Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

Got an AMD FX 4100 3.6GHz Quad Core what should I upgrade to?

Last response: in CPUs
Share
December 17, 2013 10:40:13 AM

For christmas im looking to upgrade my processor so i can run the latest games on decent settings. Im looking at spending anywhere between £200-£400 (or a little bit more if it's worth it) and want some advice on what to upgrade.

My other specs are as follows:
ASRock 970 Extreme 3
NVIDEA GeForce GTX 670
8GB of ram
Fx 4100 quad core

Also is it the processor that I shoud upgrade? Or it it somthing else


a c 137 À AMD
a c 462 à CPUs
December 17, 2013 10:48:47 AM

FX 8320 is the best value. You could pay a little more and get a 8350.
m
0
l
December 17, 2013 10:52:41 AM

CTurbo said:
FX 8320 is the best value. You could pay a little more and get a 8350.


Ah thanks, but whats the diffrence between the two?
m
0
l
Related resources
a c 136 À AMD
a c 738 à CPUs
December 17, 2013 10:54:21 AM

Your board supports an FX 6300 and 6350. It does not officially support the 8320 or 8350.
m
0
l
December 17, 2013 10:59:41 AM

logainofhades said:
Your board supports an FX 6300 and 6350. It does not officially support the 8320 or 8350.

So how much of an upgrade would the 6350 be to my current processor?
m
0
l

Best solution

a c 136 À AMD
a c 738 à CPUs
December 17, 2013 11:08:37 AM

FX 6300 is a better value and a nice upgrade over that 4100. FX 6350 is just a multiplier overclocked FX 6300. You can get FX 6350 speeds with just a multiplier bump. Your CPU is slower than a Phenom II X4 965. This will give you an idea of difference between the 965 and a 6350.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/piledriver-k10-cpu-...
Share
December 18, 2013 11:32:59 AM

logainofhades said:
FX 6300 is a better value and a nice upgrade over that 4100. FX 6350 is just a multiplier overclocked FX 6300. You can get FX 6350 speeds with just a multiplier bump. Your CPU is slower than a Phenom II X4 965. This will give you an idea of difference between the 965 and a 6350.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/piledriver-k10-cpu-...


I know that it chose it as the best solution, but lets say that you have £500 (or a bit more) and you don't have to have the 970 Extreme3, the make doesn't bother me very much?
m
0
l
a c 136 À AMD
a c 738 à CPUs
December 18, 2013 11:51:23 AM

With that much, you could upgrade quite a bit actually.

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant / Benchmarks

CPU: AMD FX-8320 3.5GHz 8-Core Processor (£109.65 @ Amazon UK)
Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD3 ATX AM3+ Motherboard (£95.99 @ Aria PC)
Video Card: Gigabyte Radeon R9 290 4GB Video Card (£306.98 @ Dabs)
Total: £512.62
(Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available.)
(Generated by PCPartPicker 2013-12-18 19:50 GMT+0000)
m
0
l
December 19, 2013 7:52:28 AM

logainofhades said:
With that much, you could upgrade quite a bit actually.

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant / Benchmarks

CPU: AMD FX-8320 3.5GHz 8-Core Processor (£109.65 @ Amazon UK)
Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD3 ATX AM3+ Motherboard (£95.99 @ Aria PC)
Video Card: Gigabyte Radeon R9 290 4GB Video Card (£306.98 @ Dabs)
Total: £512.62
(Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available.)
(Generated by PCPartPicker 2013-12-18 19:50 GMT+0000)

Do Gigabyte motherboards support nvidea graphics cards? I ask because I just upgraded the GPU and wan't to get my moneys worth out of it.
m
0
l
December 19, 2013 8:15:07 AM

DeathAndPain said:
logainofhades said:
FX 6300 is a better value and a nice upgrade over that 4100.

Yes, "better" as in "with that upgrade you reach the entry-level class of current Intel CPUs". With up to £400 you could do hugely better than that by getting a new mainboard and decent Intel Core i5-CPU, but AMD-fan Hades does not like me saying such a thing, so I will better shut up.

And yes, you can plug any halfway-modern graphics card in any halfway-modern mainboard, so no issues there.

So if i gave you £500 what would you suggest?
m
0
l
a c 136 À AMD
a c 738 à CPUs
December 19, 2013 10:45:51 AM

An FX 8320 and R9 290 will beat any i5 or i7 system for the same cost due to the need for a less gpu to meet the budget. FX 8320 will also beat a locked i5 because they cannot overclock and the FX can. You have been quite the Intel troll today. If you are going to suggest an Intel, don't suggest an overpriced i7 when you can get a Xeon E3 1230 v3 for a decent amount less. Bad troll is bad.
m
0
l
a c 136 À AMD
a c 738 à CPUs
December 19, 2013 10:46:41 AM

SAFCJammyD said:
logainofhades said:
With that much, you could upgrade quite a bit actually.

PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant / Benchmarks

CPU: AMD FX-8320 3.5GHz 8-Core Processor (£109.65 @ Amazon UK)
Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD3 ATX AM3+ Motherboard (£95.99 @ Aria PC)
Video Card: Gigabyte Radeon R9 290 4GB Video Card (£306.98 @ Dabs)
Total: £512.62
(Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available.)
(Generated by PCPartPicker 2013-12-18 19:50 GMT+0000)

Do Gigabyte motherboards support nvidea graphics cards? I ask because I just upgraded the GPU and wan't to get my moneys worth out of it.


Any motherboard with a PCI-E X16 graphics slot will support any PCI-E GPU from AMD or Nvidia.
m
0
l
a b À AMD
a c 146 à CPUs
December 19, 2013 3:47:40 PM

logainofhades said:
An FX 8320 and R9 290 will beat any i5 or i7 system for the same cost due to the need for a less gpu to meet the budget. FX 8320 will also beat a locked i5 because they cannot overclock and the FX can. You have been quite the Intel troll today. If you are going to suggest an Intel, don't suggest an overpriced i7 when you can get a Xeon E3 1230 v3 for a decent amount less. Bad troll is bad.


That is absolute crap. An I5/I7 with a 290 will be a lot better than an FX 8320 or 8350 with the 290X. As death said you need to overclock the FX CPU's just to compete with a stock I5 and I7.

Stock I5/I7 VS a stock FX the I5/I7 wins out.
Overclocked I5/I7 VS FX again the I5/I7 wins out.
The only way the FX CPU's can be better than an I5 or I7 is if it is overclocked and goes against a stock I/I7.
m
0
l
a c 113 À AMD
a c 443 à CPUs
December 20, 2013 4:45:28 AM

rds1220 said:
logainofhades said:
An FX 8320 and R9 290 will beat any i5 or i7 system for the same cost due to the need for a less gpu to meet the budget. FX 8320 will also beat a locked i5 because they cannot overclock and the FX can. You have been quite the Intel troll today. If you are going to suggest an Intel, don't suggest an overpriced i7 when you can get a Xeon E3 1230 v3 for a decent amount less. Bad troll is bad.


That is absolute crap. An I5/I7 with a 290 will be a lot better than an FX 8320 or 8350 with the 290X. As death said you need to overclock the FX CPU's just to compete with a stock I5 and I7.

Stock I5/I7 VS a stock FX the I5/I7 wins out.
Overclocked I5/I7 VS FX again the I5/I7 wins out.
The only way the FX CPU's can be better than an I5 or I7 is if it is overclocked and goes against a stock I/I7.


Going by what logainofhades said:

8320 + R9 290:

PCPartPicker part list: http://uk.pcpartpicker.com/p/24riV
Price breakdown by merchant: http://uk.pcpartpicker.com/p/24riV/by_merchant/
Benchmarks: http://uk.pcpartpicker.com/p/24riV/benchmarks/

CPU: AMD FX-8320 3.5GHz 8-Core Processor (£107.99 @ Aria PC)
Video Card: XFX Radeon R9 290 4GB Video Card (£300.98 @ Dabs)
Total: £408.97
(Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available.)
(Generated by PCPartPicker 2013-12-20 12:40 GMT+0000)

Intel + 280x for the same price:

PCPartPicker part list: http://uk.pcpartpicker.com/p/2ndLX
Price breakdown by merchant: http://uk.pcpartpicker.com/p/2ndLX/by_merchant/
Benchmarks: http://uk.pcpartpicker.com/p/2ndLX/benchmarks/

CPU: Intel Core i5-4670K 3.4GHz Quad-Core Processor (£164.99 @ Aria PC)
Video Card: Sapphire Radeon R9 280X 3GB Video Card (£245.14 @ Scan.co.uk)
Total: £410.13
(Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available.)
(Generated by PCPartPicker 2013-12-20 12:42 GMT+0000)

The £50-£60 you save from the CPU goes into a better GPU, which will give you better performance. Since logainofhades did say "An FX 8320 and R9 290 will beat any i5 or i7 system for the same cost". I will 100% agree that the intel chips are better. Just making the point that what logainofhades said is correct.

By the way, I'm using his example of a FX + 290 rather than your example with a 290x, since that's what this is about.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
December 20, 2013 5:04:42 AM

JOOK-D said:

The £50-£60 you save from the CPU goes into a better GPU, which will give you better performance.

Exactly that is a misconception. If your GPU is slightly too weak for a particular game, lower details and play anyway. However, if your CPU is slightly too weak for that game, endure lagging, curse, and be screwed as there is nothing you can do. When given the choice, the CPU is always more important.
m
0
l
a c 113 À AMD
a c 443 à CPUs
December 20, 2013 5:06:41 AM

DeathAndPain said:
JOOK-D said:

The £50-£60 you save from the CPU goes into a better GPU, which will give you better performance.

Exactly that is a misconception. If your GPU is slightly too weak for a particular game, lower details and play anyway. However, if your CPU is slightly too weak for that game, endure lagging, curse, and be screwed as there is nothing you can do. When given the choice, the CPU is always more important.


Fair point.
m
0
l
!