In Rust, the FX-8150 is slower than the Core Ultra 7 265F. However, it's a much better value for money, as it's $237 cheaper!
FX-8150
- Up to 82% cheaper – $51.29 vs $288.00
- Up to 82% cheaper
- Up to 77% better value in Rust – $0.24 vs $1.03/FPS
- Up to 77% better value in Rust
- Can run games without a dedicated GPU using its integrated graphics
- Can run games without a dedicated GPU using its integrated graphics
Core Ultra 7 265F
- Up to 33% faster in Rust – 278 vs 209 FPS
- Up to 33% faster in Rust
- Is 13 years and 2 months newer – Jan 07, 2025 vs Oct 12, 2011
- Is 13 years and 2 months newer
- Consumes up to 48% less energy – 65 vs 125 Watts
- Consumes up to 48% less energy
Rust FPS Calculator
FX-8150 vs Core Ultra 7 265F: Comparison of performance and price
FX-8150
Oct 12th, 2011
Average FPS
209 FPS
75%
Min 1% FPS
41 FPS
46%
Price, $
$51.29
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.24/FPS
100%
Core Ultra 7 265F
Jan 7th, 2025
Average FPS
278 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
90 FPS
100%
Price, $
$288
17%
Value, $/FPS
$1.03/FPS
23%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The FX-8150 vs Core Ultra 7 265F in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The FX-8150 vs Core Ultra 7 265F in core CPU performance specifications
FX-8150
Oct 12th, 2011
Cores
8-core
40%
L3 Cache
8 MB
27%
Base Frequency
3.6 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
4.2 GHz
79%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Core Ultra 7 265F
Jan 7th, 2025
Cores
20-core
100%
L3 Cache
30 MB
100%
Base Frequency
2.4 GHz
67%
Turbo Frequency
5.3 GHz
100%
Max. DDR5 RAM Speed
6400 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
FX-8150 Oct 12th, 2011 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Core Ultra 7 265F Jan 7th, 2025 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Oct 12th, 2011 | Released | Jan 7th, 2025 |
| – | MSRP | $379.00 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| AM3+ | Socket | LGA1851 |
| 125 W | Power Consumption | 65 W |
| Other Features | ||
| DDR3 | RAM | 6400 MHz (DDR5) |
On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | Integrated GPU | No Integrated Graphics |
Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
