why choose BD of any variety over a 2500K?

S

SonicTron

Snopes is My Fact Checker
Joined
Mar 9, 2000
Messages
5,894
Just the facts, no fanboy or sticking it to the man-isms.

Mine:

-runs on your existing AM3+ motherboard
-comes with a pretty sweet cooler
 
Honestly?

I already had picked up an MSI am3+ motherboard to replace my dying am2 motherboard...so trying to sell that and pick up an intel setup was just not worth the hassle.

I will say that the BD setup isn't a complete failure and does overclock quite well so far.

Less voltage than my phenom 2 940 used (1.43 vs 1.525) while having double the cores.
All while pulling a much higher overclock so far. It doesn't bench well, but it is smooth and was an upgrade.
 
botreaper10 said:
Honestly?

I already had picked up an MSI am3+ motherboard to replace my dying am2 motherboard...so trying to sell that and pick up an intel setup was just not worth the hassle.
Click to expand...

thats the part i hate, im most likely going to get a 2600k monday and that means i need to find a buyer for my CHV and 955BE which is always a pain. i wish i could keep both but then id be broke for xmas which isnt fun for anyone.
 
I just have a habit of rooting for the underdog, so I will be getting BD as well once things settle down a bit.
 
SonicTron said:
Just the facts, no fanboy or sticking it to the man-isms.

Mine:

-runs on your existing AM3+ motherboard
-comes with a pretty sweet cooler
Click to expand...

platform cost for me(besides my hatred for intel as a company). because if i'm going to buy something new i'm going all the way and top of the line am3+ boards are way lower priced then even the mid level overclocking boards for intel. plus there just isn't anything i do these days that the 2500k or 2600k do any better than BD.. sure i may have to wait a fraction of a second longer for something to unrar or for a program to load but that means nothing to me in the grand scheme of things. but either way BD is still faster then my phenom II x4 940.
 
SonicTron said:
Just the facts, no fanboy or sticking it to the man-isms.

Mine:

-runs on your existing AM3+ motherboard
-comes with a pretty sweet cooler
Click to expand...



If you live in a basement or cellar you can use it to heat your room more effectively than with a 2500K. Especially overclocked.
 
I'm in the position where I'm upgrading from an AM1 platform so I will be needing a new mobo either way and am faced with this decision, BD vs 2500K.

Why go Intel 2500K?
- Cheaper than 8120 by $40 (I have a microcenter nearby)
- Performs much better in some games (Cysis) doesn't really lag behind much in any vs 8150
- Reasonably pried SB platform options which are also Ivy Bridge ready! (big plus)
- Power efficiency

Why go BD
- I have been pleased with my AMD setup for 6 years
- AMD platform has more dials to turn for OC fun
- Performance on BF3 is best so far, though not by much

I haven't decided yet but with BF3 coming out Oct 25th, I'll want to figure this out by early next week.

Things that would sway me towards BD
- 8120 benchmarks with OC'd NB and fast ram that show big gains
- If TRAY version of 8120 or 8150 go on sale soon (lower price, don't need heat sink, 2500k deal includes heat sink)
 
Wait till the benchs come out on hardOCP i am sure these guys will bench the game. There are things you can do if you look at the other treads to increase BD single treaded performance but as always there is a trade off.

Although i have a Phenom II X6 and a 990FXA-UD3 motherboard i did pick them up cheap as they where on offer. I had a choice, £350 for a 2500K, Z68 and 4GB ram, or £240 for a Phenom II X6 and 880G motherboard and 4GB ram, which i decided to go for. I really needed a new rig as my power supply died and killed my Core 2 QX9650 and P5N-D and 4GB DDR2.

I killed my 880G motherboard from overclocking? Or was it due to being a refurb model? which lasted a little over a month and even got a refund by then the AM 3+ motherboards had just came out and had some money to get the 990FXA-UD3. So i am stuck with an AM3+.
 
Lot of people will go BD just for the simple fact they are not up to date or knowledgeable about current trends in computer tech as it relates to computer processors. Even people that use HardOCP, many of who are just getting started on an enthusiast website have little to no clue at all what they really need to buy that's going to give them the absolute best performance for the absolute best price. And that's perfectly fine as you have to start somewhere. Then you have your fans of AMD and they will stick to a brand even though they know Intel is faster. Again, nothing wrong with that. Look at your Apple product fans. They always pay more for slower. Same difference really.

I was ready to purchase BD like many others here were but in the end, the reviews, performance, cost, etc did not support me buying this product. As a gamer, at the end of the day, I need to have the absolute best performance period. Paying more for BD that would deliver less in that area is a non-option. Makes zero sense.

I still like AMD ATI for their video cards. Lets hope that ATI engineers continue to build their GPU's and that AMD's cpu / tool engineers stay the FUCK OUT over their as to not infect ATI with mediocrity.
 
If you buy bulldozer you will be less inclined to buy an Ivy cpu than if you got a p67 since your mobo won't support it. That's a + I guess?
 
If you're planning to do integer intensive tasks that make use of all 8 cores, then bulldozer is a good product for you.
 
My question is how do multithreaded games "feel" on BD compared to SB. Games like BC2 and BF3 will run on a dual core and turnout numbers that look playable, but in reality the game is lagging like a bitch and is unplayable. Therefore does BD bring anything to the table in terms of gameplay fluidity? This would be an interesting test, but is subjective at best.
 
I paid just over 100 bucks for my Phenom II 955BE which currently has slightly better IPC than Bulldozer and also clocks to 4.2 ghz while consuming around 100 watts. I picked it as a placeholder when I built the AM3+ system three months ago while anticipating Bulldozer. But the $229 or $279 they want for 8120 or 8150 doesn't justify the slight performance boost for almost twice the power consumption (and price).

However I will seriously consider one of the upcoming revisions like Piledriver. Wouldn't be surprised to see a Bulldozer ship at 5.0 ghz turbo stock in a year or so. That'd be more of an upgrade over what I already have. It's too bad they didn't have something like that out the gate but the current cpu is more than enough for my gaming needs at 1920x1080.
 
-If you're a huge AMD fanboy like me (I bought my 940BE instead of an i7 920 almost 3 years ago and feel like a retard for doing so. About to do it again with BD anyway)
 
jhokie said:
If you're planning to do integer intensive tasks that make use of all 8 cores, then bulldozer is a good product for you.
Click to expand...

I've been meaning to do some Fibonnacci numbers.... So I might as well get a BD.
 
... because you're the kind of person who sees an iPad2 side by side with a Blackberry PlayBook at exactly the same pricetag and buys the RIM because they're having such a hard time and you want to "support them." Yeah... ignorance and insanity is right!
 
If you like helping the poor and needy,
feel free to buy a BD

that rhymes :D
 
I'm sorry Intel is so much faster in per-thread performance and so much lower in power consumption that I don't see any justification for either the 8120 or the 8150 at their current price points, or until they drop to < $200. Intel will do what I'll be doing most today, and that's what counts. I'll wait until they iron out the kinks by sometime in 2014(and put, as the Donald would say, some "brainpower" of the human variety into their chips again).

^^^ See, I'm not a fanboy. :p I know a good or bad product when I see one.
 
Why go BD (FX-8150)
- I HAS 8-CORES!!!
- You already have an AM3+ board
- You don't pay for electricity
- You have access to software from the future
 
Probably the same type of person who thinks communism is a wonderful idea. :p
 
jhokie said:
My last system was an E8400 @ 3.6... I think Bulldozer would be quite the sizable upgrade, dual cores are definitely long in the teeth nowadays.
Click to expand...

Yeah but why would you pay more for inferior solution when superior one can be bought for less? :D
 
Michaelius said:
Yeah but why would you pay more for inferior solution when superior one can be bought for less? :D
Click to expand...

Basically what I am thinking. People can do what they want with their money of course. I just think supporting the "underdog" is only rewarding failure in our capitalistic system.
 
There is zero reason to go Bulldozer over 2500k/2600k.

- price/performance = Intel
- power efficiency = Intel
- overclocking = Intel
- lightly threaded workloads = Intel (by a lot)
- multithreaded workloads = Intel (In rare cases BD overcomes Intel by a hair).

There is only one reason to go Bulldozer over Thuban, and that's AES encryption.
 
Supertag said:
You would likely see a performance decrease in older games.
Click to expand...

But an increase in newer games & everything else..

Reason I am going to BD & not SB is simple.. I have an MSI 890gxm board now so its simply a bios update away, not 200 bucks on a new motherboard..

Even if I didnt have the board already the cost of the motherboards is such that a BD system even with 1866mhz ram would be considerable cheaper then SB.
 
sirmo said:
There is zero reason to go Bulldozer over 2500k/2600k.

- price/performance = Intel
- power efficiency = Intel
- overclocking = Intel
- lightly threaded workloads = Intel (by a lot)
- multithreaded workloads = Intel (In rare cases BD overcomes Intel by a hair).

There is only one reason to go Bulldozer over Thuban, and that's AES encryption.
Click to expand...

Does BD support ECC memory? Getting ECC support on Intel platforms is usually more expensive.
It might make a nice server platform if you think it beats Phenom II
 
Getting ECC support on Intel platforms is usually more expensive.
Click to expand...

Not that much. C20X boards are not much more expensive than desktop boards. Neither are xeon processors.
 
I have an MSI 890gxm board now so its simply a bios update away, not 200 bucks on a new motherboard..
Click to expand...

You could always sell your board and get an equivalent lga1155 board for a little over $100 US.
 
I don't know why people here are thinking the intel platform costs so much more $$$. I am normally recommending boards from $120-$150. You can get easy overclocks on those with a 2500K to at least 4.5 GHz. You do not need a $200 board for SB. These days I no longer even see a major price difference using Intel chips vs AMD chips if you are considering a FX-8120 or higher.
 
Ive only used AMD systems since my first 486 dx2 80 and im not going to switch now. I was planning to buy a bulldozer based system, but now i think im going to buy an AMD llano. the a6-3650 does everything i need, is an excellent price / features / performance.

as a bitcoin miner i dig the idea that my two 5830 can hash away while my APU outputs 1080p to my tv :)
 
Well, I went ahead and ordered an 8120.

I didn't have a particular reason for choosing Bulldozer over an i5. I just wanted to play around with an AMD setup for awhile.
 
amazon has them in stock last i checked.

newegg is sold out of both 8150, and 8120.
 
Forget about Sandy Bridge it's in a totally different league than Bulldozer. The real question is why would you choose Bulldozer over Phenom 2?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top