AMD FX-8150
vs
AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 5400+
vs
9
5
Select any two CPUs for comparison
VS

Gaming Performance Comparison

Recommended System Requirements
Game FX-8150 Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 5400+
PlayerUnknowns Battlegrounds 3% 257%
Call of Duty: WWII 7% 222%
Assassins Creed: Origins 15% 297%
FIFA 18 30% 142%
Grand Theft Auto VI 20% 313%
Star Wars: Battlefront 2 15% 297%
Pro Evolution Soccer 2018 33% 131%
Far Cry 5 22% 170%
Need For Speed Payback 15% 297%
ARK: Survival Evolved 19% 310%

In terms of overall gaming performance, the AMD FX-8150 is massively better than the AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 5400+ when it comes to running the latest games. This also means it will be less likely to bottleneck more powerful GPUs, allowing them to achieve more of their gaming performance potential.

The FX-8150 was released over three years more recently than the Athlon 64 X2, and so the FX-8150 is likely to have far better levels of support, and will be much more optimized and ultimately superior to the Athlon 64 X2 when running the latest games.

The FX-8150 has 6 more cores than the Athlon 64 X2. With 8 cores, the FX-8150 is much less likely to struggle with the latest games, or bottleneck high-end graphics cards when running them.

The FX-8150 has 6 more threads than the Athlon 64 X2. Both CPUs have one thread per physical core.

Multiple threads are useful for improving the performance of multi-threaded applications. Additional cores and their accompanying thread will always be beneficial for multi-threaded applications. Hyperthreading will be beneficial for applications optimized for it, but it may slow others down. For games, the number of threads is largely irrelevant, as long as you have at least 2 cores (preferably 4), and hyperthreading can sometimes even hit performance.

More important for gaming than the number of cores and threads is the clock rate. Problematically, unless the two CPUs are from the same family, this can only serve as a general guide and nothing like an exact comparison, because the clock cycles per instruction (CPI) will vary so much.

The FX-8150 and Athlon 64 X2 are not from the same family of CPUs, so their clock speeds are by no means directly comparable. Bear in mind, then, that while the FX-8150 has a 0.8 GHz faster frequency, this is not always an indicator that it will be superior in performance, despite frequency being crucial when trying to avoid GPU bottlenecking. In this case, however, the difference is probably a good indicator that the FX-8150 is superior.

Aside from the clock rate, the next-most important CPU features for PC game performance are L2 and L3 cache size. Faster than RAM, the more cache available, the more data that can be stored for lightning-fast retrieval. L1 Cache is not usually an issue anymore for gaming, with most high-end CPUs eking out about the same L1 performance, and L2 is more important than L3 - but L3 is still important if you want to reach the highest levels of performance. Bear in mind that although it is better to have a larger cache, the larger it is, the higher the latency, so a balance has to be struck.

The FX-8150 has a 7168 KB bigger L2 cache than the Athlon 64 X2, and although the Athlon 64 X2 does not appear to have an L3 cache, its larger L2 cache means that it wins out in this area.

The maximum Thermal Design Power is the power in Watts that the CPU will consume in the worst case scenario. The lithography is the semiconductor manufacturing technology being used to create the CPU - the smaller this is, the more transistors that can be fit into the CPU, and the closer the connections. For both the lithography and the TDP, it is the lower the better, because a lower number means a lower amount of power is necessary to run the CPU, and consequently a lower amount of heat is produced.

The Athlon 64 X2 has a 60 Watt lower Maximum TDP than the FX-8150. However, the FX-8150 was created with a 33 nm smaller manufacturing technology. Overall, by taking both into account, the FX-8150 is likely the CPU with the lower heat production and power requirements, but there really isn't much in it.

Can I Run It

Check any game system requirements

CPU Core Details

CPU CodenameZambeziBrisbane
MoBo SocketSocket AM3+Socket AM2
Notebook CPUnono
Release Date12 Oct 201102 Jan 2008
CPU LinkGD LinkGD Link
Approved

CPU Technical Specifications

CPU Cores8vs2
CPU Threads8vs2
Clock Speed3.6 GHzvs2.8 GHz
Turbo Frequency3.9 GHzvs-
Max TDP125 Wvs65 W
Lithography32 nmvs65 nm
Bit Width64 Bitvs64 Bit
Max Temperature61°Cvs72°C
Virtualization Technologynovsno
Comparison

CPU Cache and Memory

L1 Cache Size384 KBvs256 KB
L2 Cache Size8192 KBvs1024 KB
L3 Cache Size8 MBvs-
Memory Channels-vs2
ECC Memory Supportnovsno
Comparison

CPU Graphics

Graphics
Base GPU Frequency-vs-
Max GPU Frequency-vs-
DirectX-vs-
Displays Supported-vs-
Comparison

CPU Package and Version Specifications

Package Size-vs-
Revision-vs-
PCIe Revision-vs-
PCIe Configurations-vs-

Gaming Performance Value

Performance Value

CPU Mini Review

Mini ReviewFX-8150 is a high-end CPU based on the 32nm Bulldozer architecture.

It offers 8 Physical Cores (8 Logical), initially clocked at 3.6GHz, which may go up to 3.9GHz and 8MB of L3 Cache.
Among its many features, Turbo Core and Virtualization are activated and the clock multiplier is unlocked, meaning it can be overclocked easily.

The processor DOES NOT integrated any graphics. and has a rated board TDP of 125W.

Its performance is very good and sufficient for extreme gaming.
Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core 5400+ is a middle-class Processor based on the 65nm K8 micro-architecture.

It offers 2 Physical Cores (2 Logical), clocked at 2.8GHz and 2MB of L2 Cache.
Among its many features, Virtualization is activated.

The processor DOES NOT integrated any graphics. and has a rated board TDP of 65W.

Its performance is below the average and so most demanding games will not run optimally.