AMD 3.6 GHz AM3 FX 8150 Processor

I know this place is crawling with AMD fan boys... so I'm writing to this for opening the eyes of those who are undecided what to buy.
To the people who go for specs alone... here are some things to consider
1. Can a webcam of 20 Megapixels replace a DSLR of 12 megapixels?
2. Do you think two cameras of 8 Megapixels produce the same clarity images?
3. A graphic card has around 600+ cores... but can it do the work that the CPU does? and Vice versa?
4. Do you think a high-end android phone like galaxy s3 (with 4 cores) has the power to even open up photoshop? If you say yes... why are there no ARM PCs?.... it uses much less power.

The way of measuring performance is not specs like cores, cache etc.... it is only benchmarks.
I'm not saying cores, cache etc. don't count -- these things cannot be used to compare two different brands.... think of it like you go buy two shirts.. both have XL written on it -- but one fits and other doesnt. Why? Because XL means different for different brands! That is why you cannot compare two brands even if they are from the same company eg: Nahlem vs Sandy Bridge vs Ivy Bridge just purely on specs.... If that were the case then, Nahlem = Sandy Bridge = Ivy Bridge... but you know thats not true. And people would be using FX 8150 in high-end server machines because they have better specs than Xeon processors. The only way to compare a processor is via "benchmarking"

What is a benchmark? It is a way of running the same task on two different systems and seeing who completes faster and scoring it on a number system.

Now coming back to the topic...
If you look at benchmarks (source:anadtech.com) you can see what I'm talking about -- FX 8150 is ridiculously slow compared with the i7 2600 .. and most of the time gets beaten by i5 2500.
The specs don't matter -- its the performance that it shows when doing basic tasks like photoshop, playing a game, compiling a program.
So why does intel have such a lead with lesser cores?
Its because of the R&D that they did. I work in a processor company that specializes in cryptography... there are many things that intel doesn't share with the world -- but they have a lot of proprietary technology inside the Sandy/Ivy Bridge that makes is really fast in doing the simplest of tasks.
Thats why AMD lost out.

A processor is not as simple as a car -- where you can say this much bhp, this much weight, this much mileage -- and you can get an idea about the performance of a car... a processor is a very complex combination of transistors that no single person can explain and they keep improving everything every year -- not just clock speed, cores and cache. It is much more complex than that.

If you just want to brag about 8 cores-- yeah, go for the FX 8150 -- but if you want pure performance -- Sandy Bridge is the way to go (and you can brag about the cores of your GPU instead). Don't trust me, check out the benchmarks.

Another point is power consumption -- its known that overclocking a processor will increase its power usage -- which is true for an AMD .. but intel has done something incredible -- if you look at the power usage that i7 2600 shows after overclocking, you'll see that it just consumes slightly more -- which is nothing compared to what this processor does when overclocked !!! It just draws power like an AC

So keeping all this in mind, you make your choice... remember folks -- its not about the specs -- there is a lot proprietary technology inside these products that are not published to the outside world... so only way to judge a processor is by benchmarking it.
There was a time when AMD got it right -- like during the time they released the Athlon 64 and Athlon 64 X2... it swept the floor with the pentium 4s that time... But for the last couple of years, it was just intel which was holding the cup for best performance.

Having said all that, this is a very cheap processor.. and if this is what you can afford -- you should definitely get it.. But don't expect some ridiculous performance because it says 8 cores.

This processor gives you Outstanding performance better than Intel 2011 core 17 Extreme processor and its cheaper than Intel and also more core than Intel. And you can overdrive up to 4.8 to 5 GHz with out any problem if you have a proper cooling like Corsair H80 and H100. And for 3D people it renders high Polygon Models in a blink of an eye with a ridicules 8 core. So looking for a high performance in cheaper rate this is the No 1 processor.

Note : Don't use the stock cooler for Overclocking.

Hi

8 CORES, 16 MB CACHE MEMORY, 3.6 GHz with Maximum Turbo Speed of 4.2 GHz, 125 W MAX TDP, Integrated Graphics.... everything just for 12 K

I dont know why people compare it to i5 2500k... i5 gives 6 MB cache , 4 cores 3.2 GHz... for the same cost..

The only reason people buy Intel is because they trust Intel... Intel processors were the first to come .. there was no AMD.. millions of people got Intel so they still trust intel and think that it can beat AMD ... thats not the truth.. go on specifications and not on reviews...

Its the same story people still buy Iphone because they trust it but mobiles like HTC One X, Galaxy S3, Galaxy NOTE are far better...

I hope that I made my point clear there..!! :)

Its one of the best processor in the world today at a very low cost ... simply buy it..!!!!!!!!!!

Guys, number of cores on your cpu will definitely be the driving factor on performance of the running programs. Being a person from computer science background I would always say increased number of cores(processing units) on chip will exponentially improve the performance of the system. At one point of time you will never be able to execute more than one instructions on a single core. But if your cpu contains n number cores, n parallel instructions can be executed simultaneously.

If you are unable to extract full power of 8 core AMD processor that is an issue within your program/process. It is not built to run on multi processor environment. But you can not blame the processor or comment that higher number of cores or high clock speed doesn't help. This is computer science, everything is controlled by the Mathematics not by the marketing or advertisement by a big brands.

Please make a note that this piece of technology is the greatest thing known till date in the market providing you a 8 Physical cores Thats right 8 physical cores. The i7 3960 is a 6 physical core processor providing you with hyper threading technology but if you guys really wanna do some overclocking and are in need of full utilization of your cpu go for amd fx 8150 its the only processor which has stable overclocking at clock speed of 5.0 ghz at its factory air cooling provided by amd. Whereas intel i7 3960 are 6 core 12 threads processors may have the chances of making a pc lag as my cousin is himself using it. Well if you want a value for money go for amd. I myself have a bulldozer which is a 8 core fx8120 cpu which gives me 30 fps at all the games i play which is standard frame rate also no lags and no hangs
AMD really has proved that its the best brand and also has value for money
:D