• 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.

8120 worth getting?

Andy_1995

Andy_1995

Andy_1995

Associate
Joined
13 Oct 2011
Posts
209
Hi there I was just wondering if the AMD FX 8120 was worth getting because of the price drop.

I was thinking of upgrading my full computer to brand new components but I want to stick to AMD what do you think?
 
Hi there,

May I ask what you are using the computer for?

If it is CPU-heavy multithreaded tasks like video encoding then a FX8120 (after the rebate) may be a good choice. However, if you use the system for lightly threaded applications (like games) then Intel's Sandy Bridge is by far the better option.
 
No the computer is for gaming and internet usage, but I like to stick to AMD even thought the I5 2500K kicks the crap out of the 8150. But I just thought the 8120 was a good price if not I might consider changing to intel.

I have always liked AMD, I know that right now intel are beating them. even know that the computer would be for gaming I would like to stick to AMD. but like I said if the price is still not good enough for the 8120 then I might go for intel.
 
A i5 2500K overclocks easily to,

About 4Ghz± with the stock cooler supplied in the Retail box is safe with nice temps.

Add a £21-£25 Aftermarket cooler and you should be 4.5Ghz+
 
Ok, to be clear - for gaming uses an Intel i5 is MUCH better than a AMD Bulldoxer FX-8.

Even if you went for one of the lower-end i5 CPUs like the i5 2300 or 2400 (which can only overclock by 400MHz plus turbo) then these will easily beat an AMD FX-8 in gaming and the 2300 only costs £138 at the moment, so there isn't really a cost difference between bulldozer and i5 sandy bridge, but there is a big performance gap in lightly threaded applications (like games). have a look here:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4955/the-bulldozer-review-amd-fx8150-tested/8
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/amd/hd_7970_cpu_scaling/16.html
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/amd-fx-8150_10.html#sect0
http://techreport.com/articles.x/21813/7

So basically, for your uses there is no logical reason to go for the AMD cpu over the Intel one. Though I guess we can't really tackle emotional reasons.

As mentioned by stulid, if you can afford the extra - the i5 2500K has all the speed of the Sandy Bridge architecture plus it can overclock extremely well.
 
Last edited:
Andy_1995 said:
No the computer is for gaming and internet usage, but I like to stick to AMD even thought the I5 2500K kicks the crap out of the 8150. But I just thought the 8120 was a good price if not I might consider changing to intel.

I have always liked AMD, I know that right now intel are beating them. even know that the computer would be for gaming I would like to stick to AMD. but like I said if the price is still not good enough for the 8120 then I might go for intel.
Click to expand...
i understand u prefer amd. i was the same, until i bought a 8150, it was crap tbh. worser than the 1090t clock for clock. so i sent it back and went with intel and im so glad i had
 
gareth170 said:
i understand u prefer amd. i was the same, until i bought a 8150, it was crap tbh. worser than the 1090t clock for clock. so i sent it back and went with intel and im so glad i had
Click to expand...

I know what you mean I didn't own a 8150 but I saw a lot of threads and tests about it and I was a bit shocked of it's performance. the reason why I was thinkin about the 8120 instead of the 8150 is because if I overclocked the 8150 it would take a lot of power to run compared to the 8120, also the 8120 is much cheaper.
 
Andy_1995 said:
the reason why I was thinkin about the 8120 instead of the 8150 is because if I overclocked the 8150 it would take a lot of power to run compared to the 8120
Click to expand...

But the 8120 and 8150 are effectively the same CPU, so if you overclocked the 8120 to the same level they would use the same amount of power (ie a lot).

Also here are some interesting results of overclocked Bulldozer (both 8150 and 8120) performance compared to stock and overclocked i5 2500K performance.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/amd-fx-8120-6100-4100_9.html#sect0
 
Last edited:
Andy_1995 said:
I know what you mean I didn't own a 8150 but I saw a lot of threads and tests about it and I was a bit shocked of it's performance. the reason why I was thinkin about the 8120 instead of the 8150 is because if I overclocked the 8150 it would take a lot of power to run compared to the 8120, also the 8120 is much cheaper.
Click to expand...
well if you oc a 8120 it will still take a lot of power to run same as a 8150. both are 125w tdp

if u still want amd why not try to find a 1090t/1100t
 
Last edited:
I thought that the 8120 used less power than the 8150 when it was overlcocked I never looked it up I just asumed it, well I made myself look like a fool :p Well thats why i came on here to learn about this stuff lol.

I was also thinking about maybe changing to a Llano CPU. The games I play are quite old for the pc and cannot get for a console, but still want to upgrade for the future :)
 
Andy_1995 said:
I thought that the 8120 used less power than the 8150 when it was overlcocked I never looked it up I just asumed it, well I made myself look like a fool :p Well thats why i came on here to learn about this stuff lol.

I was also thinking about maybe changing to a Llano CPU. The games I play are quite old for the pc and cannot get for a console, but still want to upgrade for the future :)
Click to expand...

Stick with what you have??
 
CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
Stick with what you have??
Click to expand...

you think i should stick to what i have for a while? my computer right now can cope with the games i play, i was wanting to upgrade then i wouildnt need to for another couple of years.

I usually play the play station for online gaming that is why i don't really want a 2500K. But when the new series of consoles come out I am switching from Consoles to just gaming on the computer.
 
Andy_1995 said:
you think i should stick to what i have for a while? my computer right now can cope with the games i play, i was wanting to upgrade then i wouildnt need to for another couple of years.
Click to expand...

Sticking with what you have right now is a good idea. As moving over to LLano would only be a sideways move.

I say this because that for older games (which tend to use only one or two CPU cores) an Athlon II X2 should be fine (plus looking at this review the single threaded performance of the top-end Llano A8-3850 is around the same as the Athlon II X4 635).

Plus, a GTS 250 is faster than even the fastest Llano onboard GPU (see here). So you would have to either keep the same graphics card (so saving no power) or use the LLano onboard graphics (and get less performance).

However, if you want a proper upgrade which will greatly extend the life of your system, then by far the best answer at the moment is Intel Sandy Bridge (and specifically an i5 2500K CPU and Z68 motherboard).

If you would like to spend less money then I would suggest going for the cheaper (but still very quick) i3 2100. This CPU blasts past the Athlon II and Lllano in terms of performance (see the review I linked to above) and if you use a good value Z68 board like this one then you can always upgrade to a quad core sandy bridge or even Ivy Bridge CPU in the future with the same board/RAM.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom