From what I know, MSRP for 8150 should be 245 USD.
Printable View
From what I know, MSRP for 8150 should be 245 USD.
I love my 2600k
Still too much.Quote:
Originally Posted by Monstru
Well IF these results are representative of final performance then the biggest gripe I have is the DECEPTION that has / had taken place by certain individuals posting here at XS.
We only have a few more days to go so am still hoping that these results are not representative of final performance.
Not going to make any other comments till NDA is lifted but am hoping that AMD will not have purposefully deceived people at this great community.
If there are no major changes in the bios or whatever and there is no significant performance gain, I am not going to buy this chip. I will stick to my 1090T and wait for the next revision....
Wow, the results are indeed disappointing, it can't even keep up with the i7 2600K despite it having more cache.
Sheesh, no wonder Dirk was shown the door, good riddance but now AMD is in deep trouble.
Why the performances are very2 bad?? Not better than Phenom II X6.
My X6 1055T @3.6GHz at SuperPi 1M can hit 16.240s, but at that review, SuperPi 1M @5GHz only 17.019s
At Cinebench R11.5 64-bit, my X6 1055T @3.6GHz can hit 6.45 Pts, but at that review FX-8150 @default (3.6GHz) only 6.01 pts
And at wPrime v1.55, my X6 1055T @3.6GHz can hit 7.191s, and at that review only 8.845s with FX-8150 @default clock
Why X6 1055T @3.6GHz can better than FX-8150 @3.6GHz at single core and multicore performances??? Actually 6 cores vs 8 cores :confused:
Someone seems to be playing silly buggers with us, that looks terrible :confused:
@ Monstru , thanks for the preview , would it be possible for you to do some benchmarking under Linux between Fx vs I7. I want to understand whether Bulldozer as a processor is really SH*T or there some thing else going on.
remember "shared" resources for BD...hence the poor multicore scaling from the 6-core thubanQuote:
Originally Posted by bondhahnmrt85
It almost seems like some kind of cruel joke, I'm half expecting AMD to raise a curtain on launch day and say "gotcha" and all of a sudden a second set of reviews will come out with decent numbers :(
You have used Bios 0811 or 0813, is that correct?Quote:
Originally Posted by Monstru
I think he used 9905 bios.
IrfanView as benchmark.:rofl:
This is the worst review which I've seen in the past few years.
this is xs correct? can someone take a 2600k and FX-8150 and some ln2 and see how far that 2600k goes before you are waiting for it to warm back up so you can get it to post again?
How cold can you get a 2600k before it craps out and you are stuck waiting for the board to warm up so it will post again? what clocks did you get? how far can you take a FX-8150 at what temps?
I see most ln2. 2600k around 6ghz. what temp was that at?
I dont know what Im talking about. I just assume the 2600k is going to crap out on cold below -100c and the FX-8150 is going to go up to -200c and what happens then? does anyone care about cold benching anymore? all im saying is I want to have some fun doing ln2 benches again and from what I gather 2600k is not much fun on xtreme cooling. It sounds more like the h20 and air cooling 24/7 gift from god. I just want to do some ln2 again with something exciting and new.
TA
These amd chips don't cb as far as I know.
For sb cooling doesn't help alot. sb chips just maxes out.
the BD plays starcraft 2 at 7ghzQuote:
Originally Posted by trans am
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...er-7GHz-stable!
it should be a great chip for ln2 and it has the highest clock speed record.
this set of benches scores worse than my 1090, there has to be something wrong, especially with it loosing in wprime and cinibench were amd typically dose well.
This! And also Win 8 Dev preview thanks!Quote:
Originally Posted by Blaber
Also "latest drivers" (please specify version number on the most important ones...(chipset drivers))- latest from where?
1. Windows update
2. From Asus download/ftp
3. Directly from AMD
Bios/Uefi settings???
remember this from chew*
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...=1#post4952360
This is exactly the point im trying to make. everyone :banana::banana::banana::banana::banana:es about clock for clock performance on stock cooling. this is nothing new. we knew intel was still going to be better. but the sandys cold bug and ever since sandy chip came out my dewar has been collecting dust. I want to see some FX-8150 runs on ln2 and see how they scale and then you can bash amd till your hearts content.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hondacity
on ln2 they go to 8ghz easy[unless they were binned] - we already know that
benching wise they're ok on asus boards :D
Judging by the 7 ghz ln2 demo system at the amd bulldozer gaming event and the record before that they do well with cold. The trouble is, based on these reported powerdraw numbers, higher 24/7 clocks will require some hefty cooling and efficiency takes a noise dive. I wad optimistic to see these exceeding 5ghz with ease but that doesn't appear to be in the cards.
And yes you'll hit the limits of the CPU before a decent watersetup ( and even air in some cases ) on the sandys.
I'm still curious to see how these bench at 6+ ghz though. How high does thuban tend to clock under cold by the way ?
you can't compare thuban and bd[@ln2 temps], bd silicon is far superior
Well with current performance a BD at 8-8.4ghz will not beat a Phenom at 6.8-7ghz.Quote:
I want to see some FX-8150 runs on ln2 and see how they scale and then you can bash amd till your hearts content.
May be in 3DMark 2001.
I'm not a major AMD fan/user, but seeing this I might go out and pick up a (hopefully) cheap 1090T etc to use and play around with.
-PB