• 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.

why do people say FX 8 core sucks?

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.
toyota said:
😕
Click to expand...

That's right, it's Intel that is keeping me from buying Intel. Too many new products on the way, it's always wait for this wait for that. AMD on the other hand, has a new arch out there, and it probably won't be trumped anytime soon, but it's not slow regardless. Still a nice upgrade for me (or anyone).

So if a 2500k and 8150 are roughly equal and my only choices today, then there's little difference if you can get either for roughly the same comparative prices, $199 or $219.
Being as I'm getting the same performance either way, why not save a buck, get a very similar performing chip that won't be beat by it's own manufacturers products soon? At least thats my prediction, that PD won't be a huge leap. I'm going to be stuck with 2500k performance after the purchase either way.
 
Last edited:
Obsoleet said:
That's right, it's Intel that is keeping me from buying Intel. Too many new products on the way, it's always wait for this wait for that. AMD on the other hand, has a new arch out there, and it probably won't be trumped anytime soon, but it's not slow regardless. Still a nice upgrade for me (or anyone).

So if a 2500k and 8150 are roughly equal and my only choices today, then there's little difference if you can get either for roughly the same comparative prices, $199 or $219.
Being as I'm getting the same performance either way, why not save a buck, get a very similar performing chip that won't be beat by it's own manufacturers products soon? I'm going to be stuck with 2500k performance after the purchase either way.
Click to expand...
that is some strange logic you have there. the 2500k is the better overall cpu so not choosing it because Intel is going to have something better down the road is pretty dumb. 🙄
 
There are more FX processors than FX8150 and more Intel processors than Core i5 2500K.

Overclocked FX4100 and FX6100 are faster and cheaper than any Intel Core i3 and i5 up to Intel Core i5 2400.

FX8150 is the worst performance/price FX processor for overclockers but it is faster than Core i5 2500K at default in Multithreaded apps.
For people that dont OC, the FX8150 is a better choice than Core i5 2500K for heavily multithreaded apps.
 
Obsoleet said:
With Intel probably making larger strides forward in their CPUs soon with IB/Haswell, I think it'd be better to get BD for $199 and have the "best AMD has" for a lot longer than I would with a 2500k, which will be obsolete in the Intel world much sooner.
Click to expand...

Your logic is flawed. CPUs don't become obsolete because something better comes out. They become obsolete when they are no longer fast enough or do not have the features required (extensions, core count etc.) to run the latest software. There's no "Intel world" or "AMD world", they both run exactly the same software and operating systems.

As for the BD, it doesn't "suck", it's just that Intel has the better product at almost every price point. I would pick a 2500K over a BD any day. At worst (heavily threaded apps), it will still be slightly faster. At best, it will be significantly faster. If you overclock, the gap only widens.

Sure, a high-end BD processor will be "good enough", but why not go with the best option at your price point? Since I'm going to have to get a new mobo and DDR3 RAM anyway, I see no point in sticking with AMD next time I upgrade. Maybe if I had an AM3 mobo, but even then, a 6-core Phenom II would be a tempting over the BD.
 
AtenRa said:
There are more FX processors than FX8150 and more Intel processors than Core i5 2500K.

Overclocked FX4100 and FX6100 are faster and cheaper than any Intel Core i3 and i5 up to Intel Core i5 2400.

FX8150 is the worst performance/price FX processor for overclockers but it is faster than Core i5 2500K at default in Multithreaded apps.
For people that dont OC, the FX8150 is a better choice than Core i5 2500K for heavily multithreaded apps.
Click to expand...
for gaming that is not true though. even the Pentium G860 beats the FX cpus.


image upload
 
Last edited:
yes, its fast enough, but that doesn't mean its a good buy

the 2500K has more potential for the average user as its much faster in single threaded scenarios (ie the majority of the average user's computing), can keep up with the 8 core BDs in multi threaded scenarios, and will beat BD hands down when each are overclocked to their potential in both performance and especially performance-per-watt.

really just bad news bears for bulldozer on the whole

and when you really think about it, if you can't notice a difference in computing experience between an 8 core BD and a CPU like the 2600K, you don't even need the the 8 core BD to be happy, you'd be much better off saving money and going with an X4 or unlocked Llano
 
Except that overclocking is 1) not guaranteed 2) has extra costs (generally budget motherboards aren't good for overclocking, and unless your grilling burgers on your FX you'll probably need a cooler...)

Not saying its not worth doing (my 2500ks are quite happy at 4.5) but if I was looking at a budget too small to include the 2500K I would probably forego overclocking, and simply put an extra 20-30 into a better CPU.
 
toyota said:
That is some strange logic you have there.
Click to expand...
This is what it all comes down to. In the end, everyone will buy what he wants and what is best for him. The numbers and graphs are all there for everyone to see and they don't need any yelling defenders on the forums.
I'm well aware that SB is a fantastic series - I build SB PC's for all my friends. But when it comes to my PC, I bought a 960T in an Asus Sabertooth and pair it with two 5870'ies. And that IS the best possible PC for me. I'll replace the 960T with a Pilediver or revised Zambezi, when one comes out.

Programs and games don't care what CPU you're running - it's all just MHz's for them. Same as your stomack doesn't care how the food you're eating tastes - it's all protein. But you care and are free to choose. Eat what you like and let other people do the same.
 
tulx said:
This is what it all comes down to. In the end, everyone will buy what he wants and what is best for him. The numbers and graphs are all there for everyone to see and they don't need any yelling defenders on the forums.
I'm well aware that SB is a fantastic series - I build SB PC's for all my friends. But when it comes to my PC, I bought a 960T in an Asus Sabertooth and pair it with two 5870'ies. And that IS the best possible PC for me. I'll replace the 960T with a Pilediver or revised Zambezi, when one comes out.

Programs and games don't care what CPU you're running - it's all just MHz's for them. Same as your stomack doesn't care how the food you're eating tastes - it's all protein. But you care and are free to choose. Eat what you like and let other people do the same.
Click to expand...
I think you missed the whole point. its stupid not to buy a 2500k just because Intel will have something better down the road.
 
Let's provide a Belgians point of view:

1) We have no MC or Egg.

2) Cheapest FX 8150 I can find is 232 euro (and it's not even in stock). Cheapest AM3+ mobo with 4 RAM slots is the MSI 760GM-E51 for 52 euro.

3) Cheapest i5 2500k I can find is 190 euro (in stock). Cheapest P67 mobo is Asrock P67 Pro3 SE for 73 euro.

284 euro for FX-8150. 263 euro for 2500k.

I've had AMD since my first pc, a K6-II 350Mhz. Then AMD 64 3000+. Next an AMD 64 x2 4200+ (still used by my dad). The Phenom II x4 955 BE. And my latest build has a 2500K. Because hey, that sort of performance at 189 euro (price when I bought it) was just too good to pass on.
 
Reminds me when I had a P4 Northwood many years ago. It was working so well for me and games were fine, I completely brushed aside any notion of going to an AMD x64.
 
I love how someone says the old reviews are outdated because they just released the new stepping. Then in the very next post what do I see? Links to old reviews. D:
 
So all it took was 1 troll to restart this BD discussion that should have been put to bed months ago.
 
Well, mainly because... it sucks.

It has lower single-threaded performance than its predecessor, no gains were made on already high power consumption, and for the money you can get something better from the blue team.
 
Really I think power costs are a completely pointless argument here. What's an 8150, ~$240 new, used maybe ~$200 or something like that. Over the course of most people here, that $37 extra per year (calculated above) is actually a small savings over initially buying a a I7 2600k and they benchmark nearly the same (8150 is a bit less though) or a whole hell of a lot higher than an I5 2500k. (Passmark) So power arguments...really pointless as a lot of people here are constantly upgrading/changing processors. I changed processors 4 times over the past 2 months.

Though really, I don't know what I'm talking about :awe:
 
YABT 🙄

Bulldozer sucks. We all know this. If anyone dosent realize this by now then they have failed at using google and reading or they are not that interested in tech which makes me wonder how they ended up here in the first place 🙂
 
AtenRa said:
OK, choose any Intel CPU up to $149,99 and ill put an Overclocked FX 6100.
Click to expand...

why do people say FX 8 core sucks?
Click to expand...

Also, from AMD for $150 I'll take a Phenom II X6 1045T and overclock that instead, thank you very much.

Intel doesn't have products in the $150 range; therefore, it's disingenous to use that as an argument. It's akin to me telling you to find the best NVIDIA graphics card up to $550 and I'll put it against an overclocked HD 7970 when at that price range the 7970 currently has no competition.
 
Pcgeek09 said:
I bought this processor and tbh, its working great for me. Its blazing fast and having no problems, especially when im running games and other applications.
Microsoft also updated windows so now the FX can now support it which is a plus.

So to the people who are still complaining, please explain because its working wonders for me.
Click to expand...

I checked the Anandtech cpu comparison of the 8150FX and the 2500k. Out of 50 benchmarks the 2500k had the better score in 32 occasions so it appears somewhat better. However, to say the 8150FX sucks is neither fair nor accurate. What is accurate is that the 2500k costs less ($230 vs $250) and though both OC the 2500k seems to be a more efficient OCer. The 2500k might be a better buy for the $ but that does NOT translate into the FX 8150 "sucks".

I own 2 2500k rigs and a rig that right now has a 1100 Thuban. I will wait for the Piledriver. I will NOT say the Bulldozer "sucks".
 
Obsoleet said:
Ok I did some searching and found there was a deal at one time for a 2500K + mobo for $220 at MC, but I can't find a 8150 + mobo for $199 or anywhere near that.
2500k+mobo deal here http://viewer.zmags.com/publication/16efa968#/16efa968/27 back in November. Not bad.
I'm not pleased that the combo had a gigabyte mobo though, would prefer Asus but at that price who's complaining.

With Intel probably making larger strides forward in their CPUs soon with IB/Haswell, I think it'd be better to get BD for $199 and have the "best AMD has" for a lot longer than I would with a 2500k, which will be obsolete in the Intel world much sooner.
Click to expand...

My friend got the 2500k+mobo deal earlier this month. I'd know if it is still going or not but when we went the guy in the parts section told us it was $50 off any z68 mobo they had in stock.

It's not an 8150+mobo, its a 8120+mobo: http://www.microcenter.com/specials/promotions/AMDbundlePROMO.html

Also why would you want to be stuck with the weaker chip and possibly dead-end socket longer just to save a few bucks now? The 2500k is the better processor for the majority of apps out there and IB will work in the same socket afaik. There is no guarantee that Piledriver will use the current AM3+ boards.


AtenRa said:
OK, choose any Intel CPU up to $149,99 and ill put an Overclocked FX 6100.
Click to expand...

I think an i5-2400 would give it a good go. Not saying it would win outright every time but I think it would be close.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top