AMD FX-8150 Bulldozer performance for Gaming only

[Oye! Champion]

Sponsored Links

Is there anyone who had already got well experience with AMD FX Bulldozer processors? I am thinking about to get it soon because I have a compatible Gigabyte motherboard for AMD FX processor. So I am eager to get this processor installed on my motherboard. I know that before purchasing, it is necessary to look at the performance of the new AMD FX-8150 and it is really important. How is the performance of AMD FX Bulldozer for gaming only? There are plenty of benchmark results posted on different pages. None of them are able to get a proper review over gaming. I don’t know how games will run using this processor as compared to Intel’s brand new IVY bridge processors. Please somebody elaborate it.

[Ilampirai]

In order to know about the AMD FX Bulldozer processors performance, it is necessary for you to analyze the synthetic benchmarks as well as CPU orientated tests regarding the Media Encoding as well as Image Manipulation. You cannot get a real conclusion without covering those results by yourself and study them. Now-a-days it is easy for you to get the details about the performance because large number of users usually use the Bulldozer or Sandy Bridge one, mainly for the intention to do a lot of gaming. You can directly compare the new FX-8150 with the famous i7 2600k processor because both models have so much focus on the overclocking. If you are going to opt for a high end video card, you will definitely get very good gaming experience with both processors even with good FPS rate for smooth gameplay since the AMD processors had been for the great fans of Gamers. By just checking the benchmark result it is hard to understand how it can act in game since it completely depends on the type of specs you have.

[Vrushabha]

Whenever you are going to compare a processor performance in games, you always have to use or play with only those games which take the full driver and CPU multithreading coverage. I mean there might be a few CPU intensive games which will help you to recognize how it can really perform in games under much load. DirectX 11 is also needed when playing CPU intensive games. DX11 might acts as a graphics API, but sometime it will take the full advantage of multi-core CPUs. The new feature available in DirectX 11 is driver multithreading. It was released 3 years back. Due to Multithreaded Rendering, DirectX will be processed via multiple CPU threads. In order to use this feature, the game should have support for it in any manner. There are few games like Battlefield 3 which will use this new DX11 feature.

[Usha Kiran]

As far as I know, when it comes to the games and gameplay performance the FX range, it was really better than the Phenom II. Gaming experience on these high-end processors is something that is predefined for the game and worth to play. Some says that the FX-8150 compared with the Core i7-2600K was few frames per second slower at 1920x1200 but I don’t see any difference in both platform. 1 or 2 FPS difference does not change anything yet. With slight overclocking everything will be normal and equal.

[Atticus]

Actually I have tested a lot of time gaming on AMD Bulldozer FX-8150 CPU. The configuration is entirely based on single AMD Radeon HD 6970 at 1080p. Next test was based on 2-way and 3-way SLI using GeForce GTX 580 at NV Surround resolutions. If I use the single GPU, the performance seems to be very much in each game depending on the workload of the game. But still in most situation you cannot actually notice a difference with a single-GPU at 1080p either on AMD FX-8150 or Intel i5 2500K. Only CPU dependent games will let us know what is the exact performance of the processor. On the other hand during the SLI game setup, the performance also depends on the game but also on the resolution you set.

[Baldwin]

One thing I would like to tell you is that, you should not give much attention to the benchmark results actually. It is only necessary whenever you go for some multimedia related things like video editing and video transcoding all day long. Currently I have 2 computers in which one is based on Intel processor and another one is AMD processor. The Intel Core i7-3960X CPU overclocked and configured with two GTX580 video cards in SLI. On the other side, the AMD FX-8150 overclocked and set up with single Radeon 6950 video card. The monitor is 30’’ with 1920x1200 resolution. While playing same game on both computers I don’t actually see any difference at all. I can check the frame rate differences with benchmarks but you cannot actually notice this in actual game play.

[Izna]

I don’t say that the FX-8150 is a bad processor and you don’t worry about the price point because it is actually little cheaper that Intel Sandy Bridge processors. If you're focusing on gaming the FX-8150 offers an unplayable one. Bulldozer platform is quite strong and there is no doubt about getting good gaming performance from it. Interestingly, the best and the affordable AMD's FX processor for gaming will be FX-4100. You cannot get more advantage from FX-6100 or FX-8120 over this $110 model. By testing with in GPU-bound games, you cannot get to tell the actual difference. Intel's processors obvious choice is for host processing power. In reality most games are still not really optimized for multithreading. I think that it will still take years to develop such kind of games. The current Game Engines are yet not able to make stand on this. I hope that in future we can at least see something better over these processors.