FX Vs Phenom II

[IlliterateDino]

I'm looking to upgrade my PC soon. I'm wondering about what AMD has to offer. I heard Bulldozer was very disappointing and that a Phenom can beat it. I'm wondering if this is true? I'm looking for something in the FX 6100 range. Not sure what the Phenom equivalent is called though. Should I go for a Bulldozer, Phenom or wait? I've already asked about the i3 in another thread, but right now I want to research AMD CPUs.

BTW, I do everything with my computer. That includes video editing, game playing (would gladly settle for 720p), and web surfing.

 

[ShintaiDK]

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4955/the-bulldozer-review-amd-fx8150-tested

 

[AtenRa]

What budget for the CPU and what Graphics Card you gonna use ?? Will you Overclock ??

 

[Hits9Nine]

FX 6100 (AM3+ 6 CORE) is not as good as the 1090t (AM3 6 CORE), but the FX 8120/8150 overclocked is better than the 1090/1100t overclocked. To be quite honest though the FX6100 is a good CPU, I am currently using it in an HTC build with an AMD 7770 and it does it all quite well.
If you are going for the BD CPU's you should overclock them and you will be very happy with the results.

 

[IlliterateDino]

What budget for the CPU and what Graphics Card you gonna use ?? Will you Overclock ??

Budget for CPU is probably around 100-140 dollars. As for graphics card, I'm not too worried about it right now. I'm using an 8800 GS (yes, I know it's old) and might not upgrade it until later this year to see what the HD8xxx has to offer.

Oh and while I do edit videos, the videos I edit usually aren't longer than 20 minutes, if that's any issue. I know longer videos requires even more time, and with the tiny stuff I edit, not sure I should really worry too much about it.

 

[AtenRa]

Newegg has the FX6100 at $139,99 and FX8120 at $159,99 with a 10% off w/ promo code FX0812, ends 8/21

That puts them at $121,5 and $144,00, I would get the FX8120

 

[Smoblikat]

If you are doing gaming, then any Ph 2 will beat a Bulldozer, if you are oing anything else a 1100T will beat a bulldozer clock for clock. If kept at stock a 1100T loses to a 4.5ghz+ 8120/50.

 

[IlliterateDino]

I can't find any 1100T cheap nowadays.

 

[ShadowVVL]

yeah I cant find a 1100t for less then $200 new.

I found some cpu+mobo combos for 1090T
http://www.tigerdirect.com/applicati...FWGHtgoduRMAqg


some of the bundles are $400+ which isnt worth it since you can get a i7 2600k or non k cpu and mobo for less.

what about the 1045t for $130?

http://www.tigerdirect.com/applicati...262&CatId=4432

 

[RussianSensation]

In some newer games the FX-6100 beats the X6. It's not as clear cut as it used to be for FX vs. Phenom II

I would rather get an FX-6100 or an FX-8120 at this point. I am not seeing X6 holding on to the gaming performance in latest benchmarks.

Here is another way to think about your situation:

Let's say you get the FX-6100 for $122 or FX-8120 for $144. Core i5-3470 is $185 after $15 off.

When you'll buy all the other parts, your desktop will probably cost you $600-700 or more, if you get a new monitor.

Suddenly the AMD system will be just $60-80 less but in the grand scheme of a $600-700 system.

Will Core i5-3470 be > 10% faster? In games it will be, especially minimum frames and in strategy, RPGs and MMOs if you play those. Over the next 3 years for example, you may want to upgrade the GPU 1 more time. Well that i5-3470 CPU will cope a lot better with games. Over 3 years, that extra $90-100 on an Intel desktop system will amount to just $30-35 a year. So ask yourself, is it worth saving $90-100 over the next 3 years you'll use this system to sacrifice CPU performance, especially if you plan to add a $300 gaming GPU? Imo, no.

Between the Phenom II and FX-6100, I'd just go for the FX-6100. At that point, you'll still have similar slow rigs but at least with Bulldozer, lower idle and load power consumption:

I was even thinking of putting together a budget AMD rig and I still can't justify only $60 CPU savings over a Core i5 over keeping it for 3-4 years. Also, I find that Intel CPUs have higher resale value so in the end the actual cost of ownership isn't that much if you upgrade often and sell off a 2 year old Intel platform for example.

 

[IlliterateDino]

Wow, that's a really detailed explanation! Thank you!

What about comparing an FX 6100 against i5 2320? Power draw is a factor for me.

 

[Fox5]

Hmm, based on the benchmarks, it looks like the FX chips just need compiler optimizations to compete.

That said, the Windows world is optimized for Intel. Better off buying an Intel chip if you can fit one in your price range.

 

[Vic Vega]

For what it's worth, I have an X4 965 @ 4.1GHz, humming along with zero fuss for two solid years now. I have two HD5850s as well. I mostly play Battlefield 3, Star Trek Online and a few others. I can play these games maxed out 1920x1200. Frame rates? Never checked, don't care. I have zero slowdown, stutter or anything like that. Power consumption? You can also file that under don't care - I have an Antec CP1000 for power delivery, it hasn't complained yet - in fact the fan basically never spools up. I've been happy with my PII. I typically have a bunch of crap running in the background, mostly VMs for work. No issues.

The endless debate over this subject is tired. If I gave you my system for a week and didn't tell you the specs, you would use it and be happy with it.

 

[IlliterateDino]

For what it's worth, I have an X4 965 @ 4.1GHz, humming along with zero fuss for two solid years now. I have two HD5850s as well. I mostly play Battlefield 3, Star Trek Online and a few others. I can play these games maxed out 1920x1200. Frame rates? Never checked, don't care. I have zero slowdown, stutter or anything like that. Power consumption? You can also file that under don't care - I have an Antec CP1000 for power delivery, it hasn't complained yet - in fact the fan basically never spools up. I've been happy with my PII. I typically have a bunch of crap running in the background, mostly VMs for work. No issues.

The endless debate over this subject is tired. If I gave you my system for a week and didn't tell you the specs, you would use it and be happy with it.

I understand what you mean. I'm not an advanced user. I'm more intermediate. But the thing is I'd like to be a little bit more future proof. Like you said, you've been using yours for 2 years now, but would I be more future proof in buying something from 2 years ago, or something from a year ago? The problem is that I heard Bulldozer was disappointing even though it's newer, but after more research, it doesn't look too bad. I wish the power draw was a little better though.

 

[Magic Carpet]

I'm looking to upgrade my PC soon. I'm wondering about what AMD has to offer. I heard Bulldozer was very disappointing and that a Phenom can beat it. I'm wondering if this is true? I'm looking for something in the FX 6100 range. Not sure what the Phenom equivalent is called though. Should I go for a Bulldozer, Phenom or wait? I've already asked about the i3 in another thread, but right now I want to research AMD CPUs.

BTW, I do everything with my computer. That includes video editing, game playing (would gladly settle for 720p), and web surfing.

I'd rather do an Intel rig at this point. This should be a good choice for you.

 

[IlliterateDino]

Yeah, I'm also thinking about a 2120 as well.

 

[AtenRa]

Im sorry to say but the Core i3 2120 will be inferior to the FX6100(when OCed) at everything while costing the same. Unless you really want an Intel CPU there is no point to even think of the Core i3.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Im sorry to say but the Core i3 2120 will be inferior to the FX6100(when OCed) at everything while costing the same. Unless you really want an Intel CPU there is no point to even think of the Core i3.

But burning 3x the power. Power is free, right?

And how much would you need to OC that FailXtreme6100?

 

[AtenRa]

But burning 3x the power. Power is free, right?

And how much would you need to OC that FailXtreme6100?

At idle, power consumption differences are minimal, some reviews put the FX 6100 in front and others put it slightly behind the Core i3.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/amd-fx-8120-6100-4100_8.html#sect0

In full load, the FX6100 will consume almost the same power because it is generally faster in almost every multithreaded application.

About the performance,

Even at default clocks the FX6100 is faster in multithreaded applications and at 4.2GHz it will be enough not to be a CPU bottleneck for almost every game.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/amd-fx-8120-6100-4100_7.html#sect0

Really at $125 the FX6100 when OCed is the best performance/price all around CPU right now.

 

[nismotigerwvu]

But burning 3x the power. Power is free, right?

And how much would you need to OC that FailXtreme6100?

Nothing personal, but taking a solid point and making it in the most childish way possible does nothing for credibility. Believe it or not, this isn't 4chan.

 

[ShintaiDK]

At idle, power consumption differences are minimal, some reviews put the FX 6100 in front and others put it slightly behind the Core i3.

Others behind. And it will be behind due to its 3 chip platform design.

In full load, the FX6100 will consume almost the same power because it is generally faster in almost every multithreaded application.

So the metric is now converted to highly multithreaded performance/watt?

What about overclocked. That was your baseline, or did you forget that?

Almost faster in VERY multithreaded? What about 1-2 threads that accounts for basicly all SW. Hows the performance/watt there? Or performance/$.

Or even games that supports 4 threads like WoW:
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/CPU/62

 

[AtenRa]

Others behind. And it will be behind due to its 3 chip platform design.

Even FX8150 idle power consumption is very close to Intel, a few watts difference is not something worth talking about here.

So the metric is now converted to highly multithreaded performance/watt?

What about overclocked. That was your baseline, or did you forget that?

Almost faster in VERY multithreaded? What about 1-2 threads that accounts for basicly all SW. Hows the performance/watt there? Or performance/$.

Or even games that supports 4 threads like WoW:
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/CPU/62

BTW, I do everything with my computer. That includes video editing, game playing (would gladly settle for 720p), and web surfing.

It is in video editing that you use the CPU at full load and thats were you want the fastest CPU, the FX6100 is faster that Core i3 even at default clocks. The power consumption will be smaller for the FX6100 than the Core i3 because you will finish earlier.

Also in Video encoding(another multithreaded app) the FX6100 is faster than Core i3 even at default.

If you OC with default Voltages (4 to 4.2GHz) your power consumption will remain low, your performance will rise more than the power consumption and your performance/watt will raise too. The FX6100 will become even more power efficient than Core i3.

With fewer threads (browsing etc) the power consumption is very low and the difference is not worth talking about.

In most of the games, the GPU will be your limited factor. But for games that need more CPU performance you can OC the FX6100 and have enough performance for the CPU to not becoming a bottleneck.

 

[ShadowVVL]

It kind of sucks that anandtech doesn't have benches for the 6100 and 4100.

Its seems like every bench marking site has different power draws on the 8150.

toms hardware 107 w idle

ananadtech 84 w idle

tech power up http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/FX8150/12.html

edit: I just realized this could be due to different motherboards

 

[AtenRa]

It kind of sucks that anandtech doesn't have benches for the 6100 and 4100.

Its seems like every bench marking site has different power draws on the 8150.

toms hardware 107 w idle

ananadtech 84 w idle

tech power up http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/FX8150/12.html

edit: I just realized this could be due to different motherboards

That's because they use different hardware. They use different Ram sticks, different Graphics Cards and different power supplies.
So the power at the wall plug that they measure is always different from one setup to the other

 

[frozentundra123456]

Im sorry to say but the Core i3 2120 will be inferior to the FX6100(when OCed) at everything while costing the same. Unless you really want an Intel CPU there is no point to even think of the Core i3.

Interesting how you say the FX is superior at "everything" --- your words--- and then when you show benchmarks, you cleverly switch to showing only heavily multithreaded benchmarks.