HardOCP: FX8150 vs. 2500K with 2-way/3-way SLI

[boxleitnerb]

Very interesting review there. Pretty rare as not every reviewer has 3 GTX580.

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2011/11/03/amd_fx8150_multigpu_gameplay_performance_review/1

Not really sure what to think about AMD promoting their FX platform for (highres) gaming...kinda backfired. Badly. Anyway, enjoy reading.

 

[Arachnotronic]

The performance isn't what scares me. It's the crippling bugs. As much as I like AMD, this is inexcusable. I will not be using the AMD FX chips for any client builds. For high end, I'll go i5/i7, for lower end, I'll go Athlon II/Phenom II.

 

[RussianSensation]

Horrendous performance. Once 28nm GPUs launch with rumored performance near HD6990/GTX590, FX-8150 will need a price cut to $129-139 to make sense.

And bugs

 

[Rifter]

Horrendous performance. Once 28nm GPUs launch with rumored performance near HD6990/GTX590, FX-8150 will need a price cut to $129-139 to make sense.

It needs a price cut NOW to make sense let alone later.

 

[Arachnotronic]

No, it doesn't need a price cut. THEY NEED TO RECALL THESE CHIPS. Jesus...how, how can AMD put out a chip that has such horrid bugs?!

 

[RussianSensation]

No, it doesn't need a price cut. THEY NEED TO RECALL THESE CHIPS. Jesus...how, how can AMD put out a chip that has such horrid bugs?!

They should have delayed the launch until summer of next year, giving them time to incorporate 15% IPC increase, fix the bugs, and launch the FX-8150 with 4.8ghz clocks stock, at least. In 2011, they should have spent January 2011 to October 2011 simply shrinking Phenom II to 32nm. Even with 0 changes to Phenom II, I am sure they could have figured out a way to shrink it to 32nm in 10 months and up clocks 20-30%. 32nm would have allowed them to save on manufacturing costs, and raise profitability while still being able to seel Phenom II X6 1100T well below $280 of the FX-8150.

 

[MentalIlness]

The performance isn't what scares me. It's the crippling bugs. As much as I like AMD, this is inexcusable. I will not be using the AMD FX chips for any client builds. For high end, I'll go i5/i7, for lower end, I'll go Athlon II/Phenom II.

That, and the price.

 

[lehtv]

This graph cracked me up pretty badly... LOL

 

[Remobz]

This graph cracked me up pretty badly... LOL

I am almost speechless.....wow!

 

[frostedflakes]

Yeah, the frame rate is all over the place in some games, I don't really understand that. Does the same happen with Phenom II? If not maybe it has something to do with the scheduling issues in Win 7 for BD. For example if the OS schedules 2 threads to the same module one second and 2 threads to different modules the next, that could result in a pretty large swing in performance and might explain the variance.

And not sure what issues they were having with Deus Ex, other reviewers didn't seem to have any problems. I'd chalk it up to poor SLI drivers (nVidia only recently added support for SLI on AMD platforms, so some growing pains are to be expected), but they mention not being able to run it even on a single GTX 580 or 6970.

 

[fffblackmage]

Wow... I guess I was expecting BD to pretty much fail, given the fact it just has more useless cores and no better IPC than Phenom IIs, but to fail that badly.... D:

 

[Rifter]

Wow... I guess I was expecting BD to pretty much fail, given the fact it just has more useless cores and no better IPC than Phenom IIs, but to fail that badly.... D:

I know huh.

The funny thing is there are alot of people out there who think its not that bad, and that the BD sucks threads are to negative and are just people jumping on the anti BD bandwagon and that its just a mid range chip thats ok. When the cold hard truth is that IT BLOWS, its really that bad, the threads are justified

 

[apoppin]

i found pretty much the same thing with HD 6970-X2 Cross-Fire - until i overclocked the FX-8150. Then adding the 3rd GPU for HD 6970-X3 Tri-Fire again pointed up the shortcomings of the FX-8150.

Next week, i am going for 4.8GHz with watercooled FX-8150 (3 PSUs) and and HD 6970-X4 QuadFire

 

[HopJokey]

i found pretty much the same thing with HD 6970-X2 Cross-Fire - until i overclocked the FX-8150. Then adding the 3rd GPU for HD 6970-X3 Tri-Fire again pointed up the shortcomings of the FX-8150.

Next week, i am going for 4.8GHz with watercooled FX-8150 (3 PSUs) and and HD 6970-X4 QuadFire

You really need to upgrade your Intel setup, it is ancient. The HardOCP review mentions that they got up to 40% higher FPS in multi-GPU tests upgrading from the 920 to the 2500K.

 

[Maximilian]

I know huh.

The funny thing is there are alot of people out there who think its not that bad, and that the BD sucks threads are to negative and are just people jumping on the anti BD bandwagon and that its just a mid range chip thats ok. When the cold hard truth is that IT BLOWS, its really that bad, the threads are justified

Yup its a shame, i pity those that think BD is "fine for gaming" because in the future they will need to upgrade that POS long before anyone with a sandy bridge needs to upgrade.

 

[Rvenger]

I wonder if turbo is causing those wierd spikes.

 

[RobertR1]

I feel bad for anyone who bought BullDozer.

 

[Rifter]

Yup its a shame, i pity those that think BD is "fine for gaming" because in the future they will need to upgrade that POS long before anyone with a sandy bridge needs to upgrade.

SB?? they will need to upgrade it before Bloomfield users let alone SB Im pretty sure my i7 930@4.2 will push multi GPU better than BD.

 

[Elixer]

This is not news, is it ?
We have all been saying that AMD's new flagship is just too expensive for what it brings to the table.
This subject has been beaten to death, yet people still keep saying the same things over and over.
I know, they should have used crossfire to make it better!

 

[beginner99]

If not maybe it has something to do with the scheduling issues in Win 7 for BD. For example if the OS schedules 2 threads to the same module one second and 2 threads to different modules the next, that could result in a pretty large swing in performance and might explain the variance.

Yeah. Had the same thought. on the other hand it could also be some general design problem with the cache. Interesting is that the spikes also go up very high. And also in encoding and other benches maybe there are similar spikes, sometimes it's very fast and then the issue hits that slows it down but we only see the average. So one could assume that if AMD was able to eliminated this problem, the next BD could actually preform very well.

Well we need to grab the few straws available.

 

[StinkyPinky]

You'd have to be a brainless fanboy to buy one of those dogs. Such a shame.

 

[TakeNoPrisoners]

I'm so glad my AM3 motherboard dropped AM3+ support.

 

[Hypertag]

You really need to upgrade your Intel setup, it is ancient. The HardOCP review mentions that they got up to 40% higher FPS in multi-GPU tests upgrading from the 920 to the 2500K.

That would be unfair to AMD. AMD's actual competition from Intel is http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16819116404 , and anyone that doesn't bench the FX-8150 against that chip is an intel employee.

 

[Denithor]

That would be unfair to AMD. AMD's actual competition from Intel is http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16819116404 , and anyone that doesn't bench the FX-8150 against that chip is an intel employee.

LOL

 

[WT]

This graph cracked me up pretty badly... LOL

That graph bounces more than a Thai stripper !!

So sad ... I'm glad I went 2500k and didn't suffer any longer wait. I'd still recommend a Ph II X4 955-965 to a budget gamer tho.