"This week we launched the highly anticipated AMD FX series of desktop processors. Based on initial technical reviews, there are some in our community who feel the product performance did not meet their expectations of the AMD FX and the “Bulldozer” architecture. Over the past two days we’ve been listening to you and wanted to help you make sense of the new processors. As you begin to play with the AMD FX CPU processor, I foresee a few things will register: In our design considerations, AMD focused on applications and environments that we believe our customers use – and which we expect them to use in the future. The architecture focuses on high-frequency and resource sharing to achieve optimal throughput and speed in next generation applications and high-resolution gaming. Here’s some example scenarios where the AMD FX processor shines: Playing the Latest Games A perfect example is Battlefield 3. Take a look at how our test of AMD FX CPU compared to the Core i7 2600K and AMD Phenom™ II X6 1100T processors at full settings: Map Resolution AMD FX-8150 Sandy Bridge i7 2600k AMD Phenom™ II X6 1100T MP_011 1650x1080x32 max settings 39.3 37.5 36.3 MP_011 1920x1200x32 max settings 33.2 31.8 30.6 MP_011 2560x1600x32 max settings 21.4 20.4 19.9 Benchmarking done with a single AMD Radeon™ HD 6970 graphics card Creating in HD Those users running time intensive tasks are going to want an AMD FX processor for applications like x264, HandBrake, Cinema4D where an eight-core processor will rip right along. Building for the Future This is a new architecture. Compilers have recently been updated, and programs have just started exploring the new instructions like XOP and FMA4 (two new instructions first supported by the AMD FX CPU) to speed up many applications, especially when compared to our older generation. If you are running lightly threaded apps most of the time, then there are plenty of other solutions out there. But if you’re like me and use your desktop for high resolution gaming and want to tackle time intensive tasks with newer multi-threaded applications, the AMD FX processor won’t let you down. We are a company committed to our customers and we’re constantly listening and working to improve our products. Please let us know what questions you have and we’ll do our best to respond. Adam Kozak is a product marketing manager at AMD. His postings are his own opinions and may not represent AMD’s positions, strategies or opinions. Links to third party sites, and references to third party trademarks, are provided for convenience and illustrative purposes only. Unless explicitly stated, AMD is not responsible for the contents of such links, and no third party endorsement of AMD or any of its products is implied. "
They can say whatever they want, but the FX's suck for gaming.....look a the benches for all the other games, I mean my processor gives it a run for its money in games....
I won't lie, Bulldozer is great technology that will certainly be made use of in the future, but by the time there's something that could fully make use of an architecture like Bulldozer, there will be something else better already out. What good is having the technology if you can't use it? Also, those benchmarks only show at the most an increase of 3 fps. I'm not an Intel fanboy, but at least Intel's new generation of cpus actually show improvement over the last.
the comment is a cop-out. High resolution gaming sees very little difference since the majority of the load is on the graphics card. So the difference in CPU spec is unnoticed. Benchmarks always try to test the hardware itself so they do so in a gaming environment that I would not run in like 1200x1600 no AA. I would have AA at max so my gpu will show what it can do not my processor. This response is understandable but it doesn't change things. AMD is clearly behind intel in raw power. And in all honesty BF3 is the type of game that would benefit from 8 cores. If AMD truly has the edge on bf3 for the cpu that would instantly make me want to buy one. I frankly don't care if I can't get 100fps in farcry2. BF3 is all that matters.
Sure let's believe AMD, I think not after their lies anyone remember the promotional video of 8150 beating 980X in cinebench 11.5? marketing lies here's the video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8rDwXuAINJk&feature=player_detailpage#t=60s missing from that statement clock speeds for cpu's? gpu stock or overclocked? turbo enabled? OS used?
In other words, "no comment". What's more shocking about this whole ordeal is the size of Bulldozer, I don't think AMD can even lower the prices with the yields they must be getting. EDIT: By the way, you forgot to list the source: http://blogs.amd.com/play/2011/10/13/our-take-on-amd-fx/comment-page-2/#comments
spot on with your comments tbh AMD deserve all this flak with lying an how badly it perform's for how long they spent designing an making it
Yeah combination of disabling comments on their youtube video because feedback was quite harsh an they didn't like it. Wouldn't be surprised if class action isn't brought against them soon for their marketing lies of performance.
More like Absurd Marketing Department. So now they go into denial mode and pretend that their miserable failure does anything more than match their previous generation X6. Intel are probably out of breath from laughing and will delay Ivy Bridge some more, thanks a lot AMD.
I think it'd be epic if, just to spite AMD, they dropped their prices, INSTEAD of raising them. It'd...hit the AMD Market so hard if Intel matched their prices with superior hardware.
They suck in old games that use 1-2 threads, but seem to do well in the new stuff that is well threaded, especially those games that make use of multi threaded DX11. Going forward more and more games will support these advancements, and if AMD can sort the power draw these chips would possibly be a viable choice for a gamer. AMD obviously bet the farm everything was going to be multi threaded years ago and developed this chip for it, but it looks like the software market is at least 12 months behind where their chip is. If AMD can raise IPC by 10%, cut power draw and get clocks up 10-15% then all of a sudden they will have a chip that is worth buying, and I would go for one because frankly I'm bored of Intel. Uhm, I'd argue its not AMD that need to get real. (They do need to sort their house out though.) AMD haven't been chasing the performance crown for years as it takes billions of dollars in R&D to create a $1000 dollar cpu that 3 people will buy. Instead they've been looking to be there or thereabouts with a high value product, so it shouldn't be expected they would release a world beater product. Instead they've produced a product that is a little too forward thinking for current market conditions and unfortunately power issues have caused it to be probably 10-15% behind where it should be with regards performance. I'm hoping that side of things can be sorted fairly quick. I'm sorry but in the BF3 I played at the settings I was running 2 fps extra was needed, and if every game was like that going forward I would pick a FX chip (If power draw sorted.) over a 2600k.