of any other business), it will be bad for all of us, period. Now, I would never state something untruthful and lie just to make the world a better place (the ends justify the means, huh?), but if one is ready to make this choice and fully aware of what awaits him with it, I won't stop him.

What awaits the OP with this CPU is improved performance and durability, and a good processor for the money. What he can expect: good multithread performance; better gaming; more power consumption and heat; good overclocking; better performance overall. Is it worth the money in my opinion? No, I 'd wait for the Piledriver (which I already stated). The thing is, he already decided what to do, so I won't stop him.

I suspect Piledriver will be largely comparable to the performance of the current line up of BD FX CPUs but with better efficiency power consumption. Reason I sate this is because AMD already stated quite a while back they are pulling out of the end end CPU market as if they ever where really there. Ether way I want to continue to run with the Mobo I have cause it is good and even does Crossfire. I have turned into a humble gamer over the past few years and AMD is imho humble and underrated just like where it's roots are in Canada.

 

[Akantus]

Guys, let them have it, they seem like they are meant for each other, and we can't help them. Every attempt to explain only leads to strengthening their beliefs.

So let's go "force Intel upon others" to different thread, so we can get our money from The Almighty Chipzilla! :sneaky:

 

[Hatisherrif]

Guys, let them have it, they seem like they are meant for each other, and we can't help them. Every attempt to explain only leads to strengthening their beliefs.

So let's go "force Intel upon others" to different thread, so we can get our money from The Almighty Chipzilla! :sneaky:

If you had read my last two posts, you would have noticed I was trying to be very sincere and accept a different opinion. I guess you really are a bad reader.

I don't know what the OP's beliefs are, but I stated mine, and I cannot see the need for trying to correct them because they contradict yours. Try to be more open-minded.

 

[lehtv]

If you look at the OP's post, you will see that he had already made his decision and just wanted to ask us what he could expect from the CPU.

The answer to that was established early on in this thread, the next logical step was to suggest that a different decision would lead to better results.

 

[Akantus]

If you had read my last two posts, you would have noticed I was trying to be very sincere and accept a different opinion. I guess you really are a bad reader.

I don't know what the OP's beliefs are, but I stated mine, and I cannot see the need for trying to correct them because they contradict yours. Try to be more open-minded.

Well, if you actually read ANY of my post you would I know I'm actually very open minded. (Well, except when I overlook something)

Damn... got baited again
Sayonara

 

[Hatisherrif]

The answer to that was established early on in this thread, the next logical step was to suggest that a different decision would lead to better results.

Define better.

Well, if you actually read ANY of my post you would I know I'm very open minded. (Well, except when I overlook somethink)

Damn... got baited again
Sayonara

I have no intention of baiting you and wasting your so precious time, and never did I make a move towards that. If you consider me such a person, by all means stop replying.

 

[lehtv]

Better performance in games and lower power consumption, the two things OP has stated he is interested in achieving.

 

[Hatisherrif]

Better performance in games and lower power consumption, the two things OP has stated he is interested in achieving.

This also seems to be what he is interested in:

I have turned into a humble gamer over the past few years and AMD is imho humble and underrated just like where it's roots are in Canada.

But it did come out late in the thread, so I get where you are coming from. But if this another factor, we must honor it as well. Also that little opening post where he specifically said no to Intel.

 

[Black Mesa]

Better performance in games and lower power consumption, the two things OP has stated he is interested in achieving.

I don't really care about power consumption or heat I care about the efficiency and quality of the PSU though. In fact down the road I think a BD 8120 OCed to 4.8Ghz and SLI GTX 480s are in order and I could care less if I need a jigawatt reaction just to boot into windows

 

[SlowSpyder]

Black Mesa, to answer your original post, I think you will not notice much difference between the 8120 and what you have. I did not go from a Phenom to a Bulldozer, so I cannot speak from experience, but based on what I've seen around the web my guess is you'll notice very little to no difference. If it were me thinking about buying right now, I would save the money and wait to see what Piledriver can do. I think this would be too much of a side grade.

Here's the 8150 vs. the 955: http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/88?vs=434

There aren't gaming benches for whatever reason, but you can see it is a pretty mixed bag of results. The 8150 already has high clock speed and often loses to the middle of the road Phenom 955. I just don't see an 8120 making much of a difference vs. your current CPU.

 

[lehtv]

But it did come out late in the thread, so I get where you are coming from. But if this another factor, we must honor it as well.

Yeah, I agree...

Also that little opening post where he specifically said no to Intel.

... but it doesn't mean he can dictate what we can and cannot suggest, or how we choose to try to help him. He is free to ignore Intel-related answers, and only consider the posts regarding AMD's performance, and we are free to choose whether to help him in his quest for an AMD upgrade or not

I don't really care about power consumption or heat I care about the efficiency and quality of the PSU though. In fact down the road I think a BD 8120 OCed to 4.8Ghz and SLI GTX 480s are in order and I could care less if I need a jigawatt reaction just to boot into windows

Power consumption and efficiency go hand in hand though, two sides of the same coin. PSU quality is a different thing, Bronze PSUs are in practice just as reliable as Platinum ones.

 

[Maximilian]

Tinfoil hat ^

Fail @ reading and comprehension ^

 

[Ferzerp]

If you want to have only one PC processor maker on the planet, that is a great idea in theory. You'd have only one company to choose from and it would be easier for the normal user to understand the hierarchy of the product line and make the right decision. The problem with lack of competition is that this one company can dictate the prices and make us suffer financially. But you know all that.

In the performance segment, there functionally already is only one choice. In the general server space the story is much the same (single digit marketshare for AMD there). It's all too easy to fall for the trap of "the presence of ANY alternative is good". I don't agree with that statement at all. I can't really advocate what in my view is little more than corporate welfare (i.e. the purchase of BD processors so that "competition" still exists).

AMD has their place in the discrete video card market and the low performance/no discrete video segment. Encouraging shoddy "performance" products by buying something that is only better than the previous product in a few ways and is also worse in other ways is a big mistake, but we see many people openly advocating the position in the name of "competition".

 

[Hatisherrif]

... but it doesn't mean he can dictate what we can and cannot suggest, or how we choose to try to help him. He is free to ignore Intel-related answers, and only consider the posts regarding AMD's performance.

Are the posts that go against what he stated even productive? You are just going to post and it is going to be there, but it isn't going to make a difference. It's just a waste of energy. Plus, it is kind of off-topic.

I agree you are free to suggest anything, but in this case it seems you are trying too hard to change something which has already been decided. But you can always try if you think it is best. I do not think an Intel solution would be ideal in this case for my own reasons, but even if I did, I wouldn't want to persuade the OP into my way of thinking, except if I had personal experience with both, or had evidence to disprove a certain point OP is making to justify his decision. If I could say that AMD was just as unfair as Intel when it comes to respecting the competition and doing malpractice, then by all means I would take the plunge and suggest against his pre-made choice. This way, I don't feel the need to.

I hope you understand

AMD has their place in the discrete video card market and the low performance/no discrete video segment. Encouraging shoddy "performance" products by buying something that is only better than the previous product in a few ways and is also worse in other ways is a big mistake, but we see many people openly advocating the position in the name of "competition".

Yes, because putting the entire industry in the command of one company is always a safe bet. Plus, I thought you understood I recommended what I did because of the factors the OP stated to be important. Also, I don't see how the AMD choice in this case was so inferior if he is willingly and knowingly making a certain sacrifice in the means of power consumption.

Don't make me a bad guy here, I am not encouraging people to buy stuff not suitable for their needs for some weird agenda. Taking everything into consideration, I didn't recommend a different product here. That's it.