Ok so I just upgraded from a Phenom II 940 to the FX8150....

Call me a fanboy or whatever but this thing is beast!! 7zip ex, 3 1080p youtube videos,itunes,windows media player, BF3, Crysis, SC2, Skyrim, WoW, and even the flippin windows side bar without a a single hitch! Sure you can say this is an unrealistic benchmark and the ram is mostly handling my multi tasking but this baby is snappy.. Sad that I feel a lot of you are gonna be turning your heads to a true innovating processor which probably hasn't had most programs optimized for it yet.

My new rig (Waiting on 7970)

FX 8150@4.2 w/ 212+,16GB 1600, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD3, Corsair Force GT 60GB SSD, 600 GB Raptor, 2x 2TB Samsung 7200RPM RAID0, using my brothers 6870 for the meantime! (he has 2)

I was smart and bought my hard drives when I thought bulldozer was coming out sooner, but when it finally released I couldn't seem to order one anywhere without getting too terribly ripped off. Worth the wait and it doesn't even get hot sitting at 46c @4.2 w/ load!

First time overclocking as well and it couldn't have been easier really! True innovation money can't buy! (Intel)

People here seem to think you only one program at once and this is still the single core era.

I've seen bulldozers up close and they are very nice. You can throw many many more programs at it than a phenom II or sandybridge without it even blinking.

Pics or it didn't happen.

I'm happy that you're happy with it. I bought an AM3+ board and an Athlon X3 with BD upgrade in mind, even though I knew I could get better performance for the money. I don't really need a better CPU right now, but it's good to know there's a proper upgrade available.

People here seem to think you only one program at once and this is still the single core era.

I've seen bulldozers up close and they are very nice. You can throw many many more programs at it than a phenom II or sandybridge without it even blinking.

GummiRaccoon

[QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]

People here seem to think you only one program at once and this is still the single core era.

I've seen bulldozers up close and they are very nice. You can throw many many more programs at it than a phenom II or sandybridge without it even blinking.

WWIAB

It isn't 8 cores in the traditional sense. the way that they made bulldozer with 2 int cores per module is only about 15% larger die than a quad would have been

Think of an 8 core bulldozer as a 4 core bulldozer with hardware hyperthreading.

hardware hyperthreading.

NailedGR

[QUOTE="NailedGR"]

hardware hyperthreading.

superclocked

I Just use that term to explain it, if you really want, I can explain the difference between smt and cmt to you.

Overall it is a superior solution. When windows 7's scheduler gets revamped to take advantage it will really shine, windows 8 already does and sees a 10% improvement across the board.

I can guarantee you intel will be implementing this in 2-3 years, just like 64bit, imc, native multiple cores, etc all things that AMD did first.

The only real problem with bulldozer is the GloFo 32nm process, it doesn't scale as high as it was meant to and it sucks down power.

People here seem to think you only one program at once and this is still the single core era.

I've seen bulldozers up close and they are very nice. You can throw many many more programs at it than a phenom II or sandybridge without it even blinking.

GummiRaccoon

Programs such as? Only the loosest definition of a consumer workload is going to bottleneck on an SNB i5, so it begs the question of why someone doing that kind of multitasking wouldn't go with an SNB i7 or SNB-E CPU (which'll get better performance than Bulldozer virtually across the board).

[QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]

People here seem to think you only one program at once and this is still the single core era.

I've seen bulldozers up close and they are very nice. You can throw many many more programs at it than a phenom II or sandybridge without it even blinking.

Slow_Show

Programs such as? Only the loosest definition of a consumer workload is going to bottleneck on an SNB i5, so it begs the question of why someone doing that kind of multitasking wouldn't go with an SNB i7 or SNB-E CPU (which'll get better performance than Bulldozer virtually across the board).

You do know that while some programs aren't multithreaded well, windows is? Windows will use all the cores you give it as you run more and more applications.

What's the point of this thread? To tell everyone you made a daft choice with your new CPU?C_Rule

C'mon C Rule I know you hang around this board with your short quirky anwsers but in reality, I just think you post on threads just to bloat your vastly inferior knowledge to the world of computer technology...You have an OLD quad core which gets outperformed by most dual cores these days. Maybe instead of hanging around the internet all day you could afford something more than what you have before you start trash talkin my choice...

You do know that while some programs aren't multithreaded well, windows is? Windows will use all the cores you give it as you run more and more applications.

NailedGR

Which is why I'm talking about the workload in its entirety. Based on my own experience and what I've read, you need to throw a thoroughly ridiculous workload at an i5 for it to be a significant bottleneck (ie far more than 99% of consumers will ever consider running) and anyone who does run that kind of workload should be smart enough to go with an SNB/SNB-E i7 in the first place. So I'm wondering exactly what programs GummiRaccoon was running that would justify a Bulldozer CPU.

[QUOTE="C_Rule"]What's the point of this thread? To tell everyone you made a daft choice with your new CPU?dabigsiebowski

C'mon C Rule I know you hang around this board with your short quirky anwsers but in reality, I just think you post on threads just to bloat your vastly inferior knowledge to the would of computer technology...You have an OLD quad core which gets outperformed by most dual cores these days. Maybe instead of hanging around the internet all day you could afford something more than what you have before you start trash talkin my choice...

[QUOTE="C_Rule"]What's the point of this thread? To tell everyone you made a daft choice with your new CPU?dabigsiebowski

C'mon C Rule I know you hang around this board with your short quirky anwsers but in reality, I just think you post on threads just to bloat your vastly inferior knowledge to the would of computer technology...You have an OLD quad core which gets outperformed by most dual cores these days. Maybe instead of hanging around the internet all day you could afford something more than what you have before you start trash talkin my choice...

[QUOTE="NailedGR"]

You do know that while some programs aren't multithreaded well, windows is? Windows will use all the cores you give it as you run more and more applications.

Slow_Show

Which is why I'm talking about the workload in its entirety. Based on my own experience and what I've read, you need to throw a thoroughly ridiculous workload at an i5 for it to be a significant bottleneck (ie far more than 99% of consumers will ever consider running) and anyone who does run that kind of workload should be smart enough to go with an SNB/SNB-E i7 in the first place. So I'm wondering exactly what programs GummiRaccoon was running that would justify a Bulldozer CPU.

Virtual box, Ps3 media server, vent, chrome, insert random game, f@h, mpc, cs5, youtube, word, excel. And that my friends is much snappier than on any intel based computer. no crappy stutters between going from one to the next or with having so many things going at once.

[QUOTE="C_Rule"]What's the point of this thread? To tell everyone you made a daft choice with your new CPU?dabigsiebowski

C'mon C Rule I know you hang around this board with your short quirky anwsers but in reality, I just think you post on threads just to bloat your vastly inferior knowledge to the would of computer technology...You have an OLD quad core which gets outperformed by most dual cores these days. Maybe instead of hanging around the internet all day you could afford something more than what you have before you start trash talkin my choice...

that was the biggest fail post i have seen all day...for the simple fact at the end of the day this thread is just about you gloating about your new build which is fine....but to put someones build down over an outdated cpu which i still going strong to this day in which i will say the Q series lineup was pretty dam good in its time is pretty pathetic plus to add to it add some pics so some of can actually maybe even belive what you say is true. :)

[QUOTE="dabigsiebowski"]

[QUOTE="C_Rule"]What's the point of this thread? To tell everyone you made a daft choice with your new CPU?Nethemis

C'mon C Rule I know you hang around this board with your short quirky anwsers but in reality, I just think you post on threads just to bloat your vastly inferior knowledge to the would of computer technology...You have an OLD quad core which gets outperformed by most dual cores these days. Maybe instead of hanging around the internet all day you could afford something more than what you have before you start trash talkin my choice...

that was the biggest fail post i have seen all day...for the simple fact at the end of the day this thread is just about you gloating about your new build which is fine....but to put someones build down over an outdated cpu which i still going strong to this day in which i will say the Q series lineup was pretty dam good in its time is pretty pathetic plus to add to it add some pics so some of can actually maybe even belive what you say is true. :)

I'm glad that you're happy with your upgrade and i'm sure it's a great cpu. Haters are gonna hate anyway unfortunately..Guovssohas

I think intel must be running PSA ads 24/7 in australia. Australians seem to love intel like as if it were santa claus.

Virtual box, Ps3 media server, vent, chrome, insert random game, f@h, mpc, cs5, youtube, word, excel. And that my friends is much snappier than on any intel based computer. no crappy stutters between going from one to the next or with having so many things going at once.

GummiRaccoon

So yeah, decidedly not even a remotely typical consumer workload. Also, define "Intel based"; I would've thought HT would be enough to get i7-2600 to outperform Bulldozer in that type of workload, and BD sure as hell shoiuldn't be outperforming the hex-core SNB-E's.

[QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]

Virtual box, Ps3 media server, vent, chrome, insert random game, f@h, mpc, cs5, youtube, word, excel. And that my friends is much snappier than on any intel based computer. no crappy stutters between going from one to the next or with having so many things going at once.

Slow_Show

So yeah, decidedly not even a remotely typical consumer workload. Also, define "Intel based"; I would've thought HT would be enough to get i7-2600 to outperform Bulldozer in that type of workload, and BD sure as hell shoiuldn't be outperforming the hex-core SNB-E's.

one thousand dollars

one thousand dollars

GummiRaccoon

Only for the Xtreme Edition, the 3930k goes for ~$550; still expensive, but the extra performance is going to be worth it for some professional/workstation-type workloads. And you didn't answer my question.

[QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]

one thousand dollars

Slow_Show

Only for the Xtreme Edition, the 3930k goes for ~$550; still expensive, but the extra performance is going to be worth it for some professional/workstation-type workloads. And you didn't answer my question.

I did. Way to live up to your handle.

[QUOTE="Slow_Show"]

[QUOTE="NailedGR"]

You do know that while some programs aren't multithreaded well, windows is? Windows will use all the cores you give it as you run more and more applications.

GummiRaccoon

Which is why I'm talking about the workload in its entirety. Based on my own experience and what I've read, you need to throw a thoroughly ridiculous workload at an i5 for it to be a significant bottleneck (ie far more than 99% of consumers will ever consider running) and anyone who does run that kind of workload should be smart enough to go with an SNB/SNB-E i7 in the first place. So I'm wondering exactly what programs GummiRaccoon was running that would justify a Bulldozer CPU.

Virtual box, Ps3 media server, vent, chrome, insert random game, f@h, mpc, cs5, youtube, word, excel. And that my friends is much snappier than on any intel based computer. no crappy stutters between going from one to the next or with having so many things going at once.

Not too sure about the other applications you used (except maybe gaming, which is not a good reason at all to buy a BD over an X6/i5/i7), but the BD processor is equivalent to an i5 2500k in FAH. It gets spanked by the i7.

[QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]

one thousand dollars

Slow_Show

Only for the Xtreme Edition, the 3930k goes for ~$550; still expensive, but the extra performance is going to be worth it for some professional/workstation-type workloads. And you didn't answer my question.

[QUOTE="Slow_Show"]

[QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]

Virtual box, Ps3 media server, vent, chrome, insert random game, f@h, mpc, cs5, youtube, word, excel. And that my friends is much snappier than on any intel based computer. no crappy stutters between going from one to the next or with having so many things going at once.

GummiRaccoon

So yeah, decidedly not even a remotely typical consumer workload. Also, define "Intel based"; I would've thought HT would be enough to get i7-2600 to outperform Bulldozer in that type of workload, and BD sure as hell shoiuldn't be outperforming the hex-core SNB-E's.

one thousand dollars

[QUOTE="Guovssohas"]I'm glad that you're happy with your upgrade and i'm sure it's a great cpu. Haters are gonna hate anyway unfortunately..GummiRaccoon

I think intel must be running PSA ads 24/7 in australia. Australians seem to love intel like as if it were santa claus.

Most gamers that I know (myself included) are actually running AMD :P

Though I guess it's closer to 50-50.

welcome to the club. So far I see you and me having bulldozer on gamespot.

welcome to the club. So far I see you and me having bulldozer on gamespot.

mixedplanet

welcome to the club. So far I see you and me having bulldozer on gamespot.

mixedplanet

I have your motherboard, I love it so much, so many usb ports.

[QUOTE="C_Rule"]What's the point of this thread? To tell everyone you made a daft choice with your new CPU?dabigsiebowski

C'mon C Rule I know you hang around this board with your short quirky anwsers but in reality, I just think you post on threads just to bloat your vastly inferior knowledge to the would of computer technology...You have an OLD quad core which gets outperformed by most dual cores these days. Maybe instead of hanging around the internet all day you could afford something more than what you have before you start trash talkin my choice...

[QUOTE="dabigsiebowski"]

[QUOTE="C_Rule"]What's the point of this thread? To tell everyone you made a daft choice with your new CPU?mastershake575

C'mon C Rule I know you hang around this board with your short quirky anwsers but in reality, I just think you post on threads just to bloat your vastly inferior knowledge to the would of computer technology...You have an OLD quad core which gets outperformed by most dual cores these days. Maybe instead of hanging around the internet all day you could afford something more than what you have before you start trash talkin my choice...

Your 95% estimate is not very close.

Well, I plan to do a straight CPU swap from my 2.8ghz Phenom II X3 720 BE to a Phenom II X6 1100T in the near future. I'm not really concerned about the latter lagging its Intel competition. But, it is the least expensive CPU upgrade for me.

Plus, in some areas like video editing, CUDA and Stream are now starting to be supported by heavyweight apps, making GPU processing a great alternative to traditional CPU tasks.

So wait wait when we talk about phenom II it's all about "real world gaming performance" and now when we talk bulldozer we are talking crazy multi-tasking? What about actually doing a task faster??

Even a 2500k murders the 8150 90% of the time.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/434?vs=288

And then the 2600k makes it 99%. :lol:

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/434?vs=287

For a normal user it is absolutely completely impractical to choke a sandy bridge quad core like a 4.5Ghz 2500k let alone a 2600k. But every user will benefit from doing things much faster, you are only kidding yourself if you think you will ever actually need to do even half of what your OP says.

[QUOTE="Nethemis"]

[QUOTE="dabigsiebowski"] lol you mad bro?? Seriously bro I know it's a sham that I already had a better cpu to begin with than you it just seems that your jealous over the fact that I have a much better system that you could possibly even comprehend?

C'mon C Rule I know you hang around this board with your short quirky anwsers but in reality, I just think you post on threads just to bloat your vastly inferior knowledge to the would of computer technology...You have an OLD quad core which gets outperformed by most dual cores these days. Maybe instead of hanging around the internet all day you could afford something more than what you have before you start trash talkin my choice...

superclocked

that was the biggest fail post i have seen all day...for the simple fact at the end of the day this thread is just about you gloating about your new build which is fine....but to put someones build down over an outdated cpu which i still going strong to this day in which i will say the Q series lineup was pretty dam good in its time is pretty pathetic plus to add to it add some pics so some of can actually maybe even belive what you say is true. :)

does not matter it is the point of going off topic and saying ones cpu is so called "Old" and saying he is jealous over what his build? pls dude.

[QUOTE="mixedplanet"]

welcome to the club. So far I see you and me having bulldozer on gamespot.

GummiRaccoon

I have your motherboard, I love it so much, so many usb ports.

:lol: its about CPU's, not mobos :P

I did. Way to live up to your handle.

GummiRaccoon

About what you mean by "any Intel based computer". Saying BD is snappier than i5, saying BD is snappier than SNB i7 and saying BD is snappier than SNB-E i7 are three very different statements.

i7-2600 = $310 i7-3930k= $600 FX8150 = $270 No way should the 3930 be even considered in this argument. You could get an 8150, RAM, a Mobo and a PSU for the cost of a 3930k. If I'm building a workstation, I'm looking at bang for buck, and there's no way I look at a $400+ processor unless it blows everything out of the water, like over 50% performance increase. Even then, it would be a tough sell, and I'd only consider it if I'm encoding things for a living. Now, in his position, I would likely take the i7 over the 8150 because it would be more skin to my uses. But, were I looking to make a jack of all trades build while spending as little money as possible, and I had an AMD board already, there's no way I'm swapping infrastructure. I'm keeping my AM3 board, maybe getting better RAM, but if you have all the parts already and just need a boost in multitasking, you can't go wrong with a bulldozer. If you're building from scratch, you'd be odd not to consider Intel. If you already have AMD parts to get a very good build, you'd be odd not to heavily consider AMD.Lockedge

Yeah, that's my point about the SNB-E chips: at a certain level of work the price doesn't matter because the time you'll save is worth more than a few hundred bucks.

And I agree about BD still being a viable drop-in upgrade or on-the-cheap workstation build. I'm just trying to figure out if this is a genuine discussion about the pros and cons of Intel v. AMD, or if people just want to post "lololol $1000 CPUs" for a couple of pages. :P

[QUOTE="Guovssohas"]I'm glad that you're happy with your upgrade and i'm sure it's a great cpu. Haters are gonna hate anyway unfortunately..GummiRaccoon

I think intel must be running PSA ads 24/7 in australia. Australians seem to love intel like as if it were santa claus.

at my shop we jst recently got in the samsungs and toshibas with A6 and A8 systems. some of the boys make fun of them but we get a lot of budget uni students who want to spend as little as possible. they need to do school work AND play games well, and samsung gives us the A8 3510 with dual graphics(onboard+6630m) at the same price as i7 2.2ghz and GT540's.... sure i know the i7 is better for mobile video editing but the A8 with dual graphics blows away the gt540 (no one seems to beleive me....)

So wait wait when we talk about phenom II it's all about "real world gaming performance" and now when we talk bulldozer we are talking crazy multi-tasking? What about actually doing a task faster??

Even a 2500k murders the 8150 90% of the time.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/434?vs=288

And then the 2600k makes it 99%. :lol:

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/434?vs=287

For a normal user it is absolutely completely impractical to choke a sandy bridge quad core like a 4.5Ghz 2500k let alone a 2600k. But every user will benefit from doing things much faster, you are only kidding yourself if you think you will ever actually need to do even half of what your OP says.

Gambler_3

Anandtech also suggests 1200 dollar computers with no graphics cards for "workstation" use. Never mind gaming, a discrete graphics card is absolutely necessary in a desktop environment for so many tasks to run well it is ridiculous to make such a suggestion at that pricepoint. I seriously am starting to doubt their credibility, which is unfortunate, they are one of my bookmarked tech news sites.

And yes, bulldozer is a multitasking monster and a very capable all around cpu. The only problem with BD is that the frequency is low because the immature process that GloFo has, which causes too much power consumption once you get into the higher frequencies. The next revision will very clearly show that the actual CPU design is very solid, not to mention the 10% performance increase across the board in windows 8 (not even the release build) and the similar performance increase you can expect when microsoft is done tweeking the windows 7 scheduler.

[QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]

[QUOTE="mixedplanet"]

welcome to the club. So far I see you and me having bulldozer on gamespot.

GTR12

I have your motherboard, I love it so much, so many usb ports.

:lol: its about CPU's, not mobos :P

The motherboard is a very important component, putting a powerful processor in a crap motherboard is like putting a big block V8 in a model T chassis. Yes the motherboard doesn't actually make it go fast, but it allows the processor to unlock its full potential. For myself, I use basically every USB and esata port that is available. I don't just run 1 game at once, I run many things constantly, which includes gaming, which is why I have extra ram, extra monitors, etc.

Your stance is very ignorant.

[QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]

I did. Way to live up to your handle.

Slow_Show

About what you mean by "any Intel based computer". Saying BD is snappier than i5, saying BD is snappier than SNB i7 and saying BD is snappier than SNB-E i7 are three very different statements.

You never asked that question.

And yes snappier as in switching between programs faster than i5 sandy bridge and i7 sandybridge.

Anandtech also suggests 1200 dollar computers with no graphics cards for "workstation" use. Never mind gaming, a discrete graphics card is absolutely necessary in a desktop environment for so many tasks to run well it is ridiculous to make such a suggestion at that pricepoint. I seriously am starting to doubt their credibility, which is unfortunate, they are one of my bookmarked tech news sites.

GummiRaccoon

And yes snappier as in switching between programs faster than i5 sandy bridge and i7 sandybridge.

GummiRaccoon

If you run an insane amount of stuff at once and actually use 100% of the CPU it's better than the 2500k.

To try to run all the FX-8150's cores at maximum usage, we ran two sets of our benchmarks at once. Here, both the FX-8150 and the Core i5-2500K ran at 100% processor usage at all times. Once we'd calculated the average of the two benchmark scores, we saw that AMD's chip had finally managed to pull ahead, with an overall score of 82 compared to the Intel processor's 63. This shows that the FX-8150 can have an advantage, but only if you run incredibly intensive tasks such as encoding two HD videos at once to another format or encoding two HD videos while playing back a third.

Computer Shopper

Bulldozer:

2500k:

Source:

http://www.expertreviews.co.uk/processors/1287799/amd-fx-8150/2

If you run an insane amount of stuff at once and actually use 100% of the CPU it's better than the 2500k.

[quote="Computer Shopper"]

To try to run all the FX-8150's cores at maximum usage, we ran two sets of our benchmarks at once. Here, both the FX-8150 and the Core i5-2500K ran at 100% processor usage at all times. Once we'd calculated the average of the two benchmark scores, we saw that AMD's chip had finally managed to pull ahead, with an overall score of 82 compared to the Intel processor's 63. This shows that the FX-8150 can have an advantage, but only if you run incredibly intensive tasks such as encoding two HD videos at once to another format or encoding two HD videos while playing back a third.

kraken2109

Bulldozer:

2500k:

Source:

http://www.expertreviews.co.uk/processors/1287799/amd-fx-8150/2

So more is better for BD.

mitu123

so far I noticed it too, hopefully its futureproof. HOPEFULLY. So far I am enjoying it. got it upto 4Ghz and tightened up the ram timings, every program it load balzing fast, even booting windows.

[QUOTE="mitu123"] So more is better for BD.

mixedplanet

so far I noticed it too, hopefully its futureproof. HOPEFULLY. So far I am enjoying it. got it upto 4Ghz and tightened up the ram timings, every program it load balzing fast, even booting windows.