The NDA is over and review sites can publish their reviews of the new AMD desktop processors based on the Bulldozer architecture.

http://techreport.com/articles.x/21813
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4955/the-bulldozer-review-amd-fx8150-tested
http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Processors/AMD-FX-8150-Processor-Review-Can-Bulldozer-Unearth-AMD-Victory
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2011/10/11/amd_bulldozer_fx8150_gameplay_performance_review
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2011/10/11/amd_bulldozer_fx8150_desktop_performance_review
http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1741/1/
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2011/10/12/amd-fx-8150-review/1

Short version, the processor is disappointing when it comes to desktop applications and games, apps that are likely optimized for quad core or dual core processors. It starts to shine a bit when dealing with highly threaded server type applications.

I read the anand review early this morning. One interesting note I saw was that since the new chip cores are not created equally, win7 treats each as the same. They say that win8 will resolve that, but that is like a year away. So in theory you will get slightly better performance, but by then new hardware will be out anyways.

It is an interesting design, I hope they can perfect it over the next couple iterations.

 

-----signature-----

This looks like a train wreck to me for a desktop processor. A Core i5-2500 has up to 50% faster single threaded performance, the AMD chips just get shredded to pieces by similarly priced Intel processors in common desktop applications and games.

Several reviews ended with the hope that later versions of this architecture will be able to fine tune and improve clock speeds, sadly is very similar with the original Phenom launch too (another train wreck for AMD). Phenom got better, but it never got competitive.

This could be by design. Maybe AMD has given up on providing processors for gamers and enthusiasts. It's Llano seems pretty good for people wanting an CPU+GPU all in one solution (APU) and the Bulldozer architecture is probably very awesome for it's Interlagos server chips. Definitely more money catering to those two markets.

Desktop gamers still rocking AMD might need to put on a life vest and jump for it now though.

Checked Anand's, saw it was way below the Corei5 chips, formed an opinion that it is crap, came back here to post said opinion.

If they were charging $100 for it, might not be a bad deal.

 

-----signature-----

http://youtu.be/SArxcnpXStE

LOL. This is pretty good even for a hilter clip

I for one am really disappointed with AMD. yea it does great for the hard hitting multithreading scenarios but everything else is subpar. this leaves me to recommend intel all the way. i really hope AMD can step it up with this new design to at least be comparible to Intel!

 

-----signature-----

Here are the stock and overclocking wattage numbers from bit-tech.net

i5-2500K at 3.3GHz uses 162 watts.
Overclocked to 5.0GHz uses 311 watts.
52% overclock for 91% more power

FX-8150 at 3.6GHz uses 244 watts (already a lot).
Overclocked to 4.8GHz uses 586 watts (holy crap).
33% overclock for 140% more power

I added in the percentages to put it into perspective (hope my remedial math is right). Math aside, it definitely uses quite a bit of power even at stock and needs a lot more to overclock.

So liquid cool and overclock the 8150, then add in SLI 580's and you will be required to have over a 1200w psu to even run just the chip and 2 graphic cards lol

Nice!

 

-----signature-----

Why not save money and get a couple of those original Nvidia Fermi based GTX 480's.

Never mind that orange glow coming from inside the computer, those aren't the LED's.

Yeah I read some comments saying if intel put this chip out people would be calling it "prescott 2.0"