18 replies to this topic

[162db]

Anyone out there running the XP-10 demo with an AMD FX 8120 or 8150 cpu? If so please let us know how it performs. I know it gets a lot of negative attention. But after seeing some reviews where they give Sandy Bridge a run for the money in multi threaded applications, I've reconsidered it and ordered a setup. XP-10 seems to be making good use of the 6 cores I have now so I guess I'll see how it does with 8 cores.

[-SE-]

The bulldozer CPUs doesnt seem to be any good, i have seen a few benchmarks where it even struggles to keep up with the i5-2500K and was barely faster than the 1100T when both where running at 4.2GHz.

So i would go with the i5-2500K or i7-2600K as you probably will have to change motherboard anyways.

i was planning on getting the 8150 but after i saw those benchmarks and reviews i changed my mind.
here is one review i was just watching:
jOVJnszQvnU

Edited by SE-REF, 30 November 2011 - 12:48 PM.

[162db]

SE-REF, on Nov 30 2011, 10:38 AM, said:

The bulldozer CPUs doesnt seem to be any good, i have seen a few benchmarks where it even struggles to keep up with the i5-2500K and was barely faster than the 1100T when both where running at 4.2GHz.

So i would go with the i5-2500K or i7-2600K as you probably will have to change motherboard anyways.

i was planning on getting the 8150 but after i saw those benchmarks and reviews i changed my mind.
here is one review i was just watching:

I wouldn't rule out the Bulldozer just yet which is why I was asking if anyone has it. I too saw reviews that didn't look that good. But I started to question myself, if it's so bad, then why is it sold out at many places? After looking in depth at those reviews and factoring in differences in clock speed clock for clock, I found a couple things. Some review sites will favor Sandy Bridge cpus by listing them at the top and Bulldozer towards the bottom even if Bulldozer performed beter, close, or on par.

Bulldozer chips have an instruction set which Sandy Bridge lacks. What exactly it does, I have yet to find out but I find it interesting nonetheless. After more research I came across something called the Intel compiler and found out it is used in many benchmarks. Looks like any AMD chip run through a benchmark with the Intel compiler will always perform worse than an Intel chip.

I also found that the FX-8150 actually beat the 2600k in some multi threaded apps/games and was on par with it in other multi threaded apps. There's no doubt that this chip wasn't designed for single threaded apps but it seems to be a monster in multi threading. From what I have seen, X-Plane is heavily multi threaded taking advantage of all 6 of my cores. Which brings me to my question. How does the 8 core Bulldozer chips do in X-Plane? If no one can answer, I'll find out for myself and post results within the next week.

[162db]

Got the Bulldozer in today and it's definitely an upgrade from the 1090t I had. From the minute I booted it up on stock clocks, I could tell it was faster than the 1090t was @ 4ghz. Boot and shutdown times have definitely improved. X-Plane loads a bit faster and is just smoother throughout with more consistent framrates. The only thing I changed was the cpu and mobo. Everything else is the same. All in all very happy and would recommend it to anyone looking to upgrade from Phenom II. Don't always go by what you see in benchmarks alone folks. If you do, you might miss something good.

Edited by 162db, 09 December 2011 - 01:38 AM.

[_BD6_]

Uh, for the performance I'll stick to sandy bridge.

You see it sold out because some people just don't know any better, or are AMD fanboys. The other half bought their motherboards early in anticipation and ended up disappointed.

[162db]

bl00mfield, on Dec 9 2011, 08:01 AM, said:

Uh, for the performance I'll stick to sandy bridge.

You see it sold out because some people just don't know any better, or are AMD fanboys. The other half bought their motherboards early in anticipation and ended up disappointed.

Please, let's not start this mess. That's the exact same type of senseless drivel I see from intel fanboys in other forums. The early adopters were disappointed because of the buggy bios holding back the capabilities of the chip. Manufacturers have since updated the bios and ironed out those issues.

No it's not perfect, no it's not the best (in my mind there is no best), but it's certainly not what it was made out to be. It is certainly an upgrade from my 1090t which was an upgrade from my i7 920. I have spent countless hours reading up on the architecture and getting a better understanding of the design. From what I have researched, the design is quite good. If you don't have experience with it then it makes no sense to criticize it

Edited by 162db, 09 December 2011 - 09:14 PM.

[_BD6_]

I didn't mean that in an argumentative way. Just people who like AMD will buy AMD, or they see the amount of cores/clockspeed and see the price.. they want it.

[162db]

That's understandable. I'm just tired of all the BD bashing I see in other forums from people who have never even tried it.

[-SE-]

162db, on Dec 10 2011, 03:13 AM, said:

Please, let's not start this mess. That's the exact same type of senseless drivel I see from intel fanboys in other forums. The early adopters were disappointed because of the buggy bios holding back the capabilities of the chip. Manufacturers have since updated the bios and ironed out those issues.

No it's not perfect, no it's not the best (in my mind there is no best), but it's certainly not what it was made out to be. It is certainly an upgrade from my 1090t which was an upgrade from my i7 920. I have spent countless hours reading up on the architecture and getting a better understanding of the design. From what I have researched, the design is quite good. If you don't have experience with it then it makes no sense to criticize it

a 1090t is an upgrade from an i7-920? i thought they were at the same level or that the 1090t was slightly slower, anyways do you recommend upgrading from a 1090t to a FX8150? but then i would have to upgrade to a AM3+ MB aswell is it worth it? i mean is there any noticeable difference?

[162db]

SE-REF, on Dec 11 2011, 12:00 PM, said:

a 1090t is an upgrade from an i7-920? i thought they were at the same level or that the 1090t was slightly slower, anyways do you recommend upgrading from a 1090t to a FX8150? but then i would have to upgrade to a AM3+ MB aswell is it worth it? i mean is there any noticeable difference?

I do a lot of multitasking and archiving, so yes for me, the 1090T was an upgrade from the 920. Now if all I did was play games all day, I doubt I would notice any difference between any of those cpus. Since X-Plane is multi threaded, it takes advantage of all the extra cores. There is noticeable difference for me coming to the 8120 from the 1090T. The system boots and shuts down faster. My unrar times have practically been cut in half. Everything loads quicker.

I can have more processes running without a reduction in response. Not to mention it takes full advantage of 1800mhz+ ram unlike my old 1090T. All in all, it depends what you're going to use it for. If you're a heavy mult itasker, then yes it will be worth it. If all you do is play games all day without having anything else going on in the background, no I would not recommend it.

[-SE-]

162db, on Dec 12 2011, 01:34 AM, said:

I do a lot of multitasking and archiving, so yes for me, the 1090T was an upgrade from the 920. Now if all I did was play games all day, I doubt I would notice any difference between any of those cpus. Since X-Plane is multi threaded, it takes advantage of all the extra cores. There is noticeable difference for me coming to the 8120 from the 1090T. The system boots and shuts down faster. My unrar times have practically been cut in half. Everything loads quicker.

I can have more processes running without a reduction in response. Not to mention it takes full advantage of 1800mhz+ ram unlike my old 1090T. All in all, it depends what you're going to use it for. If you're a heavy mult itasker, then yes it will be worth it. If all you do is play games all day without having anything else going on in the background, no I would not recommend it.

oh ok, thanks for the awnser. well the cheapest FX8150 i found in my country cost 302USD, is that an ok price for the black edition BD?

Edited by SE-REF, 12 December 2011 - 10:02 AM.

[162db]

SE-REF, on Dec 12 2011, 08:01 AM, said:

oh ok, thanks for the awnser. well the cheapest FX8150 i found in my country cost 302USD, is that an ok price for the black edition BD?

That's actually a bit pricey. Try to find a an FX8120. It's the better deal.

[-SE-]

162db, on Dec 13 2011, 02:32 AM, said:

That's actually a bit pricey. Try to find a an FX8120. It's the better deal.

Actually the FX8120 isn't that much cheaper here its around 280 USD, i'll probably wait til' they drop in price. anyways thanks for the advise/help.

[162db]

No problem. Wow that is pricey. Here, the 8120 is around $200. Not sure if a price drop is going to happen any time soon. These cpus are in very high demand at the moment.

[Jonay]

Microsoft leak reveals hotfix for underperforming Bulldozers

http://www.engadget....olshare_twitter via @engadget

(sorry! Easiest way to share link on my iPad! )

[162db]

I appreciate it but that patch is incomplete. The complete two part patch won't be released until early next year.

[robdrums69]

Intel Fan boys are joksters -- usually 13 year old kids who really don't know how the world works yet. They really don't know how the business world works either -- as in, BIASED JUNK TECH REVIEWS and BIASED Benchmarks that favour the Intel side because they are fronted by a company that accepts kick backs from Intel ... maybe later in life they will realize that they are spending money for no reason
Computer tech
Ontario Canada
Rob

X plane 10 is being ported right now to 64 bit, so we'll have use of the upper range of Ram in our machines soon as well. I am building an AMD 8120 with Sapphire HD 6950 2G - 8 Gig Kingston to start - then 16Gig to follow - 700Watt Power - Asus M5A88-M Mobo .... I figure this should push my xplane 10 fairly well

_BD6_, on 09 December 2011 - 10:01 AM, said:

Uh, for the performance I'll stick to sandy bridge.

You see it sold out because some people just don't know any better, or are AMD fanboys. The other half bought their motherboards early in anticipation and ended up disappointed.

Doesn't it upset you though, when you spent more money on your machine and we both can perform the same in different applications? In other words- I got there with less money than you

[_BD6_]

What? You're an idiot. Computer tech, my ######.

[SwitchFX]

Rob, stop drumming on your head.