Return of AMD FX: My OC'd AMD FX 8150 / 6990 review - Check in Daily for New Results!

[BeepBeep2]

haha, I didnt want it to come to that either. Thanks for the feedback! more results tmw!

Lets be reasonable though...and not make wild claims from either side. You know what I meant when I said your results thrown into charts only gives an idea, but is not accurate enough to take seriously...

I'll look forward to your upcoming results. I know you've put in a lot of hard work to get this much done.

[polyzp]

I never ruled out doing my own internal 2600k benchmarks @ 4.8 Ghz with the same gpu. I could and probably will eventually do this. It is hard to find overclocked 2600k results with a 6990 or 6970s in crossfire in any review so my comparisons are what I could find. I am not purposely trying to hide or stretch the truth. I am simply comparing what I have to what other reviewers have, all my comparisons should be taken with a grain of salt, and I thought that would be obvious or implied by me posting my results with what I could find online.

[Daveburt714]

Even though they may not offer 100% scientific results (not sure any web results do), they still give a general overview IMHO...

Besides, everytime you post, I get to look at your AWESOME avatar agin!

[eRazorzEDGE]

It's not worth it Beep, literally and figuratively.

On a side note, after owning only AMD products (including the FX-8150), I recently bought a Maximums IV Extreme-Z and an i7-2600k. I've done a few 3dmark11 runs now at 4.8GHz without any errors with two 6970's @ 950/1450 and I'm very surprised by the P11.1k numbers I'm getting. And I say this because when I benched my 1090T and FX-8150 back in October, and running three 6970's @ 950/1450, I got scores of P11.5k and P11.7k, respectively. Other game benches showed more in favor of the 1090T, however.

@ polyzp, I know it takes a lot of work to put together comparisons, so thanks for taking the time. however, there's no point in trying to shine a better light on the FX-8150. It's simply not better than it's predecessor, overall. And for the price, it damn well should be.

[mR Yellow]

It's not worth it Beep, literally and figuratively.

On a side note, after owning only AMD products (including the FX-8150), I recently bought a Maximums IV Extreme-Z and an i7-2600k. I've done a few 3dmark11 runs now at 4.8GHz without any errors with two 6970's @ 950/1450 and I'm very surprised by the P11.1k numbers I'm getting. And I say this because when I benched my 1090T and FX-8150 back in October, and running three 6970's @ 950/1450, I got scores of P11.5k and P11.7k, respectively. Other game benches showed more in favor of the 1090T, however.

@ polyzp, I know it takes a lot of work to put together comparisons, so thanks for taking the time. however, there's no point in trying to shine a better light on the FX-8150. It's simply not better than it's predecessor, overall. And for the price, it damn well should be.

I disagree. It is better. I think the second gen will prove just that.

I'm basing it on my opinion...as i have had both.

8150 isn't worth it. It's better to get a 8120. They OC the same

[NEOAethyr]

Just wanna mention that nah I haven't been around much at all this last year, since may I think or earlier.
I only saw a couple aida bench screens and baised my opinions around that.
Now that I think about it, each person's results are usually quite different (sometimes..).
So I shouldn't be baising my opinion on that since just the other day I saw some better results.
I guess it's all down to just how fast the cpu is, and how efficient it is at doing it within certain wattages (users picks the ranges).

To be honest...
I only look for aida screens...
I'm mostly interested in those, benching pcsx2 with specific disk id's and avisynth performance (supereq specifically along with a few other filters will tear the cpu up...).
Superpi32 too.

[polyzp]

AVP revisited with patch up!

[polyzp]

POV RAY 3.7 RC3 benchmarks up! More benchmarks tomorrow!

[FlanK3r]

I cant find POV RAY on first page...

[polyzp]

I cant find POV RAY on first page...

Its there scroll down! ^^

[charged3800z24]

Even though they may not offer 100% scientific results (not sure any web results do), they still give a general overview IMHO...

Besides, everytime you post, I get to look at your AWESOME avatar agin!

I keep looking for results, but the avatar is all i've seen, are the result any good?

[BeepBeep2]

I keep looking for results, but the avatar is all i've seen, are the result any good?

Depends on if you mean "good" like "good performance" or "good" as in "accurate"

[polyzp]

I invite you to prove me to be inaccurate.

Anyone with a 8150 that can hit 4.8 ghz will see similar results.

Just because the benchmarks I chose up to date show it to do alright against intel and older phenom II architecture. Most of which have been patched or updated since bulldozer's release.

[Maxforces]

I invite you to prove me to be inaccurate.

Anyone with a 8150 that can hit 4.8 ghz will see similar results.

Just because the benchmarks I chose up to date show it to do alright against intel and older phenom II architecture. Most of which have been patched or updated since bulldozer's release.

In the first place, you can`t compare the results to someone NOT inaccurate
I have 3 cpu fresh system, real applications performance NOT benchmarks.For example compressing and decompressing in winrar CORE Parking doesn`t work, it`s working only in benchmark.
You have a couple of examples of good made test






Thank God I paid only 199$ CPU+ motherboard at MC.

[polyzp]

But there are such thing as real world performance benchmarks :P. But I get your point. I meant in the specific benchmarks I have tested with, all FX processors with similar ram as mine will notice that they score similarly.

[polyzp]

Also with bulldozer HT/NB overclocking will affect performance as well

[mR Yellow]

Also with bulldozer HT/NB overclocking will affect performance as well

From what i've heard it doesn't see much improvement compared to Phenom II.

Can you please post CPU-Z screens of your OC? Would like to see all your OC details.

[polyzp]

DIRT 3 revisited ..AGAIN! FX @ 4.0 Ghz. Tomorrow Fritz Chess benchmark, then after Cinebench 10, then SpecviewPerf 11

[BeepBeep2]

Again, due to unknown differences in CCC settings as well as uncore/memory, OS etc your results are pretty invalid.

Your Cinebench GPU scores were pretty bogus too, I can pull out 74 FPS with a lowly pair of HD5770 at stock. By the way, I believe (I can't remember for sure) I get higher FPS on that benchmark with 1100T than I do with my FX CPU.

[polyzp]

This is an example where FX lacks, just like winrar. I have shows cases where it has and cases where its .

[FlanK3r]

this 3Ds2011 is bull, no possible, cause I had scene better than with 1100T and 1100T is more better than quadcore PII

[polyzp]

Wait I'm confused by your last statement. :S

[NEOAethyr]

Be nice guys ...

[polyzp]

Fritz Chess Benchmark 4.3 results up! Tomorrow Cinebench 10

[polyzp]

Are you saying my gpu open gl score is impossible?