7

AMD FX Processors Show Improved Performance On Windows 8


Recently AMD unveiled its new line of AMD FX Processors which go by the name of Bulldozer. The chip is first of its kind made for desktop processor for consumer PCs with an eight core set-up. However, the early reviews for the new Bulldozer processors tell a different tale.

Reviews from web sites such as TechSpot confirm that the new chips don’t even match up to the  performance given by an older Sandy Bridge-based chips from AMD’s main rival Intel.

In light of such comments,AMD has come ahead and notified everyone that these processors do give increased performance on Windows 8 in a new slide promoting the AMD FX processor.According to Xbitlabs , the slide shows that the chip, running on the developer’s preview version of Windows 8, shows better performance running games when compared to Windows 7. The slide shows a two percent increase in Windows 8 when playing Deus Ex: Human Revolution, a four percent increase while playing Battlefield 3 and Call of Duty Black Ops, and a significant 10 percent increase while playing Left 4 Dead 2.

Although,there’s no info on what kind of PC setup was used to run these gaming benchmarks. According to AMD,  the performance boost while running games in Windows 8 is due to the OS’s new scheduler which handles processors with multiple cores more efficiently.

In the end, there are no PC games that can currently access the full eight processors that the new Bulldozer chips have. As of now, it seems that the new AMD FX chips are still not able to match up with Intel’s current line of processors.

Filed in: Windows 8 Tags: , , , ,
  • AaronWright3

    Poor AMD. They try so hard.

  • blane shoy

    2 percent, is this some kind of joke. I would be ashamed to stop the presses then say no wait, it’s 2 percent better than that. In the computer world you have to start hitting about 12-15 percent to make any difference in the things that need speed. Amd just shut up and start working on the next project, this one is a failure. i have been waiting since the first bulldozer was announced back in 2006, what a disgrace.

  • http://overhackit.com Platatomi

    AMD sucks

  • Tehpanda64

    but here is the difference, AMD stuff is cheap as dirt in comparison to intel. much more “bang” for your buck.

    • heath mcfarland

      That might have been the case before, but to say it about Bulldozer and Sandy Bridge would show that you haven’t looked at the prices of either.

  • Anonymous

    At 125 watts and less performance per watt per core , vs. the cheaper i5 2500 cpu this is sad, @ 2% is insignificant in value , a 5% or greater is significant and not by chance!

  • Estephens101

         I have been an AMD fan since the AMD 386 CPU’s came out prompting 7 years of litigation with Intel. AMD won by the way. When Dirk Meyer (DEC Alpha CPU great) lead the engineering team at AMD to pounce on Intel with a far superior AMD Athlon CPU I was very happy, however, AMD fell asleep at the wheel on their core product line (CPU’s) and let Intel spring ahead again and they have been eating Intel’s dust ever since! The Phenom 1.0 launch failure was bad enough, then the Fusion delays, Phenom 2.0 was what Phenom 1.0 was supposed to be, then the Bulldozer delays, and now the excuses from AMD again!
         So I ask AMD, did you get rid of the best leadership guy you had since Jerry Sanders (Dirk Meyer), to seriously lust after a stupid niche tablet market? FAIL! Did you spin off your foundries so that way you could point a finger at someone else when things go wrong? FAIL! So if things do go wrong on initial silicon you now have no control over the process! FAIL!
         Windows 8 is geared towards tablets with a stupid tile interface that I and many others DO NOT LIKE! I seriously doubt we will be running bulldozer on a tablet to be blown away by your massive 2% increase in performance AMD! FAIL!!!!!

© 2012 Windows 8 Beta. We are in no way affiliated with Microsoft