AMD Athlon X4-750K

Status
Not open for further replies.

ascalice

Member
Feb 16, 2014
112
0
0
My friend built a PC with an Athlon x4-750k. He says it is the fastest processor he ever had, faster than the i7-3960K. The CPU is only $86 and he says it can be overclocked to 4.2GHz. Is it a good CPU?

I believe the question has been sufficiently answered
-ViRGE
 
Last edited by a moderator:

netxzero64

Senior member
May 16, 2009
538
0
71
^ lols! its not faster than the 3960k. does he have any graphs to show? AFAIK, the 750k is still based on the jurassic age of architecture (phenom 2) which is slow compared to the ivys.
 

burninatortech4

Senior member
Jan 29, 2014
736
425
136
It has nowhere near the performance of the i7-3960K. Your friend is full of it.
 
Last edited:
Aug 11, 2008
10,451
642
126
^ lols! its not faster than the 3960k. does he have any graphs to show? AFAIK, the 750k is still based on the jurassic age of architecture (phenom 2) which is slow compared to the ivys.

It is not phenom 2, it is an apu with the graphics part disabled. Based on Trinity or Richland, I am not sure. It is a good basis for a budget rig, but its absurd to compare it to a 3960k.
 

nwo

Platinum Member
Jun 21, 2005
2,308
0
71
Your friend is a troll. Do not fall for his trap! I don't think any Athlon x4 can beat any Intel i series CPU (not even an i3) regardless of OC.
 

inf64

Diamond Member
Mar 11, 2011
3,884
4,692
136
It's a snappy processor with great perf./$ for sure, but not anywhere near 1K$ behemoth like 3960K.
 

NTMBK

Lifer
Nov 14, 2011
10,435
5,784
136
^ lols! its not faster than the 3960k. does he have any graphs to show? AFAIK, the 750k is still based on the jurassic age of architecture (phenom 2) which is slow compared to the ivys.

It's not based on the Phenom II, it's based on Piledriver. It's a Trinity chip with the graphics disabled.

If you want to get an idea of how it performs, look up reviews of the CPU performance of A10-5800K. It's nowhere near an i7-3960, it's roughly comparable to an i3-3220. Worse single threaded performance, better multithreaded performance. It's a good chip for the price.
 

Arkaign

Lifer
Oct 27, 2006
20,736
1,379
126
You know, it can be funny to show people systems with slightly different buildouts to get their reactions. One of my job sites has a Dell workstation with the Xeon version of that chip (6-core 12 thread something or other) with 24GB ram and a relatively low end professional GPU, running on a raid set of SAS drives. The other day I brought in my spare laptop, which is nothing special, i7 SB, 8GB, etc, but it has a new Toshiba 256GB Q-Series Pro SSD (about identical to Samsung 840 Pro in performance), and the guy was swearing up and down that my laptop was ten times faster than his desktop, and thinking about 'upgrading' to it. I ended up ordering him a set of SSDs to move the SAS drives to storage duties.

Anyway, back to this one, I bet if a gamer used these configs back to back, without being able to check device manager or look in the case :

Intel 4960X, 32GB DDR3-2400, 2TB 7200RPM HDD, 2GB GT640 DDR3

with

AMD Trinity 750K, 8GB DDR3-1600, 256GB Samsung 840 Evo, 1GB 750ti

That he would swear up and down that the Trinity was the MUCH faster system.

So the OP's friend might just have compared machines built for different purposes. A 3960K with a crappy GPU and HDD will feel like a total dog compared to an i3 with a great GPU and an SSD.
 

PPB

Golden Member
Jul 5, 2013
1,118
168
106
Tell your friend that he should make an account on this forum. His bull is no different from the fud we are used to read on this subforum these days.
 

el etro

Golden Member
Jul 21, 2013
1,584
14
81
Last edited by a moderator:

dragantoe

Senior member
Oct 22, 2012
689
0
76
This raises a question in my mind, how many cores on a 3960x need to be disabled to match the performance of a 750k?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.