AMD Bulldozer FX-8150 Processor Review Comment Thread

[terrybear]

Price? A 2500k is $200 and will oc easy to at least 4.5Ghz. 2500k performance at 4.5Ghz will blow any BD chip out of the water in 99% of tasks. For the very small minority that run something with 8 threads sure you can save a few $ with BD but why not just spring a few more and get 2600k and have better performance for the other 99% of tasks as well?

IF you go back a few pages I point out somethings with what I have read with all the reviews this morning ...

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...essor-review-comment-thread-6.html#post556834

8120 is suposivly same prive point as 2500k ..... the chip also preforms up to 8150 levels in oc's ... ergo ... when you do a 8120 vs 2500k comparision on oc'ed levels .... the 2 chips trade blows @ 4.5 ghz ...

Again, everyone is ready to call this cpu a failure cause it lacks single thread preformance, BUT again, as i, others & some reviewers have pointed out .... this cpu is built for the future of a most ovious multithreading reality of the pc world.

 

[Rasparthe]

Price? A 2500k is $200 and will oc easy to at least 4.5Ghz. 2500k performance at 4.5Ghz will blow any BD chip out of the water in 99% of tasks. For the very small minority that run something with 8 threads sure you can save a few $ with BD but why not just spring a few more and get 2600k and have better performance for the other 99% of tasks as well?

Put the period in a confusing spot I see. Price if you are running heavily threaded apps is what I meant to point out, and as I also said in the same post, one period over, very narrow market. But thanks for reiterating my thoughts. :thumb:

 

[chrisk]

Again, everyone is ready to call this cpu a failure cause it lacks single thread preformance, BUT again, as i, others & some reviewers have pointed out .... this cpu is built for the future of a most ovious multithreading reality of the pc world.

There might be something in the architecture that will be useful for the future, but I doubt that any enthusiast will be holding on to a BD chip and suitable motherboard long enough to see some of these instruction sets get utilized properly.

Multiple threads mostly benefits folks doing video work right now and in the foreseeable future (and folders, but those folks are not mainsteam for the most part). From the benches I have seen Bulldozer can barely keep up with the 2600K in some benches....and it must eat a tonne of additional power to do so.

As for gamers? The last gen AMD is plenty. For folks doing video work and other multi-threaded tasks, SB is superior, especially when power consumption is considered....now, and in the medium-term.

 

[Dead Things]

Price? A 2500k is $200 and will oc easy to at least 4.5Ghz. 2500k performance at 4.5Ghz will blow any BD chip out of the water in 99% of tasks. For the very small minority that run something with 8 threads sure you can save a few $ with BD but why not just spring a few more and get 2600k and have better performance for the other 99% of tasks as well?

And who wouldn't want better performance in 198% of tasks? :bleh:

Seriously, though - Bulldozer's failure to keep up in single- or lightly-threaded applications really oughtn't come as much of a surprise to anybody. It's failure to keep up in multi-threaded applications, though, is an absolutely shocking finding that undercuts the whole raison d'être of Bulldozer. here are my takeaways:

It's a poor chip for ordinary users; It's a poor chip for gamers; It's a poor chip for crunchers; and, from the indicators that hint at SMP performance (wPrime and Cinebench), It's a poor chip for servers. In sum, Bulldozer has failed to appeal to ANY market at all, not even AMD's traditional stronghold in the budget category. AMD has pulled some fail over the years, but this has got to be the most epic of them all! :sad:

 

[Shadowmeph]

For the most part CPUs are more advanced then software needs and I think that AMD is more Advanced then Intel in this department. But MPO is that AMD is taking a gamble at this because I am not sure how long it is going to be before Software will catchup to Multi core CPUs.
Like I posted before AMD is a work horse CPU ( meaning Power over speed) and Intel is more for the Speed then the power and to compare the two is kind of unfair.
if the software out there ever catches up to the CPUs the tables will turn.

 

[Razamatraz]

Can they actually make money selling a 2 billion transistor chip for this cheap??? Processor division is in trouble.

 

[KylSp]

The only good thing about this release is the justification it gave everyone who bought a 2500k 10 months ago that they still have a better chip, and have had it for 10 MONTHS.

It's a garbage desktop part, only a delusional AMD fanatic can call this a success.

 

[Dead Things]

Like I posted before AMD is a work horse CPU ( meaning Power over speed) and Intel is more for the Speed then the power and to compare the two is kind of unfair.

Except that's not true in this case. Bulldozer loses to a Lynnfield processor in wPrime for chrissakes! And chews through more hydro in doing so! If your statement was correct, then there would be a clear market segment for Bulldozer for those who require strong symmetrical multi-processing capabilities - an area that was supposed to be Bulldozer's bread and butter. But, unfortunately, it fails even there in relation to two-year old Intel chips that have half as many physical processing cores. If there was a worst-case scenario for Bulldozer, this is even worse.

 

[Razamatraz]

Yet the stock price is up today....obviously investors haven't read the reviews and are just looking at first day sales.

 

[matsta31]

Broad market is up....