• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

a phenom x4 II 960 or a fx 4100/6100

E

eastyy123

Member
want to get a processor for my current am3+ system was toying with those mentioned in the title

now i saw the phenom II x4 960 black edition and i know there is a slight chance it can be unlocked to a hex core but not to fussed on that

at the moment have a phenom I I dual core which is unlocked to a quad core and at 3.3ghz which i plan to take out and use for another computer i am building for a relative was wondering if any of the processors i mentioned would be a improvement on what i have ?

oh forgot to mention its mostly to watch movies (dvds and movie files) and play games (possibly using two monitors to)
 
Last edited:
The older Phenom IIs Thuban can get higher single threaded performance while the newer FX get better multi-threaded performance.

Right now Newegg has a sale on the FX-4100 I would go with that. You can always OC it a bit with an after market cooler.
 
You said gaming, the 960 is definitely your best bet there. Pop it in, overclock it a little bit, bang good to go. The FX-4100 is not as strong a real quad in games, and likewise the FX-6100 is not as good as a real hex.

Most games use two or four cores. And even those that can use quads usually load one or two cores pretty heavy, and the others a little to a lot less so.

The 960 unlocked and overclocked will be a better gaming chip than an 8150 which costs quite a lot more.
 
think of the fx 4100 like a dual core with hyper-threading, not a true quad. go with the x4.
 
Last edited:
my pecking order:
phenom II x4 960t> if sold out> fx-6100>if to expensive> fx-4100
on the hole though i would still take the 6100 over the 960t as the 6100 is guaranteed to work. the 960t doesnt always unlock and oc's will vary pc to pc. so yeah the 960t is a bit of a gamble. but on the hole is a wiser investment.

should have gotten a thuban while they were still around man. i recommend shopping used. you may find one, like i did
 
Last edited:
I wanna call BS the fx 4100 should perform a tiny bit better than the 960T. There are people that are upgrading from the x4 955 on the reviews and are happy. Yes its just a little bit faster than the phenom 2's but at the price point at least you get an unlocked multiplier, for easy overclocks. Ideally for this to be a no brainer I would like to see the fx4100 at $89 bucks but hey I like good deals. So yes there is a lot fud, but it comes mostly from the remnants of the whole BD launch where people were lying about this chips performance. Overall I still have my fingers crossed for the mythical or non mythical Phenom X8 BD phenoms because if they do release them, they will be the value chip that would take away a big part of the low end from Intel.
 
Last edited:
eternalone said:
I wanna call BS the fx 4100 should perform a tiny bit better than the 960T. There are people that are upgrading form the x4 955 on the reviews and are happy. Yes its just a little bit faster than the phenom 2's but at the price point at least you get an unlocked multiplier, for easy overclocks. Ideally for this to be a no brainer I would like to see the fx4100 at $89 bucks but hey I like good deals. So yes there is a lot fud, but it comes mostly from the remnants of the whole BD launch where people were lying about this chips performance. Overall I still have my fingers crossed for the mythical or non mythical Phenom X8 BD phenoms because if they do release them, they will be the value chip that would take away a big part of the low end from Intel.
Click to expand...

Nope_speech_bubble.png


The FX-4100 is between the A6-3650 and A8-3850 when it comes to performance. If you have a Phenom II X4 955 and go to an FX-4100, you're doing around a 10-15% downgrade in performance. Hell, even the FX-6100 sometimes struggles to beat the Phenom II X4s in multi-threaded.
 
Dark Shroud said:
The amount of FUD being spread about the FX series is pretty disgusting.
Click to expand...

The amount of ignorance that still exists about it being a worthwhile chip is far more disgusting I assure you, whop di do it works, we've had better performance, power consumption and thermals for years now. x4 FTW.
 
LOL_Wut_Axel said:
The FX-4100 is between the A6-3650 and A8-3850 when it comes to performance. If you have a Phenom II X4 955 and go to an FX-4100, you're doing around a 10-15% downgrade in performance. Hell, even the FX-6100 sometimes struggles to beat the Phenom II X4s in multi-threaded.
Click to expand...

Then I guess I have been mistaken in giving BD the benefit of the doubt. If its really as bad as you say it is, then AMD is really in a bad position.. I thought that maybe these chips were still receiving unnecessary hate I got over the initial hate BD phase but you have made me hate them again. How does it make you feel to know you have made me hate ??? LOL jk Oh well guess I gotta find a cheapo Phenom 2.
 
eternalone said:
Then I guess I have been mistaken in giving BD the benefit of the doubt. If its really as bad as you say it is, then AMD is really in a bad position.. I thought that maybe these chips were still receiving unnecessary hate I got over the initial hate BD phase but you have made me hate them again. How does it make you feel to know you have made me hate ??? LOL jk Oh well guess I gotta find a cheapo Phenom 2.
Click to expand...

You be the judge:

x264.jpg


A8-3850 is 6% faster.

mediashow.jpg


A8-3850 is 9% faster.

handbrake.jpg


A8-3850 is 4% faster.

povray.jpg


A8-3850 is 14% faster.

cinebench.jpg


A8-3850 is 18% faster.

Now, keep in mind the 3850 is clocked at 2.9GHz and the 4100 at 3.6GHz. That means the FX is clocked 24% higher yet the A8 is 10% faster on average. That means Llano has around 35% higher IPC, which is an absolutely HUGE difference. Bigger than I though initially, actually.

So yes, as you can see, it slots between an A6-3650 and A8-3850 in performance. A terribly bad CPU, I must say.
 
eternalone said:
Then I guess I have been mistaken in giving BD the benefit of the doubt. If its really as bad as you say it is, then AMD is really in a bad position.. I thought that maybe these chips were still receiving unnecessary hate I got over the initial hate BD phase but you have made me hate them again. How does it make you feel to know you have made me hate ??? LOL jk Oh well guess I gotta find a cheapo Phenom 2.
Click to expand...
I don't think it is hatred towards BD or a grudge towards AMD. At least for me it is more of disappointment that was caused by the hype and anticipation of a product that did not live up to my expectations.

If on most tests ST and MT, BD performed well and shows a significant improvement even compared to its predecessors it wouldn't be that bad. The reality is that BD is somewhere between worse than, as good as or slightly better than when compared to its predecessor or Intel.
 
dma0991 said:
I don't think it is hatred towards BD or a grudge towards AMD. At least for me it is more of disappointment that was caused by the hype and anticipation of a product that did not live up to my expectations.

If on most tests ST and MT, BD performed well and shows a significant improvement even compared to its predecessors it wouldn't be that bad. The reality is that BD is somewhere between worse than, as good as or slightly better than when compared to its predecessor or Intel.
Click to expand...

You are correct, when somebody points out that in almost any usual usage there is an existing product that outperforms bulldozer either economically (cost or power consumption) or performance wise or indeed both AMD fanboys start screaming HATERS and claiming that intel fanboys are making up crap. The fact of the matter is a lot of these so called "intel fanboys" would be using a bulldozer rig right now if it produced 90% of the performance it was claimed it was going to.
 
thanks for the replys one thing i was confused about was that i have a 955 which is standard clocked at 3.2ghz ...i wondered why the 960 which is a higher model number is clocked at 3ghz of course wouldnt be a problem just to overclock it i think was just curious
 
IMHO, I would go with Phenom X4/X6 (depending on apps/workload) and not llano or FX6/4-xxx, and make use of the existing platform you have to maximum effect. The next major purchase would not be a cpu upgrade but an investment in an entirely new platform with newer tech (PCI-E 3, 10XX chipset, etc.):thumbsup:

Some nice prices at Microcenter.
X4 960T - http://www.microcenter.com/single_product_results.phtml?product_id=0382790http://www.microcenter.com/single_product_results.phtml?product_id=0382798
X6 1045T - http://www.microcenter.com/single_product_results.phtml?product_id=0382798

Thanks for reading.
 
cheers for the help decided to get the phenom II dont think any processor for the am3+ would offer a substantial upgrade but really its just so i can use my older processor in my fiances am3 machine
 
LOL_Wut_Axel said:
You be the judge:

x264.jpg


A8-3850 is 6% faster.

mediashow.jpg


A8-3850 is 9% faster.

handbrake.jpg


A8-3850 is 4% faster.

povray.jpg


A8-3850 is 14% faster.

cinebench.jpg


A8-3850 is 18% faster.

Now, keep in mind the 3850 is clocked at 2.9GHz and the 4100 at 3.6GHz. That means the FX is clocked 24% higher yet the A8 is 10% faster on average. That means Llano has around 35% higher IPC, which is an absolutely HUGE difference. Bigger than I though initially, actually.

So yes, as you can see, it slots between an A6-3650 and A8-3850 in performance. A terribly bad CPU, I must say.
Click to expand...

Funny thing about reading those graphs is that the FX 8150 performs much better in multithreading than i originally remembered.

I picked up the AMD 960T and a Gigabyte GA-78LMT-S2P for $109.99 + Tax from Microcenter last week. Glad i did as the 960T now shows as sold out. Great cpu for the price!
 
Why people that compare the FX4100 against the Core i3 never speak about OC ??? :\

Ehm let me guess, you cannot OC the Core i3 but you can OC the FX4100 😉
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top