software overclocks are showing abnormal ratings in cinebench as opposed to bios overclocks. when I SW OC my CB scores are way up since CB thinks I'm running at the stock 3.1 GHz. For a true score, overclock your shit the right way... In the bios
@anonymousb37 Yes.. lol never copy this, this is actually the worst o.c ever no temperature, and his cinebench is 5.53... lol i get 5.48 on my FX-6100 which is one series down ok if i we're you i would get Cinebench, Prime95, and AMD overdrive or speedfan for the temperatures, and NEVER go past 1.5V will kill you're cpu... ok if you're going for 4ghz go 1.3V-1.375V and leave it at 4ghz otherwise you are overheating with 1.525
@anonymousb37 whats you're cooler? if u have stock cooling dont even go close to 4 ghz lol... if you have a 20-35$ one i would stay about 4.2ghz and anything above maybe 4.3-4.5ghz im not totally sure there might be some ripoffs so do ur research but generally get prime95 and stres test it with AMD overdrive open if AMD overdrive is showing u temp above 65 degrees i would slow down b4 i kill my cpu
@anonymousb37 ok i have the same cooler i have some idea ur max temp is 65 degrees dont exceed that ever and its risky to even get close to 65 degrees run it at 1.4V and stress test it at 4.5ghz if its above 65 degrees stop the stress test and dont o.c it past the degrees you have now... and if its like 50 degrees even at 4.5ghz then u could risk running 1.425V to 4.7ghz and run stability tests weekly for 15-30 mintes (60 degrees above can be risky so this is you're precaution)
@newegg what software was you using with the republic of gamers logo? is it the software that comes with the motherboard or is it an additional software?
Im sorry but I have a question about the cinebench render pogram.
I can see J.J. overclocking the cpu to xxxxGhz, but I cant see that amount of Ghz in the cinebench results info. I can just see 8cores/8threads @2.81 Ghz all the time.
Is that a cinebench bug? It seems like the changes he's doing are not being updated by cinebench.
Might I point out here, this video was of an engineering sample. BIOS have not been optimized, scores are not accurate, all you traitors spamming "AMD Fails!" videos are going to feel like idiots when BIOS and drivers are optimized. Right now the price of a 8150 and decent MB vs the similar priced i5-2500K and MB (Intel MBs cost much more) Passmark has AMD win @ 8544 and Intel @ 7449 Check the site and price of decent MBs before you reply or I will point out your failure. AMD wins here.
What a noobish overclocking example of this processor !
If I was a noob watching this video I`d never buy one.
1. This chip will be dead shortly on over 1.5v on air !
2. This chip scales best with 1866Mhz + RAM (huge leap between 1600 and 1866 even - search the web)
3. Completely useless overclocking, take a look at the CB score ! (mine 8120 gets around 7.0 in Cinebench R11.5 at 4.3GHz) FX`s love FSB overclocking - not just a multi !
4. Stress it with PRIME95 and show stability first
1.Ths guys are using a Xigmatek cooler that have contact pipelines, it is pretty good but anyway 1.5v isnt required to hit 4ghz range
2. Yes no brainier, but Bd have problem with paired 1866s
3.Depends on what you have, if you got 990fx chipset with BD you will be just fine with multi overclock, I just got mine in CB 7.38 in just the multi @ 4.5ghz
4. Prime95 will crash for this BD, better use htb wprime 32
I would rather they spent their time refining the Phenom II architecture for more efficient clock speeds, made it 32nm and released a 7ghz Phenom III chip..... now that is a product i would be interested in.... even as a fan of AMD i see no use whatsoever for this chip in home computing
One thing I like about AMD is how durable their hardware is. More power? Strap some more CPUs on there. May not run as cold as Intel, but far more durable from my experience. The one thing I want them to make is the stackable modular CPU concept from years past.
@slyfox8900 That is NOT a normal cine bench score, he must have some problem, cuz at 4.5 I am easily getting 7.4 (amd 8120) and I am getting 6.38-6.5 at 3.92
question -- when J.J. got he CPU to 4.8 ghz, what temp was it running at, under load or idle, i dont care, im just quite curious how it was with a mid grade cooler.
Anybody remember this guy taking a 2600k to 5.2 ghz on a air cooler test bench. This guy needs to show realistic overclocks for processors. No way the overclocks this guy shows for this processor will hold up. The top end 8150 can't even do 4.8 all cores without insane voltage and top of the line water cooler kit.
I have been able to hold 4.8GHZ with Hyper 212+ continually for approx 1 month now without issues. You are correct that as always when overclocking voltage and cooling need to be kept in consideration. In addition if you are efficient you can maximize voltage being supplied to the CPU using an offset vid as opposed to a manual fixed vid. For Sandy Bridge i have also been able to hold consistent 5.0GHz overclocks. Thanks for the view and support.
In response to myself, I'm gonna pass. I've heard reports that AMD themselves have said that if you want to overclock to above 5 GHz you should disable 3 of the 4 modules. In addition temperatures are fairly hot as well. At 4.6 GHz running Prime 95 temps were hitting about 75 degrees Celsius, so it isn't a particularly stable overclock compared to a Sandy Bridge.
And to top it off the 2500k, an i5 CPU, is faster. It might be a new chip, but it seems rushed out for a bit of dick waving.
So it went from 3.1 GHz to 4.8 GHz I take it, since this is apparently the 8120.
Interesting, but I'll wait for comparison tests between Ivy Bridge and Bulldozer to come out before I blow my wad prematurely. PC tech is expensive enough as it is and I'd rather have the latest and greatest over the overhyped and overrated.
Hey everyone! I make Dubstep, Beats and Remix's Be sure to look up VoltageTunez on Facebook, Soundcloud and Twitter! Every follower and like and subscriber is a big BIG help!
I have some questions for JJ. Especially when people have found out that the Bulldozer performs MUCH BETTER on an ASRock mobo than an ASUS motherboard that costs way more!
We have not seen this our Crosshair is the fastest performing AM3+ board on the market this is part of the reason AMD chose our board as the launch board for all media review of Bulldozer. Thanks for the view and support.
@ASUSIlluminati I was hoping that too. I have been buying ASUS my entire life when it comes to motherboards. The review at hardwareheaven shows the results. Please have a look at it and get back to me on it.
@ASUSIlluminati Also thanks for getting back to me. Please give me a word on that hardware heaven review that shows the ASRock producing clear results than the Crosshair V with the BD.
I do not see anything on hardware heaven as i do not work with that media as well i can not comment on it but as you see foryourself in the Interview between Paul and AMD , AMD states they selected the Crosshair for the board to match with BD because of ours offering the best performance and overclocking. Thanks for the reply. Best Regards
@Martinx88813 Depends on the game on the GPU you have. If the bottleneck in a game you were playing was your cpu before, then yes lol. But most games the bottleneck is the gpu. This will definitely not hurt, but not give you like 20 fps more, unless maybe like in sc2, which is very cpu intensive.
@Scizor2120 Look at the CPUZ and Task Manager windows showing all 8 cores enabled. Furthermore, did you watch the entire video? He overclocked from 4GHz all the way to 4.8GHz on the final Cinebench run. The score of 5.53 is really terrible.
@lexwalker2 I own an fx-8120 and have noticed Asus boards having problems with BD - I think they're getting it sorted in later BIOS versions, but not 100% sure on that. My chip scores 7.40 in Cinebench at 4.5ghz, using an MSI 990fxa-gd80. However, that is still abysmal for such high frequency and power draw, so I wound up buying a sandy bridge anyway, which is scoring 7.21 at stock (mobo is EVGA P67 FTW) :D
@Amuffin456 and the i7-990x destroys the sandy bridges even the top of the line i7-2600k ..... so your point is mute ... the i7-2600k is about 50 bucks more and the motherboard you need for it is also at a premium and if you want to over clock then you need to spend another 50 to 100 bucks on a real cpu cooler ... so you might aswell have just gotten the i7-990x if money is no object why did you cheap out and get the i7-2600k ....
@Justchuck69 Uh, no. Even if you buy a 200 dollar mobo and expensive cpu cooler : 314 + 100 + 200 = 614 dollars. Compared to $999 just for the i7 990x. He is not "cheaping out", just doing the sensible thing - buying an already extremely fast, overclockable proccesor that will be compatible with ivy bridge.
@amoghthegamer no not really a fan boy of intel (i7-990x is intel ) nor amd but i'm not looking for a gamer cpu but one that might be good for encoding and trans coding videos
but i will wait a bit and still check our more benchmarks ( both intel and amd ) !
but you sound like a sandy brigde fan boy ! just saying
I think a big reason BD seems to perform poorly compared to SB is because these synthetic benchmarks use Intel's proprietary libraries which were proven to work ineffectively when 'non genuine intel' architecture is detected.
@LordSamuelJ there's that as well as the BIOS for the BD Processor is bugged from what i've been hearing, AMD is working on it though so we will see how it goes in the upcoming months
Hi Paul + JJ: Many of us have heard some alarming news about these new processors underperforming when compared to the SB series from Intel that it was supposed to be competitive with. An air cooled 4.8 OC sounds awesome but do you need to disable 3 cores to achieve the highest OC potentials on a standard production version? Is it true that the 8150 is outperformed by a Phenom x6? You need to do/show some actual benchmarks from a stock model and tell people if they need to wait for a new BIOS.
Thanks for the view and support. In regards to cores needing to be disabled no you can achieved overclocks depending on CPU margin and cooling between 4.6GHz to 5.0GHz on air. Keep in mind at higher frequencies about 4.8 the vid required is quite high. Additionally in regards to UEFI support we have full BD support as of now for all of our AM3+ 900 series motherboards. Thanks for the view and support.
Haha, read the breakdown of this on one of the tech sites, turns out that even with 8 cores, and a higher base clock speed, Intel's Core i5-2500k still smokes this thing!
@iPheonixMedia I have i7 2600K ocerclocked to 5.0Mhz with Corasir H100 cooler. And my score on Cinebench 9.8 compare to there 5.53, WOW it's a shame AMD officially SUCKS.
@valeriys2000 That is an engineering sample, the retail version OC'ed to 4.6 does around 7.5 in Cinebench, is not too good but still better that the Phenom II.
@valeriys2000 In terms of the fx 4100 and fx 6100, I think AMD offers better price to performance ratios compared to Intel. The 8000 series definitely is a disappointment for the price they' put it at.
This brings back memories. Remember the first generation Phenoms with that bug? Guess what it feels like that all over again. I reckon AMD is going to release a 2nd generation bulldozer and will be happy again.
it must be software compatility problems....because x6 1100 which old AMD cpu got better performance!!! we have to wait a bit....This benchmarks are not show us real performance of FX cpus
@nebukenazar You are right on, on the software compatibility. No one else seems to understand this. End user benchmarks on a different OS (maybe Linux or Win 8) may be a better result.
I see the FX 4100 to be a better chip for the masses. If you have the need for 8 cores like in a editing enviroment that used many heavy hitting programs at the same time, then the FX 8150 would be a great chip for that use.
I really cant figure out why the bd performs so badly. It has very impressive core speed, cache and core counts yet its slow?? I think that there must be a compatibility issue with software? Maybe this new architecture will improve in time much like Nvidia and fermi.
You have to remember that all these intel cpu's that y'all are talking about are 2nd gen chips not first gen yah BD isn't what the hype was leading us to; however this is first gen chipsets and first gen chips. Once the bugs have been worked out in the chipset things might be different. On a side note your comparing a cpu without virtual cores to one that is running 4-6 physical and 4-6 virtual cores at the same time their not even the same people so take it for what it is.
@indyrocker but you have to realize that AMD is touting BD chips to take on SB. It doesn't matter if SB is 1st or 2nd-gen, it doesn't matter that BD is AMD's first architecture refresh in a long time. All that matters is that the chips are disappointing and doesn't deliver the goods.
@lpjz290 Yes I do realize that they were saying that it was going to take on SB. I also realize that it may take a revision or two to get it to where it can really take on SB. AS for the price everything is always the most expensive when it first comes out wait a few months and for new chips to come out and for a price drop and then lets do a comparison. Besides I remember the phenom fiasco.
wow, I am running an intel i7 950 @ 4.2Ghz and my Cinebench score is 7.19...AMD fails to beat my old intel x58 based computer. AMD's new FX CPUs are an amazing fail.
Wow it had REALLY REALLY low cinebench score. 5.93? How is that possible. The BDs are really really bad cpus. Also real expensive. I thought they would be cheaper.
Since amd overclocked this to around 8.4 ghz with I think liquid nitrogen I wonder if it's possible with water. And if so 8 cores at 8.4 ghz is way too good to pass up these days. I bet it'll beat the i7 then. Not unless the 2700k comes out and rains on amds parade with 12 cores at 15 ghz with the stock cooler at 5.9v lol. 4000 watt psu ftw.
@expertnoobFTW No, they overclocked it to 8.4GHz using LIQUID HELIUM, which is within a degree from absolute zero, -273C. You probabaly wouldn't be able to get past 5.5GHz even with the best of chips on water.
@swirle13isme Well when it draws around 460W by itself when OC'd to a little over 4GHz, you need something :). Personally, I love AMD but the power drain from Bulldozer is pretty crazy. Not that I mind but the competition (Intel) is running the same performance while consuming half the power.
@SGTSHOOTnMISS Not sure where you're getting your information from, because in every single benchmark, the 2500K outperforms the FX-8130, and, in most cases, the FX-8150.
@BeSweeeet CPU Benchmark shows read and write speeds, encryption rates, 3d FPS Benches, and overall capability of multithreading. They have tested them all and shown the 8150 to highly outperform the 2500k, but fall short to the 2600k
@SGTSHOOTnMISS Then websites such as Hardware Secrets must've altered the benchmark results, because in nearly every test, the 2600K and 2500K both come out on top of the FX-8150. If the 2500K fell short, it was by an incredibly small margin.
It only beats the i7 2600k when overclocked, and not by much, according to bench marks by guru3d. However, it is amazing at multi-threading and is much better at that. I think the decision would be determined on your use. For me, modern gaming does not really require more than 4 cores, so I would go with the sandy bridge cpu's.
@TheSchmitzrunner So?? That's just marketing. Pentium 4s can hit 7GHz with liquid nitrogen but you don't see anyone using those.
The 2500K is a cheaper processor that is better in every possible way. From what I've read the FX-8150 seems to have a problem with it's L2 and L3 cache, especially latency wise. The 2500K is tried and tested, and has crazy single threaded performance, which is very important to a lot of applications. Also they aren't true cores.
@TheSchmitzrunner Well, yeah, I can. I'm not saying that they wont be able to get the job done, but for a CPU that was released after sandy bridge it should at least compete with it. The fact that the Phenom IIs can beat the FX-8150 in some areas is just pathetic.
Ivy Bridge will probably be out by the the time AMD release Piledriver, and PD probably wont even beat SB. AMD stated a 10-15% increase in performance over Bulldozer. IB is supposed to be 20-30% more powerful than SB. And it's 1155.
i don't get it, my phenom II gets 7.5-ish cinebench scores clocked at 4.2 gHz. I think the shared resources were a backfire if a significantly better overclocker than I gets sub 6 points with a 4.8 gHz overclock
the thing i thought was sad, is its not a scorpius platform...just because they use a GTX 580.. /sigh.. opther than that, this vid is all good
caseychaos3601 1 week ago
I was buy AMD FX 8120 , gigabyte 880GM-USB3L 4 RAMS SKILL, but I forgot buy the powwer supply, do u recommended power supply pls
DBProduccionesapson 2 weeks ago
@DBProduccionesapson any corsair psu is decent :]
schreech7202 1 week ago
My girl said cool video but the wall is dirty, you should clean that up a little bit! lol
JamesMFG 2 weeks ago
liquid nitrogen?! no liquid helium
seanoid69 1 month ago
software overclocks are showing abnormal ratings in cinebench as opposed to bios overclocks. when I SW OC my CB scores are way up since CB thinks I'm running at the stock 3.1 GHz. For a true score, overclock your shit the right way... In the bios
KharnakPVP 2 months ago
I copied everything he did with a FX-8150 and it crashed at 4GHz. Is 1.525V too high for the CPU?
anonymousb37 2 months ago in playlist Tech
@anonymousb37 Yes.. lol never copy this, this is actually the worst o.c ever no temperature, and his cinebench is 5.53... lol i get 5.48 on my FX-6100 which is one series down ok if i we're you i would get Cinebench, Prime95, and AMD overdrive or speedfan for the temperatures, and NEVER go past 1.5V will kill you're cpu... ok if you're going for 4ghz go 1.3V-1.375V and leave it at 4ghz otherwise you are overheating with 1.525
lolzxDrofl 2 months ago
@lolzxDrofl I like to achieve 4.6 to 4.8GHz, what voltage should i set my CPU at? And what are some good guides to overclocking?
anonymousb37 2 months ago
@anonymousb37 whats you're cooler? if u have stock cooling dont even go close to 4 ghz lol... if you have a 20-35$ one i would stay about 4.2ghz and anything above maybe 4.3-4.5ghz im not totally sure there might be some ripoffs so do ur research but generally get prime95 and stres test it with AMD overdrive open if AMD overdrive is showing u temp above 65 degrees i would slow down b4 i kill my cpu
lolzxDrofl 2 months ago
@lolzxDrofl I have a Corsair H60 and my max load temps are around 42C.
anonymousb37 2 months ago
@anonymousb37 ok i have the same cooler i have some idea ur max temp is 65 degrees dont exceed that ever and its risky to even get close to 65 degrees run it at 1.4V and stress test it at 4.5ghz if its above 65 degrees stop the stress test and dont o.c it past the degrees you have now... and if its like 50 degrees even at 4.5ghz then u could risk running 1.425V to 4.7ghz and run stability tests weekly for 15-30 mintes (60 degrees above can be risky so this is you're precaution)
lolzxDrofl 2 months ago
First of all what are the temps? did he even monitor them?
This dingaling is using 1600 ram - get the 1866 so you dont have to worry about your ram getting retarded over higher fsb speeds
Should have started with fsb increase to maximize overall system speed, then the multiplier for internal speeds, and lastly voltage for stability
oh yeah and one more thing... OVERCLOCKING ISN'T ALWAYS THIS EASY
KharnakPVP 2 months ago in playlist Computer builds/unboxings/reviews/parts 11
This has been flagged as spam show
@KharnakPVP it does not support all 4 dimms in 1866 to my knowledge.
Ri1seAgainst 1 week ago
@newegg what software was you using with the republic of gamers logo? is it the software that comes with the motherboard or is it an additional software?
lynxloco 2 months ago
Mine Phenom II 1090T 4.05Ghz CPU scores 6.98 on Cinebench 11.5. And this 8-core last gen 4.8 Ghz CPU scores only 5.5 What a looser.
BloodScatter 2 months ago
Comment removed
BloodScatter 2 months ago
i have a score of 6.54 on cinebench just by overclocking my fx-8120 to 4.0GHz. something isnt right here 0.o
sk8erboy4k4 2 months ago
Im sorry but I have a question about the cinebench render pogram.
I can see J.J. overclocking the cpu to xxxxGhz, but I cant see that amount of Ghz in the cinebench results info. I can just see 8cores/8threads @2.81 Ghz all the time.
Is that a cinebench bug? It seems like the changes he's doing are not being updated by cinebench.
What I am missing?
r05021975 2 months ago
Overclock the fx-6100
RATSHADY 2 months ago
JJ looks gangsta!
savagex805 3 months ago
Might I point out here, this video was of an engineering sample. BIOS have not been optimized, scores are not accurate, all you traitors spamming "AMD Fails!" videos are going to feel like idiots when BIOS and drivers are optimized. Right now the price of a 8150 and decent MB vs the similar priced i5-2500K and MB (Intel MBs cost much more) Passmark has AMD win @ 8544 and Intel @ 7449 Check the site and price of decent MBs before you reply or I will point out your failure. AMD wins here.
XionEternum 3 months ago
What a noobish overclocking example of this processor !
If I was a noob watching this video I`d never buy one.
1. This chip will be dead shortly on over 1.5v on air !
2. This chip scales best with 1866Mhz + RAM (huge leap between 1600 and 1866 even - search the web)
3. Completely useless overclocking, take a look at the CB score ! (mine 8120 gets around 7.0 in Cinebench R11.5 at 4.3GHz) FX`s love FSB overclocking - not just a multi !
4. Stress it with PRIME95 and show stability first
RIDICULOUS
subuk420 3 months ago 19
@subuk420 it does not support all 4 dimms in 1866 to my knowledge.
Ri1seAgainst 1 week ago
@subuk420
1.Ths guys are using a Xigmatek cooler that have contact pipelines, it is pretty good but anyway 1.5v isnt required to hit 4ghz range
2. Yes no brainier, but Bd have problem with paired 1866s
3.Depends on what you have, if you got 990fx chipset with BD you will be just fine with multi overclock, I just got mine in CB 7.38 in just the multi @ 4.5ghz
4. Prime95 will crash for this BD, better use htb wprime 32
Moution23 1 day ago
I would rather they spent their time refining the Phenom II architecture for more efficient clock speeds, made it 32nm and released a 7ghz Phenom III chip..... now that is a product i would be interested in.... even as a fan of AMD i see no use whatsoever for this chip in home computing
addz17 3 months ago
One thing I like about AMD is how durable their hardware is. More power? Strap some more CPUs on there. May not run as cold as Intel, but far more durable from my experience. The one thing I want them to make is the stackable modular CPU concept from years past.
Battlemaster00 3 months ago
That cannot be... My 8120 at 3.92 Ghz scores 6.38-6.5, why at 4.8 he is scoring 5.53??
ArzenalX 3 months ago
what i would give for that cpu
meloveu1ongtime 4 months ago
A 5.5 at 4.8ghz with 8 CORES!? Wow..... My 1090t scores a 6 at stock ghz.......
Bulldozer=Fail.
My next build will be Intel thick and through.
slyfox8900 4 months ago
@slyfox8900 That is NOT a normal cine bench score, he must have some problem, cuz at 4.5 I am easily getting 7.4 (amd 8120) and I am getting 6.38-6.5 at 3.92
ArzenalX 3 months ago
I swear, JJ never leaves.
junitono1 4 months ago
question -- when J.J. got he CPU to 4.8 ghz, what temp was it running at, under load or idle, i dont care, im just quite curious how it was with a mid grade cooler.
datOtaku 4 months ago
J.J. has a cool mustache... xD
TrueGamerNET 4 months ago in playlist More videos from newegg
@TrueGamerNET agreed
xJeTyHD 3 months ago
wow he overclocked and made it look so ez...
officedemon 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@officedemon
Thanks for the view and for the support.
ASUSIlluminati 4 months ago
5.53 pts.... I get 7.01 with my 1100T @4Ghz :(
But then again... the cpu they used was the slowest of the 8 cores. Lota intel fanboys are over looking that small detail.
drmurda 4 months ago
Anybody remember this guy taking a 2600k to 5.2 ghz on a air cooler test bench. This guy needs to show realistic overclocks for processors. No way the overclocks this guy shows for this processor will hold up. The top end 8150 can't even do 4.8 all cores without insane voltage and top of the line water cooler kit.
traingp7 4 months ago
@traingp7
I have been able to hold 4.8GHZ with Hyper 212+ continually for approx 1 month now without issues. You are correct that as always when overclocking voltage and cooling need to be kept in consideration. In addition if you are efficient you can maximize voltage being supplied to the CPU using an offset vid as opposed to a manual fixed vid. For Sandy Bridge i have also been able to hold consistent 5.0GHz overclocks. Thanks for the view and support.
ASUSIlluminati 4 months ago
You guys.. This CPU Can outperform the i5.. Also, you have to use a hd6 series graphics card if you wanna get the most out of it.
JtGorospe90 4 months ago
love my sandy's (i7 2600k,i5 2500k) so much have one for gaming and another for backup and movies etc..p67 and z68 i have so much luv for them...
zilkoify 4 months ago
In response to myself, I'm gonna pass. I've heard reports that AMD themselves have said that if you want to overclock to above 5 GHz you should disable 3 of the 4 modules. In addition temperatures are fairly hot as well. At 4.6 GHz running Prime 95 temps were hitting about 75 degrees Celsius, so it isn't a particularly stable overclock compared to a Sandy Bridge.
And to top it off the 2500k, an i5 CPU, is faster. It might be a new chip, but it seems rushed out for a bit of dick waving.
Sektor14g 4 months ago
So it went from 3.1 GHz to 4.8 GHz I take it, since this is apparently the 8120.
Interesting, but I'll wait for comparison tests between Ivy Bridge and Bulldozer to come out before I blow my wad prematurely. PC tech is expensive enough as it is and I'd rather have the latest and greatest over the overhyped and overrated.
Sektor14g 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Hey everyone! I make Dubstep, Beats and Remix's Be sure to look up VoltageTunez on Facebook, Soundcloud and Twitter! Every follower and like and subscriber is a big BIG help!
Thank you for your time guys!
@VoltageTunez
Check my youtube account
Facebook search
Soundcloud search!
voltagetunez 4 months ago
Why will this video not leave my subsrciption page very annoying
RichardA5150 4 months ago
I have some questions for JJ. Especially when people have found out that the Bulldozer performs MUCH BETTER on an ASRock mobo than an ASUS motherboard that costs way more!
Tilan123 4 months ago
@Tilan123
We have not seen this our Crosshair is the fastest performing AM3+ board on the market this is part of the reason AMD chose our board as the launch board for all media review of Bulldozer. Thanks for the view and support.
ASUSIlluminati 4 months ago
@ASUSIlluminati I was hoping that too. I have been buying ASUS my entire life when it comes to motherboards. The review at hardwareheaven shows the results. Please have a look at it and get back to me on it.
Tilan123 4 months ago
@ASUSIlluminati Also thanks for getting back to me. Please give me a word on that hardware heaven review that shows the ASRock producing clear results than the Crosshair V with the BD.
Tilan123 4 months ago
@Tilan123
I do not see anything on hardware heaven as i do not work with that media as well i can not comment on it but as you see foryourself in the Interview between Paul and AMD , AMD states they selected the Crosshair for the board to match with BD because of ours offering the best performance and overclocking. Thanks for the reply. Best Regards
ASUSIlluminati 4 months ago
More jj!
G00DFe77a 4 months ago
@G00DFe77a
Thanks appreciate the view and the support
ASUSIlluminati 4 months ago
JJ and Paul... ultimate overclockers
LikeATox 4 months ago 3
@LikeATox
LOL thanks man appreciate it.
ASUSIlluminati 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
5.53 => 4.8GHz ? fuk..
Capeta2004 4 months ago
12 intel fanboys were here.
drmurda 4 months ago
MORE OVERCLOCKING TUTORIALS!!
manutube8080 4 months ago in playlist Videos from newegg
@manutube8080
Check our our ROG Forums. Thanks for the view and support.
ASUSIlluminati 4 months ago
And I was so hoping a major price drop from Intel. AMD, you kill my inner child.
giorgiv18 4 months ago
This Awesome 4.0!!!!!!! Will it help get more FPS also or not really?
Martinx88813 4 months ago in playlist More videos from newegg
@Martinx88813 Depends on the game on the GPU you have. If the bottleneck in a game you were playing was your cpu before, then yes lol. But most games the bottleneck is the gpu. This will definitely not hurt, but not give you like 20 fps more, unless maybe like in sc2, which is very cpu intensive.
ConeJellos 4 months ago
@ConeJellos Thanks man for the info!!!! So meaning it not work on Crysis2 or BF3 rite
Martinx88813 4 months ago
Score of 5.53 at 4.8GHz ?! That's really bad! Epic fail.
lexwalker2 4 months ago 2
@lexwalker2 obviously they didn't actually run the test at that OC level, or they disabled some modules to get it to handle 4.8GHz
Scizor2120 4 months ago
@Scizor2120 Look at the CPUZ and Task Manager windows showing all 8 cores enabled. Furthermore, did you watch the entire video? He overclocked from 4GHz all the way to 4.8GHz on the final Cinebench run. The score of 5.53 is really terrible.
lexwalker2 4 months ago 8
@lexwalker2 I own an fx-8120 and have noticed Asus boards having problems with BD - I think they're getting it sorted in later BIOS versions, but not 100% sure on that. My chip scores 7.40 in Cinebench at 4.5ghz, using an MSI 990fxa-gd80. However, that is still abysmal for such high frequency and power draw, so I wound up buying a sandy bridge anyway, which is scoring 7.21 at stock (mobo is EVGA P67 FTW) :D
statikreg 3 months ago
@lexwalker2 I got 5.86pts on my 8120 @4.3ghz. I just released a review of the 8120 with a few benchmarks :)
misterpc23 2 months ago
@Scizor2120
No cores were disabled. Thanks for the view and for the support.
ASUSIlluminati 4 months ago
thats a cinebench fail score.... The epic returns amd Faildozer.
3dkiller 4 months ago 2
i have a cool master 212 seeing it do so well makes me happy.
shalom1181 4 months ago
THE FX 8000 series is the lower scale of FX processors!!!!!!!!!!!
SO OF COURSE THEIR NOT THE BEST. BUT THERE CHEAP AS HELL!
they said they will have another Fx to fight the 3930k Q1 2012
killerv135 4 months ago
My i5 is overclocked to 5.1 with a thermaltake frio
SlayCrazed 4 months ago
1.525 volt? thats kinda high. what were his temps like?
fanmanabc 4 months ago
thumbs up if you watched in 2x speed or 1/4 speed
sodapopinski1077 4 months ago
Wow
r0mulyni2 4 months ago
1.525v
JJ has ballz
brandono61cr 4 months ago
bulldozer was bulldozed by Sandy Bridge!
amoghthegamer 4 months ago 4
@amoghthegamer and this youtube vid was trolled by amoghthegamer
thumbs up if it is true
:-)
Justchuck69 4 months ago 3
@Justchuck69 Not trolling, facts. Sandybridge destroys this thing.
Amuffin456 4 months ago
@Amuffin456 and the i7-990x destroys the sandy bridges even the top of the line i7-2600k ..... so your point is mute ... the i7-2600k is about 50 bucks more and the motherboard you need for it is also at a premium and if you want to over clock then you need to spend another 50 to 100 bucks on a real cpu cooler ... so you might aswell have just gotten the i7-990x if money is no object why did you cheap out and get the i7-2600k ....
Justchuck69 4 months ago
@Justchuck69 2500k destroys this, I never said the 2600k, but if we compared the 2600k to this the bulldozer is destroyed.
Amuffin456 4 months ago
@Amuffin456 but still was a dissapointment compared to the i7-990x right
Justchuck69 4 months ago
@Justchuck69 You can't even comopare the 990x to this. The 990x blows this thing out of the water, so does the 2500k and the 2600k.
Amuffin456 4 months ago 2
@Amuffin456 was comparing the dissapointing i7-2600k to the i7-990x not the bulldozer vs i7-990x
Justchuck69 4 months ago
@Justchuck69 2600k is better than the bulldozer.
Amuffin456 4 months ago
@Amuffin456 yes it does but is it better then the i7-990x?
Justchuck69 4 months ago
@Justchuck69 In certain tests, yes.
Amuffin456 4 months ago
@Amuffin456 Even the 2500k
Tilan123 4 months ago
@Justchuck69 Uh, no. Even if you buy a 200 dollar mobo and expensive cpu cooler : 314 + 100 + 200 = 614 dollars. Compared to $999 just for the i7 990x. He is not "cheaping out", just doing the sensible thing - buying an already extremely fast, overclockable proccesor that will be compatible with ivy bridge.
qw3rtyui0p250 4 months ago
@Justchuck69
fanboy much? look at the specs bulldozer < sandy bridge.
amoghthegamer 4 months ago
@amoghthegamer no not really a fan boy of intel (i7-990x is intel ) nor amd but i'm not looking for a gamer cpu but one that might be good for encoding and trans coding videos
but i will wait a bit and still check our more benchmarks ( both intel and amd ) !
but you sound like a sandy brigde fan boy ! just saying
Justchuck69 4 months ago
@amoghthegamer Specs don't tell anything.
4lpha0ne 4 months ago
@4lpha0ne Amd bulldozer is a huge disapointment compared to sandybridge.
Amuffin456 4 months ago
what power supply did you guys use? 2000w 3000w?
omni13vision 4 months ago
yea wow... 4.8, but who run's their cpu at 1.525 volts ?????!?!?! thats wayyy to high for a stable 24/7
mrDMxtreme 4 months ago
Lol did he say twice in the first minute of the video that he is working very had to overclock it. That says it all
saneblane 4 months ago
I think a big reason BD seems to perform poorly compared to SB is because these synthetic benchmarks use Intel's proprietary libraries which were proven to work ineffectively when 'non genuine intel' architecture is detected.
LordSamuelJ 4 months ago
@LordSamuelJ there's that as well as the BIOS for the BD Processor is bugged from what i've been hearing, AMD is working on it though so we will see how it goes in the upcoming months
FRIntense 4 months ago
Hi Paul + JJ: Many of us have heard some alarming news about these new processors underperforming when compared to the SB series from Intel that it was supposed to be competitive with. An air cooled 4.8 OC sounds awesome but do you need to disable 3 cores to achieve the highest OC potentials on a standard production version? Is it true that the 8150 is outperformed by a Phenom x6? You need to do/show some actual benchmarks from a stock model and tell people if they need to wait for a new BIOS.
cy2087 4 months ago
@cy2087
Thanks for the view and support. In regards to cores needing to be disabled no you can achieved overclocks depending on CPU margin and cooling between 4.6GHz to 5.0GHz on air. Keep in mind at higher frequencies about 4.8 the vid required is quite high. Additionally in regards to UEFI support we have full BD support as of now for all of our AM3+ 900 series motherboards. Thanks for the view and support.
ASUSIlluminati 4 months ago
Haha, read the breakdown of this on one of the tech sites, turns out that even with 8 cores, and a higher base clock speed, Intel's Core i5-2500k still smokes this thing!
Quantium 4 months ago
Wheel world
miestarSqils 4 months ago
@iPheonixMedia I have i7 2600K ocerclocked to 5.0Mhz with Corasir H100 cooler. And my score on Cinebench 9.8 compare to there 5.53, WOW it's a shame AMD officially SUCKS.
valeriys2000 4 months ago 3
@valeriys2000 That is an engineering sample, the retail version OC'ed to 4.6 does around 7.5 in Cinebench, is not too good but still better that the Phenom II.
krnt13 4 months ago
@krnt13 I c, but still Intel did there homework better then AMD... :)))
valeriys2000 4 months ago
@valeriys2000 In terms of the fx 4100 and fx 6100, I think AMD offers better price to performance ratios compared to Intel. The 8000 series definitely is a disappointment for the price they' put it at.
jubjub1114 4 months ago
@valeriys2000 wts the integrated GPU on a i7 2600k? HD 3000 still?
idiota115 4 months ago
@idiota115 yes HD3000
valeriys2000 4 months ago
I hope this cpu overclocks great with the 990fxa-ud3 and the cooler master v6gt.
RATSHADY 4 months ago
This brings back memories. Remember the first generation Phenoms with that bug? Guess what it feels like that all over again. I reckon AMD is going to release a 2nd generation bulldozer and will be happy again.
conyo985 4 months ago 2
174Watts =)))) gtfo
stigyo92 4 months ago
it must be software compatility problems....because x6 1100 which old AMD cpu got better performance!!! we have to wait a bit....This benchmarks are not show us real performance of FX cpus
nebukenazar 4 months ago
@nebukenazar You are right on, on the software compatibility. No one else seems to understand this. End user benchmarks on a different OS (maybe Linux or Win 8) may be a better result.
I see the FX 4100 to be a better chip for the masses. If you have the need for 8 cores like in a editing enviroment that used many heavy hitting programs at the same time, then the FX 8150 would be a great chip for that use.
e4300 4 months ago
Comment removed
nebukenazar 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@e4300 You're right, i am goning to wait further benchmarks....
nebukenazar 4 months ago
I really cant figure out why the bd performs so badly. It has very impressive core speed, cache and core counts yet its slow?? I think that there must be a compatibility issue with software? Maybe this new architecture will improve in time much like Nvidia and fermi.
LordSamuelJ 4 months ago
I would really love to know what temps they were reaching with that cooler
XcrimasX 4 months ago
You have to remember that all these intel cpu's that y'all are talking about are 2nd gen chips not first gen yah BD isn't what the hype was leading us to; however this is first gen chipsets and first gen chips. Once the bugs have been worked out in the chipset things might be different. On a side note your comparing a cpu without virtual cores to one that is running 4-6 physical and 4-6 virtual cores at the same time their not even the same people so take it for what it is.
indyrocker 4 months ago 2
@indyrocker i5 2500k is cheaper and better :/
by the time they have 2nd gen BD out, ivy bridge will be out
magicdevil09 4 months ago
@indyrocker but you have to realize that AMD is touting BD chips to take on SB. It doesn't matter if SB is 1st or 2nd-gen, it doesn't matter that BD is AMD's first architecture refresh in a long time. All that matters is that the chips are disappointing and doesn't deliver the goods.
lpjz290 4 months ago
@lpjz290 Yes I do realize that they were saying that it was going to take on SB. I also realize that it may take a revision or two to get it to where it can really take on SB. AS for the price everything is always the most expensive when it first comes out wait a few months and for new chips to come out and for a price drop and then lets do a comparison. Besides I remember the phenom fiasco.
indyrocker 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
give him fuel
give him fire
give him that which he desires!
GreyWarden5 4 months ago
Over hype from AMD! Not worth it if you live next to a microcenter which has an 2600k for 280.
skavanger408 4 months ago
thats crazy 4.8 ghz on air?!?!?
mota411 4 months ago 2
@mota411
Thanks for the view and for the support.
ASUSIlluminati 4 months ago
9-9-9!!!
TheArea510 4 months ago
I think I'll stick with my i5 2500K OC to 4.3GHz. Intel 4 life
Mas7erChief117 4 months ago
Or go to microcenter and get the 2500k for 180$. I actually got mine for 150$ on sale and brand new.
Digitalunderground2 4 months ago 4
I don't think JJ goes home. He just hangs out with Paul all the time.
TheUnknownHarbingers 4 months ago 66
So, how's the temps on the OC, paul?
Sodisna 4 months ago
wow, I am running an intel i7 950 @ 4.2Ghz and my Cinebench score is 7.19...AMD fails to beat my old intel x58 based computer. AMD's new FX CPUs are an amazing fail.
humanitysonlyhope 4 months ago
Wow it had REALLY REALLY low cinebench score. 5.93? How is that possible. The BDs are really really bad cpus. Also real expensive. I thought they would be cheaper.
howtooverclockcpu 4 months ago
@howtooverclockcpu lol at $280 for the high end one is pretty damn cheap compared to intels i7 970 at $570
helloworldinthenet 4 months ago
@helloworldinthenet And the 2500K is pretty damn cheap at $220 considering it beats them all.
Polymerabbit 4 months ago
@Polymerabbit I wouldn't call 220 cheap.
Sodisna 4 months ago
@Sodisna As far as processors go it is.
Polymerabbit 4 months ago
Since amd overclocked this to around 8.4 ghz with I think liquid nitrogen I wonder if it's possible with water. And if so 8 cores at 8.4 ghz is way too good to pass up these days. I bet it'll beat the i7 then. Not unless the 2700k comes out and rains on amds parade with 12 cores at 15 ghz with the stock cooler at 5.9v lol. 4000 watt psu ftw.
expertnoobFTW 4 months ago
@expertnoobFTW Lol, liquid nitrogen is about -200C, you wouldn't get close.
xVeccs 4 months ago
@expertnoobFTW No, they overclocked it to 8.4GHz using LIQUID HELIUM, which is within a degree from absolute zero, -273C. You probabaly wouldn't be able to get past 5.5GHz even with the best of chips on water.
Polymerabbit 4 months ago
Bulldozer was actually cooled using liquid helium. Liquid nitrogen was too hot...
swirle13isme 4 months ago 35
@swirle13isme and running only on 2 cores 1 module
omni13vision 4 months ago
@swirle13isme Well when it draws around 460W by itself when OC'd to a little over 4GHz, you need something :). Personally, I love AMD but the power drain from Bulldozer is pretty crazy. Not that I mind but the competition (Intel) is running the same performance while consuming half the power.
procupine14 4 months ago
i5 2500 is better at half the price and this cpu dont come close to any of i7
hornerable 4 months ago
Yawn. A 2500K is still faster. AMD failed.
BeSweeeet 4 months ago
@BeSweeeet CPUbenchmark shows the 2500k as being slower in real performances in all benchmarks, where are you getting your information?
I love Intel, but im not going to sit idle as you slander another company because of mild Fanboyism
SGTSHOOTnMISS 4 months ago
@SGTSHOOTnMISS Not sure where you're getting your information from, because in every single benchmark, the 2500K outperforms the FX-8130, and, in most cases, the FX-8150.
BeSweeeet 4 months ago
@BeSweeeet CPU Benchmark shows read and write speeds, encryption rates, 3d FPS Benches, and overall capability of multithreading. They have tested them all and shown the 8150 to highly outperform the 2500k, but fall short to the 2600k
SGTSHOOTnMISS 4 months ago
@SGTSHOOTnMISS Then websites such as Hardware Secrets must've altered the benchmark results, because in nearly every test, the 2600K and 2500K both come out on top of the FX-8150. If the 2500K fell short, it was by an incredibly small margin.
BeSweeeet 4 months ago
It only beats the i7 2600k when overclocked, and not by much, according to bench marks by guru3d. However, it is amazing at multi-threading and is much better at that. I think the decision would be determined on your use. For me, modern gaming does not really require more than 4 cores, so I would go with the sandy bridge cpu's.
jzoott 4 months ago
i dont understand why people are bashing these. im def using one of these 8 core babys in my next build. and they are considerably cheap price too.
AND THEY HOLD A FUCKING WORLD RECORD
TheSchmitzrunner 4 months ago
@TheSchmitzrunner So?? That's just marketing. Pentium 4s can hit 7GHz with liquid nitrogen but you don't see anyone using those.
The 2500K is a cheaper processor that is better in every possible way. From what I've read the FX-8150 seems to have a problem with it's L2 and L3 cache, especially latency wise. The 2500K is tried and tested, and has crazy single threaded performance, which is very important to a lot of applications. Also they aren't true cores.
Polymerabbit 4 months ago
@Polymerabbit solid arguments. but you cant say that these are bad cpus
TheSchmitzrunner 4 months ago
@TheSchmitzrunner Well, yeah, I can. I'm not saying that they wont be able to get the job done, but for a CPU that was released after sandy bridge it should at least compete with it. The fact that the Phenom IIs can beat the FX-8150 in some areas is just pathetic.
Ivy Bridge will probably be out by the the time AMD release Piledriver, and PD probably wont even beat SB. AMD stated a 10-15% increase in performance over Bulldozer. IB is supposed to be 20-30% more powerful than SB. And it's 1155.
Polymerabbit 4 months ago
@Polymerabbit well for a nice gaming build should i just go for a core i5 then?
TheSchmitzrunner 4 months ago
does it have hyper threading though???
RoxxPC 4 months ago
@RoxxPC Are you retarded?
starwarsfan76 4 months ago
i don't get it, my phenom II gets 7.5-ish cinebench scores clocked at 4.2 gHz. I think the shared resources were a backfire if a significantly better overclocker than I gets sub 6 points with a 4.8 gHz overclock
landwolf00 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
What CPU is better for Gaming and Video Rendering. "Phenom ll X6 1100T" or this?
absoluteblkade3 4 months ago
At first look I thought J.J.'s chair was some fat ass with their butt to the camera...
RustyRazor2010 4 months ago
Haha Paul is acting so strange at the beginning with all those hand gestures.
cjhatesu 4 months ago
Comment removed
cjhatesu 4 months ago
What cpu coolers work on it.
BLiNdsnipin 4 months ago
@BLiNdsnipin
Any AM3 CPU cooler will work without issue. Thanks for the view and support.
ASUSIlluminati 4 months ago
Thanks for coming again JJ, love ya.
snoopy210190 4 months ago
@snoopy210190
Thanks for the view and for the support I appreciate it.
ASUSIlluminati 4 months ago
I see a scary face behind JJ @ 7:07 if you full screen this video
declaration963 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
can this cpu crossfire with a 6xxx series card???? like the A8?????and why is everyone complaining how bad this cpu is :( .
gen2sega 4 months ago
Comment removed
gen2sega 4 months ago