which link?
i wanna check out the review.

http://www.hardwareheaven.com/reviews/1285...troduction.html

The link

oo
nice.....

but if u look @ the bigger picture, not much of an improvement from phenom2 x6 & 980.

http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/article/AMD...U-Review/1402/3

dis review uses asus formla, but they dun hav the bios issue mentioned......
the result is consistent to the hardwareheaven review.

Guess have to wait for more FX's tested with different boards to see nicely

http://www.hardwareheaven.com/reviews/1285...troduction.html

The link

Edit: Weird, Hardware Heaven is the only reviewer who is able to run Total War: Shogun 2. If you refer to my earlier post, four other review sites (bit-tech.net, Sweclockers.com, Muropaketti and  HardWare.fr) had system crashes when running Total War: Shogun 2. 

i thk mobo can b the pb. Hardware Heaven uses Asrock 990FX extreme4, the rest use Asus Crosshair Formula V

Apparently ASUS CH5's BIOS is being blamed for the performance drop, we will see later how it goes

Asrock 990FX Extreme4 already shown us that BD can rival the 2600k in gaming, awaiting other boards

This is also a good clock to clock comparison between the AMD FX-8150 and the Phenom II X6 1100T both overclocked at 4.2Ghz

Both using Gigabyte's 990FX-UD7 mobo with F5 BIOS

http://wccftech.com/amd-bulldozer-fx8150-p...ark-comparison/

The benchmarks posted are all on high resolution.
In this case, the GPU is more important.
Why Bulldozer platform get slightly better FPS in high resolution gaming compared to i7 2600K when SLi/CFX, because the Bulldozer mobo gives x16/x16 while Sandy Bridge mobo gives x8/x8 only.

There are many reivews that compares clock-to-clock results as well (such as those at Tom's Hardware, HardwareCanucks, SweClockers.com, Planet 3DNow!, etc). 

That's incorrect because most of those reviews are using single card. The only reviews I've seen so far using SLI or CrossFireX are TweakTown and AlienBabelTech.

I was talking about reviews with SLi/CFX.
Don't see anything wrong there.

I was talking about reviews with SLi/CFX.
Don't see anything wrong there.

On Friday some benchmarks of the AMD FX-8150 Bulldozer on Linux were shared, thanks to an early adopter running some benchmarks under Gentoo and uploading them to OpenBenchmarking.org. But there's more to come.

While I don't have any physical access to AMD Bulldozer systems at this time, a Phoronix reader and early AMD customer was kind enough to offer remote access into his new system this weekend. Many thanks go out to Daniel Newkirk. This Bulldozer setup had a 3.60GHz quad-core AMD FX-4100 processor with 16GB of RAM and an SSD while running Ubuntu 11.04 on the Linux 2.6.38 kernel. Below is the /proc/cpuinfo for reference from the FX-4100 retail CPU.

    processor : 3
    vendor_id : AuthenticAMD
    cpu family : 21
    model : 1
    model name : AMD FX™-4100 Quad-Core Processor
    stepping : 2
    cpu MHz : 1400.000
    cache size : 2048 KB
    physical id : 0
    siblings : 4
    core id : 3
    cpu cores : 2
    apicid : 19
    initial apicid : 3
    fpu : yes
    fpu_exception : yes
    cpuid level : 13
    wp : yes
    flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush mmx fxsr sse sse2 ht syscall nx mmxext fxsr_opt pdpe1gb rdtscp lm constant_tsc rep_good nopl nonstop_tsc extd_apicid aperfmperf pni pclmulqdq monitor ssse3 cx16 sse4_1 sse4_2 popcnt aes xsave avx lahf_lm cmp_legacy svm extapic cr8_legacy abm sse4a misalignsse 3dnowprefetch osvw ibs xop skinit wdt lwp fma4 nodeid_msr topoext arat cpb npt lbrv svm_lock nrip_save tsc_scale vmcb_clean flushbyasid decodeassists pausefilter pfthreshold
    bogomips : 7224.27
    TLB size : 1536 4K pages
    clflush size : 64
    cache_alignment : 64
    address sizes : 48 bits physical, 48 bits virtual
    power management: ts ttp tm 100mhzsteps hwpstate [9]

From this system I've remotely run a variety of CPU tests using the Phoronix Test Suite on the FX-4100 Bulldozer. While I don't have the other matching components to his system to replicate a 1:1 comparison, I am now running results from close Sandy Bridge and Llano systems for reference using Ubuntu 11.04. These AMD FX-4100 Linux benchmarks should be out next week.

From the FX-4100 system I also facilitated a compiler comparison between GCC 4.5 and GCC 4.6. Those results are coming soon as well. Unfortunately due to the remote access and not wanting to make invasive changes to this reader's system, I wasn't able to do a Linux kernel comparison or with AMD's Bulldozer kernel patch that's said to improve the performance by several percentage points. I'm also optimistic on obtaining remote access to a FX-8150 Bulldozer system running Ubuntu 11.10 later in the next week.

Until then, many Phoronix readers have been running their own hardware comparisons against the Gentoo Linux results of the AMD FX-8150 Bulldozer system that was mentioned on Friday. With the Phoronix Test Suite it's simply a matter of running phoronix-test-suite benchmark 1110131-LI-BULLDOZER29 for the automated test download, installation, execution, and comparison.

Among the independent users facilitating comparisons against the FX-8150 results in the past two days are with an Intel Core i7 2820QM, AMD Phenom II X6 1090T, AMD Phenom II X2 550, AMD Athlon 64 X2 4800+, AMD Phenom II P920, AMD Athlon 64 X2 6000+, Intel Core 2 Quad Q9450, Intel Core i7 2600K, and Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550.

For those looking to facilitate a comparison of these results from the web-interface, simply click on the results via the "Compare Test Results" from the left-hand menu. Here's an OpenBenchmarking.org example that's comparing the AMD FX-8150 to some of the other user-supplied data.

I've also received some emails with users inquiring about interpreting the FX-8150 OpenBenchmarking.org Performance Classification data. To learn about OPC and other OpenBenchmarking.org features, see these SCALE slides (namely pages 4 and 5 for the OPC information) from the presentation earlier this year. There's also some other features being worked on too in order to improve usability and proper documentation of the platform's capabilities. (Feedback and other suggestions are also welcome.)

Until the AMD FX-4100 comparisons are finished, you can read about the AMD Trinity APU and also the AMD dual-Interlagos Bulldozer benchmarks under Linux.

so..is the bulldozer worth buying? huhu

Actually, the benching we've done in-house did show some very bad scenarios in games, but generally the performance was right where it should be for the price.

The power consumption however, is a different story. it's not uncommon to at 50W or 100W extra for the use of an Asus board versus that of an other brand.

Graphics performance with an AMD graphics card is better than the same card on an Intel board and a BD can actually provide beter results in games/benchmarks than a i7-2600K. it just seems AMD didn't think this launch out quite as well.