Out of Pod Experience

I had a bulldozer chip and whilst I was impressed with the architecture, I had to RMA it because the majority of my Steam games refuse to work, actually BSOD'ing.

There was a microcode update that helped a bit, but not enough.

I replaced it with a Phenom II X4 980 BE and have been far more satisfied with the performance.

I'm running Windows 7 Professional 64bit with 8gb of RAM and I can multi-box 4 clients without any problems.

Hope this helps.

Oh... 10 core could be even more interesting. I heard something about them being cancelled however?

And yeah, 8120 or 8150 doesn't really matter. I'm just curious how running a bunch of clients would actually owrk on it.

As for the steam issues, is this still so? I thought it was fixed, but if it's still a big issue I guess it may be a no go from start.

I would say the 3570 would probably be a better chip considering that chip is the gen3 'I' series CPU while it's gen2 equivalent was dropkicking the 8150 with ease.

AMD did some weird stuff with Bulldozer, and the result, while hyped before release, it wasn't very pretty, and it has shown.
One such "Bulldozer module" (actual physical "core") that reports two separate (logical) cores should normally be slightly better than a single physical core with hyperthreading enabled (for two logical cores, Intel tech), but worse than two actually separate physical cores... but it's so only in a very limited set of circumstances which you normally don't really care for.

The FX-8150 (~190$, 125W TDP) is basically not really an 8-core 3.6GHz CPU, but a a 4-Bulldozer-module CPU. It only manages to be marginally faster than an i5-3570 (~215$, 77W TDP) in certain circumstances (MOSTLY SYNTHETIC BENCHMARKS), even if the Intel chip has only 4 physical cores (with no hyperthreading) at slightly lower frequencies and with much lower power usage. And that's before you consider the slightly more expensive 3570k and some light overclocking (only so much as to match the FX's TDP). In actual gaming situations, the Bulldozer architecture pretty much fails its intended purpose, and the FX-8150 performs ever so slightly worse than even a 2500, let alone a 2600 or a 3570. Heck, it's not noticeably better than my rapidly aging i5-760.

All that being said, having a very good CPU is not really that much of an issue for most current gaming needs, the GPU is more of a pressing matter most of the time.
For EVE, for instance, CPU only matters when you go into seriously player-heavy PvP battles (think nullsec fleet combat), until then, the video card is the undisputed king (by virtue of being the only noteworthy bottleneck).

IMO, either go with a radically cheaper Phenom (an AMD Phenom II X4 965 Black Edition @3.4GHz costs only ~100$ and is quite enough for most games) and give your wallet a rest (or push the savings into a GPU upgrade), or an i5 (no need to go i7 ; i5-3570 or i5-3570k sounds like the most sensible choice right now) and leave the FX alone, not really worth the bother, not the currently available ones anyway.

See, I would've expected running multiple eve-clients to be JUST one of those certain cirumstances. I'd expect it to handle say 20-23 clients quit e noticably better than the 3570k. As you point out yourself, the CPU isn't all that relevant for most other games, which should mean it doesn't really matter for those.

I'm currently running a Phenom II x3(One of those with a fully functional fourth core), but find the CPU stressed out way before neither memory nor the GPU seems to annoyed. Of course, this would be entirely different running fewer clients.