AMD Bulldozer / FX-8150 Desktop Performance Review @ [H]ardOCP

Discussion in 'AMD Processors' started by FrgMstr, Oct 11, 2011.

  1. FrgMstr

    FrgMstr Just Plain Mean Staff Member

    Messages:
    48,439
    Joined:
    May 18, 1997
    AMD Bulldozer / FX-8150 Desktop Performance Review - Computer hardware enthusiasts have literally waited for years for AMD's Bulldozer architecture to come to market and we finally see this today in its desktop form, code named Zambezi, brand named AMD FX. In this article we share with you our analysis of Bulldozer's performance in synthetic benchmarks and desktop applications.
     
    Last edited: Oct 12, 2011
  2. heflys20

    heflys20 [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,492
    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2010
    If I were Intel, I'd raise prices on SB. Now, I'm officially going to bed. LOL.
     
  3. CaptNumbNutz

    CaptNumbNutz Bulls[H]it Master

    Messages:
    20,293
    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2007
    Where is AMD_Gamer and teletran8 to explain this one away?

    This quote has got to be my favorite...

    It's quite clear that many of the benchmarks clearly show Bulldozer behind the older Thuban. An 8 core Thuban would probably beat it in multi-threaded tests.
     
  4. sirmo

    sirmo Gawd

    Messages:
    516
    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2009
    Great review Kyle!

    Well I've been very optimistic about Bulldozer over the years. I commended them for going with a shared "module design" as I thought it was brave and they were on to something, even longer pipeline (less IPC), I thought it would be offset by clever power gating.

    But now that we finally see the real benchmarks, I must say I am very disappointed. What was AMD thinking? The power consumption is just terrible. Have they learned nothing from their GPU division?

    After 12 years of building AMD systems, it saddens me to say my next machine will most likely have an Intel CPU in it.
     
  5. Tiporaro

    Tiporaro [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,151
    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2011
    Well, there wont be much reason for intel to even consider being competitive on pricing for SB-E.
     
  6. munkle

    munkle [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    11,196
    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2005
    Disappointing results was hoping for better, oh well I own a 2600k. :p
     
  7. cannondale06

    cannondale06 [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    16,180
    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    lol slower IPC than Phenom 2. and the cpu uses twice the power of a 2500k. :eek:
     
  8. Zero82z

    Zero82z [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    27,897
    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2004
    Who else isn't surprised at all? I'm sure Intel is laughing all the way to the bank. This may have been impressive four years ago, but now it's just sad. Not even worth getting over a Thuban.
     
  9. Chihlidog

    Chihlidog [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,163
    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    That was anticlimactic. I'm going to bed.
     
  10. petertew

    petertew Gawd

    Messages:
    984
    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2005
    Darn. I was hoping to build a cheap AMD rig to upgrade from my core 2 duo, but the cost differences seem so minimal between AMD and Intel while the performance differences and power consumption seem fairly significant. Guess I'll be going the Intel route now.

    Thanks for the great review.
     
  11. Forceman

    Forceman [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    9,243
    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2005
    I'm sure there are some glasses being raised in Santa Clara right now. Those single-threaded numbers look bad. I know they kinda sorta said they were focusing on cores not IPC, but still. And the power consumption is not pretty either. Really looks like Pentium 4 and Netburst all over again.
     
  12. BoogerBomb

    BoogerBomb [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,469
    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2003
    Damn, has AMD completely given up on outdoing Intel? It seems as though current corporate policy is that almost or ,as good as, is their current goal.
     
  13. MartinX

    MartinX One Hour Martinizing While You Wait

    Messages:
    7,187
    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2003
    Disappointing.

    Wasn't looking to upgrade soon, but I was hoping AMD could inject a little zazz into the cpu market and get some competition going again.

    Guess not, and intels dominance continues...
     
  14. MarkedOne

    MarkedOne Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    398
    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2011
  15. Vegasr

    Vegasr Gawd

    Messages:
    972
    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2006
    Very good review. I may get the 8150 and the crosshair V for the kids just so i can mess around overclocking it.
     
  16. MavericK

    MavericK Zero Cool

    Messages:
    28,997
    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2004
    It's not so much that it totally sucks or anything, but it's more that it's just disappointing and not really worth getting over SB.

    Good review.
     
  17. Insula Gilliganis

    Insula Gilliganis [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,458
    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2007
    It's Kyle's birthday!! Let's all call him up and wish him a happy birthday!!

    [​IMG] "WTF? How did you get my number??"

    I still think we all need to get a collection up to repay Kyle the $60 RAGE took from him!! Anyway.. HAPPY BIRTHDAY KYLE!!

    [​IMG]

    Nice write up.. at least as far as my after midnight eyes can tell. Bulldozer is somewhat of a disappointment.. no doubt.. but just wondering if it is a case of something too new being judge by present day or old benchmarks. Not to excuse Bulldozer's poor showing but, while reading your review, it reminded me of MaximumPC's 2005 Dream Machine.. it had two Opterons dual core CPUs for a total of four cores but all the benchmarks and software they were using couldn't take advantage of how the dual Opterons worked. So that Dream Machine ended up testing a lot slower than the previous year's single core Pentium 4. Just wondering if Bulldozer is ahead of the curve in some way, that perhaps a year or so from now the design decisions that AMD made will start paying off. Or am I just dreaming since it is way past my bedtime.. 12:34AM! Thanks again Kyle for your hard work! Hope your birthday is great in every way possible!
     
  18. dkev

    dkev Gawd

    Messages:
    1,013
    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2000
    I fully agree. I've been a AMD fan boy since the K5 but my next upgrade in Dec will be an Intel.
     
  19. Forceman

    Forceman [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    9,243
    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2005
    I'm guessing we won't be seeing much of them for a day or so...
     
  20. cannondale06

    cannondale06 [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    16,180
    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    well Phenom 2 owners on the AM3+ platform can put their credit cards away.
     
  21. Vostok

    Vostok n00b

    Messages:
    12
    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2011
    That's a shame. I was hoping for some exciting competition.
     
  22. Zero82z

    Zero82z [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    27,897
    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2004
    They didn't do a great job of that either. Honestly, I don't see any reason whatsoever to buy one of these chips. They are simply not competitive at all. Intel's CPUs are better in every way.
    Or keep them out and buy Intel ;).
     
  23. Sieg

    Sieg Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    213
    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2011
    Hmmm looks like I'm going Intel. Bye bye 1055t :(
     
  24. Yoda4561

    Yoda4561 Gawd

    Messages:
    896
    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008

    If there's one application in that whole test that should tell the tale, it's handbrake. That app has about as ideal multicore scaling as you're going to see in the real world, and it's only about 5% faster, than a PII with 75% of the cores and a 400Mhz clockspeed disadvantage.
     
  25. cannondale06

    cannondale06 [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    16,180
    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    Intel would like to thank AMD for finally releasing Bulldozer.
     
  26. Valshistixol

    Valshistixol [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,809
    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2011
    Hate to say I told you so but... LOL TOLD YOU SO.
     
  27. munkle

    munkle [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    11,196
    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2005
    I wonder what teletran is going to say? :p
     
  28. lilxskull

    lilxskull Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    138
    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2011
    So dissapointing AMD. Well looks like most people will go Intel for their high end builds still.
     
  29. Haiku214

    Haiku214 [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,025
    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2010
    In other news, SB-E and Ivy Bridge will be postponed to Q4 2012 - Q1 2013 lol
     
  30. Blacklash

    Blacklash [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,893
    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2004
    Yeah thanks Kyle and [H]ard for doing the review. That's pretty much all I have to say right now.
     
  31. Tiporaro

    Tiporaro [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,151
    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2011
    It's sad but true. Intel will pick up a sales bump without having done anything other than waving at the dwindling crowd of people that had held out over the several bulldozer delays.
     
  32. ShuttleLuv

    ShuttleLuv [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    7,072
    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2003
    Great review, exactly what I knew was coming. Nothing to hate on but it's a HUGE disappointment.
     
  33. tybert7

    tybert7 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,634
    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2007
    The biggest issue is that it can't even outclass its own 45nm based phenom II X6 in many cases... that's just insane to me. Is it a chip design issue? I mean in a field like rocketry, if your engine is capable of producing a certain level of controlled explosions, you get an expected level of thrust... is chip design blind like throwing darts? Did they have no way of knowing the design would end up being not much better than a phenom II x6?

    I just, I don't understand how so much time and research could lead to a virtual sidestep instead of a leap...
     
  34. Uwish

    Uwish n00b

    Messages:
    20
    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2004
    wow, completely disappointing. I truly thought this would have been much closer in the benchmarks to Intel than what was found. I hope AMD didn't bet the bank on it, cause they just went broke if they did.
     
  35. dnottis

    dnottis [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    4,768
    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2001
    This is why I'll never wait for hardware... hardware can wait on me....
     
  36. Tiporaro

    Tiporaro [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,151
    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2011
    With this release, it's honestly hard to pick out a market segment that I'd happily recommend amd cpus for anymore.
     
  37. dr.kevin

    dr.kevin 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,053
    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2006
    I knew BD would need a nuclear power plant to power that OC.

    That $40 difference is looking sweeter and sweeter.

    Your electricity bills will make it more expensive than the 2600k.

    have fun gaming at 500+ watts.

    DEA will be wondering if you're growing marijuana with all that draw.

    [​IMG]
     
  38. umcpgrad

    umcpgrad 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,800
    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2004
    amd needs to break apart their processor division and their video card division and concentrate on r&d on their future processors - disappointed.
     
  39. ShuttleLuv

    ShuttleLuv [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    7,072
    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2003
    Holy shiatsu! *Hugs his Sandy Bridge*
     
  40. cheese007

    cheese007 [H]Lite

    Messages:
    112
    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2010
    Bulldozer's performance was lol worthy. Great review Kyle!