• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

**AMD FX BULLDOZER 8120 & 8120@8150 NOW ONLY £149.99 Inc. VAT!!**

Combat squirrel said:
The only problem being, the people who are most likely to buy this CPU are people with AMD systems already...upgraders....except...there old CPU is faster than the one they would be buying ? :rolleyes:

philosoraptor meme.jpg
Click to expand...


i was an AMD fanboy for years, but i wont touch them with a 10ft barge pole now
 
Last edited:
Is it me, or is this AMD's Pentium 4 moment?

  • Slower than previous gen parts when launched
  • Produces a lot of heat
  • High power consumption
  • High stock clocks
  • Low IPC

I do really like their APUs though, currently using a HP laptop with an A6 APU. Runs GTA IV on med/high so I'm not complaining for £420. :)
 
sehcure said:
So it's..hand picked 8120s that are good overclockers? No

So surely they've been used at some point? No

I don't understand how they can guarantee that:confused:


Edit:
Take off the £10 for deus ex (Steam price atm) and it's only £119 ;o
Click to expand...
it's only 500mhz differece which all 8120's can do. even should do it on stock voltage.

if you get a very poor chip that can't do the guarantee speed even with extra voltage, u can rma it
 
gareth170 said:
it's only 500mhz differece which all 8120's can do. even should do it on stock voltage.
Click to expand...

Yeah exactly all 8120's should be capable they were probably just binned as 8120's because they couldn't do it under the 125W TDP limit.

Talking of binning why is 8150 stock still as rare as rocking horse poo? are yields really that bad? only place that seems to have stock is OCUK and they're overpriced as a result... whereas there's an abundance of 8120 stock.
 
Last edited:
Would suspect that 8120 are slightly worse chips, mine doesn't do the same speeds as 8150s at the same voltages and the CPU-NB is a bit of a bugger at times, wouldn't say they are hot or particularly power hungry mind, at least no more than Intel previous offering and they were never 'avoid, avoid, avoid' for their power consumption figures. In-fact day to day usage Bulldozer chips offer dare I say 'good' power consumption, its only when the four module chips come under heavy load that their power consumption reaches a high level, but even then its almost the same as the X6 they replaced. Will mention have never been in the situation where all cores are fully loaded in anything except synthetic benchmarks, which stands testament to the one catastrophic problem the architecture has, not many programs make use of all the resources available and that is the entire point Bulldozer hinged on. Also idle power consumption is really good, even by today Intel standards.
 
Gashman said:
Will mention have never been in the situation where all cores are fully loaded in anything except synthetic benchmarks, which stands testament to the one catastrophic problem the architecture has, not many programs make use of all the resources available and that is the entire point Bulldozer hinged on.
Click to expand...

It was a bit of a stupid decision though really to split those resources into 8 cores at a time when most applications can't even make use of 4 threads, if each module had put its full resources towards executing a single thread BD would have been a much better all-round chip, albeit only a quad core.
 
mmj_uk said:
I'm starting to wonder if AMD have given up on the FX-8150? or perhaps it was a limited edition CPU all along due to yields? nobody has had 8150 stock in weeks and yet 8120 is plentiful.
Click to expand...

I have a theory why this might be the case. I bought an FX-8150 on release and had to RMA it back to AMD within two days because at stock speeds it was throwing L2 cache parity errors all over the place. This was very obvious under Linux because even 'non fatal' hardware errors like this get logged. Running Windows you'd probably just get the odd BSOD or a bit of data corruption and never know what caused it.

It's now three months since AMD got the original processor back and I still don't have a replacement. I was on the phone with AMD support today and they still have no idea when they'll get any in. Now I've seen the 8120@8150 at OCUK, I suspect that AMD have decided that the silicon originally binned for use as FX-8150 parts can't be relied on to run at the rated speeds without tweaking - and have decided to ship it as specially overclockable FX-8120 parts instead. If this is the case you'd be nuts to spend the extra on an FX-8150 part when the 8120@8150 is basically the same thing.

Of course, none of this solves my particular problem. I'm now not expecting to get a warranty replacement until they have a new stepping out.
 
Yeah it's all starting to smell a bit fishy, FX-8120 may have been all the current BD was capable of due to poor yields but if AMD didn't create the faster FX-8150 model and trickle out a limited number into retail then AMD would have been even more of a laughing stock in benchmarks (with the FX-8120 as their high end part).

I'm surprised that it's taken you 3mths to get a replacement from AMD themselves though. :eek:
 
Last edited:
gareth170 said:
well i guess u have a poor chip,
Click to expand...

it seems alright, runs cooler than most people have reported though requires ever so slightly higher voltage to get past a certain clock speed, but clocks rather high under the maximum safe voltage so can't be all bad. the CPU-NB appears to be a common thing though, at least so far as I have heard. happy that it now works like its supposed to, since am currently using the Windows 8 Preview it shows up as quad-core, eight-thread, rather than eight-core.
 
When is pile driver due?

Also with AMD's recent anouncment that their focus will move away from the desktop and more to the mobile, what does that actually mean for AMD desktop cpu's?

They are obviously still going to develop them right?
 
Gashman said:
it seems alright, runs cooler than most people have reported though requires ever so slightly higher voltage to get past a certain clock speed, but clocks rather high under the maximum safe voltage so can't be all bad. the CPU-NB appears to be a common thing though, at least so far as I have heard. happy that it now works like its supposed to, since am currently using the Windows 8 Preview it shows up as quad-core, eight-thread, rather than eight-core.
Click to expand...
wondering if thats how it should be, bit like HT...

when i had a 8150 i could clock it to 4.5ghz with 1.25v~, the cpu-nb i got was 2600mhz, with 1.20v i think
 
mmj_uk said:
I'm surprised that it's taken you 3mths to get a replacement from AMD themselves though. :eek:
Click to expand...

I can think of a lot of other words I'd use instead of 'surprised'. Most of which would probably get me banned . It's obvious that AMD have every reseller in the business demanding to know where the hell their (possibly prepaid) allocation of FX-8150's has got to. Compared to that, warranty service is obviously not a priority.

It's also interesting that they've gone from confident predictions that new stock would be available within two weeks (mid January) to making vague promises about sending a replacement when they have one. Something has obviously gone quite badly wrong in the intervening time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom