It's crazy to think that Bulldozer nearly put AMD into bankruptcy. It really did set the undertones for the next 5 years of dominance (and slow-down) from Intel, followed by an eventual comeback story. Watch our AMD Phenom II 1090T revisit here: ua-cam.com/video/igjrJ7qH3_8/v-deo.html And our FX-8370 revisit here: ua-cam.com/video/c_Gcg-tFfu0/v-deo.html
I am pretty confused by all this. I was running a FX-8320 when PubG came out along with my 1080 ti and was getting 80-90 fps on ultra..... THATS AT LAUNCH, WHEN NOTHING WAS OPTIMIZED. Meanwhile your getting 50 fps on GTA V? On a game that is heavily optimized over the last 7 years. Something dont smell right.... yup i smell BULLSHIT
As bad as it was, I think it was the most fun I had overclocking. Haven't had the pleasure of tweaking a chip as much as the FX ones. 5.1 GHz on a 9000 series that I got dirt cheap. Though ya.... Paid for it in electricity bills
@@GamersNexus Genuine question, does it matter though? IPC wasn't that good so the number was basically, nice to see, but mostly useless in terms of performance when factoring in extra power and thermals. I agree with OP's post, about it being fun to OC though.I had an 8350 that did boot 5GHz (under an H80i AIO) and actually made it in Windows, but crashed in stability test...most I could get out of it was 4.85GHz stable without going too high on temps(mostly socket and VRM, package was actually fine, 59-60 at most)
@@DeLawrence97 Back then I was happy with 60 fps and near max settings in most games, partly cause I didn't know what I was missing though. Getting a 6850k after the 9590 was a bit eye opening. And the only chip I got above 5 GHz and stable was the 9590. 8370 I think I got to 4.9 stable, for a while.
From GN I expected at least 2800MHz NB+HT frequencies, that would've squeezed a little bit more frames out of it. The biggest issue with FX lineup we had here was that most pre-builds, just like with Intel-based systems, included ONE stick of 1333MHz RAM, which HAMMERED any remnants of performance in this chips. And some people ran with it, trying to OC their core clocks and were left utterly disappointed. Even with good on paper specs, I still remember clients face when I removed his 5GHz overclock, rearranged his RAM modules for dual channel, OCed and tuned a bit his RAM, NB+HT with BCLK overclocking (something like 230 BCLK, since it would crash any higher, and i think 12 for HT+NB, 20 for CPU and 9 for RAM). And BCLK OC was the only way to get his board to OC at all, considering half of multipliers didn't work properly on auto. The gains were impressive.
@@glennv3176 I had a lot of AMD stock at the time. The grave in question was nearly mine=-- tens of thousands gone. Finally made it up last year and this year (and then some)...
i remember i was SO HYPED for this, i had cpu+board+ram queued in a vendor cart with vendor prices. perks of working in retail with authorization to get stuff for myself with a small flat markup. money was stacked and ready, the perfect storm for an upgrade. i waited for reviews. reviews came in. reality settled in. more reviews confirmed. it's shit. what a colossal disappointment.
Mine had some shitty sensors that didn't display thermals correctly (24C at max load with a stock cooler...lol okay). It was literally a worse experience over my Phenom II 1050 by that aspect alone.
Its not bad for certain things / use case's etc. But ya they suck for anything demanding etc, not gaming reg pc use there not bad for that. But that's about it
Imagine the performance jump consoles will be getting. Mind you, the PS4 CPU is essentially a 2x 4-core Athlon 5150. 1.6 GHz Jaguar microarchitecture (Kabini APU) CPU with its ST score being around just "45" in CB R15. Which is over -50% slower than even 2009 Core 2 Duo E7500's ST performance. Now you have 8C/16T Zen 2. Basically a Ryzen 7 4800H but downclocked to 3.5 GHz max boost outfitted with RDNA 2-based GPU in the same die. And most likely has the same amount of 8MB L3 cache given the Series X's Zen 2 CPU L3 cache is confirmed to be 8MB.
Yeah the bottleneck were the CPUs. The graphics weren't great because the PS4 GPU was between the 7850 and 7870. As we saw though it can look good. The bottleneck were the CPUs and we can tell with open world games.
It's hard to imagine games not being held back by hardware since that's what they've been the last two generations (from a PC perspective). My last console was a PS2 and I won't ever buy another, but damn I'm excited for this coming generation because of what it means for games as a whole. (bad/outsourced ports notwithstanding)
Not that I would ever abandon my PC, but I hope I get the chance to play on a PS5 when it releases. Especially if it's connected to a high refreshrate display, I never had the pleasure.
I would really like to see a wide range of architectures set to the same frequency and core count. I'd especially like to see if intel has actually made any architecture improvements during the 14∞+ era.
IPC does not scale linearly with clocks so when you screw with the core clock you throw it all out of wack anyway.... prime example is the completely nonlinear performance curve of Renoir due to having plenty of cache to keep up below 3.4GHhz but running a bit light on cache above that...
@@Wingnut353 ahh, so you'd need to also configure cache identically too, might be some way around it though, very low frequency or some application that occupies a set amount of cache, not sure. There might also be some benchmarks with a very low cache dependancy, but I don't really have a clue
@@NovemberOrWhatever No....what I'm saying is what you are trying to do is completely impossible. If you want to compare CPUs like you want the way to do that is normalize against clock rate not actually change it....
I used an FX8150 for.... a lot of years.... It wasn't.... TOO bad.... 😬 I'm sure I'd definitely be feeling different going back to it after a year using 2700X and last 8 months of using a 3950X.
The magic in being able to put a am3 cpu in a am2/am2+ motherboard with a bios update while still using ddr2 before finally upgrading to am3/am3+ with ddr3 was one of the coolest thing ever. Back when twitch was still using flash/cpu decoding, the 8350 didn't sweat while gaming + watching a stream, it even doubled as a heater in the winter! However unoptimized early access games was a whole different story..
I bought some shares back when it was 5 bucks. It wasn't moving so I started selling calls against those shares. Made a few hundred bucks. Then all of a sudden AMD took off to like $8 within two weeks. Had to let go of the shares. Wish I rolled the contracts or bought to close. AMD has not stopped growing since.
The FX line brought us dark ages over the PC landscape as far as choice goes. Always wanted a Phenom back then, ended up with the FX... at least I had a nice space heater for two winters.
I used an Fx-8150 for almost 7 years, with radeon hd 7870 at first, and then with rx480. (Now I have a ryzen 3900x and still the rx480) At 2560x1440 resolution I was definitely GPU bound with the 7870 almost all the time, and then with the rx480 it was case by case. I'm OK running games at 40fps though. I like detail more than the framerates. Must be the types of games I play. The Fx-8150 wasn't the fastest CPU but it was pretty good for running many things at the same time, since pretty much no game I played could use more than 50% of the CPU, so there was always half of the CPU free for other stuff I'd run in secondary monitors. Now some modern games probably could utilize the Fx-8150 fully, but... yeah. And back when I switched to the Fx-8150, the previous setup was the Phenom II X4 940, so it was on the previous socket and DDR2, 3GHz and not really an overclocker. The Fx-8150 felt so much faster... And it overclocked very well, I ended up running it at 4.5GHz. It did go up to 4.7GHz but with atrociously high voltages. I don't regret getting the Fx-8150. It was good enough.
I built a PC in 2012 with an FX 8350 and it was almost in daily use until 2019 when I built a new PC around Ryzen 3600. I certainly got great value for my money.
I need all manufacturers to delay their releases as much as possible so that the tech reviewers have nothing to make content on other than old generation CPU/GPU :D
Had a FX-8120 and GT640. Don't ask me how but I actually played like 600 hours of ARK: Survival evolved on it. Yes, the game that a GTX 1080 can't even run at 1080p. I was running at 900p but damn... The abuse that build went through. She did good for $475 in 2012
Thanks for the great revisit and putting in all the time and effort to bring us this comparison for such a massive amount of CPUs! Been an AMD user since the Am386SX days and been through them all: K6-2, Athlon, Thunderbird, Palomino, Thoroughbred, Barton, Venice, and ended up running an X2 6400+ BE while holding out for Bulldozer. That October day in 2011 when that those reviews and test results came out is the day that I held off an upgrade. I switched to Intel when Ivy Bridge was released in April of 2012, and been running my i7-3770K since. Next stop for me will hopefully be early next year: AMD Ryzen 4000 series for a complete system overhaul!
I've been running a FX 6300 clock locked at 4.5 GHz for 8 years now along with a XFX RX480 GTR black ed. NEVER MISSED A BEAT so until it does I'll stay with it for the foreseeable future. What's the old saying, if it ain't broke, don't fix it!!!...
My first PC I actually put together myself was an 8350 build, definitely behind intel in about every way, managed to hold out with it until Ryzen came out. Like many others in the comments it was extremely fun to overclock, great video as always!
Seeing this makes me even happier with my upgrade from an FX-8350 to a Ryzen 5 3600 for my rig. Seems even my short time with that processor was not worth it, even for me. Also, love the bonus dig at MSI there.
Oh yeah. I upgraded from a Phenom II x6 1090T to an FX 8350 some years ago and hated that thing. It didn't seem to do any better and sometimes seemed to perform worse even with the same gpu. I only kept that thing a few months before I had to let it and and upgraded to an intel build for the first time. The FX line made me pretty much right off AMD until Ryzen came out and I saw they could actually be good again
@@ram89572 I ended up upgrading from a Phenom II X4 965 to that FX 8350 and it was not worth the hassle. Ran way too hot, sucked at things the Phenom didn't, and because it ran way too hot, it kept crashing the system from overheating causing restarts. So glad I have my Ryzen system now.
@@Jrodsly Oh yeah. 3rd Gen Ryzen is a beast of a lineup. I have a pc dedicated to just being a handbrake encode machine for ripping and encoding all my dvds and blu rays onto my home media server and I use a Ryzen 7 3700X in it now and it is so good. Render times are way way better than when I used to do them with Ryzen 7 1700X which was already better than the i7 7700 I used before that in that machine. Ryzen is damn good at that kind of task and good a gaming as well.
@@ram89572 Which is why I love my 3600. Paired with an RX 560, it obliterates anything I throw at it, including PS3 emulation, which I never thought I'd ever get to do. I'm set for a long time now, I reckon.
I skipped that generation and stuck with a phenomen II for years until ryzen. I bout ryzen simply because when it came out it seemed reliable for the price ( no shade at Intel, they make a good product too, just couldn't afford it)
My 8150 welded itself to the stock (Cooler master type) cooler. Yes I know amd PGA cpus get "STUCK" to coolers all the time. This wasn't stuck, this was fused together. It literally became one with the cooler
When I built my first computer in 2014 it was with an A10-7700k. In 2016 I built my second PC with a FX 8320E. In 2018 I built my third PC with an i5-8600. I'm inadvertently good at picking the wrong CPU for whatever's available. Hoping to change that with Ryzen 4000 series for my next PC.
Well yes, it’s about what Intel’s 9900k is stock out of the box. Also Threadripper will chug power just like most chips (between double and triple the power draw just like most chips) if you are pushing its limits for performance. I have my TR-1950x at about 465w where it sits nice and happy rendering, my FX-8350 was around 300w chugging away as well when maxed out doing fluid simulations (I would guess a 9900k would be at least 500w for me based on how insane their out of the box power load is and how much faster you need to run them to make it worth anything).
saashaa51 it’s about 250-300w out of the box depending on the motherboard (as they widely vary in voltage). For me, I typically over double the power consumption on things: Fx-8350 stock was 120w, I pushed it to 300 on AIO and 350w on phase (would have been about 500w except at sub-zero it’s very efficient). Ryzen 1700 at most pulled 70w stress testing, mine was crap so I had it running only 135w. TR-1950x was 180w, I pushed it to 465w as my daily on a 120mm AIO. RX-470 stock was ~100w, I pushed it to 300+w per GPU (on air when I set the crossfire record, modded BIOS to unlock power limit). The list goes on, that’s just what I anticipate.
saashaa51 also to make the 9900k worth anything, you won’t be using air/ambient coolers, I’d run it at no less than 6 GHz on phase to make it worth it (which makes it more efficient, but allows much higher overclocks, so not necessarily different power draw). Its simply not worth it to me if it hits some crappy 5 GHz (when my Threadripper was hitting 4.2 GHz easy on 16 core/32 thread that wouldn’t be worth spending MORE for less cores that are barely any faster when you lose quad channel memory and half your cores, as I do a ton of stuff on the side of gaming at the same time I game).
You leave my FX alone! I am still running my FX-6200 here in 2020. I might replace it this year, but it still works fine and plays plenty of games even today.
Yeah. I have a fx6300. This guy is comparing everything on 1080p high or ultra settings. I can still play gta5 with 60-170fps on 1080p normal with a 1050ti.
How is Tom Clancy still knocking games out when he died nearly 10 years ago, what's the wi-fi like in heaven, pretty good it would appear, I guess he could use Starlink these days, lol.
@@NeVerKnowFFS yes, yes i do, it was a joke, i pretended that Tom Clancy was a games developer and not some old author guy purely for comedic purposes.
I am quite surprised that you actually made a video on this CPU! I am still using one in my current PC with 12GB RAM and an RX 480. Still does more than adequately for me, but in a fair share of modern games there is noticeable stutter at times. I've gotten used to it, but I can only imagine how much smoother (wink) an upgrade would be.
I really wanna see an 8150 vs a 3770k since these were head to head at the time and some reviewers said the 8150 was just as good but better cuz it was cheaper. while i screamed at the top of my lungs that once you remove the gpu bottleneck ( gtx 680's) youll see the i7 shit on the 8150.
This video hits a lot of relevant points in my building history. I built an 8150 system on launch thinking that the extra cores would let me game better with voice chat software open or do things like edit audio better. The CPU died after ~12 months as a result of a faulty MSI motherboard that allowed some sort of current spike (as far as I can tell) and completely bricked. I went to Fry's and picked up an 8350, got a replacement mobo from MSI, angry about the whole situation. It was never fast at anything and the marketing was a total lie. The cores were gimped split cores and just didn't do well at anything other than raw multithreaded winzip or something asinine. In 2016 I had finally had enough of the anemic rig and overhauled it with an i7-6700k and Z motherboard. It literally doubled my framerate in most of the things I played. This isn't even mentioning the extended period post-launch of the 8150 where the performance was even WORSE before a fix was released. I believe it was some sort of Windows shell or BIOS fix for scheduling? Memory of what it was is fuzzy, but was even worse at launch before I was able to apply it.
I love the analysis; I just wish that you'd have added CPUs from Intel such as the Sandy Bridge. Great video nonetheless!! I do see your wider point that shows how far AMD has come. I don't recall ever seeing just a massive leap from one architecture to another from any of the big 3. AMD made the greatest comeback in history with their Zen architecture, particularly their modularity.
The legacy of this cpu is the fact it got a lot of working class people on a PC , I remember getting my fx 6300 and building my first PC 9 - 19 years ago. It was so cheap
We'd all still be rocking dual cores. If Intel has shown anything, it's that they will milk an architecture for all it's worth, until they are forced to move. Without competition from AMD, they'd just be locking up R&D for a decade, and dribbling it out piece meal.
@@chrisdpratt Doubt it, intel invented Foveros as early as 2015 so they had plans. I also heard that intel was unsure when they'll release 6 core intels because AMD needed to recover to avoid further monopoly charges. If intel released 6 core-12 core processors early AMD wouldn't be as successful as they are not...probably even bankrupt because 1st gen Ryzen was just meh. Seriously intel had Xeon 6 core ringbus CPUs as early as 2010, 12 cores at 2012 etc. Intel is what kept AMD alive
Playing devils advocate here, Intel's current line up isn't that bad compared to current Ryzen consumer cpus. The FX was beyond bad, if Intel did 4C/8T as top of the line in 2020, then it would be FX levels of bad.
Since you're doing AMD retro benchmarks, I have an FX-60 that I daily on Windows 8, haha. Seriously though, that's a lot of time and patience to bench those old relics. Well back to BF2!
I’ll never forget when Faildozer was released. Was panned everywhere. It really set AMD back for years. Quite crazy how much has changed since. No one ever thought AMD will catch Intel at that time, now … they have.
I have such a soft spot for this CPU. It has served me well for 7-8 years now and it's still going strong in my 2nd computer. I also broke my overclocking virginity with it. It's trash, but at least it's MY trash. ^_^
😄😊😘 me to, (2015-2020) specifially the 8320, tho gave it to a friend when upgraded to Ryzen back in 2020 :)) and then upgraded that to a 3800X then 5700G and after then that to the 7820X on X299 cuz bought that to replayce my i7 2600K and it was stronger then my AMD R7 system even tho 5 yrs older so i switched to using my Ryzen 5700G as my secy PC next to the bed, before i downgraded to the R5 2600X from a friend and gave him my 57G cuz i could use it way more then me, but i wanna have an FX rig again and see if i can stand it a month or so :))
I remember when I considered Bulldozer... but after it's release, I stayed with the 1090T overclocked. I did go with an FX8350 later on..... it suited my needs and the cost was ok considering it was a drop in CPU in my motherboard.
@@willg955 But the FX CPUs got 5Ghz, so it must be better than ryzen? Yeah I remember when my parents got P4 and everybody was hyped "OMG you've got P4!". Then i found out AMD Athlon would have been the superior CPU. Seems like AMD could have used stronger marketing with the FX series.
Except Intel sold an imperial shit ton of P4. The shade P4's get these days would all appear to be retrospective, all these NPC's repeating their scripted lines of dialogue "P4 bad, P4 bad". It reminds me of all the folk that gave Vista shit just because they had read it in a magazine, but never actually used it. Not sure if you'd ever used a P4 or if you were around at the time, but folk didn't think they were shit at the time, not too sure what's happened since then. Doesn't really make any difference to Intel thou, they've made their money off it years ago, lets face it it's hardly going to hurt P4 sales is it, lol.
@@antanasbananas7909 Sandy bridge was out in 2011. AMD could have done all the marketing in the world, It wouldn't have stopped people rather having an i7 2600/2700k over anything Amd had to offer for the next five years
Guy'S I own all these CPU's I love the Bulldozer FX-8150 it's one of my best I found one for $80 never sold in the back of a wearhouse I love it it's insane great i muti open so many tasks and runs them at the same time while I game Runs great!!!!!no issues,... I run also for speed 32G DDR3 1600mhz Ram and 4 SSD Kingston Raid-0 Very pleased..I don't understand any negativity on this CPU..They run better in 2021 !!
I'm glad I picked up Phenom II and just let that last until Ryzen came around. Likely got away with this was because I was a programmer and not a gamer. Which honestly I much enjoy my twice as fast compile times now, lmao.
Naisu! Actual FX oc! As far as i remember 2400NB was sufficient for 4 and 6c but not enough for 8c FX. For 8c you need 2600NB, but that was for vishera, not zambezi. In case of zambezi you might need to sacrifice some core clock. Nevertheless 6c phenom was rendering FX pretty pointless, until lack of instructions came into play.
Same here. When I'm playing csgo I literally have to open the windows, turn the fan on, get into gym clothes because the heat makes me sweat like in a sauna.
I have finished a build last week. It was the 8150 and it worked flawlessly, even without an overclock. It performed better than expected, and the temperatures were absolutely fine
My corsair h100i gtx survived a fx 9590 at 5ghz. Still alive today. I use this cooler with a ryzen 5 2600x now. It wasn't that bad. I installed a wraith prism on the fx 9590 and locked it to 4ghz with no issues.
@@DmitriyDarkJoney Ok I looked at Ebay and I concede I underestimated how much it still costs. Let's call it a 60 € chip. Seems not only old Intel CPU's are ludicrously overpriced, AMD's too.
My 8350 has been pretty good to me. Began as my gaming rig running Windows 8, and then went to running Arch-Linux with Steam built against Arch rather than the traditional one from Valve built against Ubuntu. But I mostly used it for video editing/recording and it did well there too, especially when I liquid cooled it.
I disagree. If they would have withheld that potential the kids today would still have to learn all aspects of O.C. to understand exactly why AMD is the company that represents the industry of gaming and enthusiast. They made it too easy to compete with intel for mainstream profits and lost sight of what made their profitable.
@@pearlrival3124 if they withheld that potential? you mean by making worse products that need heavy manual tuning to be competitive? or locking OC features behind paywalls like intel? just so that "these darn kids nowadays" have to learn manual overclocking just to "understand" and apprieciate AMD products? if that happened AMD would still remain a niche company with subpar products. Profits would have plummeted and we would still buy intel 4 Cores today. to me your comment embodies the worst of Hipster Tribalism.
@@SteveAkaDarktimes " to me your comment embodies the worst of Hipster Tribalism." lol The read was worth the laugh, but the comparison is read towards the "hipster" generation whereas it should be read towards your grandfathers tribalism. Too be clear, the capabilities are there its a question of whether or not you can access those capabilities. To knock the bulldozer is to simply say "I can't o.c." If you don't have that mental capability buy intel. Make no mistake AMD will bring attention to this audience again. the market is there. mainstream p.c.'s is where low profit margins lay. high margins are in the aftermarket "K's" and "X's". why do you think you haven't seen the 3300X yet? This is AMD's worst failure.
I never had any issues with my 8350, sure it was not the fastest out there but I never felt like I 'needed' to upgrade till I bought Ryzen. For a short time I held the world record on Futuremark for a 8350 combined with an Nvidia 1080. 4.8GHz on the CPU and 2100MHz on the GPU, a lot fo fun overclocking those. I bought a 4100 also which I think was 3.9GHz stock (correct me if I am wrong) and it would do 4.5GHz on stock voltage.
I beg to differ, all though the fx CPUs weren't anything fast out of the box, these CPUs were pure beasts when overclocked. I owned a fx 8120 and fx 8150. Both CPUs were able to hit over 5ghz on an msi gd80v2 board with ddr3 3200 memory and a Corsair h100i cooler. When these CPUs were overclocked they literally nearly doubled there performance in benchmarks. I learn at this time that online benchmarks were now taken with a grain of salt because every single benchmark I found online I completely destroyed with my builds. I have learned that every machine even those with the same hardware were never the same. But I used these CPUs for years and was able to run games that came years and years after these CPUs have released. I still have one of them machines and Everytime I put in an upgraded GPU it still handles everything out there. I just thought I would state my experience.
Again, the 8 cores FX perform well if you have a good board and good vrm cooling, honestly, please use it with agood board, buy some cheap heatsinks and slap them on. Performs great
yeah so many people back then put their 6 or 8 core fx cpus on a cheap asrock or msi board for 30-40 bucks... ofc the vrms could never handle such a high power consumption so the cpus reduced their clock to around 1 ghz all the time under load
yeah first bulldozer gen was actually worse than phenom II unless all 8 threads were used... the phenom II x6 was better pretty much anywhere compared to the fx 8150, especially in gaming. second bulldozer gen (fx 8350 etc) was finally better then
I actually personally believe AMD was ahead of their time. They rolled the dice and made high core count processors, hoping that software would be able to utilize it immediately after. However, software never advanced, and the architecture failed miserably. It was a gambling move that didn't pay out.
Holy; I had that CPU because I totally fell for the marketing and didn't know what a benchmark was back then. I guess people like me were the target group for these CPUs.
I still rock the 8150 in a Theater-PC. It sucks man! I put a 10Gbe Nic in it when I upgraded my home network to 10Gb, and the damn CPU is so Slow, that it caps out transfers across the network at about 400MBps. I did weeks of testing on this, and while it will spike to 800MBps every now and again, it ended up being just a limitation of the CPU able to keep up with the RSS (Receive Side Scaling.) Anyways, Great Video, And So True!
Thats not it, u should try Linux an zfs file system, that will make ur transfers so much faster, and there are some great free distros u can get that are easy to use, i wish Microsoft would move to zfs it would make things so much faster it would be insane
@@sarahwilliams4396 LOL! Yes. ZFS Works great, I agree. Thats the File System I use on my Storage Server that I was testing to. As I mentioned, this is a Theater PC, a PC that I have 3 HDHomeruns Connected to record/watch 9 Channels (9 Tuners total), that the Rest of the House Connect to using Kodi/Plex to watch TV. Its basically the DVR for my Entire House. Unfortunately the only options on Linux to use as a PVR do not allow you to record encrypted channels, and even on Windows you have exactly 1 Option currently. So for better or for worse, until a new Program comes out that supports recording Encrypted Channels (Which seem to be growing btw, it used to be just the paid channels like HBO, Showtime, etc, now its even the damn News Channels, its stupid) I am stuck with recording, at least with a Windows VM. The Idea was to add the 10Gbe Nic to increase bandwidth to the PC, not that I need it to record content, but its nice to be able to Move data Quickly to the Backup Server, makes life better. 400 is still better than 100MBps, so I am still happy. But when dealing with Windows, FX can not handle 10GBe. I know people always want to find a way to say "No you are doing it wrong, Linux" which I understand, but unfortunately Linux is not right for every situation. Also, with a different Processor, even something like a Intel 6100, On the VERY SAME Image of the OS, with the only difference being the change in Drivers for the Intel Hardware, but using the same exact driver for the 10Gbe Nic (Which is also Intel btw) it hits 965MBps average consistently. So in this situation, with this Operating system, the FX Processor is indeed the bottle neck with this particular Workload, however it handles the simultaneous recordings just fine, along with having every Shield/PC in the house connected to it and Streaming a show, without any hiccups, which is where the 6100 Fails, so I decided to keep the 8150 in service for that reason. Linux can be the answer sometimes, but not every time, you have to know the specific workload and usecase before flying in and Screaming LINUX at every person who mentions Windows, there is a time and a place my friend. (That said, I LOVE MY ZFS STORAGE SOLUTION! I got that Dialed In perfectly with Double Redundancy, and the ability to Easily Expand so beautiful!)
This CPU wasn't bad at all. It was surely bad for gamers, back in 2012. Considering it was cheaper than an I5 3470, and it is still able to game in 2022 (as it is a 8 core) this was the best CPU deal of the decade. I'm using a 8350 since 10 years, I'm not a gamer, but for video editing, and daily tasks I've been more than happy of it. I've just spent a bit on a good cooler master ventirad and it never went up to 75°C which is very good.
Ah the FX series... I bought into the FX line when I was new in DYI computer space and thought having eight "true cores" were better, for a cheaper price... Boy how I was wrong. Still have that FX build of mines, but mainly use it as a MC server, as I couldn't part away from it, since it was more or less my first PC upgrade build. But it was an upgrade from the old Ahton II x4 chip of my first build :P
Long term AMD user and fanboy here ever since the original Athlon. I was due for an upgrade when Bulldozer came out. This is when I was forced to change to Camp Blue. I held out as long as I could, but eventually caved and went Ivy Bridge. That lead to an eventual up-ish-grade to Haswell and the 4770k. I kept that until 8700k because the 4770k was bottle necking my shiny new 1080 Ti. Now I sit waiting for partner 3080s and more benchmarking with 8700k and 9900k to determine if I keep this platform and grab a used 9900k or if I wait for Next Gen Ryzen. I'm glad I have an actual choice to go back to AMD again. :)
This video is like kicking a dead horse over and over knowing the horse is already dead .... And we the viewers are just sitting there watching it ...we should be a shamed for not stepping in...
Sandy bridge/ivy bridge killed off Bulldozer as soon as it was released. Haswell literally danced on its grave. I guess videos like this are just for the kids that can't remember that far back, I don't honestly see an awful lot more point to it
I got a few 8150's and liked them so then got some 8350's. I never noticed any performance issues with any of my games. Factor in the sales and black friday prices I paid for them, the occasional rebate here and there that oddly actually paid out, and take off the class action settlement amounts I got for them. They really were inexpensive and had it not been for the lawsuit I would never have guessed or cared about the cores issue because again I didn't have any performance issues and they are all still running to this day. Maybe we need a new benchmarking metric of play a game and see if you have fun????
Yeah see the problem with that is that it is entirely subjective. You might have fun with a game barely being able to run at 40-60 fps at 1080p, but I wouldn't. So trying to measure it that way would be a problem. I want my games to be at solid 60 all that time at least at 1080p and when possible at 4k. I can't stand that juttery feeling when things slow down. I had a Phenom II x6 1090T back in the day. And for what I played on pc at the time it was fine since 95% of what I played on pc was just World of Warcraft. It did it's job, and that left me to play everything else on my xbox 360 (which again the framerate issues pissed me off). Fast forward to the point where the xbox one generation is getting ready to release and microsoft has pissed me off with their whole always online drm bs considering my internet situation. So I said fuck consoles and decided to rebuild my pc. Well I went with an FX-8350 because I was pretty brand loyal to AMD having only every had a system with their cpus with me under the impression intel couldn't game at all and was just for business use. Well that thing sucked ass. It felt like I didn't do any upgrade and often times felt like it did worse with the same gpu in the same games. I kept that for maybe 3 months before I got right and truly pissed at it's lack of performance. That's when I finally moved over to an intel based build with my first one being an i7 4790k. I was immediately blown away at how much smoother my games ran and how much better of an experience I had - again with the same gpu. Later my board died and it was too expensive to get a replacement mobo for that old of a cpu so I did an upgrade to a i7 7700k Now I did try a 1st gen Ryzen build when they came out and it was pretty damn good. I had used it to build a secondary gaming machine. But eventually I wanted more performance out of that secondary pc so I switched to an intel build and just went with an i5 8600k which again saw performance increases over even that Ryzen 7 1700. I then repurposed that Ryzen 7 build into a computer that just does handbrake encodes for media i rip from my dvds/blu rays to put onto my home media server. It was great for that for a while, then I decided to upgrade that to a 3rd gen Ryzen 7 3700X and that is even more amazing. Ryzen definitely has brought AMD back for good reason. But I was ready to write them off after that FX series disaster that I tried. And actually right now I am getting read to rebuild that formerly secondary system that eventually became my primary gaming rig. I was highly considering a Ryzen build, but ultimately decided to go with intel again on this one for their better single core performance. So I'm now just waiting on my case and power supply to come tomorrow and then I'll have a completely new (except for the graphics card which is being transplanted) with an i9 10900k. In conclusion I think benchmarking should always be as objective as possible to inform people of what something actually is because their individual perceptions about what is acceptable to be fun might be a much higher bar than someone else's. As an example: I can't stand when American Truck Simulator dips below 60fps for me because that stutter can really be felt when playing a driving game. Someone else in the skinning discord with me locks his ATS to 30 fps so he maintains a constant framerate. But 30 is way too low and jittery to be as is. He has more fun playing at locked 30 than I would. I prefer to try to maintain 60 even if sometimes I can't and have to deal with drops to have a smoother game the other 80% of the time
I had a 1090T and it worked well for my workflow, but once they went Piledriver, I couldn't even recommend AMD any more, and I'm the guy that had a K6-2 450mhz and K6-2 475mhz, both with a whopping 64mb of ram. I feel like I should be telling people to get off my lawn now.
all this going on... Amd fx crashed under load at first as multi core wasn't supported by software... Causing the processor to overload and overheat. This was something the more reliable Intel chips used to market themselves and increase their prices. Now multi core is working and supported, and are outperforming their over priced Intel counter parts and people have realised the FX were good chips and not as bad as they were were purported to be. There were some architectures problems, the main problem the fx range suffered from was it being ahead of its time. I still have an FX and it's great.
On Oct 12, 2011, I remember making a big cup coffee and sitting down to read the reviews of the FX-8150. I don't remember which site I checked first but I do remember the first review being so bad that I had to check another site. By the time I read the 3rd review which showed the 1100T beating the FX-8150 in a few benchmarks I had given up and disappointment set in. I wasn't disappointed because I'm an AMD fan, and I already had a system with a 2600k, but I was disappointed because I didn't know what Intel would try to do with pricing. Intel didn't do anyone any favors but their pricing didn't ever get as bad as I feared it would. I went from an Athlon 64 4200+ > e8400 > i7-920 > i7-930 > i7-2600k > i7-3930k and I stopped there. I'm still rolling with my x79 system but now I have a Xeon E5-1680 v2.
It's crazy to think that Bulldozer nearly put AMD into bankruptcy. It really did set the undertones for the next 5 years of dominance (and slow-down) from Intel, followed by an eventual comeback story.
Watch our AMD Phenom II 1090T revisit here: ua-cam.com/video/igjrJ7qH3_8/v-deo.html
And our FX-8370 revisit here: ua-cam.com/video/c_Gcg-tFfu0/v-deo.html
Oh shit, it's going down... should put it in the 12 fan oven...
I am pretty confused by all this. I was running a FX-8320 when PubG came out along with my 1080 ti and was getting 80-90 fps on ultra..... THATS AT LAUNCH, WHEN NOTHING WAS OPTIMIZED. Meanwhile your getting 50 fps on GTA V? On a game that is heavily optimized over the last 7 years.
Something dont smell right.... yup i smell BULLSHIT
Lisa Su is our hero also amds hero
I remember, Radeon GPU's save AMD in this time
🇺🇸USA🔗PC ok from FTK.COM 👍
"The only emptier void that we've seen is the one in MSI's ethics guidelines" Nice.
Oofff
I'm sure Steve is holding a BBQ party everyday; these companies ain't going to roast themselves.
Of the 3 comments attempting to quote Steve, you’re the only one who actually did.
Side note: is GN now banned from MSI too, not just by ASRock?
O-U-C-H !!!
What did MSI do now?
You are sooooo not getting a Christmas card from MSI this year.
Yeah well, I doubt he'd want one from them.
They would burn it on camera anyway.
They'd send a return label for it anyway
Did I miss something? What's wrong with MSI?
@@eliaskuhnert5768 inside joke heh
As bad as it was, I think it was the most fun I had overclocking. Haven't had the pleasure of tweaking a chip as much as the FX ones. 5.1 GHz on a 9000 series that I got dirt cheap. Though ya.... Paid for it in electricity bills
FX remains one of the highest-clocking consumer chips ever made! It definitely gets credit there.
@@GamersNexus my 8320 still works as an everyday machine (with a 3gb 1060). My R5-2600 is for the gaming stuff.
@@GamersNexus Genuine question, does it matter though? IPC wasn't that good so the number was basically, nice to see, but mostly useless in terms of performance when factoring in extra power and thermals.
I agree with OP's post, about it being fun to OC though.I had an 8350 that did boot 5GHz (under an H80i AIO) and actually made it in Windows, but crashed in stability test...most I could get out of it was 4.85GHz stable without going too high on temps(mostly socket and VRM, package was actually fine, 59-60 at most)
It contributed to heating my home in the winter... So its =/=
@@DeLawrence97 Back then I was happy with 60 fps and near max settings in most games, partly cause I didn't know what I was missing though. Getting a 6850k after the 9590 was a bit eye opening. And the only chip I got above 5 GHz and stable was the 9590. 8370 I think I got to 4.9 stable, for a while.
“The only emptier void we’ve seen is in MSI’s ethics guidelines”
Oof
Big Oof
😂🔥
Sick MSI Burns!
OUCH
out of the loop, can you explain?
Still have fx 6300 because 'i am gonna get the next ryzen' every single time
Wait am5 2021
Hoi Hey hoi no?
Yep sitting through studders from my old i5, right there with you
@Darth Draugir same
Had the same cpu, eventually pulled the trigger and bought a 3900x
From GN I expected at least 2800MHz NB+HT frequencies, that would've squeezed a little bit more frames out of it.
The biggest issue with FX lineup we had here was that most pre-builds, just like with Intel-based systems, included ONE stick of 1333MHz RAM, which HAMMERED any remnants of performance in this chips. And some people ran with it, trying to OC their core clocks and were left utterly disappointed. Even with good on paper specs, I still remember clients face when I removed his 5GHz overclock, rearranged his RAM modules for dual channel, OCed and tuned a bit his RAM, NB+HT with BCLK overclocking (something like 230 BCLK, since it would crash any higher, and i think 12 for HT+NB, 20 for CPU and 9 for RAM). And BCLK OC was the only way to get his board to OC at all, considering half of multipliers didn't work properly on auto. The gains were impressive.
You could say it was... "The CPU That Almost Bulldozed AMD"
I think this every time I hear Bulldozer in relation to AMD
I like to call it "Gravedigger"
badum, tsss
@@glennv3176 I had a lot of AMD stock at the time. The grave in question was nearly mine=-- tens of thousands gone. Finally made it up last year and this year (and then some)...
😎 nice
9:33
"The only emptier void we've seen is MSI's ethics guideline"
Savage...
Oooof
i remember i was SO HYPED for this, i had cpu+board+ram queued in a vendor cart with vendor prices. perks of working in retail with authorization to get stuff for myself with a small flat markup.
money was stacked and ready, the perfect storm for an upgrade. i waited for reviews.
reviews came in. reality settled in. more reviews confirmed. it's shit. what a colossal disappointment.
I had one of these through most of college, and it wasn't too terrible when I wasn't playing games. I don't regret it at all.
I still have 2 8150s, each in another PC I don't mainly use. I can say they stay pretty cool.
Just upgraded from mine to a R5-3600 about half a year ago and damn is it ever nice.
My desktop atm is running FX 8320 doing ok still until I get on games like borderlands 3
Mine had some shitty sensors that didn't display thermals correctly (24C at max load with a stock cooler...lol okay). It was literally a worse experience over my Phenom II 1050 by that aspect alone.
"The Bulldozer architecture sucks"
Everyone with an FX 8000 processor: "Yes, we know."
"Yes."
Its not bad for certain things / use case's etc. But ya they suck for anything demanding etc, not gaming reg pc use there not bad for that. But that's about it
Yes, we know. "proceeds to use the cpu with shadow of the tomb raider"
@@YTSZAZU lol
Not really, those AMD fanboys defend it so hardcore, until Intel release their 8-core CPU and realised that an i3 2c/4t can beat any Faildozer chips.
What FX lacked in performance, it made up for by doubling as a space heater during cold months.
9590 with a couple of R9 280s and you have a cozy little cabin .
Imagine the performance jump consoles will be getting. Mind you, the PS4 CPU is essentially a 2x 4-core Athlon 5150. 1.6 GHz Jaguar microarchitecture (Kabini APU) CPU with its ST score being around just "45" in CB R15. Which is over -50% slower than even 2009 Core 2 Duo E7500's ST performance. Now you have 8C/16T Zen 2. Basically a Ryzen 7 4800H but downclocked to 3.5 GHz max boost outfitted with RDNA 2-based GPU in the same die. And most likely has the same amount of 8MB L3 cache given the Series X's Zen 2 CPU L3 cache is confirmed to be 8MB.
Yeah the bottleneck were the CPUs. The graphics weren't great because the PS4 GPU was between the 7850 and 7870. As we saw though it can look good. The bottleneck were the CPUs and we can tell with open world games.
Also don’t forget the 50-100x increase in storage bandwidth
It's hard to imagine games not being held back by hardware since that's what they've been the last two generations (from a PC perspective).
My last console was a PS2 and I won't ever buy another, but damn I'm excited for this coming generation because of what it means for games as a whole. (bad/outsourced ports notwithstanding)
Not that I would ever abandon my PC, but I hope I get the chance to play on a PS5 when it releases. Especially if it's connected to a high refreshrate display, I never had the pleasure.
It's going to be an insane perf boost on the cpu side. Dev's won't know what to do with this new unlimited power!
I would really like to see a wide range of architectures set to the same frequency and core count. I'd especially like to see if intel has actually made any architecture improvements during the 14∞+ era.
Guru3D always test IPC on the Cinebench section of their CPU reviews, just go to the latest CPU review and take a look.
IPC does not scale linearly with clocks so when you screw with the core clock you throw it all out of wack anyway.... prime example is the completely nonlinear performance curve of Renoir due to having plenty of cache to keep up below 3.4GHhz but running a bit light on cache above that...
@@Wingnut353 ahh, so you'd need to also configure cache identically too, might be some way around it though, very low frequency or some application that occupies a set amount of cache, not sure. There might also be some benchmarks with a very low cache dependancy, but I don't really have a clue
@@NovemberOrWhatever No....what I'm saying is what you are trying to do is completely impossible. If you want to compare CPUs like you want the way to do that is normalize against clock rate not actually change it....
The early “Before that” always gets me
And now I, Tech Jesus, will tell you the true meaning of life........ BEFORE THAT
I used an FX8150 for.... a lot of years....
It wasn't.... TOO bad.... 😬
I'm sure I'd definitely be feeling different going back to it after a year using 2700X and last 8 months of using a 3950X.
The magic in being able to put a am3 cpu in a am2/am2+ motherboard with a bios update while still using ddr2 before finally upgrading to am3/am3+ with ddr3 was one of the coolest thing ever.
Back when twitch was still using flash/cpu decoding, the 8350 didn't sweat while gaming + watching a stream, it even doubled as a heater in the winter! However unoptimized early access games was a whole different story..
The only good thing about Bulldozer being so bad and Ryzen being so good is I've made a pile of cash in AMD stock.
🧠
Same here. Bought a ton of shares back in 3$ per share days and well yeah enjoying it now.
I bought stocks on Nvidia when they were just at 40 or something
420 IQ move
I bought some shares back when it was 5 bucks. It wasn't moving so I started selling calls against those shares. Made a few hundred bucks. Then all of a sudden AMD took off to like $8 within two weeks. Had to let go of the shares. Wish I rolled the contracts or bought to close. AMD has not stopped growing since.
The FX line brought us dark ages over the PC landscape as far as choice goes.
Always wanted a Phenom back then, ended up with the FX... at least I had a nice space heater for two winters.
FX literally made me jump from an 6300 to the core i7 4790 for almost ten years.... And was an always AMD User since 386
I used an Fx-8150 for almost 7 years, with radeon hd 7870 at first, and then with rx480. (Now I have a ryzen 3900x and still the rx480)
At 2560x1440 resolution I was definitely GPU bound with the 7870 almost all the time, and then with the rx480 it was case by case. I'm OK running games at 40fps though. I like detail more than the framerates. Must be the types of games I play.
The Fx-8150 wasn't the fastest CPU but it was pretty good for running many things at the same time, since pretty much no game I played could use more than 50% of the CPU, so there was always half of the CPU free for other stuff I'd run in secondary monitors. Now some modern games probably could utilize the Fx-8150 fully, but... yeah.
And back when I switched to the Fx-8150, the previous setup was the Phenom II X4 940, so it was on the previous socket and DDR2, 3GHz and not really an overclocker. The Fx-8150 felt so much faster... And it overclocked very well, I ended up running it at 4.5GHz. It did go up to 4.7GHz but with atrociously high voltages.
I don't regret getting the Fx-8150. It was good enough.
jkk79 its good to hear that some people who own FX 8000 series, still appreciate it, because of good multi core performance.
@Bob Dole ...Yeah CIV5/6 needs 165fps.... Not everything is counterstrike
I built a PC in 2012 with an FX 8350 and it was almost in daily use until 2019 when I built a new PC around Ryzen 3600. I certainly got great value for my money.
Imagine the dual-core Athlon 3000G competing against the "8 core" FX-8150 in nearly every test. Amazing progress, what a time to be alive
I need all manufacturers to delay their releases as much as possible so that the tech reviewers have nothing to make content on other than old generation CPU/GPU :D
I had an 8120 and it wasn’t great back then either. I switched to a 2600K (which I still have on the side)
Had a FX-8120 and GT640. Don't ask me how but I actually played like 600 hours of ARK: Survival evolved on it. Yes, the game that a GTX 1080 can't even run at 1080p. I was running at 900p but damn... The abuse that build went through. She did good for $475 in 2012
She wasn’t pretty, but damn she worked hard.
I know that feeling.
Thanks for the great revisit and putting in all the time and effort to bring us this comparison for such a massive amount of CPUs!
Been an AMD user since the Am386SX days and been through them all: K6-2, Athlon, Thunderbird, Palomino, Thoroughbred, Barton, Venice, and ended up running an X2 6400+ BE while holding out for Bulldozer.
That October day in 2011 when that those reviews and test results came out is the day that I held off an upgrade. I switched to Intel when Ivy Bridge was released in April of 2012, and been running my i7-3770K since. Next stop for me will hopefully be early next year: AMD Ryzen 4000 series for a complete system overhaul!
Pentium 4: Watch my clock speed soar
AMD FX: Hold my beer
"Boil my beer"
FX still holds the record for highest overclock at 8722.8MHz
And here we are in 2022 when AMD reaches 5.7 GHz without OC.
I've been running a FX 6300 clock locked at 4.5 GHz for 8 years now along with a XFX RX480 GTR black ed. NEVER MISSED A BEAT so until it does I'll stay with it for the foreseeable future. What's the old saying, if it ain't broke, don't fix it!!!...
My first PC I actually put together myself was an 8350 build, definitely behind intel in about every way, managed to hold out with it until Ryzen came out. Like many others in the comments it was extremely fun to overclock, great video as always!
Seeing this makes me even happier with my upgrade from an FX-8350 to a Ryzen 5 3600 for my rig. Seems even my short time with that processor was not worth it, even for me.
Also, love the bonus dig at MSI there.
Oh yeah. I upgraded from a Phenom II x6 1090T to an FX 8350 some years ago and hated that thing. It didn't seem to do any better and sometimes seemed to perform worse even with the same gpu. I only kept that thing a few months before I had to let it and and upgraded to an intel build for the first time. The FX line made me pretty much right off AMD until Ryzen came out and I saw they could actually be good again
@@ram89572 I ended up upgrading from a Phenom II X4 965 to that FX 8350 and it was not worth the hassle. Ran way too hot, sucked at things the Phenom didn't, and because it ran way too hot, it kept crashing the system from overheating causing restarts.
So glad I have my Ryzen system now.
@@Jrodsly Oh yeah. 3rd Gen Ryzen is a beast of a lineup. I have a pc dedicated to just being a handbrake encode machine for ripping and encoding all my dvds and blu rays onto my home media server and I use a Ryzen 7 3700X in it now and it is so good. Render times are way way better than when I used to do them with Ryzen 7 1700X which was already better than the i7 7700 I used before that in that machine. Ryzen is damn good at that kind of task and good a gaming as well.
@@ram89572 Which is why I love my 3600. Paired with an RX 560, it obliterates anything I throw at it, including PS3 emulation, which I never thought I'd ever get to do. I'm set for a long time now, I reckon.
I skipped that generation and stuck with a phenomen II for years until ryzen. I bout ryzen simply because when it came out it seemed reliable for the price ( no shade at Intel, they make a good product too, just couldn't afford it)
I'm still using Phenom II. X4 to be exact. Good enough for what I use it for.
My 8150 welded itself to the stock (Cooler master type) cooler. Yes I know amd PGA cpus get "STUCK" to coolers all the time. This wasn't stuck, this was fused together. It literally became one with the cooler
PGA CPUs get stuck to coolers because people can't grasp the concept of twisting the heatsink
This'll be good, Im literally running on this CPU watching this. A classmate built it for me in 2012, and I havent upgraded since
Same here i have the 8320 and still runs strong on new titles.
When I built my first computer in 2014 it was with an A10-7700k. In 2016 I built my second PC with a FX 8320E. In 2018 I built my third PC with an i5-8600. I'm inadvertently good at picking the wrong CPU for whatever's available. Hoping to change that with Ryzen 4000 series for my next PC.
OC'ing a 8150 needs more power than a 64 core 128 thread Ryzen. LMAO!
Well yes, it’s about what Intel’s 9900k is stock out of the box.
Also Threadripper will chug power just like most chips (between double and triple the power draw just like most chips) if you are pushing its limits for performance. I have my TR-1950x at about 465w where it sits nice and happy rendering, my FX-8350 was around 300w chugging away as well when maxed out doing fluid simulations (I would guess a 9900k would be at least 500w for me based on how insane their out of the box power load is and how much faster you need to run them to make it worth anything).
@@jakegarrett8109 9900k, "would be at least 500w" wtf are you saying?
saashaa51 it’s about 250-300w out of the box depending on the motherboard (as they widely vary in voltage). For me, I typically over double the power consumption on things: Fx-8350 stock was 120w, I pushed it to 300 on AIO and 350w on phase (would have been about 500w except at sub-zero it’s very efficient). Ryzen 1700 at most pulled 70w stress testing, mine was crap so I had it running only 135w. TR-1950x was 180w, I pushed it to 465w as my daily on a 120mm AIO. RX-470 stock was ~100w, I pushed it to 300+w per GPU (on air when I set the crossfire record, modded BIOS to unlock power limit). The list goes on, that’s just what I anticipate.
saashaa51 also to make the 9900k worth anything, you won’t be using air/ambient coolers, I’d run it at no less than 6 GHz on phase to make it worth it (which makes it more efficient, but allows much higher overclocks, so not necessarily different power draw). Its simply not worth it to me if it hits some crappy 5 GHz (when my Threadripper was hitting 4.2 GHz easy on 16 core/32 thread that wouldn’t be worth spending MORE for less cores that are barely any faster when you lose quad channel memory and half your cores, as I do a ton of stuff on the side of gaming at the same time I game).
You leave my FX alone! I am still running my FX-6200 here in 2020. I might replace it this year, but it still works fine and plays plenty of games even today.
Yeah. I have a fx6300. This guy is comparing everything on 1080p high or ultra settings. I can still play gta5 with 60-170fps on 1080p normal with a 1050ti.
How is Tom Clancy still knocking games out when he died nearly 10 years ago, what's the wi-fi like in heaven, pretty good it would appear, I guess he could use Starlink these days, lol.
You do know they brought out his name
@@NeVerKnowFFS r/woooosh
@@NeVerKnowFFS yes, yes i do, it was a joke, i pretended that Tom Clancy was a games developer and not some old author guy purely for comedic purposes.
@@yakacm :(
@@NeVerKnowFFS r/woooosh
I am quite surprised that you actually made a video on this CPU! I am still using one in my current PC with 12GB RAM and an RX 480. Still does more than adequately for me, but in a fair share of modern games there is noticeable stutter at times. I've gotten used to it, but I can only imagine how much smoother (wink) an upgrade would be.
I really wanna see an 8150 vs a 3770k since these were head to head at the time and some reviewers said the 8150 was just as good but better cuz it was cheaper. while i screamed at the top of my lungs that once you remove the gpu bottleneck ( gtx 680's) youll see the i7 shit on the 8150.
This video hits a lot of relevant points in my building history. I built an 8150 system on launch thinking that the extra cores would let me game better with voice chat software open or do things like edit audio better. The CPU died after ~12 months as a result of a faulty MSI motherboard that allowed some sort of current spike (as far as I can tell) and completely bricked. I went to Fry's and picked up an 8350, got a replacement mobo from MSI, angry about the whole situation. It was never fast at anything and the marketing was a total lie. The cores were gimped split cores and just didn't do well at anything other than raw multithreaded winzip or something asinine.
In 2016 I had finally had enough of the anemic rig and overhauled it with an i7-6700k and Z motherboard. It literally doubled my framerate in most of the things I played.
This isn't even mentioning the extended period post-launch of the 8150 where the performance was even WORSE before a fix was released. I believe it was some sort of Windows shell or BIOS fix for scheduling? Memory of what it was is fuzzy, but was even worse at launch before I was able to apply it.
I love the analysis; I just wish that you'd have added CPUs from Intel such as the Sandy Bridge. Great video nonetheless!!
I do see your wider point that shows how far AMD has come. I don't recall ever seeing just a massive leap from one architecture to another from any of the big 3. AMD made the greatest comeback in history with their Zen architecture, particularly their modularity.
The legacy of this cpu is the fact it got a lot of working class people on a PC ,
I remember getting my fx 6300 and building my first PC 9 - 19 years ago.
It was so cheap
Think where we would be without AMD. We would still be buying 4 cute i7's.
...at 10 times the today price...bcause without competition Intel probably rise its price without limit.
That’s assuming intel wouldn’t get into antitrust trouble with the FTC or the EU.
4 cute CPUs at a time? Do you at least but them dinner first? Oh my, that'll be a wild night...
We'd all still be rocking dual cores. If Intel has shown anything, it's that they will milk an architecture for all it's worth, until they are forced to move. Without competition from AMD, they'd just be locking up R&D for a decade, and dribbling it out piece meal.
@@chrisdpratt Doubt it, intel invented Foveros as early as 2015 so they had plans. I also heard that intel was unsure when they'll release 6 core intels because AMD needed to recover to avoid further monopoly charges. If intel released 6 core-12 core processors early AMD wouldn't be as successful as they are not...probably even bankrupt because 1st gen Ryzen was just meh. Seriously intel had Xeon 6 core ringbus CPUs as early as 2010, 12 cores at 2012 etc.
Intel is what kept AMD alive
I had an AMD FX 8150 up until a few weeks ago, never really had a problem with it, it did everything I needed it to do.
If you think Intel is bad and noncompetitive now, that's how *BAD and noncompetitive* actually looks like.
Playing devils advocate here, Intel's current line up isn't that bad compared to current Ryzen consumer cpus.
The FX was beyond bad, if Intel did 4C/8T as top of the line in 2020, then it would be FX levels of bad.
Nothings worse than being anti-competitive & anti-consumer, Intel wins those accolades & that's why I can't stand that damn company!
Are you gonna act like Netburst didnt exist?
Since you're doing AMD retro benchmarks, I have an FX-60 that I daily on Windows 8, haha. Seriously though, that's a lot of time and patience to bench those old relics. Well back to BF2!
I had an FX 8350. It was by a long long way the worst CPU I have ever owned.
i had that as well, eventually died of a heat stroke
I’ll never forget when Faildozer was released. Was panned everywhere. It really set AMD back for years. Quite crazy how much has changed since. No one ever thought AMD will catch Intel at that time, now … they have.
i'm slowly Rollin with my fx 6300
Always enjoy Gamers Nexus' way of making informative videos that couple as back-handed compliments.
I have such a soft spot for this CPU. It has served me well for 7-8 years now and it's still going strong in my 2nd computer. I also broke my overclocking virginity with it. It's trash, but at least it's MY trash. ^_^
😄😊😘 me to, (2015-2020) specifially the 8320, tho gave it to a friend when upgraded to Ryzen back in 2020 :)) and then upgraded that to a 3800X then 5700G and after then that to the 7820X on X299 cuz bought that to replayce my i7 2600K and it was stronger then my AMD R7 system even tho 5 yrs older so i switched to using my Ryzen 5700G as my secy PC next to the bed, before i downgraded to the R5 2600X from a friend and gave him my 57G cuz i could use it way more then me, but i wanna have an FX rig again and see if i can stand it a month or so :))
I remember when I considered Bulldozer... but after it's release, I stayed with the 1090T overclocked. I did go with an FX8350 later on..... it suited my needs and the cost was ok considering it was a drop in CPU in my motherboard.
This was AMDs "Pentium 4" moment.
At least they have learned from that disaster, now we have Zen, which is the best. :-)
Which P4 you talking about? Because I had the 2.4C Northwood and that thing was an overclocking beast.
@@willg955
It was low IPC, especially because of it's insane pipeline length and exorbitant speculative execution.
The P III was a far superior CPU.
@@willg955 But the FX CPUs got 5Ghz, so it must be better than ryzen?
Yeah I remember when my parents got P4 and everybody was hyped "OMG you've got P4!". Then i found out AMD Athlon would have been the superior CPU.
Seems like AMD could have used stronger marketing with the FX series.
Except Intel sold an imperial shit ton of P4. The shade P4's get these days would all appear to be retrospective, all these NPC's repeating their scripted lines of dialogue "P4 bad, P4 bad". It reminds me of all the folk that gave Vista shit just because they had read it in a magazine, but never actually used it. Not sure if you'd ever used a P4 or if you were around at the time, but folk didn't think they were shit at the time, not too sure what's happened since then. Doesn't really make any difference to Intel thou, they've made their money off it years ago, lets face it it's hardly going to hurt P4 sales is it, lol.
@@antanasbananas7909 Sandy bridge was out in 2011. AMD could have done all the marketing in the world, It wouldn't have stopped people rather having an i7 2600/2700k over anything Amd had to offer for the next five years
Guy'S I own all these CPU's
I love the Bulldozer FX-8150 it's one of my best
I found one for $80 never sold in the back of a wearhouse
I love it it's insane great i muti open so many tasks and runs them at the same time while I game
Runs great!!!!!no issues,...
I run also for speed 32G DDR3 1600mhz Ram and 4 SSD Kingston Raid-0
Very pleased..I don't understand any negativity on this CPU..They run better in 2021 !!
I'm glad I picked up Phenom II and just let that last until Ryzen came around. Likely got away with this was because I was a programmer and not a gamer. Which honestly I much enjoy my twice as fast compile times now, lmao.
Naisu! Actual FX oc!
As far as i remember 2400NB was sufficient for 4 and 6c but not enough for 8c FX. For 8c you need 2600NB, but that was for vishera, not zambezi. In case of zambezi you might need to sacrifice some core clock.
Nevertheless 6c phenom was rendering FX pretty pointless, until lack of instructions came into play.
i have an 8320, im afraid
Same here. When I'm playing csgo I literally have to open the windows, turn the fan on, get into gym clothes because the heat makes me sweat like in a sauna.
Deep Stereo same 😔
8350 here. It's time.
I had an 8320E, upgraded to a ryzen 5 3600 and it's amazing
KingHelianTheXVIII will once i have the cash
I have finished a build last week. It was the 8150 and it worked flawlessly, even without an overclock. It performed better than expected, and the temperatures were absolutely fine
Dudes! Don't test these 10 € chips. Check out the AMD FX-9590 and overclock it. I wanna see the 220 W TDP melt your coolers. :P
THIS.
IMO that topic probably also belong to Linus' Holy $hit
My corsair h100i gtx survived a fx 9590 at 5ghz. Still alive today. I use this cooler with a ryzen 5 2600x now. It wasn't that bad. I installed a wraith prism on the fx 9590 and locked it to 4ghz with no issues.
I want one for 10 euros! Where can I get it?
@@DmitriyDarkJoney Ok I looked at Ebay and I concede I underestimated how much it still costs. Let's call it a 60 € chip. Seems not only old Intel CPU's are ludicrously overpriced, AMD's too.
I'm using an 8320.
It gets the job done for me.
No complaints. I'll upgrade soon, but until then I'm still happy with my build.
We in the tech community should normalize saying these chips have 8 threads instead of 8 cores. The 8150 feels closer to a 4c8t cpu than a 8c8t cpu
@LabRat Knatz hey I got my 30 bucks so whatever they did back then, I'm ok with
I very much like your frame time plots. They really show how performance is. I would love to see more of them.
Can confirm FX-8350 also has the space heater feature
Also my fx-8300
Still gaming on my old Phenom II 965 BE @3.9 on AM2+ mobo and DDR2 :)
"AMD wasn't close to declaring bankruptcy. It was making money in the opposite direction" - Oliver P. Smith
My 8350 still heats up my room in the winter
Waiting for FX 6300
I am scared. Still on fx 6300... cant wait to go ryzen this year FINALLY
My 8350 has been pretty good to me. Began as my gaming rig running Windows 8, and then went to running Arch-Linux with Steam built against Arch rather than the traditional one from Valve built against Ubuntu. But I mostly used it for video editing/recording and it did well there too, especially when I liquid cooled it.
AMD chips used to have a lot of OC headroom. I'm glad to see they just use the potential and warranty the parts now.
I disagree. If they would have withheld that potential the kids today would still have to learn all aspects of O.C. to understand exactly why AMD is the company that represents the industry of gaming and enthusiast. They made it too easy to compete with intel for mainstream profits and lost sight of what made their profitable.
@@pearlrival3124 if they withheld that potential? you mean by making worse products that need heavy manual tuning to be competitive? or locking OC features behind paywalls like intel? just so that "these darn kids nowadays" have to learn manual overclocking just to "understand" and apprieciate AMD products? if that happened AMD would still remain a niche company with subpar products. Profits would have plummeted and we would still buy intel 4 Cores today. to me your comment embodies the worst of Hipster Tribalism.
@@SteveAkaDarktimes " to me your comment embodies the worst of Hipster Tribalism." lol The read was worth the laugh, but the comparison is read towards the "hipster" generation whereas it should be read towards your grandfathers tribalism. Too be clear, the capabilities are there its a question of whether or not you can access those capabilities. To knock the bulldozer is to simply say "I can't o.c." If you don't have that mental capability buy intel. Make no mistake AMD will bring attention to this audience again. the market is there. mainstream p.c.'s is where low profit margins lay. high margins are in the aftermarket "K's" and "X's". why do you think you haven't seen the 3300X yet? This is AMD's worst failure.
Oh my old cpu FX 8150 still running at 5ghz with a asus Corsair v formula z . Slow and steady :)
The AMD bulldozer almost killed the Xbox One and PS4
I never had any issues with my 8350, sure it was not the fastest out there but I never felt like I 'needed' to upgrade till I bought Ryzen. For a short time I held the world record on Futuremark for a 8350 combined with an Nvidia 1080. 4.8GHz on the CPU and 2100MHz on the GPU, a lot fo fun overclocking those. I bought a 4100 also which I think was 3.9GHz stock (correct me if I am wrong) and it would do 4.5GHz on stock voltage.
I beg to differ, all though the fx CPUs weren't anything fast out of the box, these CPUs were pure beasts when overclocked. I owned a fx 8120 and fx 8150. Both CPUs were able to hit over 5ghz on an msi gd80v2 board with ddr3 3200 memory and a Corsair h100i cooler. When these CPUs were overclocked they literally nearly doubled there performance in benchmarks. I learn at this time that online benchmarks were now taken with a grain of salt because every single benchmark I found online I completely destroyed with my builds. I have learned that every machine even those with the same hardware were never the same. But I used these CPUs for years and was able to run games that came years and years after these CPUs have released. I still have one of them machines and Everytime I put in an upgraded GPU it still handles everything out there. I just thought I would state my experience.
"The only bigger void is msi's ethics guidelines." Ouch that ones gotta hurt lmao
Again, the 8 cores FX perform well if you have a good board and good vrm cooling, honestly, please use it with agood board, buy some cheap heatsinks and slap them on. Performs great
yeah so many people back then put their 6 or 8 core fx cpus on a cheap asrock or msi board for 30-40 bucks... ofc the vrms could never handle such a high power consumption so the cpus reduced their clock to around 1 ghz all the time under load
I should power up my old IBM x3755 4 x AMD Opteron 12C 6172 115W 2.1GHz server and run a Cinebench R15
Yes
Tell me the results
Best thing about the bulldozer series was that all Phenom II users had no real reason to upgrade.
Lol
yeah first bulldozer gen was actually worse than phenom II unless all 8 threads were used... the phenom II x6 was better pretty much anywhere compared to the fx 8150, especially in gaming. second bulldozer gen (fx 8350 etc) was finally better then
yay! like so we can let steve know we appreciate his channel! I love you guys GN!
I actually personally believe AMD was ahead of their time. They rolled the dice and made high core count processors, hoping that software would be able to utilize it immediately after. However, software never advanced, and the architecture failed miserably. It was a gambling move that didn't pay out.
We're just in a wrong timeline
Holy; I had that CPU because I totally fell for the marketing and didn't know what a benchmark was back then. I guess people like me were the target group for these CPUs.
People learn from mistakes.
@@Kynareth6 Sure did! I'm a system administrator now and man do I know how to compare benchmarks!!
You okay, Steve? looks like you injured your left arm. Hope all is well, thanks for all the great content!
I still rock the 8150 in a Theater-PC. It sucks man! I put a 10Gbe Nic in it when I upgraded my home network to 10Gb, and the damn CPU is so Slow, that it caps out transfers across the network at about 400MBps. I did weeks of testing on this, and while it will spike to 800MBps every now and again, it ended up being just a limitation of the CPU able to keep up with the RSS (Receive Side Scaling.)
Anyways, Great Video, And So True!
Thats not it, u should try Linux an zfs file system, that will make ur transfers so much faster, and there are some great free distros u can get that are easy to use, i wish Microsoft would move to zfs it would make things so much faster it would be insane
@@sarahwilliams4396 LOL! Yes. ZFS Works great, I agree. Thats the File System I use on my Storage Server that I was testing to. As I mentioned, this is a Theater PC, a PC that I have 3 HDHomeruns Connected to record/watch 9 Channels (9 Tuners total), that the Rest of the House Connect to using Kodi/Plex to watch TV. Its basically the DVR for my Entire House. Unfortunately the only options on Linux to use as a PVR do not allow you to record encrypted channels, and even on Windows you have exactly 1 Option currently. So for better or for worse, until a new Program comes out that supports recording Encrypted Channels (Which seem to be growing btw, it used to be just the paid channels like HBO, Showtime, etc, now its even the damn News Channels, its stupid) I am stuck with recording, at least with a Windows VM. The Idea was to add the 10Gbe Nic to increase bandwidth to the PC, not that I need it to record content, but its nice to be able to Move data Quickly to the Backup Server, makes life better. 400 is still better than 100MBps, so I am still happy.
But when dealing with Windows, FX can not handle 10GBe. I know people always want to find a way to say "No you are doing it wrong, Linux" which I understand, but unfortunately Linux is not right for every situation. Also, with a different Processor, even something like a Intel 6100, On the VERY SAME Image of the OS, with the only difference being the change in Drivers for the Intel Hardware, but using the same exact driver for the 10Gbe Nic (Which is also Intel btw) it hits 965MBps average consistently. So in this situation, with this Operating system, the FX Processor is indeed the bottle neck with this particular Workload, however it handles the simultaneous recordings just fine, along with having every Shield/PC in the house connected to it and Streaming a show, without any hiccups, which is where the 6100 Fails, so I decided to keep the 8150 in service for that reason.
Linux can be the answer sometimes, but not every time, you have to know the specific workload and usecase before flying in and Screaming LINUX at every person who mentions Windows, there is a time and a place my friend.
(That said, I LOVE MY ZFS STORAGE SOLUTION! I got that Dialed In perfectly with Double Redundancy, and the ability to Easily Expand so beautiful!)
This CPU wasn't bad at all. It was surely bad for gamers, back in 2012. Considering it was cheaper than an I5 3470, and it is still able to game in 2022 (as it is a 8 core) this was the best CPU deal of the decade. I'm using a 8350 since 10 years, I'm not a gamer, but for video editing, and daily tasks I've been more than happy of it. I've just spent a bit on a good cooler master ventirad and it never went up to 75°C which is very good.
Ah the FX series... I bought into the FX line when I was new in DYI computer space and thought having eight "true cores" were better, for a cheaper price... Boy how I was wrong. Still have that FX build of mines, but mainly use it as a MC server, as I couldn't part away from it, since it was more or less my first PC upgrade build. But it was an upgrade from the old Ahton II x4 chip of my first build :P
I used to have this cpu, this was a real home heating device, as soon as I upgraded to my Ryzen 1600x my room was honestly 3 to 5 degrees cooler
Side note: As an GTX 1060 3Gb owner, I hated my pc every step of the way... Literally such a trash card.. Just me?
I had it and i played pretty much everything then perfectly..I loved it and it was very quiet.
Then why you buy it?
It was faster than the 1050 Ti but slower than the RX 570.
I have the 6gb version. I love it. But the 3gb version is a bit of an odd one though.
@@Gargantura i was a moron
Long term AMD user and fanboy here ever since the original Athlon. I was due for an upgrade when Bulldozer came out. This is when I was forced to change to Camp Blue. I held out as long as I could, but eventually caved and went Ivy Bridge. That lead to an eventual up-ish-grade to Haswell and the 4770k. I kept that until 8700k because the 4770k was bottle necking my shiny new 1080 Ti. Now I sit waiting for partner 3080s and more benchmarking with 8700k and 9900k to determine if I keep this platform and grab a used 9900k or if I wait for Next Gen Ryzen. I'm glad I have an actual choice to go back to AMD again. :)
This video is like kicking a dead horse over and over knowing the horse is already dead .... And we the viewers are just sitting there watching it ...we should be a shamed for not stepping in...
Sandy bridge/ivy bridge killed off Bulldozer as soon as it was released. Haswell literally danced on its grave. I guess videos like this are just for the kids that can't remember that far back, I don't honestly see an awful lot more point to it
Still got my fx6300 up and running since its release date, although I'm planning to upgrade to a 1600af/3100/3300x, it had a good and long life.
At this point, better to way to Ryzen 4000 CPUs
GN presents ol'dozer imo. Probably does better with them apps about it's release date.
The last 2 PCs I built my dad were:
1) AMD FX 6300
2) AMD Ryzen 5 3600X
Wow, what a difference (or so he tells me)
I got a few 8150's and liked them so then got some 8350's. I never noticed any performance issues with any of my games. Factor in the sales and black friday prices I paid for them, the occasional rebate here and there that oddly actually paid out, and take off the class action settlement amounts I got for them. They really were inexpensive and had it not been for the lawsuit I would never have guessed or cared about the cores issue because again I didn't have any performance issues and they are all still running to this day.
Maybe we need a new benchmarking metric of play a game and see if you have fun????
Yeah see the problem with that is that it is entirely subjective. You might have fun with a game barely being able to run at 40-60 fps at 1080p, but I wouldn't. So trying to measure it that way would be a problem. I want my games to be at solid 60 all that time at least at 1080p and when possible at 4k. I can't stand that juttery feeling when things slow down. I had a Phenom II x6 1090T back in the day. And for what I played on pc at the time it was fine since 95% of what I played on pc was just World of Warcraft. It did it's job, and that left me to play everything else on my xbox 360 (which again the framerate issues pissed me off).
Fast forward to the point where the xbox one generation is getting ready to release and microsoft has pissed me off with their whole always online drm bs considering my internet situation. So I said fuck consoles and decided to rebuild my pc. Well I went with an FX-8350 because I was pretty brand loyal to AMD having only every had a system with their cpus with me under the impression intel couldn't game at all and was just for business use. Well that thing sucked ass. It felt like I didn't do any upgrade and often times felt like it did worse with the same gpu in the same games. I kept that for maybe 3 months before I got right and truly pissed at it's lack of performance. That's when I finally moved over to an intel based build with my first one being an i7 4790k. I was immediately blown away at how much smoother my games ran and how much better of an experience I had - again with the same gpu. Later my board died and it was too expensive to get a replacement mobo for that old of a cpu so I did an upgrade to a i7 7700k
Now I did try a 1st gen Ryzen build when they came out and it was pretty damn good. I had used it to build a secondary gaming machine. But eventually I wanted more performance out of that secondary pc so I switched to an intel build and just went with an i5 8600k which again saw performance increases over even that Ryzen 7 1700. I then repurposed that Ryzen 7 build into a computer that just does handbrake encodes for media i rip from my dvds/blu rays to put onto my home media server. It was great for that for a while, then I decided to upgrade that to a 3rd gen Ryzen 7 3700X and that is even more amazing. Ryzen definitely has brought AMD back for good reason. But I was ready to write them off after that FX series disaster that I tried.
And actually right now I am getting read to rebuild that formerly secondary system that eventually became my primary gaming rig. I was highly considering a Ryzen build, but ultimately decided to go with intel again on this one for their better single core performance. So I'm now just waiting on my case and power supply to come tomorrow and then I'll have a completely new (except for the graphics card which is being transplanted) with an i9 10900k. In conclusion I think benchmarking should always be as objective as possible to inform people of what something actually is because their individual perceptions about what is acceptable to be fun might be a much higher bar than someone else's. As an example: I can't stand when American Truck Simulator dips below 60fps for me because that stutter can really be felt when playing a driving game. Someone else in the skinning discord with me locks his ATS to 30 fps so he maintains a constant framerate. But 30 is way too low and jittery to be as is. He has more fun playing at locked 30 than I would. I prefer to try to maintain 60 even if sometimes I can't and have to deal with drops to have a smoother game the other 80% of the time
I had a 1090T and it worked well for my workflow, but once they went Piledriver, I couldn't even recommend AMD any more, and I'm the guy that had a K6-2 450mhz and K6-2 475mhz, both with a whopping 64mb of ram.
I feel like I should be telling people to get off my lawn now.
Ya i had them to, the k6-2s were really good value for money
All the AMD fans told me the optimized scheduler in Windows 8 was going to unlock this beasts true potential.
I think it give these chips a 5 Percent IPC increase
all this going on... Amd fx crashed under load at first as multi core wasn't supported by software... Causing the processor to overload and overheat. This was something the more reliable Intel chips used to market themselves and increase their prices.
Now multi core is working and supported, and are outperforming their over priced Intel counter parts and people have realised the FX were good chips and not as bad as they were were purported to be. There were some architectures problems, the main problem the fx range suffered from was it being ahead of its time. I still have an FX and it's great.
I was using the 8320 until very recently. It was a solid cpu
The thumbnails are getting better .
overclocking an fx chip to 5ghz+ is cool, but sandy bridge can do that too
On Oct 12, 2011, I remember making a big cup coffee and sitting down to read the reviews of the FX-8150. I don't remember which site I checked first but I do remember the first review being so bad that I had to check another site. By the time I read the 3rd review which showed the 1100T beating the FX-8150 in a few benchmarks I had given up and disappointment set in. I wasn't disappointed because I'm an AMD fan, and I already had a system with a 2600k, but I was disappointed because I didn't know what Intel would try to do with pricing. Intel didn't do anyone any favors but their pricing didn't ever get as bad as I feared it would.
I went from an Athlon 64 4200+ > e8400 > i7-920 > i7-930 > i7-2600k > i7-3930k and I stopped there. I'm still rolling with my x79 system but now I have a Xeon E5-1680 v2.
15:25 when your 2 core CPU renders faster than the 8 core... healthcare pls