Awarding Performance

AMD's flagship Bulldozer processor delivered roughly the same performance equally the Core i5-2500K and Core i7-920 in Excel 2022, which is a behemothic jump forward compared to the Phenom II. AMD'southward fries rarely practise well in Excel compared to Intel's. For instance, the Phenom Ii X6 1100T was 30% slower than the FX-8150.

WinRAR's congenital-in criterion pegged the FX-8150 as the fastest processor by far, but the results are quite different in our own custom WinRAR compression exam. The FX-8150 took 118 seconds to complete the 700MB file compression exam, which was on par with the dated Cadre i7-920, only 17% slower than the i5-2500K and 22% backside the i7-2600K.

Compared to AMD's last-gen hexa-cadre processor, the FX-8150 offers a hefty 26% boost in Adobe Photoshop CS5, placing information technology in the league of Intel's i5-2500K -- though the i7-2600K was nonetheless 32% faster.

The FX-8120 was only a fraction of a 2nd slower than its snappier sibling, and although the FX-6100 saw a noticeable performance drop, it was all the same 8% faster than the Phenom II X6 1100T. Oddly. the FX-4170 was 4% slower than the Phenom Two X4 980, which is surprising considering they're both quad-core processors and the FX-4170 has a significant clock advantage.

When testing with Fritz Chess 12's built-in criterion, the FX-8150 delivered 11682 kilo nodes per 2d, which was only 1% faster than the Phenom II X6 1100T and x% quicker than the i5-2500K, while beingness 12% slower than the i7-2600K.

Clock for clock, the FX processors are likely no faster than the Phenom II in this test, as the FX-8120 was 6% slower than the Phenom II X6 1100T. Moreover, the FX-4170 was 24% slower than the Phenom II X4 980 despite having a 14% college frequency.