• 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.

Do you own a Bulldozer CPU?

H

hasu

Senior member
Do you own a Bulldozer CPU? What was your earlier CPU you upgraded from and what do you think of the upgrade?

I am planning to upgrade my machine to FX-4100 or FX-6100. Wondering if I should wait for B3 stepping or not! This machine is being used (mainly) for software development and hosts up to three VMs at the same time.

TIA
 
Get an X6 1090T while they still exist, Gillbot has a really nice deal down in FS/FT. $225 shipped with MOBO and RAM!
 
RavenSEAL said:
Get an X6 1090T while they still exist, Gillbot has a really nice deal down in FS/FT. $225 shipped with MOBO and RAM!
Click to expand...

I was actually thinking of 1100T (from Microcenter), but that is 125W. The newer CPUs are 95W. I may have to go with lower power devices as my machines are all small form factor with smaller PSUs.
 
hasu said:
1100T with a free motherboard looks pretty impressive deal at Microcenter, except that the CPU is 125W. So budget is about $150+.
Click to expand...

Assuming you have an AM3+ motherboard, then it's not going to be worth replacing what you have now for an FX-4100. An FX-6100 might be fine if you really are going to utilize all 6 threads, although getting a 95W Phenom II x6 would be a better buy (Amazon has a Phenom II x6 1045T for $150 when I checked yesterday; there's a 1055T for $135, but that's the 125W chip).
 
Last edited:
jhu said:
Assuming you have an AM3+ motherboard, then it's not going to be worth replacing what you have now for an FX-4100. An FX-6100 might be fine if you really are going to utilize all 6 threads, although getting a 95W Phenom II x6 would be a better buy (Amazon has a Phenom II x6 1045T for $150 when I checked yesterday; there's a 1055T for $135, but that's the 125W chip).
Click to expand...

Correct, my motherboard is AM3+ and I checked mfr website to make sure that I can upgrade to Bulldozer.
Phenom II x6 1045T is 2.7 GHz. I would imagine FX-4100 be faster with its 3.6 GHz clock.
 
hasu said:
Correct, my motherboard is AM3+ and I checked mfr website to make sure that I can upgrade to Bulldozer.
Phenom II x6 1045T is 2.7 GHz. I would imagine FX-4100 be faster with its 3.6 GHz clock.
Click to expand...

Different architectures so for single threaded programs the FX-4100 will be faster, but it will definitely be slower if you're able to use 6 threads (eg for my workloads with Povray, and extrapolating from anandtech.com/bench, a 1045T will be about 3178 pixels per second whereas an FX-4100 will be about 2256 pixels per second). Plus with the Phenom II x6 you could host more VMs without bogging down the computer. However, if the workload you state in your original post is not going change (software development + 3 VMs), then stay with what you have now and reassess when the next BD revision comes out.
 
Last edited:
FX-4100 is just crap IMO, I'd stay away from that, probably a downgrade from your Phenom II X4. FX-6100 could possibly be worth it, though. The BD may be a good deal faster in some tasks (for example programs compiled with AES-NI, AVX, XOP, etc. can see some pretty huge gains over Phenom II). But in terms of raw processing power, and therefore performance in programs not optimized for it and the new ISAs it sports, it won't be much faster or might even be slower than Phenom II. IPC of BD is lower so lightly threaded performance tends to suffer compared to Phenom II, although a Win 7 scheduler patch is supposed to help address this. FX-6100 should be faster than Phenom II X4 for heavily threaded tasks, although I don't know if the performance increase would be large enough to justify upgrading.

I'd say it just depends on what you do I guess, just check benchmarks and see how Phenom II and BD perform for the applications you use most. BD performance varies wildly, it performs very well in some tasks and very poorly in others. Makes it difficult to say whether it would be a good upgrade or not for someone unless you know what they do with their computer.
 
jhu said:
Different architectures, plus the FX-4100 will definitely be slower if you're able to use 6 threads. Plus with the Phenom II x6 you could host more VMs without bogging down the computer. However, if the workload you state in your original post is not going change (software development + 3 VMs), then stay with what you have now and reassess when the next BD revision comes out.
Click to expand...

That's what I am thinking too. Currently it is plenty fast for what I do with that machine. The upgrade is only for the sake of upgrade 🙂 At work I use an Intel i7-2600 @3.4GHz, which does not seem any faster than my Phenom II 925 at all for the kind of usage I have. I read somewhere that AMD is going to release FX-4170. May be I should wait for that or the next stepping Bulldozer.
 
An FX 4100 trades blows with a Llano A8 3850(model number might be off, I'm thinking the 2.9Ghz chip), and it regularly looses to the Phenom II 955. I wouldn't waste my time even considering that chip. The FX 6100 might be worth while over your Phenom II X4 depending on your workload, but you could always grab some Phenom II X6 processors. I'd rather purchase 95W Phenom II X6 1055Ts than get new motherboards that support the FX 6100.
 
LoneNinja said:
An FX 4100 trades blows with a Llano A8 3850(model number might be off, I'm thinking the 2.9Ghz chip), and it regularly looses to the Phenom II 955. I wouldn't waste my time even considering that chip.
Click to expand...
Is that personal experience?
 
hasu said:
1100T with a free motherboard looks pretty impressive deal at Microcenter, except that the CPU is 125W. So budget is about $150+.
Click to expand...

Don't get to hung up on the TDP, overall the older PII's are a bit more energy efficient. Do some research as well, in most any case ( I.e. there are one or two exceptions), an FX-4100 or FX-6100 will be at best a side- grade, and more probably a downgrade from you current setup.
 
One of my unvervolted/underclocked (2.6 Ghz) Thubans, wPrime, total system consumes 110W at the wall. That includes 2 drives and a discrete card. Don't be afraid of TDP numbers, they are really not that bad ;-p
 
Last edited:
I'm interested in getting one, I already own an am3+ board so it would be a drop in upgrade. Despite what many will tell you on these boards, the 8150 is overall faster than the 1100T, and I'm actually more curious about the 95W version of the 8120, although it's not for sale yet.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/203?vs=434

I just don't understand why everyone pushes the 1100T so hard when the benchmarks show rather clearly that the 8150 is better overall, for a small price premium. Remember, these results are WITHOUT the "bulldozer patch", when you account for additional performance after the patch it should be obvious that the FX-8150 is a better buy than a 1100T.

That said, I haven't bought one yet, and probably won't for awhile. I'm in no rush to build a second system as my 1090T and various laptops, netbooks, tablets, and phones are enough for my needs.
 
I think I'd jump on an 8120 for $150. Especially if I knew PD would be on AM3+.

Until then, meh. Especially when you can pick up a 2500K for under $200 @ MC.
 
I have a 6100 right now - running conservatively at 4200 MHz - 1.387 volts. Had an X4 previously.

Despite all of the bad press, this 6100 works fine for me. My usage is heavy into excel apps and and a blueprint takeoff program (cad types of usage).

Right now though - if I was looking only at AMD I would get a 960T Zosma (95 watt), $110 at newegg currently - most clock up to aroung 4000 MHz and a large portion of them can be unlocked to all six cores - essentially an 1100T for $110 if you are lucky.

Link to Zosma .. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16819103995

If I was setting up a new system from zero, it would probably be based on a 2500K.
 
Maximilian said:
Nope dont own a bulldozer.

Also a bulldozer would be a downgrade from your phenom II rigs.
Click to expand...
hahahah no.. once MS is done with their patch an fx-6100 generally speaking sits next to the core i7 920, one bad bench doesnt cost you a fight, ESPECIALLY when the 2500k lost to a 3.5ghz 3870k in most linux benchies :whiste:
the fx-4100 then sits next t0 the x4 980 sometimes better.

realistically speaking bulldozer wouldn't be too bad once the MS patch arrives to boost everyone by 15%+ and once the prices go down. when the 4100 hits south of 100 bucks, hater you cant stop that ----
a 980 for -100 is practically a must by haha

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=64wZO36OuPU
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top