![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
AMDFX.blogspot.com
Hi, first off I would like to introduce myself. My name is Panos, and I am a computer enthusiast who loves to benchmark. I am new to the blog scene, but I hope you guys like it here.
My first goal is to finally get some AMD FX 8150 benchmarks at a decent overclock. I have noticed that many websites, except for overclockersclub.com, really have not pushed FX to its limits. On top of that, poor FX is always paired with a more lower end card! Remember how AMD recommended using a 6990 with the FX 8150 in their original FX promotional video?
Enter Scorpius,
My Gaming Rig - ON AIR!!
AMD FX 8150 @ 4.81 Ghz 24/7 Stable (23.5 x 204)
Promlatech Genesis - 3 x Scythe Sflex 135mm
G.Skill 2200 Mhz Cl7 DDR3
XFX 6990 stock (830/1250) > OC (990/1500) 2 Hr Stable (Ungine Heaven 2.5) Catalyst 12.1 Preview
Arctic Twin Turbo 6990 Cooler
OCZ Revodrive 3 X2 240 Gb
HAF 932 - 10 x Additional Scythe Fans
OCZ 1000w ZX Gold PSU
Benchmarks:
Ungine Heaven 2.5
3DMark11 P/X
AID64
7Zip
Winrar
Passmark
SiSoftware Sandra 2012
PCMark 7
Cinebench 11.5
Cinebench 10
Possibly more
Games:
Dirt 3
Alien vs. Predator
Possibly more
Finally Bulldozer can Breath! Will FX shine? or will it fall short? Will an overclocked FX bottleneck a 6990 OC'd?
Well,
First results ARE IN!! Techarp H.264 first and second pass results are up.
Tech ARP H.264 encoding benchmarks!! FX is back!
ROUND1 :
Tech ARP H.264 encoding First Pass / Second Pass Results
TEST SYSTEM:
AMD FX 8150 @ 4.81 Ghz 24/7 Stable (23.5 x 204)
Promlatech Genesis - 3 x Scythe Sflex 135mm
G.Skill 2200 Mhz Cl7 DDR3
XFX 6990 stock (830/1250) > OC (990/1500) 2 Hr Stable (Ungine Heaven 2.5) Catalyst 12.1 Preview
Arctic Twin Turbo 6990 Cooler
OCZ Revodrive 3 X2 240 Gb
HAF 932 - 10 x Additional Scythe Fans
OCZ 1000w ZX Gold PSU
THE RESULTS:
First Pass Results (Single Core Performance) :
In this benchmark, the single core performance of an overclocked AMD FX 8150 CPU @ 4.8 Ghz is better than a 3.7 Ghz (tubro) i5 2500k, but worse than a 4.0 Ghz i5 2500k.
Second Pass Results (Multi-threaded Performance) :
When all cores are used FX shines! Performance is well over a i7 2600k @ 4.5 Ghz, but less than 2 fps shy of a i7 2600k @ 5.0 Ghz. I am not sure about the low 5.18 ghz 2600k score =S... but its well over that aswell. It should also be notes that 3960x at 3.8 Ghz Turbo is not much faster than a 4.8 Ghz FX 8150.
This benchmark is well designed to take advantage of Bulldozer's architecture, but what about others?
Benchmarks source : http://www.techarp.com/
3DMark11 Performance / Extreme Performance
ROUND 2 : 3DMark11
Finally a benchmark that utilizes GPU! We will see here whether FX bottlenecks or not while overclocked to 4.8 Ghz. The score to really look at is GPU score (as this directly relates to fps of the rendered scenes), but because the total score also heavily relies on GPU score (especially in the Extreme Preset) it is also a good measure.
RESULTS: 3DMark11 Performance Preset:
AMD FX 8150 @ 4.8 Ghz
6990 OC @ 990/1500 Mhz
Compared Results (with several 6990 OC's) :
As you can see the graphics score of my OC'd 6990 does not fall systematically behind intel rigs with similar GPU OC's. My GPU Score of 12046 is a clear winner over the rest of the rigs tested., however with combined and physics scores also put into consideration FX falls behind with a total score of only 10318.
The most noted comparison is that with the i5 2500k at 5.35 Ghz with a 6990 @ 1000/1420. Although it manages to squeeze out slightly higher combines/physics score, it still seems to bottleneck in GPU scores. The only intel cpu coming close to FX GPU score is the 3960x.
It should be noted that the OC on the 6990 does play a role in GPU score, so take these results with a grain of salt. a 930 Mhz OC is still 7% below a 990 Mhz OC, but nevertheless we can determine that FX does not heavily bottleneck when it is overclocked to 4.8 Ghz. What about Extreme Preset?
3DMark11 Extreme Preset:
AMD FX 8150 @ 4.8 Ghz
6990 OC1 @ 880/1250Mhz
6990 OC2 @ 990/1500 Mhz
- - - OC1 - - - 6990 @ 880/1250Mhz
- - - OC2- - - 6990 @ 990/1500 Mhz
Comparison (from Hexus.net) :
- - - OC1/OC2 - - -
The most noteable comparison is between my stock 6990 @ 880/1250 paired with my AMD FX 8150 @ 4.8 Ghz, and their stock 6990 with the exact same clocks paired with a 980x @ 3.6 Ghz Turbo. The difference in score is mostly due to a difference in Graphics Score, as the 980x generally destroys the FX in physics and combined results even at stock.
This tells us alot about where FX bottlenecks or not, and the answer seems to be NO, atleast when comparing to a 980x @ 3.6 Ghz. The difference in score is roughly 5%, where the FX is slightly favoured.
When my 6990 is pushed to its stable limits @ 990/1500 Mhz, my score jumps an additional 13%. That is, for a 12/20% (clock/memory) overclock on my 6990. It is clear that an AMD FX 8150 does not bottleneck on Extreme Preset.
Look here : http://amdfx.blogspot.com/2012/01/look-at-this.html for comparisons to 1100t @ 4.2 Ghz and i7 2600k Stock @ 3.8 Turbo.
These are examples where their GPUS are being bottlenecked. My Stock OC1 (880/1250) Graphics score actually manages to beat a 6990 @ 950/1450 on an 1100t @ 4.2 Ghz. (meaning higher fps). Here is an example where OCing a 6990 will not result in much benefit. (ie. the bottleneck is around that CPU frequency)
It is also interesting to see that OC'd my 6990 is the clear winner against the 980x @ 3.6 Ghz 580 SLI @ stock in the Extreme Preset.
It should be noted that the drivers I used were Catalyst 12.1 beta drivers, and those used in the HEXUS test were 11.4. The difference in 3DMark 11 scores should be negligible however. Also the 3DMark11 version used for my Performance Preset Results is 1.03, while that of the Extreme Preset Results is 1.02.
ROUND 3: Alien vs. Predator
Comparison is between an intel i7 980x @ 4.0 Ghz and my AMD FX 8150 @ 4.8 Ghz.
Check and Mate!
Graphics Settings:
A) (top) - High Quality Settings, SSAO, No AA / 16xAF, vsync off
B) (bottom) - Ultra Quality Settings, 4x MSAA / No AF, SSAO, vsync off
These are the stated settings in the testing methodology section, however above the actual graph Tom's claims both are set to ultra. Based on the amount of detail given in the given above settings when compared to that given above the plot, I took this to be the settings they used. (but its still not clear :S)
RESULTS:
Source: Tomshardware.com GTX 590 Review
This seems to be one of the few games AMD actually beats intel in with higher end graphics cards. The most notable comparison is when the 6990 GPU is @ 880/1250 between processors. FX truly shines in DX11 games that are more graphically demanding.
Overclocking the 6990 from 850/1250 to 990/1500 ( a clock/mem - 12/20% OC) results in an AVG fps increase of about 15% for both settings (A) and (B). Scaling between a single 6970, and two (in a 6990) is also very good, roughly 95-110% depending on settings.
Allow some error as the drivers are different between comparisons, however this game is sufficiently old enough to have negligible gain between catalysts.
PassMark Performance Test Benchmarks!
Round 4: PassMark CPU Score
Lets just get to the nitty-gritty shall we?
Competitors :
First Corner - intel i5 2500k @ 4.8 Ghz, ASUS P4P67 Pro, 8 Gb DDR3
Second Corner - intel i7 2600k @ 4.8 Ghz, Gigabyte GA-P67A-UD4-B3, 8 Gb DDR3
Third Corner - AMD 1100t @ 4.2 Ghz 8 Gb DDR3
Fourth Corner - AMD 8150 FX @ 4.8 Ghz, ASUS Crosshair V, 4 Gb DDR3
RESULTS:
WINNERS:
First Place - intel i7 2600k @ 4.8 Ghz - 107.5 % Performance
Second Place - AMD FX 8150 @ 4.8 Ghz - 100.0% Performance
Third Place - intel i5 2500k@ 4.8 Ghz - 81.4% Performance
Fourth Place -AMD 1100t @ 4.2 Ghz - 73.2% Performance
Intels monstrous leap over AMD in CPU Integer Math seems to be the game changer, with 63.4% gain on the FX 8150. But FX manages to beat its older phenom II brother by a whopping 74%. The OC'd AMD FX 8150 beats its intel i7 2600k rival in five out of eight tests, however narrowly loses in the final score. In FPU Score its a dead tie between the 2600k and FX, with the 1100t and i5 2500k lagging behind.
Comparing FX to the i5 2500k in this benchmark, AMD wins in seven out of the possible eight tests, and only loses in the CPU integer math test.
We can really see Bulldozer shine in this benchmark when compared to the older 1100t, and it manages to be right at intels door with performance significantly higher than its intel counterpart, the i5 2500k.
If you have any questions feel free to ask!
--------------------------
Link to Blog:
http://AMDFX.blogspot.com
--------------------------
Last edited:
and a 1000w PSU.
![Zarathustra[H]](https://cdn.hardforum.com/data/avatars/m/9/9298.jpg?1677728934){kind=avatar}