• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

[HardwareHaven] New Review shows FX-8150 beating i7 2600k at gaming

jacktesterson

jacktesterson

Diamond Member
I thought this deserved a thread of its own as its being overlooked. Is there something to this?

very interesting... supposedly every review out there was done on a Asus test board sent to all the review sites by AMD, but this site used a different board and the results were much better. PRetty interesting, beats the i7 2600k in a lot of cases


http://www.hardwareheaven.com/revie...sor-vs-core-i7-2600k-review-introduction.html

At 2 pages long it's too late to close this thread. Do this again however and I will string you up; we were rather clear about wanting all reviews in the review thread.
-ViRGE
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Its the same site that had the very popular GTX 570/580 SLI vs 6950/6970 Xfire Review when it came out that circulated around here.

just sayin

Not sure why would dismiss it so easily.
 
Yeah, sorry, I don't trust that site and maybe it is me, but the games in particular seem very cherry-picked.

EDIT: Tom's Hardware benchmarks F1 with the same settings and resolution and the 2600K wins by nearly 30 fps.
 
Last edited:
Wait for the respin and dont support bad hardware or AMD will do this again. Let them know consumers should be respected. This was a slap in the face and the propaganda was deceitful including their representative that posted on this board outright lied.
 
IndyColtsFan said:
Yeah, sorry, I don't trust that site and maybe it is me, but the games in particular seem very cherry-picked.

EDIT: Tom's Hardware benchmarks F1 with the same settings and resolution and the 2600K wins by nearly 30 fps.
Click to expand...

Tom's Hardware also used the Asus Board that is in question.

I'm not trying to fight here. I'm just saying maybe there is an issue with the Asus Crosshair board. Anandtech and Tom's and EVERYONE ELSE except this site used that board. Thats the point of my posting, which you shrugged off
 
adam_the_giant said:
Tom's Hardware also used the Asus Board that is in question.

I'm not trying to fight here. I'm just saying maybe there is an issue with the Asus Crosshair board. Anandtech and Tom's and EVERYONE ELSE except this site used that board. Thats the point of my posting, which you shrugged off
Click to expand...

No, I understand, but at the risk of giving AMD too much credit, you'd think they would have only provided the best components which were thoroughly tested and vetted in their test kits for the press.
 
No motherboard based on the same chipset should be showing such differences.

We know that theres almost no difference in perfomance between most boards using the same chipsets, I doubt AMD would send junk boards out for review...
 
Your point of posting was 1 site that found away to get hits . There is no magic for AMD just hardwork and work out the kinks . BD1 is a terriable cpu all things considered . But its still better than we had 6 years ago .
 
For the games, i'm confident that our results will be more correct than other sites. Various reasons for that, many of which involve the tests/practices other sites use, so I wont go over that all again. Overall though any recent game which is impacted by CPU perfomance and cores will do well on AMD. F1/Dirt3 are examples of this and pretty much any decent engine going forward.

um okay...

this guy is a little bonkers and sometimes get some crazy numbers in his reviews that no other site seems to match.
 
toyota said:
For the games, i'm confident that our results will be more correct than other sites. Various reasons for that, many of which involve the tests/practices other sites use, so I wont go over that all again. Overall though any recent game which is impacted by CPU perfomance and cores will do well on AMD. F1/Dirt3 are examples of this and pretty much any decent engine going forward.

um okay...

this guy is a little bonkers and sometimes get some crazy numbers in his reviews that no other site seems to match.
Click to expand...

So he touts Dirt3 but doesn't use it in his benchmarks (unless I am blind). That's certainly interesting.....
 
WaitingForNehalem said:
These reviews didn't use ASUS motherboards and they still came up with the same results.

Asrock 990FX: http://www.techspot.com/review/452-amd-bulldozer-fx-cpus/page6.html
Gigabyte 990FX: http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/amd-fx-8150_7.html#sect1
Click to expand...
i used the ASUS MB and here are my results with HD 6970 and HD 6970 CrossFire versus an i7-920 at 3.8GHz and Phenom II 980 BE at 4.3GHz.
PerfSummary-1.jpg
PerfSummary-2.jpg

My article is a bit late because i got a DOA MB from AMD and had to wait 2 days for a replacement.
🙁
 
IndyColtsFan said:
No, I understand, but at the risk of giving AMD too much credit, you'd think they would have only provided the best components which were thoroughly tested and vetted in their test kits for the press.
Click to expand...
They do. However, the ASUS AM3+ MB they sent to me was DoA and i had to wait two days for a replacement
:'(

And there is suspect CrossFire scaling with the FX-8150 that is not there with the Phenom II 980BE in the same PC, so i can't rule out the MB having some issues

On top of that, i couldn't get 4.5GHz stable on air (with a Thermalright UltraExtreme 120 that gets my Phenom 980BE to 4.3GHz)
 
Last edited:
adam_the_giant said:
I thought this deserved a thread of its own as its being overlooked. Is there something to this?

very interesting... supposedly every review out there was done on a Asus test board sent to all the review sites by AMD, but this site used a different board and the results were much better. PRetty interesting, beats the i7 2600k in a lot of cases


http://www.hardwareheaven.com/revie...sor-vs-core-i7-2600k-review-introduction.html
Click to expand...

GPU limited

Those results are well within margin of error. Lower the res and lift the GPU limit, then bulldozer gets thrashed. With a GPU limited benchmark like that an athlon II dual core could equal the 2600k. Bulldozer will never be good for gaming.

EDIT:

Just reading the conclusion of that review... "There are two areas where the FX-8150 excells though, those are gaming and overclocking." Uh huh... dunno what hes been smoking but id like some.
 
Last edited:
eternalone said:
Wait for the respin and dont support bad hardware or AMD will do this again. Let them know consumers should be respected. This was a slap in the face and the propaganda was deceitful including their representative that posted on this board outright lied.
Click to expand...

Whos their representative? Ive seen the Intel guy floating around but never an AMD one.
 
Maximilian said:
GPU limited

Those results are well within margin of error. Lower the res and lift the GPU limit, then bulldozer gets thrashed. With a GPU limited benchmark like that an athlon II dual core could equal the 2600k. Bulldozer will never be good for gaming.

EDIT:

Just reading the conclusion of that review... "There are two areas where the FX-8150 excells though, those are gaming and overclocking." Uh huh... dunno what hes been smoking but id like some.
Click to expand...
FX-8150 does do well in games. At stock it smokes my i7-920 at 3.8GHz and the Phenom II 980BE at 4.3GHz.

Didn't you see my charts?
PerfSummary-1.jpg

PerfSummary-2.jpg
 
Maximilian said:
Whos their representative? Ive seen the Intel guy floating around but never an AMD one.
Click to expand...

JF-AMD was pushing it constantly on basically every site

You can dig up the exact quote, but he basically said

1) Higher IPC for bulldozer
2) Much higher single thread performance for bulldozer
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top