Is this technically better than Ryzen 3?

[star_pilot475]

I was looking at this cpu, I kinda wondered if it’s any better than a ryzen 3 2200g? It’s a AMD FX-8150  Black Edition. Any better than Ryzen? Clock speed is at 3.6 but can turbo to 4.2ghz. 8 cores too. I kinda think it is, but what do you guys think?

Edited March 20, 2019 by star_pilot475

[TheRandomness]

The short and long answer is simply no.

[star_pilot475]

Ok, any reasons? 

[SkilledRebuilds]

3 minutes ago, star_pilot475 said:

I was looking at this cpu, I kinda wondered if it’s any better than a ryzen 3 2200g? It’s a AMD FX-8150  Black Edition. Any better than Ryzen? Clock speed is at 3.6 but can turbo to 4.2ghz. 8 cores too. I kinda think it is, but what do you guys think?

Each individual Core is give or take some small percent.,...HALF speed (lower IPC at same/higher clocks) of Modern day offerings..
So knowing ALL apps,.. don't use all cores,... your severely limited in performance against alternatives...

[star_pilot475]

Ok thanks for the help. I guess that makes sense.

[.Apex.]

Just now, star_pilot475 said:

Ok, any reasons? 

Multicore performance is basically the same, but since the FX has 8 cores, and the Ryzen has 4 cores, Ryzen has much superior Single core performance, there's really nothing better about the FX 8150

[Tristerin]

https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/AMD-Ryzen-3-2200G-vs-AMD-FX-8350/m441832vs1489

 

Much faster single and quad core on the R3

[SkilledRebuilds]

FX8 has 8 Integer Cores, but only 4 Floating Point units

So games that use Floats, perform way worse than expected,...
Apps that use Integer, work great (at a higher than modern power usage cost though)

[r2724r16]

1 minute ago, star_pilot475 said:

Ok, any reasons? 

The Bulldozer architecture is just crap by today's standards. Zen/+ is much better in terms of IPC.

Just now, _Syn_ said:

but since the [FX-8150] has 8 cores

It has 8 integer cores, but only 4 modules. So I wouldn't really call it an 8 core CPU.

[.Apex.]

1 minute ago, Geography said:

It has 8 integer cores, but only 4 modules. So I wouldn't really call it an 8 core CPU. 

There's alot of debate around that subject, and honestly i'm too tired, I just want people to stop considering FX CPU's, or even talking about it, it's just terrible in every possible way, it didn't have any advantages back in 2011-2012, and it especially doesn't have any advantages in 2019.

[Mira Yurizaki]

26 minutes ago, star_pilot475 said:

I was looking at this cpu, I kinda wondered if it’s any better than a ryzen 3 2200g? It’s a AMD FX-8150  Black Edition. Any better than Ryzen? Clock speed is at 3.6 but can turbo to 4.2ghz. 8 cores too. I kinda think it is, but what do you guys think?

Clock speed and core count are only part of the story, but what's also important is the per-core performance. The problems with the FX series are (using AMD's definition of a core at the time):

• Two cores share a single floating point unit. Ryzen has a floating point unit for each core.
• Each core has fewer execution units than Ryzen's core.
• The amount of instructions that could be fed to each core is limited. On Bulldozer, each pair of cores can decode four instructions at once (though one core can get up to four instructions at once). On Ryzen, each core can decode four instructions, but each pair of cores can get eight.

Those are the surface details, I'm sure there are other things that require deeper digging. However the other thing to note about selecting the CPU is what system you get with it. The FX processors are old and don't natively support modern technologies or features. Another point is that the FX processors are inefficient, running hotter and consuming more power on average.