AMD FX processors released

Performance of these chips are disappointing, I didn't expect them to compete with intel, but I was really hoping. And for the price its just better to stick with an older Phanom II.:erm:

Happy I bought my i3-2100 in early March instead of waiting.

But I guess the really bad news could be in the form of no price drops for Intel CPUs, as it wouldn't make any business sense for Intel.
 
The only way that AMD would still be able to stay in the desktop market would be if they drop their prices (CPU & motherboard) to way below that of the Intel.
 
Very disappointing AMD...

Lets hope that the FX2 can turn things around for them. In the mean time, everybody MUST buy AMD GPU's to keep them afloat! :p
 
McGuywer said:
It is. Still an AMD fan but with these figures, it is hard to not buy Intel...
Click to expand...

Yup i had the same dilemma when core2 dropped, big fanboy of amd but the numbers sent shivers down my spine and i literally had no choice but to drop my fanboy ways and concede defeat.

It's one thing being a fanboy when the product can compete it's another thing buying hardware that is way behind the comp, that is border line insane.
 
Eish thats very sad indeed.
Amd's stronghold is declining rapidly,but at least they still have a decent low power netbook competitor to the Atom.
Am actually going to retire my AMD desktop for an I5 laptop very soon,so i hope im not too late.....
 
demon angel said:
Eish thats very sad indeed.
Amd's stronghold is declining rapidly,but at least they still have a decent low power netbook competitor to the Atom.
Am actually going to retire my AMD desktop for an I5 laptop very soon,so i hope im not too late.....
Click to expand...

Stronghold, this isn't 2001 :D. They haven't had a stronghold since intel dropped the core2 bomb.
 
Review at Bit-Tech against an older generation Intel Core i7 :)

2011 AMD FX-8150 (3.6GHZ) vs 2008 Intel Core i7 920 (2.66GHZ)

Notice how close it performs to an almost 3 year old Intel processor. Very disappointing for AMD fans :o

Cinebench 11.5

2011 AMD FX-8150 (3.6GHZ) = 6.01
2008 Intel Core i7 920 (2.66GHZ) = 4.82

WPrime 2.05

2011 AMD FX-8150 (3.6GHZ) = 9.484 sec
2008 Intel Core i7 920 (2.66GHZ) = 10.778 sec

Image Editing (Gimp)

2011 AMD FX-8150 (3.6GHZ) = 887
2008 Intel Core i7 920 (2.66GHZ) = 1218

Video Encoding (Handbrake)

2011 AMD FX-8150 (3.6GHZ) = 2520
2008 Intel Core i7 920 (2.66GHZ) = 2113

Multi-Tasking (mplayer and 7-Zip)

2011 AMD FX-8150 (3.6GHZ) = 1283
2008 Intel Core i7 920 (2.66GHZ) = 1216

Overall Score (Gimp, Handbrake, mplayer, 7-Zip)

2011 AMD FX-8150 (3.6GHZ) = 1563
2008 Intel Core i7 920 (2.66GHZ) = 1516

Arma II: Operation Arrowhead

2011 AMD FX-8150 (3.6GHZ) = 61 fps
2008 Intel Core i7 920 (2.66GHZ) = 62 fps

Shogun 2: Total War CPU Test

2011 AMD FX-8150 (3.6GHZ) = Cannot load the game
2008 Intel Core i7 920 (2.66GHZ) = 13 fps

Power Consumption (Idle)

2011 AMD FX-8150 (3.6GHZ) = 110 WATTS
2008 Intel Core i7 920 (2.66GHZ) = 158 WATTS

Power Consumption (Load)

2011 AMD FX-8150 (3.6GHZ) = 244 WATTS
2008 Intel Core i7 920 (2.66GHZ) = 243 WATTS
 
Last edited:
Frankly I am more interested to see what they deliver with trinity.

A processor that can jam games in hd at 30+ fps without a graphics card makes me engorged.

Sent from my GT-I9000 using Tapatalk
 
Felt like crying when i saw the benchmarks, i was at least hoping it would be vaguely competitive. At least you get a nice cooler with it...

Sent from my GT-I9000 using Tapatalk
 
dualmeister said:
Review at Bit-Tech against an older generation Intel Core i7 :)

2011 AMD FX-8150 (3.6GHZ) vs 2008 Intel Core i7 920 (2.66GHZ)

Notice how close it performs to an almost 3 year old Intel processor. Very disappointing for AMD fans :o

Cinebench 11.5

2011 AMD FX-8150 (3.6GHZ) = 6.01
2008 Intel Core i7 920 (2.66GHZ) = 4.82

WPrime 2.05

2011 AMD FX-8150 (3.6GHZ) = 9.484 sec
2008 Intel Core i7 920 (2.66GHZ) = 10.778 sec

Image Editing (Gimp)

2011 AMD FX-8150 (3.6GHZ) = 887
2008 Intel Core i7 920 (2.66GHZ) = 1218

Video Encoding (Handbrake)

2011 AMD FX-8150 (3.6GHZ) = 2520
2008 Intel Core i7 920 (2.66GHZ) = 2113

Multi-Tasking (mplayer and 7-Zip)

2011 AMD FX-8150 (3.6GHZ) = 1283
2008 Intel Core i7 920 (2.66GHZ) = 1216

Overall Score (Gimp, Handbrake, mplayer, 7-Zip)

2011 AMD FX-8150 (3.6GHZ) = 1563
2008 Intel Core i7 920 (2.66GHZ) = 1516

Arma II: Operation Arrowhead

2011 AMD FX-8150 (3.6GHZ) = 61 fps
2008 Intel Core i7 920 (2.66GHZ) = 62 fps

Shogun 2: Total War CPU Test

2011 AMD FX-8150 (3.6GHZ) = Cannot load the game
2008 Intel Core i7 920 (2.66GHZ) = 13 fps

Power Consumption (Idle)

2011 AMD FX-8150 (3.6GHZ) = 110 WATTS
2008 Intel Core i7 920 (2.66GHZ) = 158 WATTS

Power Consumption (Load)

2011 AMD FX-8150 (3.6GHZ) = 244 WATTS
2008 Intel Core i7 920 (2.66GHZ) = 243 WATTS
Click to expand...

Keep in mind with these benchmarks that the AMD is an 8 core chip while the Intel is only a hyperthreaded quad core chip. AMD kinda failed with this. Though the power consumption is impressive, double the cores of the intel while still having almost identical power usage. Shows how technology is advancing :D

You could get a Sandy Bridge i5 that could outperform the AMD, which would be a far cheaper option.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X