overwhelmed?

Underwhelmed by AMD's showing?

  • Total voters
    176
  • Poll closed .
Are there any reviews about the 8150 on resolutions higher then 1920...
eyefinity sized resolutions? 5040x1050+
 
You made a multiple choice poll, so I choose both options. Because I could.
 
I'm probably going to wait for next generation then, prices for everything are going to remain stable in the next while. Phenom II x6 is a better deal than a bulldozer right now =/. Hopefully phenom II x4 970/975/980 drops to around $135-145 where it might be a decent price if you aren't paying for electricity.
 
No option for 'Slightly Underwhelmed'? Because that is how I feel. Not terribly underwhelmed, like "OMG FX is FAILBOAT" or something similar, but more like "wonder if the C0/C1 chips may fare better, especially in overclocking."

Though $245 for an 8150 isn't horrendous, maybe the prices on X6s will start to drop.
 
Damn. Some sites are showing the 8150 getting beaten in games by an old i7 920 @ stock speed. :(
 
Disappointed for sure. Especially by the power numbers. The thing is a power hog!
 
images
 
mesasone said:
You made a multiple choice poll, so I choose both options. Because I could.
Click to expand...

Well it looks like you and AMD_Gamer are the only ones.

My mistake on multiple choice, AMD's mistake on another dissapointing "high-end" CPU.


What happend to the performance JF-AMD was talking about?
 
griff30 said:
Well it looks like you and AMD_Gamer are the only ones.

My mistake on multiple choice, AMD's mistake on another dissapointing "high-end" CPU.


What happend to the performance JF-AMD was talking about?
Click to expand...

why can't one be overwhelmed by the 5 gigawatts of power it consumes while overclocked?

:p Man, It would be funny if Intel posted a video on youtube to mock it like AMD did to Nvidia with Fermi.
 
Anyone able to make a Hitler Downfall video?

Might include AMD_Gamer's and JF-AMD's quotes in it?
 
There's something wrong with the forums, even they agree BD is 100% fail. (out of 107%)
 
Single threaded performance? Where art thou?

Power hungry like Thuban... sure this is on a 32nm process?

So just curious, how about the AES and AVX circuitry? Apparently WinRAR 4.01 and later uses the AES instructions. For AVX, gcc 4.6 will generate AVX instructions with the -mavx flag and Visual Studio 2010 will generate AVX instructions with /arch:AVX switch.

Even the multi-thread performance isn't great...

I am left scratching my head, wondering what audience this processor is meant for. It sure as hell isn't meant for desktop. I don't think it is meant for server and enterprise either.

I am so confused. :confused:
 
im not tremendously dissapointed.. its still an affordable processor,.. i guess i can put my wallet away though, i see no reason to upgrade from my 1075 for minimal gains.
 
Im kinda disappointed. I knew that the single threaded stuff would be bad. However the heavily multihreaded stuff shows some promise ( see the x264 bench). However... you need to be using all 8 cores to get everything out of it, if you aren't you're better off with a 1100t.

Kinda like running Crysis on a Magny Cours, its not going to do you any good.... I'm wondering what the server chips are going to show, and hopefully the power consumption is better.
 
Underwhelmed is the understatement of the century. This thing reeks of server CPU lazily transitioned to client. Its lightly threaded performance (IE: a lot of client loads) is horrible. I was hoping I'd at least get an Intel price drop by waiting it out, but this thing is so non-threatening I doubt that will even happen.

What I find even more depressing is that the OCing isn't great at all. Every review I've seen seems to hit a wall at around 4.6GHz. This was basically pushed as an overclocking beast, and it's falling far short of sandy bridge. Forget percentage of overclock compared to stock, it can't even out OC sandy bridge from a raw numbers perspective. Ugh, ugh, ugh.

The real ironic thing here is that I think Intel sales are actually going to have a nice spike after this release. Everybody that was holding off to see what AMD was bringing to the table will now happily unload their money to Intel. It's a real bummer. I wanted AMD to hit a homerun here.
 
Last edited:
There is no place in the benchmarks to take solace for AMD. You can't say it's good for multi-threaded, you can't say it's good for single threaded. You can't say it's a generally decent gaming choice, or multi-tasking application choice. Right now it's just simply way out in no man's land where its nearly $100 cheaper predecessor is pretty much kicking its ass. Maybe this is just the beginning and the long term strategy is for this module design to allow them to get up to 128 CPUs more easily or something but right now it's just the wrong product at the wrong time.

Please tell me there's some compiler trick or... nevermind. Just nevermind.
 
I'm honestly confused that some reviews have managed to put a positive spin on it. Sure, it can beat the 2500k in some tasks, but in those same tasks it's tying/slightly beating/slightly losing to Thubans.
 
mesasone said:
You made a multiple choice poll, so I choose both options. Because I could.
Click to expand...

lol i was going to do the same thing but i chose the other option because i knew people wouldn't :D.

yeah thats right i'm ruining the poll so bite me!


soulsavior said:
I'm honestly confused that some reviews have managed to put a positive spin on it. Sure, it can beat the 2500k in some tasks, but in those same tasks it's tying/slightly beating/slightly losing to Thubans.
Click to expand...


if you are a gamer there is still a positive to the bulldozer, if your primarily an encoder theres still a positive, if you are a person that runs synthetic benchmarks and other benchmarks 24/7 then obviously there is no positive for them. oh crap i used common sense and logic in a thread on [H], i'm going to hell now. :(
 
sirmonkey1985 said:
if you are a gamer there is still a positive to the bulldozer
Click to expand...
What is the positive? I wanted gaming to be the excuse to pull the trigger on BD but with its deficit in FPS on games like SC2, WOW and CIV... even if it runs the games I actually play (BF3) similarly to 2500k there's no telling if the next game I play will be one where FPS tanks on BD.
 
Someone posted in one of my country's forum:

"That's it. I am buying a Thuban and i am putting an "FX" sticker on my case". :D :D
 
sirmonkey1985 said:
if you are a gamer there is still a positive to the bulldozer, if your primarily an encoder theres still a positive, if you are a person that runs synthetic benchmarks and other benchmarks 24/7 then obviously there is no positive for them. oh crap i used common sense and logic in a thread on [H], i'm going to hell now. :(
Click to expand...

I'm not really sure which part of it is supposed to be common sense and logic ?

If you are coming from position that any CPU will work for games since you will be gpu bottlenecked then by same logic Phenom II X4 > FX 41x0, i5 2400> FX 6100, i5 2500K >>>FX8120&8150
 
sirmonkey1985 said:
if you are a gamer there is still a positive to the bulldozer, if your primarily an encoder theres still a positive, if you are a person that runs synthetic benchmarks and other benchmarks 24/7 then obviously there is no positive for them. oh crap i used common sense and logic in a thread on [H], i'm going to hell now. :(
Click to expand...

Er, how so? It loses to the 2500k in basically all games. The only "positive" gaming scores I've seen are when it's GPU bottlenecked and then it ties everything else for obvious reasons.

I don't care about synthetics at all. In fact, I skip straight to the gaming results in basically every review I read, because that's what I care about.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top