AMD FX 4100 Bulldozer Benchmarks

[Durvelle27]

Going to run the 3dmark's on my 4870CF pair and see how it compares. =)

ok

 

[Yuriman]

Since 4870's can't run DX11, I only ran 06 and Vantage. The cards are at stock clocks (750/900) and the CPU is at 4.6 currently.

3dMark 06
Mine:
26097 marks / 9989 SM2 / 11911 SM3 / 8257 CPU
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm06/16877692
Yours:
17828 marks / 6784 SM2 / 9335 SM3 / 4315 CPU

3dMark Vantage
Mine:
P19165 marks / 17852 graphics / 24590 CPU
http://www.3dmark.com/3dmv/4289251
Yours:
P15567 marks / 18353 graphics / 10696 CPU

I'd definitely rather have a single 6950 over a pair of 4870's, it draws less power and has more consistent performance (as well as more vram), but I really got a lot of value out of my card(s). I added the second card for $10 shipped, and I've had the first since 2008 (and got it for under $200). You can sometimes find 4870's now for around $40-50 shipped.

 

[Durvelle27]

Single HD 4870 1Gb @ 770/1000 and cpu @4.2 before

3dMark 06
Mine:
13951 marks / 5434 SM2 / 6520 SM3 / 4055 CPU
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm06/16772068
Yours:
26097 marks / 9989 SM2 / 11911 SM3 / 8257 CPU

3dMark Vantage
Mine:
P10056 marks / 10025 graphics / 10150 CPU
http://www.3dmark.com/3dmv/4289251
Yours:
P19165 marks / 17852 graphics / 24590 CPU

when i had got my HD 4870 1GB i had gotten it free

 

[Yuriman]

Well congrats on the upgrade, looks like a really solid system now (aside from the hard drives).

 

[Durvelle27]

thx and yea ik the HDDs suck

 

[CHADBOGA]

I take it you guys are running the Freebie versions of the Benchmarks which don't allow you to fiddle with their default settings?

Anyway, that is what I ran and got the following:

 

[Durvelle27]

Sleeping Dogs Benchmark

 

[Durvelle27]

3DMARK11

Sapphire HD 6950 2GB overclocked 900/1400

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/4472200?key=8LDcS_Efx6G_AwP5LONwuQ

 

[CHADBOGA]

3DMark 11

Sapphire HD 7850 FACTORY OVERCLOCKED 920/1250

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/4476049

 

[Durvelle27]

3DMark 11

Sapphire HD 7850 FACTORY OVERCLOCKED 920/1250

http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/4476049

http://www.3dmark.com/compare/3dm11/4476049/3dm11/4472200

 

[AtenRa]

http://www.3dmark.com/compare/3dm11/4476049/3dm11/4472200

For half the price of the 3570K the FX4100 at 4.6GHz is just awesome

Graphics Test 1
Core i5 3570K @ 4GHz = 22.26 fps
FX4100 @ 4.6GHz = 24.51 fps

Graphics Test 2
Core i5 3570K @ 4GHz = 25.73 fps
FX4100 @ 4.6GHz = 27.17 fps

Graphics Test 3
Core i5 3570K @ 4GHz = 35.84 fps
FX4100 @ 4.6GHz = 33.34 fps

Graphics Test 4
Core i5 3570K @ 4GHz = 18.21 fps
FX4100 @ 4.6GHz = 16.97 fps

GPU limited most probable in both cases

 

[Durvelle27]

For half the price of the 3570K the FX4100 at 4.6GHz is just awesome

Graphics Test 1
Core i5 3570K @ 4GHz = 22.26 fps
FX4100 @ 4.6GHz = 24.51 fps

Graphics Test 2
Core i5 3570K @ 4GHz = 25.73 fps
FX4100 @ 4.6GHz = 27.17 fps

Graphics Test 3
Core i5 3570K @ 4GHz = 35.84 fps
FX4100 @ 4.6GHz = 33.34 fps

Graphics Test 4
Core i5 3570K @ 4GHz = 18.21 fps
FX4100 @ 4.6GHz = 16.97 fps

GPU limited most probable in both cases

yea i just love my FX 4100 especially after i upgraded my motherboard

 

[CHADBOGA]

http://www.3dmark.com/compare/3dm11/4476049/3dm11/4472200

That's quite nifty doing that, I didn't realise their website allowed so easily for that.

Thanks.

 

[Durvelle27]

That's quite nifty doing that, I didn't realise their website allowed so easily for that.

Thanks.

yep me and my friends do it all the time to compare our rigs scores ? :0

 

[Smoblikat]

Geekbench FTW

 

[Durvelle27]

Geekbench FTW

http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/1076159

Edit: now lets see a i3-2100, i3-2120, i3-3220, i3-3225, or i3-3240 beat that XD

 

[SPBHM]

For half the price of the 3570K the FX4100 at 4.6GHz is just awesome

Graphics Test 1
Core i5 3570K @ 4GHz = 22.26 fps
FX4100 @ 4.6GHz = 24.51 fps

Graphics Test 2
Core i5 3570K @ 4GHz = 25.73 fps
FX4100 @ 4.6GHz = 27.17 fps

Graphics Test 3
Core i5 3570K @ 4GHz = 35.84 fps
FX4100 @ 4.6GHz = 33.34 fps

Graphics Test 4
Core i5 3570K @ 4GHz = 18.21 fps
FX4100 @ 4.6GHz = 16.97 fps

GPU limited most probable in both cases

that's a VGA benchmark mostly,
core i3 delivers the same performance to
http://www.3dmark.com/compare/3dm11/4445997/3dm11/4472200

http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/1076159

Edit: now lets see a i3-2100, i3-2120, i3-3220, i3-3225, or i3-3240 beat that XD

i3 2100 can beat the memory scores by a good margin, but the integer and floating point scores are much higher with your overclocked FX 4100

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

Why would anyone rave about an FX-4100 at over 4.5GHz matching or barely beating a Core i3 (3.1-3.3GHz)?

As soon as you talk about overclocking the value proposition is thrown out the window. An i3 will run you $120. An overclocked FX 4-core will run you $110 + $30 for a better cooler + $10-20 for a motherboard with a better power delivery system plus $10-20 for a better power supply. At that point you could just buy an i5 instead, which will be faster in everything no matter how overclocked the FX is.

 

[inf64]

You don't need a special motherboard in order to OC FX4100 nor you need a special cooler... It's a half of FX8150 (2 modules fused off).

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

You don't need a special motherboard in order to OC FX4100 nor you need a special cooler... It's a half of FX8150 (2 modules fused off).

Sounds like a good proposition... until someone actually follows your ''advice'' and blows their motherboard's VRMs because of a crappy 4+1 power delivery system, has their power supply running near its max load and runs into heat issues because of using the stock cooler.

Just so you know, the FX-4100 consumes anywhere from 2x-3x more power than the i3 when overclocked. That heat isn't going to be magically dissipated. What you're saying is patently false.

 

[inf64]

Ok more facts less fiction again please.
Xbitlabs measured the power draw. So did Legitreviews. FX4100 draws less power than Phenom II 955BE and even less than A8-3850,under full load across all cores. You can OC 955BE on 4+1 boards without blowing them up (unless you try 1.6V and 4+Ghz with 955BE of course). Same goes for A8-3850.
So no,FX4100 won't blow the motherboards up.Please stop spreading BS on this forum.

edit:
As for burning up when OCed(even though the CPU doesn't come close to what you said and I have proven this above), here is what happens when you put FX4100 in a cheap 3+1 phase board(so not even 4+1 as you claimed):
http://www.overclock.net/t/1221731/whats-the-power-consumption-of-a-fx-4100-when-overclocked

You get throttling. That's right,the chip throttles itself in order to prevent damage to itself and/or the board. AMD has built in dozens of sensors on die that measure current and voltage in very short time intervals. This was a requirement for a new Turbo mode and a new APM power saving but acts as a protection service also.

 

[AtenRa]

Sounds like a good proposition... until someone actually follows your ''advice'' and blows their motherboard's VRMs because of a crappy 4+1 power delivery system, has their power supply running near its max load and runs into heat issues because of using the stock cooler.

Just so you know, the FX-4100 consumes anywhere from 2x-3x more power than the i3 when overclocked. That heat isn't going to be magically dissipated. What you're saying is patently false.

You havent used a single AM3+ motherboard with an FX CPU and you know the limits of the hardware ??
FX4100 can OC to 4-4.2GHz with default Voltage and Cooler, it can do 4.6GHz at 1.425v, those 4+1 VRMs are capable of delivering that to the CPU without having any problems.

You over exaggerate for the power usage and the Power Supply not to mention that FX4100($109.00) + Hyper 212 Evo(29,99 AR) = $138,99 is just $14.00 more than the Intel Core i3 2120.

$14.00 more for a much much faster CPU when OCed.

You also dont need a bigger PSU or more expensive Mobo.

 

[Durvelle27]

Why would anyone rave about an FX-4100 at over 4.5GHz matching or barely beating a Core i3 (3.1-3.3GHz)?

As soon as you talk about overclocking the value proposition is thrown out the window. An i3 will run you $120. An overclocked FX 4-core will run you $110 + $30 for a better cooler + $10-20 for a motherboard with a better power delivery system plus $10-20 for a better power supply. At that point you could just buy an i5 instead, which will be faster in everything no matter how overclocked the FX is.

that's complete BS i had my FX 4100 oc'd at 4.4GHz on a MSI 760GM-P21 with no problems on stock cooling for 2 1\2 months until i decided i wanted to CFX then i got a new motherboard a day ago ?

 

[Durvelle27]

that's a VGA benchmark mostly,
core i3 delivers the same performance to
http://www.3dmark.com/compare/3dm11/4445997/3dm11/4472200




i3 2100 can beat the memory scores by a good margin, but the integer and floating point scores are much higher with your overclocked FX 4100

Can you run GeekBench thx

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

Ok more facts less fiction again please.
Xbitlabs measured the power draw. So did Legitreviews. FX4100 draws less power than Phenom II 955BE and even less than A8-3850,under full load across all cores. You can OC 955BE on 4+1 boards without blowing them up (unless you try 1.6V and 4+Ghz with 955BE of course). Same goes for A8-3850.
So no,FX4100 won't blow the motherboards up.Please stop spreading BS on this forum.

It won't blow them up, immediately, no. It will give up the ghost eventually, however. Those motherboards are not made to take such high power consumption for a very prolonged period of time.

Funny how you say I'm spreading BS when you're the one advocating to overclock with raised voltage:
1. On boards with 4+1 power phase design
2. With crappy power supplies
3. With the stock cooler

You actually expect anyone to take what you're saying seriously?