Is AMD FX Bulldozer really that bad for Gaming?

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

MOST people here are fans of the BEST solution available at the time. when all things are considered that solution right now for gaming is from Intel and that is a FACT.

Quoted for truth.

That's the reality for most people, except fanboys (who I think are irrelevant and who I don't make recommendations to because they're biased and close-minded). It's all about picking what's best.

I could've picked a 2500K, but for me the multi-threaded performance wasn't enough. It's an excellent gaming choice though, as is the 3570K. I could've picked an 8120, but its power consumption is absolutely atrocious, its gaming performance is lackluster, and its multi-threaded performance only matches that of the 2500K despite all the other downsides. I couldn't have gotten a 3930K because of the CPU and platform price and because it was overkill. I could've also gotten a 3820, but platform costs were around 2x higher than P67/Z68 and I wouldn't get any more CPU performance than what the 2600K offered. Was an easy choice if you want great MT performance with low overall system cost, just as the 2500K and 3570K are great choices if the great majority of your computing tasks are gaming. Same with the i3, as well: it's better than anything AMD has for gaming, so if you're on a tight budget you want to go with that, and if you have almost no money you still have the dual-core Celeron and Pentium.

At least when it comes to gaming, right now there's absolutely no beating Intel and if the main thing you're gonna be doing is that and you don't go with them you're by default (1) a bad consumer, and either (2) misinformed or (3) an AMD fanboy. And even if we're talking multi-threaded performance only, let's not forget the fact the FX-8150 isn't faster than the 3570 there. Let's also not forget that AMD's fastest doesn't even come close to Intel's highest-tier Performance CPUs, the 2600K/2700K and 3770K.

 

[Don Karnage]

Quoted for truth.

That's the reality for most people, except fanboys (who I think are irrelevant and who I don't make recommendations to because they're biased and close-minded). It's all about picking what's best.

I could've picked a 2500K, but for me the multi-threaded performance wasn't enough. It's an excellent gaming choice though, as is the 3570K. I could've picked an 8120, but its power consumption is absolutely atrocious, its gaming performance is lackluster, and its multi-threaded performance only matches that of the 2500K despite all the other downsides. I couldn't have gotten a 3930K because of the CPU and platform price and because it was overkill. I could've also gotten a 3820, but platform costs were around 2x higher than P67/Z68 and I wouldn't get any more CPU performance than what the 2600K offered. Was an easy choice if you want great MT performance with low overall system cost, just as the 2500K and 3570K are great choices if the great majority of your computing tasks are gaming. Same with the i3, as well: it's better than anything AMD has for gaming, so if you're on a tight budget you want to go with that, and if you have almost no money you still have the dual-core Celeron and Pentium.

At least when it comes to gaming, right now there's absolutely no beating Intel and if the main thing you're gonna be doing is that and you don't go with them you're by default (1) a bad consumer, and either (2) misinformed or (3) an AMD fanboy. And even if we're talking multi-threaded performance, let's not forget the fact the FX-8150 isn't faster than the 3570 there.

I wonder if we have any 8150 owners on the forum. I'd love to compare my 3570 to there 8150

 

[blckgrffn]

I wonder if we have any 8150 owners on the forum. I'd love to compare my 3570 to there 8150

Plenty of 8120 owners, I am sure. Microcenter deals, man. The board and CPU cost $200, so you'd have to do a comparison of performance per $$$ to have it be meaningful. Subtract two years of power costs if you want, but that is going to be minimal for anyone who isn't pushing DC projects.

No doubt it's slower, but it cost maybe half as much, so...

 

[Hypertag]

Technically, yes, benchmarks don't lie, the BD is a slower chip, in some cases significantly so. I got the FX8120 and the mobo for $200 in a bundle at Microcenter tho, and honestly, it seems pretty damned quick for the price. An i5-2500k is $180 at Microcenter by itself, so I don't think it was a bad deal.

If we are going to use Microcenter's fantasy prices for comparisons, then we should at least be fair about it. They had a 2600K + Z68 motherboard sale for $280~ with tax a week ago.

 

[ShintaiDK]

I wonder if we have any 8150 owners on the forum. I'd love to compare my 3570 to there 8150

Maybe they are still waiting for some magic MS patch or Win8..maybe Win9...but full speed in Win10!

 

[Don Karnage]

Plenty of 8120 owners, I am sure. Microcenter deals, man. The board and CPU cost $200, so you'd have to do a comparison of performance per $$$ to have it be meaningful. Subtract two years of power costs if you want, but that is going to be minimal for anyone who isn't pushing DC projects.

No doubt it's slower, but it cost maybe half as much, so...

Only cheaper if you go with the 8120

8120 + 990FX Board = 319.98
8150 + 990FX board = 379.98
3570K + Z77 Board = 369.98

I can only "guesstimate" the price of the 3570K but i imagine it'll be 229.99. Lets not also forget that the 3570K/3770K will be offered at MC at substantial discounts as well.

 

[Hypertag]

Maybe they are still waiting for some magic MS patch or Win8..maybe Win9...but full speed in Win10!

Remember, AMD sent reviewers ASUS motherboards for the launch. This "clearly" caused bulldozer scores to be 20% lower.

 

[blckgrffn]

If we are going to use Microcenter's fantasy prices for comparisons, then we should at least be fair about it. They had a 2600K + Z68 motherboard sale for $280~ with tax a week ago.

It sold out in a few hours and was dead. The 8120 has been running for months now... a little more pricey now @ ~$230, but still marginally cheaper than a MC 2500k setup. A 2600k bundle will set you back $350 at a minimum I believe.

The 8120 was moving more briskly @ $200 w/solid motherboard from the board chatter I have been observing (anecdotal.) It seems that was the tipping point where performance deficit was overcome by price advantage, IMHO. It's cooled off again now.

Just sayin'.

Only cheaper if you go with the 8120

8120 + 990FX Board = 319.98
8150 + 990FX board = 379.98
3570K + Z77 Board = 369.98

I can only "guesstimate" the price of the 3570K but i imagine it'll be 229.99. Lets not also forget that the 3570K/3770K will be offered at MC at substantial discounts as well.

Haha, I can only add to my post that if you are buying a BD FX somewhere other than MC, you are also doing it wrong

Absolutely it will. FX will either get cheaper again or there will be even fewer people buying it, IMHO. All of the shortcomings it had vs SB were just made worse by IVB. Waiting for the May flier (or direct email...) to see just how it is going to shape up...

Somewhat laughably, IMHO, the hottest MC bundle for AMD is the 960t w/free mobo for ~$90+tax. It's hard to argue with the value that brings to the table, especially as the board can enable more cores. Just need to cool those VRMs!

 

[Puppies04]

You have a fundamental misconception of how CPU and GPUs relate. You can absolutely be CPU bottlenecked on a quad core with a 5870. What if a game doesn't use all 4 cores? Task manager won't show 100% what if it uses all 4 but doesn't scale well? Task manager still won't show 100% and in both cases you quite likely are in fact CPU limited.

And it doesn't matter if you're using task manager or another monitoring application, the above scenario still plays out the same. Which is to say, you'll see less than 100% utilization and still be CPU bound.

Don't worry 2IS, tweakboy has a fundamental misconception of how most things relate when it comes to pc's .

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

I wonder if we have any 8150 owners on the forum. I'd love to compare my 3570 to there 8150

Take a look at this:

Given Ivy Bridge has 5% higher IPC than Sandy Bridge, it'd be faster given the 2500K matches the 8150 in MT.

That's a time compilation for how much it took for the multi-threaded programs to complete, and it includes 3ds Max, Blender, HandBrake, MainConcept, After Effects, Photoshop, Adobe Premiere, Matlab, and 7-Zip.

 

[Don Karnage]

Take a look at this:

Given Ivy Bridge has 5% higher IPC than Sandy Bridge, it'd be faster given the 2500K matches it.

That's a time compilation for how much it took for the multi-threaded programs to complete, and it includes 3ds Max, Blender, HandBrake, MainConcept, After Effects, Photoshop, Adobe Premiere, Matlab, and 7-Zip.

Oh i agree. Just looking to do a real world comparo. Anyone have a 5Ghz 8150/8210 to compare? I'll gladly turn up the wick to 4.8Ghz to test against

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

Oh i agree. Just looking to do a real world comparo. Anyone have a 5Ghz 8150/8210 to compare? I'll gladly turn up the wick to 4.8Ghz to test against

That's only possible stably with very high-end water, and the system power consumption I'm sure would be at around 500W, with the CPU pulling in almost 400W. Not very recommended, LOL.

 

[richaron]

Maybe they are still waiting for some magic MS patch or Win8..maybe Win9...but full speed in Win10!

If any of you guys are actually interested in how bulldozer can perform you should check out the Phoronix BD review back when it was released. If you doubt about software gains, maybe you can actually learn something by reading reviews of moderm compilers for Bulldozer compared to Sandy Bridge gains.

If you have any technical ability, you would see these intel fan nubs are blowing sand up your [redacted]. Tho I would still buy Intel for gaming right now

 

[Makaveli]

SC2 is heavy cpu intensive, mostly because it uses only 2 cores....
probably, any cpu will fry in a 4vs4 zergling only for the next 5 years

I play alot of custom 4vs4 matches in SC2 and I agree with you.

even when I went from a 920 to a 970 I noticed it being abit smoother in these matches with alots on screen.

SC does love IPC tho so going to SB will give a nice alittle boost over nehalem/gulftown and IVY should give alittle boost over SB. As for BD in this game no thanks!

 

[Krakn3Dfx]

If we are going to use Microcenter's fantasy prices for comparisons, then we should at least be fair about it. They had a 2600K + Z68 motherboard sale for $280~ with tax a week ago.

I didn't know that, awesome deal to be sure.

 

[Makaveli]

If any of you guys are actually interested in how bulldozer can perform you should check out the Phoronix BD review back when it was released. If you doubt about software gains, maybe you can actually learn something by reading reviews of moderm compilers for Bulldozer compared to Sandy Bridge gains.

If you have any technical ability, you would see these intel fan nubs are blowing sand up your [redacted]. Tho I would still buy Intel for gaming right now

What is the point it won't change the fact or the current situation.

Are you only trying to convince yourself?

Intel makes superior cpu's period, Fact, Checkout, done deal.

If you choose to build an AMD rig with BD then good for you or anyone else it is your choice your money.

By the time any serious software is updated intel will be releasing haswell.

 

[beginner99]

If any of you guys are actually interested in how bulldozer can perform you should check out the Phoronix BD review back when it was released. If you doubt about software gains, maybe you can actually learn something by reading reviews of moderm compilers for Bulldozer compared to Sandy Bridge gains.

If you have any technical ability, you would see these intel fan nubs are blowing sand up your [redacted]. Tho I would still buy Intel for gaming right now

Yeah? So do you think SC2, BF3 or other games will be recompiled with these new compilers for the 0.5% of BD users out there?

It just adds to the general WTF of BD. AMD knew probably for years that BD would need such "optimizations" but did do squat about it.

 

[boxleitnerb]

That's only possible stably with very high-end water, and the system power consumption I'm sure would be at around 500W, with the CPU pulling in almost 400W. Not very recommended, LOL.

Question:
I've seen these insane numbers - how doesn't this much current fry the socket, the board, the vrms or the CPU?

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

If any of you guys are actually interested in how bulldozer can perform you should check out the Phoronix BD review back when it was released. If you doubt about software gains, maybe you can actually learn something by reading reviews of moderm compilers for Bulldozer compared to Sandy Bridge gains.

If you have any technical ability, you would see these intel fan nubs are blowing sand up your [redacted]. Tho I would still buy Intel for gaming right now

Nice job with the misquoting.

In any case, Sandy Bridge is faster. Doesn't matter how many excuses you can make up for Bulldozer, but it's a slow and inefficient architecture.

 

[AE-Ruffy]

There’s no point to a Bulldozer unless you’re a die-hard AMD fan. Even if you make the argument that you’ll flat-line from GPU limitations, a Sandy Bridge can achieve the same thing while using far less power and generating less heat.

Back in my day you were a die hard amd fan because the performance was either close or better at a lower price.


Kids these days just blindly going with a name.

 

[Hatisherrif]

Nice job with the misquoting.

In any case, Sandy Bridge is faster. Doesn't matter how many excuses you can make up for Bulldozer, but it's a slow and inefficient architecture.

InTeL r0x0r!%$#

 

[AtenRa]

Oh i agree. Just looking to do a real world comparo. Anyone have a 5Ghz 8150/8210 to compare? I'll gladly turn up the wick to 4.8Ghz to test against

I Have an FX8150 @ 4.7GHz with default voltage of 1.425v, i can run Truecrypt, Cinebench 11.5, 7-zip, x264 HD(v4.0) and PovRay RC5.

I believe we should start a new thread for this

 

[Don Karnage]

I Have an FX8150 @ 4.7GHz with default voltage of 1.425v, i can run Truecrypt, Cinebench 11.5, 7-zip, x264 HD(v4.0) and PovRay RC5.

I believe we should start a new thread for this

Start a new thread and run those benchmarks and i'll follow suit

 

[Makaveli]

I Have an FX8150 @ 4.7GHz with default voltage of 1.425v, i can run Truecrypt, Cinebench 11.5, 7-zip, x264 HD(v4.0) and PovRay RC5.

I believe we should start a new thread for this

I actually won't mind seeing some Truecrypt numbers, so I can compare them to my rig aswell.

 

[Hatisherrif]

Start a new thread and run those benchmarks and i'll follow suit

And I'll jump in with my 2500K!