Return of AMD FX: My OC'd AMD FX 8150 with OC'd 6990 Review - First Results Up!

[Maximilian]

Maximilian, is it just me or is he modding other's graphs to compare his results?

Heh yeah looks like it :awe:

 

[polyzp]

I have been asked multiple times if I work for AMD, and the answer over and over again is NO! but it would be nice haha. Too bad I am just a student in 4th year physics. And again, I would love peoples feedback or requests for benchmarks to run, which proves i am not hiding anything or trying to spread misinformation. I really am just trying to show FX performance with a 6990 as this is the scorpius platform originally brought forward by AMD on this promotional video..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4hVlo0BSJH8

It really has not been done before which shocked me when I saw all the reviews online.

Its not my fault that 16 benchmarks i have shows so far in my review show FX in a better light than most review sites. This just makes me think that most reviewers have an Intel bias, because at the end of the day benchmarks can show either way, and therefore mean little. I am doing my best to include benchmarks that are new and better optimized for FX arch. What is the point in using a four year old benchmark anyway?? What does it even show us? I never understood why people are so quick to shoot FX down because it wasn't the intel stomper people imagined it would be for all this time. In the end , however, you still cannot deny the fact that overclocked it pokes into the territory of a stock 3960x in many benchmarks, which to most people is more than enough performance for the price point.

And to the point that the 990x is way too old to compare to, that's bogus. This CPU was 1000 dollars before taxes, which is nearly four times the price of the fx 8150. Still to this day a 990x will set you back at least 500 dollars, and if not probably much more.

Tomorrow I will be posting Sandra Si Software results, which is a notoriously Intel favoured benchmark.

 

[Maximilian]

I have been asked multiple times if I work for AMD, and the answer over and over again is NO! but it would be nice haha. Too bad I am just a student in 4th year physics. And again, I would love peoples feedback or requests for benchmarks to run, which proves i am not hiding anything or trying to spread misinformation. I really am just trying to show FX performance with a 6990 as this is the scorpius platform originally brought forward by AMD on this promotional video..

Who said you worked for AMD? Shills usually work for 3rd party companies as far as im aware.

Heh you are not hiding anything or spreading misinformation this is why you post to AMD promotional videos and compare FX8150 to gulftown which is exactly what AMD did initially. Strange you use the same tactic, most enthusiasts without ulterior motives would have something better than that to paint bulldozer in a good light.

And to the point that the 990x is way too old to compare to, that's bogus. This CPU was 1000 dollars before taxes, which is nearly four times the price of the fx 8150. Still to this day a 990x will set you back at least 500 dollars, and if not probably much more.

Cut the crap. FX series goes against sandy bridge, AMD has no equivalent for gulftown or sandy bridge-e unless you want to ask them to send an interlagos server chip your way.

 

[Abwx]

Cut the crap. FX series goes against sandy bridge, AMD has no equivalent for gulftown or sandy bridge-e unless you want to ask them to send an interlagos server chip your way.

Nerved that your 2500K is overall not as good as a FX?...

As times goes by , softs will be more and more multithreaded,
making your choice an unsighted one..

 

[Ferzerp]

We did have a massive influx of new regs coinciding with (and defending) bulldozer on release. It was very transparent, and very annoying.

 

[Ferzerp]

Nerved that your 2500K is overall not as good as a FX?...

You can't honestly believe this is true.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

Nerved that your 2500K is overall not as good as a FX?...

As times goes by , softs will be more and more multithreaded,
making your choice an unsighted one..

My 2600K craps, spits, and laughs all over a crappy FX-8150, and a 2500K still beats it easily. It's such a crappy chip that it struggles to convincingly beat AMD's own old Phenom II X6 1090T.

If you actually believe what you're saying, here's reality:

Can't even beat a 2500K that has half the integer cores and costs $50 less in multi-threaded. Not even a three-year-old i7-975. It's a turd.

 

[Ferzerp]

Competition is good, but encouraging crappy products is bad. Wishful thinking doesn't make a processor that performs similarly to something intel released in 2008 a good product.

No, bulldozer is not the first 8 core product (ignoring the argument that it's not quite 2 cores per module anyway). It's not even the first 8 core x86 product. (hint: intel and amd both released 8 core x86 processors in March of 2010)

 

[Abwx]

It s good enough for the money and it s future proof wich is not the case
of the 2500K and not even the 2600K...

 

[Ferzerp]

I do not see how a rational person who didn't have some vested interest could make that comment with a straight face. I honestly do not. That claim is so far beyond the realm of reality that I don't even know how to begin to explain how incorrect it is.

 

[Abwx]

Can't even beat a 2500K that has half the integer cores and costs $50 less in multi-threaded. Not even a three-year-old i7-975. It's a turd.

All that is left to try making a pitifull point is to spread lies as this big one.

Whenever the task is heavily threaded your 2500K is noticably below.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/5448/the-bulldozer-scheduling-patch-tested/2

 

[Abwx]

I do not see how a rational person who didn't have some vested interest could make that comment with a straight face. I honestly do not. That claim is so far beyond the realm of reality that I don't even know how to begin to explain how incorrect it is.

No vested interest , simply not prone to trust the massive FUD
spread by people wanting to show their intel gear under the best light.

 

[Ferzerp]

What can be easily quantified is not FUD.

Vague claims like "It s good enough for the money and it s future proof wich is not the case
of the 2500K and not even the 2600K... " would be FUD if they weren't so laughable that no one can take them seriously.

 

[Abwx]

One who say that a 2500K is better than an FX in multithreaded tasks
is blatantly lying , yet the usual intel suckers do as if it was true..

Pitifull..

 

[Ferzerp]

One is a falsifiable claim, so it has value, and can be falsified or supported with data.

Vague claims like "futureproof" have no value as they are just an appeal to an unknown.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

It s good enough for the money and it s future proof wich is not the case
of the 2500K and not even the 2600K...

8 Intel threads>8 AMD threads. Even in the most multi-threaded scenarios this is true. And no, it's a piece of crap for the money. Anyone saying otherwise is in denial.

AMD may have more cores, but each of those cores is over 50% slower than a Sandy Bridge-based one.

But hey,

 

[Abwx]

Vague claims like "futureproof" have no value as they are just an appeal to an unknown.

Unknown for whom has no clue about the discussed CPU , yet
is trying to argue about it..

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

One who say that a 2500K is better than an FX in multithreaded tasks
is blatantly lying , yet the usual intel suckers do as if it was true..

Pitifull..

You have the facts straight in your face.

 

[Arkaign]

No vested interest , simply not prone to trust the massive FUD
spread by people wanting to show their intel gear under the best light.

Ugh. Idiocy.

For the vast majority of serious posters here, performance trumps any possible brand preference. As a matter of fact, I'd bet dollars to doughnuts that most of the people who post the FACT that the FX chips just aren't very good (they aren't, outside of rare circumstances) also use AMD GPUs, which hold a notable lead over Nvidia's offerings at this time, whether you want to talk about the best GPUs in each segment, or sheer performance (eg; GTX580 vs. 7970).

Facts :

*BD doesn't do well in IPC at all. This hurts TONS of apps that aren't that optimized for really loading loads of threads. You can say that well that's just bad programming, but that doesn't escape the fact that most things do not currently, or will likely soon support anywhere near 100% efficiency in terms of using all available cores.

*BD doesn't do well in terms of power usage compared to Intel 32nm CPUs. This only gets more exaggerated with overclocking.

*BD often loses to slower-clocked previous-gen Phenom-II series processors.

*Even in heavily-multithreaded apps that are well coded/newest versions/windows patched, an enthusiast system with a 2600k (or in many cases, a 2500k as well) will STILL outperform the FX 8150, even when both are overclocked. The relative handful of situations where FX-8150 pulls out a win are not enough to even be considered relatively even, and as such one should only consider an 8150 if their load consists PRIMARILY of those situations where an advantage can be seen. As an all-around solution, with today's operating systems and today's apps in mixed use, it's absolutely no contest.

Believe me, as enthusiasts in this community of AT, we love the sh*t out of hardware that is competitive and provides good value. If BD was convincingly evident of either, it'd be loved, and only the most ardent Intel fanboy would deny that. As it is, only the most ardent AMD fanboy would claim such obvious nonsense. It borders on a public display of mental incompetence to even try to sell such crap, and no amount of PR gymnastics can twist this disaster into success.

/signed Yet another SB owner who wanted BD to be good, but also loves the hell out of his AMD 6950.

 

[Abwx]

You have the facts straight in your face.

This chart is meaningless and highly suspect of using quite
a lot of apps that are limited to four threads efficently...

In all well multithreaded scenarii the 2500K has trouble
fighting even a X6..

 

[Ferzerp]

I'd bet dollars to doughnuts that most of the people who post the FACT that the FX chips just aren't very good (they aren't, outside of rare circumstances) also use AMD GPUs, which hold a notable lead over Nvidia's offerings at this time.

This.

I've had a 7970 in cart about 5 times, but each time I remind myself that there are no games that I am currently playing, so I can wait for prices to come down, etc (what I really want is something that can play all new games at 2560x1600 at max settings, and the 7970 can almost, but not quite do that). When I bought last time, I went nvidia because from a raw performance standpoint, nvidia was ahead (at power, and noise penalties for that performance). Right now, no reasonable person would buy nvidia's offering over AMD's offering (though that could change once nvidia releases its next product, but such is the way of video cards). Similarly, no reasonable person would buy AMD over intel in the performance desktop area right now (unless all you do is the 1 or 2 things that it is marginally better in), but unlike the video realm, amd is behind a full 3 years vs the intel offering instead of in a leapfrog position like they are with nvidia.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

This chart is meaningless and highly suspect of using quite
a lot of apps that are limited to four threads efficently...

In all well multithreaded scenarii the 2500K has trouble
fighting even a X6..

Err, maybe because even though an X6 has 50% more cores, each of those cores are around 40% slower and core scaling decreases as you add cores? Seems relatively easy to understand why.

 

[Abwx]

Err, maybe because even though an X6 has 50% more cores, each of those cores are around 40% slower and core scaling decreases as you add cores? Seems relatively easy to understand why.

At TH they used softs that are particularly optimized for intel..
Once you switch to a more agnostic CPU soft the picture is different..

Winrar/winzip are a good exemple of intel friendly softs..

 

[Ferzerp]

It appears that you have an excuse for everything. Let me give you one word.

epicycles.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

At TH they used softs that are particularly optimized for intel..
Once you switch to a more agnostic CPU soft the picture is different..

Winrar/winzip are a good exemple of intel friendly softs..

I'll leave you under your bridge now. Goodbye.