Question / Help FX 8150 8Core Compatibility

[Krazy]

If it's AM3+ it'll work with the processor. It may require a bios update though.

I would recommend buying a 8320 or a 8350 instead. Those are based on Piledriver instead of Bulldozer, which is a pretty hefty improvement. If you do buy either a 8150 or 8350 make sure you disable core parking and get the scheduler patch from MS, that fixes any issues with the processor.

You don't need Intel to stream. You can overclock a 8350 as well as a 8150. Paying a extra $100-150 for a motherboard in addition to the processor isn't worth it (something Intel users have no choice in paying for). A 8350 runs with very close to the same performance as a 3570k, let alone a 2500k. Almost no one in this thread is considering having to take a extra $100 onto a purchase to get similar performance to a 3570k.

8350 = $200
Board + 3570k = $320

There IS NOT a $120 performance difference between a 3570k and a 8350. Muf is correct. A high end i7 will completely blow a 8350 out of the water. A hexa core i7 costing at least $550. A 3770k isn't even worth buying nor are any of the other i7s till you reach hexacore. A hexacore i7 isn't 2.5x faster then a 8350 either.

The 8150/8350 sucks at single threaded performance, but even that suckiness has limitations (which a lot of people don't put properly into context). The 8350 is just as fast as a 3770k (a $320 processor) in many multi-threaded cases. Unfortunately I haven't seen good hardware review websites that have a couple benchmarks focused on streaming scenarios. Streaming is a very multithreaded workload. Encoding, running your game, running your streaming software, running any other bells and whistles in the background, a web browser, a h264 video (twitch), a web chat, VAC, all while alt tabbing constantly or having it all operating on different monitors.

Too much emphasis is put purely on game benchmarks and single threaded performance.

Except if you are lacking in game performance while...streaming a game, that has a pretty big impact on practical performance difference while streaming. In every game, even a 2500k still beats out the newest AMD chips, with still plenty of horsepower left over for streaming. Not to mention how much power draw you're looking at from the AMD chips vs Sandy/Ivy Bridge.

Yes, current AMD chips are "good enough" for streaming games and such, but they are not the most optimal/efficient.

BTW, running several programs at once isn't being "multithreaded" though obviously x264 encoding is. It's just running a bunch of, most times, single threaded programs at once. Something which the Intel chips are much better at.

Anyway, I think this thread has already gone past its usefulness, no need to continue an Intel vs AMD debate here.

 

[Bensam123]

Power draw means jack diddly unless you're talking about battery life. It's a over inflated issue. In order to make up the difference in price between a 8350 and a 3570k you'd have to run your computer quite a bit for years and that would just be to make up for the cost difference. If I remember right you'd break even in 3 3/4 years at 10c KW/h.

Single threaded performance isn't the same as multithreaded performance. It's possible for a something to be very good at single threaded and very bad at multithreaded. Streaming is a multithreaded workload, there is no way to get around it. Unfortunately there aren't any benchmarking websites that focus on streaming performance, just the same as I haven't found any that test with core parking off.

Running a bunch of programs at once is the same thing overall as a single multithreaded application, only you're the one manually making more threads (by opening more programs). A computer workload is not nearly the same running a game with nothing in the background verse running a game while streaming.

I disagree, telling someone to buy $320 worth of components when they could most definitely get away with one costing $200 is quite useful to them and their bank account.

 

[Haliinen]

I know that the FX 8150 is equivalent to the 2600K in multithreaded x264 encoding, (according to x264 Benchmark 5.0.1) both stock clocked. I'm not sure how the real world performance is however. Keep in mind that the FX 8150 is at 3.6 GHz and the 2600K is at 3.4 GHz.

 

[seronx]

I own the FX-8320 and use to have a Phenom II 965 BE.

With OBS:
965 BE - 720p @ 30 fps w/ Ultrafast preset and my games were mostly 30-40 fps range. OBS was stable @ 30 fps and no dropped frames.
FX-8320 - 720p @ 60 fps w/ Veryfast preset and my games are mostly in the 40-60 fps range. OBS is stable @ 60 fps and no frame drops.

The CPUs were not overclocked as I'm a stocker. I'm also running an old 480 GTX which doesn't help with the fps since it isn't vectorized where the 600 series and 7000/8000 series are.