Sort by:
Title (
)
Date (
)
Rating (
)
Popularity (
)
Sites currently sorted by: Date (Old Links Listed First)
)
Date (
)
Rating (
)
Popularity (
) Sites currently sorted by: Date (Old Links Listed First)
The days when AMD processors ruled the performance roost are long gone, and most enthusiasts have forgotten they ever existed. But less than a decade ago, the Athlon X2 dual-core processor thoroughly spanked Intel's first crude dual-core efforts, which were simply two separate processor dies on one chip, communicating through the front-side bus, as opposed to AMD's much more advanced true dual-core CPUs. But AMD's been playing catch-up since then, and has been forced to compete on price rather than performance in desktop processors. Now Benchmark Reviews tests the high end of the new Bulldozer desktop CPU line, the multiplier-unlocked 8-core FX-8150 CPU.
Intel’s Core i5 and Core i7 range have been dominating the headlines in 2011, bringing together a heady combination of class leading performance with competitive pricing. Today AMD are set to revitalise their famous FX brand name and we analyse the new flagship FX 8150 Black Edition processor. Is it enough to put them back on the map?
Today we get to see for the first time how the top model in AMDs new FX range of CPUs, previously known as Bulldozer, performs against the existing Intel equivalent as we put the two CPUs head to head. Not only that though we will test their entire platform, testing gaming, USB 3.0, SATA 6Gb/s and PCIe performance.
Der Vorhang für AMDs umfassendste Prozessor-Überarbeitung der letzten Jahre ist gelüftet! Wir zeigen, was hinter „Bulldozer“ steckt und wie viel das Desktop-Flaggschiff FX-8150 leistet. Parallel dazu wird von uns aber auch der Vergleich mit den Vorgängern bei gleichem Takt, gleichem Speicher und auch ansonsten identischen Voraussetzungen näher beleuchtet.
der Bulldozer FX im Test von PC Games Hardware: Wir prüfen, wie schnell der FX-8150 rechnet und wie hoch die Leistungsaufnahme ausfällt, welche architektonischen Besonderheiten der Bulldozer auffährt, wie es um das Overclocking bestellt ist und vieles mehr.
Today is a huge day in terms of significance for AMD, who just moments ago launched the first major redesign of their processor architecture since 2003. AMD has not been able to keep the new architecture much of a secret as the new 'Bulldozer' core architecture is widely known amongst enthusiasts and gamers. Read on to see how the AMD FX-8150 processor performs compared to many of the popular processors on the market today.
We have been waiting for months, but Bulldozer is finally here. The weeks leading up to the launch of the new FX line of processors hasn't been the best for AMD with a large amount of leaks that haven't put the new FX-8150 in the best light. Today, though, leaks don't matter; unofficial results don't matter. We've got all the latest drivers, the latest BIOS updates and it's time to see what Bulldozer can do. There's no denying that AMD are going to have a tough fight on their hands, though. AMD have stated that the new platform is only designed to compete against the current crop of Sandy Bridge CPUs.
AMD hasn't launched Bulldozer today; instead, they made the mistake of launching the FX-8150 and the FX-8150 only. This is where the problem lies with what AMD has done today with the launch of the new Bulldozer CPU. So, maybe it's not the marketing team; maybe the marketing team wanted to do what I think they should've done, but the suits up top wouldn't let them.
Today AMD announces the Bulldozer CPU, it's first major release of micro architecture since the AMD 64. We have the FX-8150 strapped in for some testing and with 8 cores of multi-processing power at 3.6GHz we show you why the Bulldozer is must have hardware. Gaming, processing power, and pricetag combine to make the Bulldozer recipe a winner.
Wie viele unserer Leser auch, warteten wir lange auf AMDs neue Prozessorgeneration. Eine Generation, die gleichzeitig eine komplett neue Architektur darstellt und mit vielen technischen Features aufwartet, die es bisher nicht gab.
execution time : 0.112 sec