Key Differences
In short — Ryzen 9 5900X outperforms the cheaper FX-8150 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing FX-8150 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Ryzen 9 5900X is 3312 days newer than the cheaper FX-8150.
Advantages of AMD FX-8150
- Up to 77% cheaper than Ryzen 9 5900X - $46.81 vs $203.25
- Up to 71% better value when playing Dying Light 2: Stay Human than Ryzen 9 5900X - $0.45 vs $1.55 per FPS
Advantages of AMD Ryzen 9 5900X
- Performs up to 27% better in Dying Light 2: Stay Human than FX-8150 - 146 vs 115 FPS
- Consumes up to 16% less energy than AMD FX-8150 - 105 vs 125 Watts
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than AMD FX-8150 - 24 vs 8 threads
Dying Light 2: Stay Human
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High Quality Raytracing
Buy for €51.96 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 9 minutes ago
Buy for €225.61 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 9 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High Quality Raytracing
Desktop • Oct 12th, 2011
Desktop • Nov 5th, 2020
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
AMD FX-8150 | vs | AMD Ryzen 9 5900X |
---|---|---|
Oct 12th, 2011 | Release Date | Nov 5th, 2020 |
FX | Collection | Ryzen 9 |
Zambezi | Codename | Vermeer |
AMD Socket AM3+ | Socket | AMD Socket AM4 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
8 | Cores | 12 |
8 | Threads | 24 |
3.6 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.7 GHz |
3.9 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.8 GHz |
125 W | TDP | 105 W |
32 nm | Process Size | 7 nm |
18.0x | Multiplier | 37.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | None |
Yes | Overclockable | Yes |