fx 8150 weird cpuz lol
ok well like it states cpuz says my 8150 is in fact an 8130p chip and i have heard rumors that it's not a true 8 core but a 4 core with some form of ht enable whats your take on both lol
well i am having fun playing with it not sure wear i will use it depends on what overclock i get of it :thumb:
oh i am rocking it on an gigabyte 990fxa ud7 mobo cause the formula 990fx mb i bought was toast on boot lol
so please fill me in i have looked on google and can't seem to find a answer if it's true or not about the ht enabled stuff thanks for any input
and i asked cause i am not sure how to start overclocking this ( ie an 8 core will take more vcore then a 4 core with ht )
I'd return it, you payed for a true octocore, not an "unlocked" octo, plus it costs and performs less then an 8150.
Whao that interestingI never heard of that before, does cpuz say that it is a 8130p?
yes it does it says it's an 8130p hoping tis just a mix up with cpuz
ok well this is weird cpuz 1.58 says 8130p but i checked there was a few folks says its just cpuz so i grabbed cpuz 1.59 and guess what it says its says 8150 lmao
umm, well if it says 8130 in cpu-z and windows, and its clocked like an 8130 but the box you go it in was sealed and said 8150 well, I would return it with a nasty letter :P
The FX chips are not really 8 cores, and they are not hyper threade either, they are more like 4 cores missing 1 piece per core more or less that would make them an 8 core. So they are not hyperthreaded like Intel does, more like 1.8 core or some such thing :P, I think they are kind of nifty, but they should not have been marketed as a true 8 core design, cause that they most certainly are not, real nifty design though, I would read up on it :)
What does your OS and BIOS call the CPU? I'd trust that first (and wait for the next CPU-Z) to see what happens. EDIT: well it looks like CPU-Z messed up, but check BIOS anyway
AMD has never used HyperThreading. People equate the way Bulldozer shares a floating point unit to HyperThreading.
From what I gather, since I can't find a detailed breakdown of a Sandy Bridge core, HT shares ALL the resources of a core (floating point, arithmetic logic unit (ALU) stuff, L1 cache, etc) among two threads. If you run two threads on Bulldozer however, you still get two L1 caches, 2 sets of ALU, but one L2 cache (that's meh because lots of CPUs break L2 cache to be shared between cores), and only one FPU (BIG performance penalty if your task is floating point heavy like F@H, physics, some ray tracing, etc.). If you're running an integer or branch-heavy load (e.g. most database / server stuff) you should get "true" 8-core performance.
ya i understand it now there is 8 cores but they share parts in the core modular setup so it's still kinda a true 8 with shared parts makes sense i guess we will see where this takes amd and i will c where it takes this overclocking
|All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:00 AM.|