AMD Bulldozer / FX-8150 Gameplay Performance Review @ HardOCP

FrgMstr

FrgMstr

Just Plain Mean
Staff member
Joined
May 18, 1997
Messages
55,634
AMD Bulldozer / FX-8150 Gameplay Performance Review - Today we will take a look at how the AMD FX-8150 stacks up in real gameplay versus an Intel Core i7 2500K and 2500K, at default settings and overclocked. Will any of these CPUs provide a better gameplay over the other in some current DX11 games? We show you Battlefield 3, F1 2011, and Civilization V.
 
Last edited:
You guys should consider using ArmA2 as a CPU test. The game seems to be VERY CPU-intensive and dependant. I say this because it seems like games like F1 aren't really affected at all by the processor and therefore not really significant to test.
 
Interesting read, haven't been really following the latest procs with the whole SB vs BD but I gotta say that BD seems to have gained a bit of ground with BD but for the price I'd still just roll with a intel chip.
 
MavericK96 said:
You guys should consider using ArmA2 as a CPU test. The game seems to be VERY CPU-intensive and dependant. I say this because it seems like games like F1 aren't really affected at all by the processor and therefore not really significant to test.
Click to expand...


Thanks for the insight. We will having other comparisons coming soon. Rome was not built in a day. Sorry.
 
I can't get this review to load?

Edit: got it to work, meh not much difference, like we would expect with gaming.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for taking the time with the review Kyle!

I'll be sticking with the 2600k.
 
Pitiful.
Thanks Kyle for the honest review!

Thanks JF-AMD for stringing us along till the Intel 2600k came down in price.
So much for that performance prediction.
 
And the wish list in my Sig stays unchanged as it has for the past month+

Seems like the bulldozer is out of gas and can't get out of the quarry...
 
When (if?) you're compiling a more robust set of gaming benchmarks do you mind throwing Starcraft 2 in there for us RTS junkies?
 
I feel let down by Bulldozer, but also have weight off my shoulders thats been there since i ordered my 2500k last month.. :)
 
Half expected the thread content to just be "lol" at least I know my upgrade path.
 
Haiku214 said:
Here is the Arma2 benchmark for Bulldozer. It fails even more........

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2011/10/12/amd-fx-8150-review/9
Click to expand...

Thanks for the link.

I am kinda wondering how they are able to get 100+ minimum FPS in that game. In the normal benchmarks at those settings I typically only see 50 FPS average, and that's with like a 4 GHz CPU and a GTX 580 or something.

Personally with my rig I probably get around 40-50 FPS average with some dips down to 25 or so depending.
 
Well I am still waiting for Ivy Bridge but I wish I had just made my planned Sandy Bridge build early in the year instead. AMD is disappointing in the CPU department.
 
At least we know it will play RAGE at 60 fps! LOL!
 
^ lol

I have a feeling that BF3 Beta is not using DX11 driver multi-threading yet (going by what Civ 5 showed us, and I know its enabled in that game). It will be interesting to see how the full version BF3 performs.
 
You mean generations :p. They had 1 architecture for 7 years and Bulldozer will be around for another 7 if AMD is still around in 7.
 
Is it possible to disable (from presentation to the OS) specific cores? If so, could you try disabling every other core so that one bulldozer unit only gets one thread?

This is to see if the shared FPU or decode/schedulers are causing the problem.
 
I have a feeling that using multiple monitors, GTX 580's in SLI etc. that we'll see the same thing we saw comparing Sandy Bridge to Nahalem. Clock speed, and more importantly architecture matters. I predict the AMD CPUs falling a bit short there.

Not sure though. We'll see I suppose.
 
eastmen said:
its a shame , the shooting in the game has put almost every fps game i've played in the last 5 years to shame.

Its just buggy as hell .
Click to expand...

It's also game engine capped at 60 FPS. All you would see in our graphs is a solid line at 60 FPS, I know because I tried.
 
Dan_D said:
I have a feeling that using multiple monitors, GTX 580's in SLI etc. that we'll see the same thing we saw comparing Sandy Bridge to Nahalem. Clock speed, and more importantly architecture matters. I predict the AMD CPUs falling a bit short there.

Not sure though. We'll see I suppose.
Click to expand...

I might foresee this more so with multiple NVIDIA GPUs, than with 6970's. Our last round of testing of this nature showed multiple NV GPUs benefiting more with higher clock speeds, than the AMD equivalents, but only in dual or triple SLI. If that's the case, Bulldozer could be in a lot of trouble, just speculating.
 
WTF!?!??!?!?!

Intel is going to crush AMD with Ivy....... AMD is going to shift to low power cpu for avg. users. FUSION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Glad I got my 1055T when I did at the price I paid....
 
Spartan805 said:
WTF!?!??!?!?!

Intel is going to crush AMD with Ivy....... AMD is going to shift to low power cpu for avg. users. FUSION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Glad I got my 1055T when I did at the price I paid....
Click to expand...

except they are increasing their power usage with this one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top