Discussion for AMD CPU/APU owners


Recommended Posts

I thought I'd create a topic for people who have an FX-series CPU to talk about what you like about the CPU, what you hate about it and what you are expecting from next generations.

From performance wise I couldn't be happier with mine, haven't clocked it and probably won't as I've yet to see what can cripple this CPU. I mostly game with it, deal with video/photo editing :)

Altho there's one thing, the stock cooler that came with it, it's loud as hell when the CPU gets some work on it, hopefully next time they'll ship a better cooler with it (or maybe its just me don't know :) )

Anyway shoot ahead. :)

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/1071853-discussion-for-amd-cpuapu-owners/
Share on other sites

So far my favorite thing about my FX 6 core is its ability to multitask. I have yet run into any real performance hits while running multiple applications outside of accidentally running two games simultaneously (which are both graphically demanding).

I really want to try and overclock it but I'm completely alien to it and I'd rather keep it working than risk fudging it up. The only issue I have had with it so far is the mobo firmware problem for Shogun 2. But now that I have a workaround for it the thing runs like a dream. Handles everything I throw at it and more and never hits too high a temperature.

So far my favorite thing about my FX 6 core is its ability to multitask. I have yet run into any real performance hits while running multiple applications outside of accidentally running two games simultaneously (which are both graphically demanding).

I really want to try and overclock it but I'm completely alien to it and I'd rather keep it working than risk fudging it up. The only issue I have had with it so far is the mobo firmware problem for Shogun 2. But now that I have a workaround for it the thing runs like a dream. Handles everything I throw at it and more and never hits too high a temperature.

You can try AMD Overdrive for clocking, in most cases it gives you a stable clock and will do it for you :)

I wonder if consumers who purchased an FX cpu were a bit clueless about what kind of computer they were building. I don't ask to be sarcastic but there was a lot of willful ignorance on how fast it really was.

Please do enlighten us :)

I wonder if consumers who purchased an FX cpu were a bit clueless about what kind of computer they were building. I don't ask to be sarcastic but there was a lot of willful ignorance on how fast it really was.

Yep. My Sandy Bridge from over a year ago absolutely blows it out of the water... the i7-3770K Ivy Bridge I have right now just furthers the blow :p

Yep. My Sandy Bridge from over a year ago absolutely blows it out of the water... the i7-3770K Ivy Bridge I have right now just furthers the blow :p

Eh, my Ferrari is faster than my VW bug, doesn't mean there's anything wrong with the bug, and it was a lot cheaper.

I'd still get an FX over a Intel processor right now, they're dirt cheap by comparison, and for gaming, they're good enough.

Can a moderator maybe keep an eye out for this topic and delete all kinds of "bashing" and/or mine is better then yours posts as this is meant for people who actually have an FX CPU and want to talk along :)

Yep. My Sandy Bridge from over a year ago absolutely blows it out of the water... the i7-3770K Ivy Bridge I have right now just furthers the blow :p

Intel CPU's are great for single, high power applications. But the multitasking power of my AMD is amazing. Its like comparing a Ferrari to an F350. Can you haul 350lbs of luggage, your entire family and the dogs in your Ferrari? While the Ferrari will win in a race, they still have similar power and similar ability to perform.

Not everything is about benchmarks and stress tests. Sometimes its about fulfilling a role. If all you want is for BF3 to run at 60fps on Ultra then by all means get an i7. But if you want to run Photoshop + Illustrator or Premier Pro + After Effects then I'd bet my money an FX will perform better.

PS: Speaking of stress tests and benchmarks. My current setup can run the Unigine benchmark at max settings at an average of 22fps. I think for a budget gaming rig that's pretty darn good.

For those who think their iwhatever is great, that's great. You should feel good about what you bought, or you shouldn't have bought it. However, http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=AMD+FX-6100+Six-Core

So, please, go home and love what you have. I don't really want to hear about what you think your i-3/5/7 can do that you think my FX can't, because plain and simply, my FX can do it all. Oh yeah, and I can keep some of the money for that needlessly expensive mobo/cpu in my pocket.

Good day to you sir.

I SAID GOOD DAY!

  • Like 2

Intel CPU's are great for single, high power applications. But the multitasking power of my AMD is amazing. Its like comparing a Ferrari to an F350. Can you haul 350lbs of luggage, your entire family and the dogs in your Ferrari? While the Ferrari will win in a race, they still have similar power and similar ability to perform.

Not everything is about benchmarks and stress tests. Sometimes its about fulfilling a role. If all you want is for BF3 to run at 60fps on Ultra then by all means get an i7. But if you want to run Photoshop + Illustrator or Premier Pro + After Effects then I'd bet my money an FX will perform better.

PS: Speaking of stress tests and benchmarks. My current setup can run the Unigine benchmark at max settings at an average of 22fps. I think for a budget gaming rig that's pretty darn good.

Time and time again benchmarks have proven that Intel Core i7 is much faster than AMD's top offerings. Why would you doubt Intel has better multitasking, when it gets beat in performance tests? I'm not trying to troll, because yes, AMD is great value for the money, and Intel comes at a premium. Don't see your logic here...Personally, I'd rather have a Hyperthreaded turbo-boosted hexa core Intel i7.

Intel CPU's are great for single, high power applications. But the multitasking power of my AMD is amazing. Its like comparing a Ferrari to an F350. Can you haul 350lbs of luggage, your entire family and the dogs in your Ferrari? While the Ferrari will win in a race, they still have similar power and similar ability to perform.

That used to be true before the Core i5/7. Today Intel CPUs are just faster whatever the scenario.

That used to be true before the Core i5/7. Today Intel CPUs are just faster whatever the scenario.

Really? Whatever the scenario? I got alot of results that say otherweise. As soon as it comes to multithreading AMD's FX will pull ahead, I'm not even going to talk about Linux benchmarks as thats a different story, FX has a whole new life over there.

Whoever was comparing IB to FX (Currently bulldozer) should look up when BD was release and when was IB released.

Anyway to the people who plan to buy Piledriver, there are some big changes.

Quad-channel DDR3

Up to 10 cores

HT

Dynamic scheduling and speculative execution

8 CUs with two cores per a CU.

AMD released a software optimization guide for Piledriver in January. You can read more about it here.

http://support.amd.com/us/Processor_TechDocs/47414_15h_sw_opt_guide.pdf

Really? Whatever the scenario? I got alot of results that say otherweise. As soon as it comes to multithreading AMD's FX will pull ahead
Feel free to share them, because the last time I checked, FX got smoked by the entire Core i5/7 line on nearly every benchmark, including heavily threaded ones, like C++ compilation. I think FX very slightly won on synthetic 7-zip performance, x264 2nd pass and that's basically it. And even there it still loses to the latest 3770k.

Example

Feel free to share them, because the last time I checked, FX got smoked by the entire Core i5/7 line on nearly every benchmark, including heavily threaded ones, like C++ compilation. I think FX very slightly won on synthetic 7-zip performance, x264 2nd pass and that's basically it. And even there it still loses to the latest 3770k.

Example

First of all, 3770k is a newer CPU then Bulldozer is so I can't understand why do you keep comparing them?

Secondly.

photoshop.png

41698.png

CCIMG55.png

c-rayir38.png

(Keep in mind its as fast as an $1000 Intel CPU whilist the 8150 costs around $200)

Synthetic_01.png

Anyway I got tons more but is a pain in my *ss to upload them all here.

I love the fact that when ever FX is better in a benchmark it will be labled syntetic instantly but untill then its the most widley used benchmark. Typical.

Also dear sir, just to finish our d*ck comparing, please do read on the .pdf I linked earlier and please do look up all the changes Piledriver comes with, alot of the software problems are going to be fixed with it so even if it might not be as good as Intel CPU's it'll sure close the gap a bit. :) Have a good day and please do Your own Intel topic as I'd really like to talk to people who actually have one FX or want one in the future :)

and to top it off when AMD/MS release the patch for the FX it should perform even better :D

so I think +Dr_Asik you just got smoked :woot:

Don't worry he'll be back soon stating that those benchmarks "show nothing and are usless". They always will :rofl:

Altho I think MS already released 2 patches altho they didn't change much ~1-2% gain. Not too sure if they are working on a new one.

Well, I have to say I am plesantly surpprised with the performance of my AMD FX-8120.

Some of the best features are its brute speed when it comes to multiplexing and Transcoding Hi-Def Video. Its also fast as hell when processing .FLAC Audio. All is indeed very good news it also over clocks well. I am just waiting for a pair HD7950 to come through the post.

Check out this rather large system spec. under full load :)

amdfx812039ghzbenchstre.jpg

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Well, I have to say I am plesantly surpprised with the performance of my AMD FX-8120.

Some of the best features are its brute speed when it comes to multiplexing and Transcoding Hi-Def Video. Its also fast as hell when processing .FLAC Audio. All is indeed very good news it also over clocks well. I am just waiting for a pair HD7950 to come through the post.

Does the Gigabyte 990 perform good? I made the stupidest mistake when I bought an 970 series from Gigabyte also, running on PCI-E on 4x lol :(

Now Im between Formula V and the one you got now (990 GB), if the GB one is okay I'll go with that because the price differnce is almost 100 euros :|

x264.jpgpovray.jpgcinebench-x.jpg

cinebench.jpgpcmark7.jpgpovray.jpg

Synthetic_01.pngSynthetic_02.pngSynthetic_04.png

Application_01.pngApplication_03.png

Application_04.pngEncoding_02.png

Got this from Legitreviews review of the i7-3770k and Techspot's review of the Core i7 3770k You should compare whatever is the latest/greatest from Intel with whatever is the latest/greatest from AMD - these are recently released CPU's from both companies. What more do you want - compare the Bulldozer to the Core 2 lineup? Every review I have seen says i7 for pure performance, and yes that comes with price.

Trust me, I want AMD to succeed, and competition is a great thing to have between two companies - brings better CPU's, lower prices, etc.. If you can't admit AMD is getting whopped now, then you are just not looking clearly at the benchmarks...

Thats exactly what you are doing right now. Ironic isn't it.

How so? Core 2 was released around Summer '06, and important to note it's no longer being produced nor is it anywhere on Intel's current roadmap. Bulldozer was released in October 2011, with CPU's still being produced today. Intel's i7 Sandy Bridge was released January 2011, with CPU's being produced today. Sandy Bridge-E was released in November 2011, and still being produced today. If you look at the charts, there are Sandy Bridge-E CPU's kicking AMD's ass.

I'm comparing the two current flagship models from both brands. :shifty:

Sure, what ever lets you sleep at night.

So what do you want to see a comparison of?

Believe me, I'm not losing any sleep at night over AMD vs. Intel or other technology related comparisons. I could care less who's better, and in the end consumers win. I just want what's best performance wise at a good price. It is just apparent you love AMD a little too much.

So what do you want to see a comparison of?

Believe me, I'm not losing any sleep at night over AMD vs. Intel or other technology related comparisons. I could care less who's better, and in the end consumers win. I just want what's best performance wise at a good price. It is just apparent you love AMD a little too much.

It's not about me loving them or not.

Comparsion? I don't want to see any as I already saw from graphs that you posted that the 8150 can easily hold up with the 2500k and 2600k (which are 8150's Generation CPUs).

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • All these CEOs got the biggest boners thinking about firing employees for AI. Turned out it was just a wet dream.
    • And the fact that the majority of people from Poland are white European Christians while the people you are complaining about in post after post are not is just a coincidence... Every sentence in your post I am replying to is racist nonsense. None of it is actually based on any facts whatsoever. All immigrants are seeking a better life too. It's literally the only reason they would risk everything and leave their homes, families, and homeland. They are working and contributing to the economy too, as you even admit. They get the same benefits your partner did AND that YOU are eligible for as well. That is one of the key things of the EU and a mark of a civilization. That is the definition of a society where everyone is given a chance, treated equally and fairly, and is judged by the content of their character, not their different skin color or which version of ignorant superstitious nonsense their parents lied about as children. Racists around the world said the same things about the Irish and Jews and Poles (like your partner) and...every other immigrant movement over the centuries. What's your family's heritage, by the way? Were your ancestors lied about with racist fearmongering crapola by self-entitled locals the same way as you are now? If someone like that said the same things about all people from Poland, like your partner, would they be right? Or would you want them to judge your partner based on who they actually were, not where they just happened to come from?
    • Again, this is an irrelevant attempt to attack the messenger. The truth does not require any justification.
    • Removed the blue and underline as you did not post a link. This would also  be considered spamming.
    • Why it's almost impossible to produce a smartphone in the United States by Hamid Ganji If you look at the back of some Apple products, you can see the famous phrase “Designed by Apple in California, Assembled in China.” This phrase appears on products from one of the largest smartphone brands in the United States. These products are designed in the U.S., but their manufacturing takes place in China, India, Vietnam, or even Brazil. But why can’t Apple, as one of the largest American tech companies, produce its iPhones on U.S. soil? The idea for this topic came to me after the Trump Foundation launched a smartphone called the T1 and claimed that it was designed and built with American values in mind. However, this claim did not last long, as it was revealed that Trump’s phone was actually a rebranded HTC U24 Pro, with only a gold case and minor internal component changes. You see? Even a phone that is supposed to represent American values is manufactured in China. With a gross domestic product (GDP) exceeding $32 trillion, the United States is currently the world’s largest economy, while China ranks second with around $20 trillion. On the other hand, the United States is by a wide margin the global leader in various technological fields, and American companies spend hundreds of billions of dollars annually on research and development. From Apple and Google to Microsoft, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and others, American tech and industrial giants lead their foreign competitors in many sectors. The United States also has no shortage of smartphone brands. Apple, Google, and Motorola are among the major brands in the smartphone market, collectively holding a significant share. However, the vast majority of their products are manufactured outside the United States. So why is it that the world’s largest economy, home to the most advanced technology companies and industrial powers, cannot produce a smartphone on its own soil? Let’s explore this question together. Even threats to impose tariffs won’t work After Trump entered the White House as the 47th President of the United States, his administration adopted strict tariff policies. One of these policies was the imposition of a 25% tariff on smartphones manufactured outside the United States. Trump said he “had a little problem” with Apple CEO Tim Cook over producing smartphones outside the U.S. So he thought that threatening a 25% tax on imported phones might force Apple to bring manufacturing back to the United States. “I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhones that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. Image via The White House Although Apple currently manufactures some of the iPhone’s chips in the United States with TSMC's help, it still shows no willingness to shift full iPhone production to the country. At the time, renowned Apple supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo wrote on X, “In terms of profitability, it’s way better for Apple to take the hit of a 25% tariff on iPhones sold in the US market than to move iPhone assembly lines back to the US.” However, manufacturing a smartphone in the United States is not as easy as it might seem, and many technical and economic barriers are involved. The lack of necessary manufacturing hubs There is a clear reason why many companies prefer to manufacture their products in China. China has established itself as the main global manufacturing hub for international companies, and over the past few decades, large contract manufacturers have emerged there, allowing companies like Apple to outsource production. One such example is Foxconn, which also manufactures some Apple products in India. Building the infrastructure required to produce smartphones in the United States would require tens of billions of dollars in new investment. Factories would need to be built, essential manufacturing equipment would have to be installed, and, most importantly, a skilled workforce capable of operating these systems would need to be recruited and trained. The United States currently lacks the core infrastructure needed to manufacture smartphones, and for this reason, many companies prefer to outsource production to Chinese contractors rather than spend tens of billions of dollars to build that infrastructure, which is significantly more economically efficient. Additionally, building such infrastructure in the United States could take up to a decade, ultimately leading to a significant increase in the product's final price for consumers. Shortage of trained labor in the U.S. compared to China Decades of serving as a global manufacturing hub have allowed China to build a massive talent pool in the production sector that is almost unmatched worldwide. Today, if a company chooses to manufacture its products in China, it can be confident that the workers involved in production have years of experience in their respective roles and are capable of producing high-quality goods with minimal errors. Even if we assume that tens of billions of dollars were invested in building smartphone manufacturing infrastructure in the United States, finding skilled workers would remain highly challenging. Apple CEO Tim Cook visiting the iPhone 6 assembly line in China in 2014. Image: Tim Cook on X In a 2015 interview on CBS’s 60 Minutes, Tim Cook said the main reason Apple isn’t producing in the US is a lack of skills. "China put an enormous focus on manufacturing, in what you and I would call vocational kind of skills. The US over time began to stop having as many vocational kinds of skills. I mean you could take every tool and die maker in the United States and probably put them in the room that we're currently sitting in. In China you would have to have multiple football fields,” Cook said. Also, in 2017, at the Fortune Global Forum in Guangzhou, Cook once again emphasized the importance of highly skilled Chinese workers. “China has moved into very advanced manufacturing, so you find in China the intersection of craftsman kind of skill, and sophisticated robotics and the computer science world. That intersection, which is very rare to find anywhere, that kind of skill, is very important to our business because of the precision and quality level that we like. The thing that most people focus on if they’re a foreigner coming to China is the size of the market, and obviously, it’s the biggest market in the world in so many areas. But for us, the number one attraction is the quality of the people,” Apple CEO said. Higher labor costs in the United States Producing almost any product in the United States is more expensive than in many other countries, and one of the main reasons is the higher cost of labor in the U.S. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, median weekly earnings of full-time workers in the United States were $1,235 in the first quarter of 2026. Meanwhile, the average annual salary in China's private sector in 2025 was RMB 71,590 (US$9,961). In many parts of the world, the weekly wage of an American worker is equivalent to several months of income. Another important factor to consider is that in the United States, the workforce capable of working on a smartphone assembly line is highly specialized and therefore commands higher-than-average wages. According to an estimate by Bank of America, producing an iPhone in the U.S. is technically possible, but “iPhone cost can increase 25% purely on higher labor cost in the U.S.” However, this 25% increase applies only if final assembly is performed in the United States while components are still sourced from China or elsewhere. In this case, the price of a base iPhone would rise from $799 to around $1,000. But in another scenario, if Apple were to produce the required components for the iPhone within the United States, production costs could increase by more than 90%. Trump’s dream for a “Made in the USA” iPhone might never come true In a free-market capitalist economy, one of the primary responsibilities of any CEO is to maximize profit. Using Apple as an example, Tim Cook’s role is to maximize the company’s profits so that it can fund research and development for new products and invest in areas such as artificial intelligence, while also keeping shareholders satisfied. Therefore, it is entirely understandable that Apple would choose not to bring its manufacturing back to the United States and instead keep production in countries where labor is cheaper, and products can be manufactured at a lower cost, thereby maximizing its profit margins. What is your opinion about manufacturing smartphones in the United States? If you are an American citizen, would you be willing to pay hundreds of dollars more for a smartphone made domestically in the USA? Let us know in the comments.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      jessse3334 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Reacting Well
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • One Month Later
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      506
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      196
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      153
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      72
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      65
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!