Less than a week ahead of its launch, a Ukrainian online store named Fixer started listing the AMD FX 8120 eight-core processor PIB (FD8120FRGUBOX). The store is listing the FX 8120 at 1791 UAH (US $223.5). According to the source, FX 8120 stocks arrived at Fixer's warehouse on the 5th of this month, and the product is listed since. The variant listed is the one with 95W TDP, there is a 125W TDP variant, too. It remains to be seen how the two variants spread across distribution channels. The FX 8120 is based on the Bulldozer micro-architecture, it features 8 cores, 16 MB total cache, and a nominal clock speed of 3.1 GHz (which can go up to 4 GHz with TurboCore). A worldwide launch of the AMD FX Processor family is expected on October 12.

98 Comments on AMD FX 8120 Listed on Ukrainian Store

1 to 25 of 98 Go to Page 1234 PreviousNext

#1 seronx

95 Watt part is pos to be the 2012 version ugh!! Posted on Oct 7th 2011, 12:04 Reply

#2 Lionheart

OMG just gimme my Bulldozer O_O Posted on Oct 7th 2011, 12:08 Reply

#3 IvTK

Benchmark & OC

forum.overclockers.ua/viewtopic.php?uid=2&f=2&t=42451



This is FX-8120 CPU from another store. Incredible! This is FX-8120 CPU from another store. Incredible! Posted on Oct 7th 2011, 12:09 Reply

#4 treehouse

IvTK Benchmark & OC

forum.overclockers.ua/viewtopic.php?uid=2&f=2&t=42451



This is FX-8120 CPU from another store. Incredible! those numbers mean nothing to me, did it perform well? those numbers mean nothing to me, did it perform well? Posted on Oct 7th 2011, 12:23 Reply

#5 caleb

IvTK Benchmark & OC

forum.overclockers.ua/viewtopic.php?uid=2&f=2&t=42451



This is FX-8120 CPU from another store. Incredible! LOL they took his picture so the score looks more creditable

LOL they took his picture so the score looks more creditable Posted on Oct 7th 2011, 12:24 Reply

#6 Doomedspeed

caleb LOL they took his picture so the score looks more creditable

forum.overclockers.ua/download/file.php?id=14020&t=1&sid=036a0269c6f91b1d17d209d01bb6f691 He looks like a trustworthy man! :)



On that website; why does the CPU-Z name it an 8130P when he his holding and apperently using a 8120?



Im not being stupid am i? :wtf: He looks like a trustworthy man! :)On that website; why does the CPU-Z name it an 8130P when he his holding and apperently using a 8120?Im not being stupid am i? :wtf: Posted on Oct 7th 2011, 12:55 Reply

#7 IvTK

CPU-Z needs an update i guess! Posted on Oct 7th 2011, 13:17 Reply

#8 Ghost

treehouse those numbers mean nothing to me, did it perform well? That SuperPi result is like of a Pentium II or something.



It can't take 102 seconds for BD @ 4.8GHz to finish SuperPi 1M. Because i5 2500K @ 4.6GHz takes only 8 seconds to finish SuperPi 1M.



I'm confused. Am I missing something? :wtf: That SuperPi result is like of a Pentium II or something.It can't take 102 seconds for BD @ 4.8GHz to finish SuperPi 1M. Because i5 2500K @ 4.6GHz takes only 8 seconds to finish SuperPi 1M.I'm confused. Am I missing something? :wtf: Posted on Oct 7th 2011, 13:21 Reply

#9 heky

Exactly. This cant be true, becouse if it is, it is a big FAIL. I can do 8M runs faster than that.



Linx test only 35gflops, this is seriously weak, even for a Intel specific test. Also 1.5v for 4.6ghz overclock. Seriously, this better not be real. Posted on Oct 7th 2011, 13:23 Reply

#10 IvTK



forum.overclockers.ua/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=42451&start=40

More screenshots

Also there is possibility that cache mem is brocken. I agree but this is ES and M/B BIOS wasn't updated. Look at 3rd page and further:More screenshotsAlso there is possibility that cache mem is brocken. Posted on Oct 7th 2011, 13:45 Reply

#11 Damn_Smooth

First, I don't care how it performs with dead instruction sets.



Second, This guy can't be the only enthusiast in the Ukraine that would have one on forums if this was already shipping. Posted on Oct 7th 2011, 13:50 Reply

#12 heky

Its not shipping to customers according to the article, it is shop stock, waiting till NDA lift. But hey, we will know very soon. Posted on Oct 7th 2011, 13:55 Reply

#13 Damn_Smooth

True. I've waited this long, 5 more days for something official isn't going to kill me. Posted on Oct 7th 2011, 13:58 Reply

#14 repman244

Ghost That SuperPi result is like of a Pentium II or something.



It can't take 102 seconds for BD @ 4.8GHz to finish SuperPi 1M. Because i5 2500K @ 4.6GHz takes only 8 seconds to finish SuperPi 1M.



I'm confused. Am I missing something? :wtf: You missed the fact that superPi is based on ancient code (x87). Good read: SuperPi is an antiquated benchmark that assesses core performance using an antiquated fpu x87 instruction set. It is a grossly inefficient computer program that uses floating point units to calculate pi and "evaluate" processor cache performance. It's not by any means a "real world" reflection of todays modern cpu's microarch capabilities. It's like running a horse(fpu x87 instructions) down today's paved interstate(the cpu hardware), when all the while a car(newer simd's) are available. You missed the fact that superPi is based on ancient code (x87). Good read: www.overclock.net/benchmarking-software-discussion/569964-superpi-1m-32m-nope.html Posted on Oct 7th 2011, 14:07 Reply

#15 treehouse

does the fact that it says 'mod' in the super pi window title mean anything, might be a modded test hence the strange result na? Posted on Oct 7th 2011, 14:12 Reply

#16 repman244

treehouse does the fact that it says 'mod' in the super pi window title mean anything, might be a modded test hence the strange result na? If you are referring to the name of the program: This is a modified version of Super Pi which shows milliseconds. If not then don't bother with this post :D If you are referring to the name of the program: www.techpowerup.com/downloads/366/Super_PI_Mod_v1.5.html If not then don't bother with this post :D Posted on Oct 7th 2011, 14:18 Reply

#17 blibba

treehouse does the fact that it says 'mod' in the super pi window title mean anything, might be a modded test hence the strange result na? No, it's just so that you get a result that isn't rounded to the nearest second. No, it's just so that you get a result that isn't rounded to the nearest second. Posted on Oct 7th 2011, 14:19 Reply

#18 Ghost

repman244 You missed the fact that superPi is based on ancient code (x87). Good read: www.overclock.net/benchmarking-software-discussion/569964-superpi-1m-32m-nope.html Nah, I knew that. It's something else. SuperPi doesn't reflect real CPU performance, yet still the difference between AMD and Intel CPUs should be much smaller. So this whole thing smells fake.



According to DonanimHaber, BD gets about 20 secs @ SuperPi 1M. And that is a lot more realistic result.



Anyway, here are some other benches. They seem to be a lot more legit, IMHO Nah, I knew that. It's something else. SuperPi doesn't reflect real CPU performance, yet still the difference between AMD and Intel CPUs should be much smaller. So this whole thing smells fake.According to DonanimHaber, BD gets about 20 secs @ SuperPi 1M. And that is a lot more realistic result.Anyway, here are some other benches. They seem to be a lot more legit, IMHO forum.coolaler.com/showthread.php?t=273986 Posted on Oct 7th 2011, 14:27 Reply

#19 DarkOCean

heky Exactly. This cant be true, becouse if it is, it is a big FAIL. I can do 8M runs faster than that.



Linx test only 35gflops, this is seriously weak, even for a Intel specific test. Also 1.5v for 4.6ghz overclock. Seriously, this better not be real. I see 4.8 with 1.52v and afaik later cpus from amd with improved yields oc better with much lower votage. I see 4.8 with 1.52v and afaik later cpus from amd with improved yields oc better with much lower votage. Posted on Oct 7th 2011, 14:33 Reply

#20 qubit

Overclocked quantum bit It's funny how it's usually these out of the way places no one's heard of which list new pre-NDA lifted stuff first. And it's not even in English. Posted on Oct 7th 2011, 14:42 Reply

#21 dickobrazzz

if you want i can translate everything from that site :)

all results we can see may be this evening or tomorrow morning

also some people think that man need to update bios because of some unreal results e.x. 32gflops in linX:) Posted on Oct 7th 2011, 14:43 Reply

#22 qubit

Overclocked quantum bit dickobrazzz if you want i can translate everything from that site :)

all results we can see may be this evening or tomorrow morning

also some people think that man need to update bios because of some unreal results e.x. 32gflops in linX:) Yeah, translation would be great - I bet it'll get tongues wagging! :) Yeah, translation would be great - I bet it'll get tongues wagging! :) Posted on Oct 7th 2011, 14:46 Reply

#23 TheLaughingMan

To everyone posting BS about BD. THERE IS NO FX-8130P. There is no FX processor with a "P" in its name. Any and everything you post about this processor that does not exist is BS. Posted on Oct 7th 2011, 15:31 Reply

#24 dickobrazzz

TheLaughingMan THERE IS NO FX-8130P yes, but as you can see aida64 said that it is fx8120

cpu-z sometimes lying.. e.x. core voltage on all giga mb for SB yes, but as you can see aida64 said that it is fx8120cpu-z sometimes lying.. e.x. core voltage on all giga mb for SB Posted on Oct 7th 2011, 15:37 Reply

#25 Inceptor

That is an engineering sample.

The engineering samples that were supposedly benched earlier on were showing in cpu-z as 8130P and 8120 (ES).

Also take note of the TDP at 1.5xx Volts -- 200+ watts, ultra high wattage just like the engineering samples. That doesn't mean that's what the wattage IS, just what it's showing. But that doesn't change the fact that it's being identified as an engineering sample Posted on Oct 7th 2011, 16:04 Reply