Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Amd 1090t vs fx 4100 vs Phenom II X4 965

Last response: in CPUs
Share
October 16, 2011 1:51:48 PM

Which of these cpu`s have the best overall performance in order?
Also which is the best bang for the buck?
October 16, 2011 2:03:27 PM

1100t vs fx 8120 is also interesting
October 16, 2011 2:07:01 PM

just go intel, 2500k and you'll be alright.
Related resources
October 16, 2011 2:10:32 PM

Keep in mind i have the am3+ motherboard. SO i have no other choice than to buy an amd cpu.
a b à CPUs
October 21, 2011 4:46:20 PM

Grab a X6 CPU if you plan on gaming. The 1090t and 8120 are basically the same performance wise.
a b à CPUs
October 21, 2011 4:56:01 PM

Nope, for Gaming the 965 is better and cheaper.

So, P/P is 965 (OC to 4Ghz or 3.9Ghz would be good enough), then could be the FX-4100 (but taking it to 4.5Ghz is a must) and then the 1090T.

Keep in mind that's gaming only. If you want threading power, then the 1090T comes before the 965 IMO.

Cheers!

EDIT: lil' mistake
a b à CPUs
October 21, 2011 4:59:45 PM

Yuka said:
Nope, for Gaming the 965 is better and cheaper.

So, P/P is 965 (OC to 4Ghz or 3.9Ghz would be good enough), then could be the FX-4100 (but taking it to 4.5Ghz is a must) and then the 1090T.

Keep in mind that's gaming only. If you want threading power, then the 1090T comes before the 965 IMO.

Cheers!

EDIT: lil' mistake

No, the 8 core FX 8150 competes with the 1090t and is bassically on par on benches that take advantage of all cores. BD is not very quick. For new games like BF3, BFBC2, Mafia two, etc. the two cores really come in handy. The new quad core bulldozer is a waste of money considering the that the phenom ii X4 is faster. Don't advise him a BD quad core that will perform like garbage.... 1090t is the perfect AMD gaming CPU now days because games still don't use all 8 threads a 8120 or 8150 has to offer but will destroy a X4 in modern games.
a b à CPUs
October 21, 2011 5:08:47 PM

While I do agree that the FX4100 could be a waste down the road, I don't agree that a 8120 is a better buy than the 1090T at all.

I'll give you that, down the road, the 965 could be put in third place easily, right now is not far behind (in games) to justify the extra price for the 1090T or the 8120.

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

If you look at the CPU testing for the games, the 965 (represented by the 980) still has a lot to give and hardly become obsolete in the near future. And since I cannot guarantee that "new" games will use more than 4 cores actively, the 1090T and 8120 are hard to recommend right now IMO.

Cheers!
a b à CPUs
October 21, 2011 5:19:20 PM

Yuka said:
While I do agree that the FX4100 could be a waste down the road, I don't agree that a 8120 is a better buy than the 1090T at all.

I'll give you that, down the road, the 965 could be put in third place easily, right now is not far behind (in games) to justify the extra price for the 1090T or the 8120.

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

If you look at the CPU testing for the games, the 965 (represented by the 980) still has a lot to give and hardly become obsolete in the near future. And since I cannot guarantee that "new" games will use more than 4 cores actively, the 1090T and 8120 are hard to recommend right now IMO.

Cheers!

I would not recommend a 8120, they are not very good unless are cores are active. The 1090t on the other hand can be used in modern games. Not the COD series, but BFBC2 and BF3, Mafia II, and there are a few more I cannot remember, but it will be more widely used soon. If he has the money, go for it.
a b à CPUs
October 21, 2011 8:00:48 PM

Yuka said:
Nope, for Gaming the 965 is better and cheaper.



Its cheaper, not better. The 965 and the 1090 are close to identical in gaming.
a b à CPUs
October 21, 2011 8:11:12 PM

FALC0N said:
Its cheaper, not better. The 965 and the 1090 are close to identical in gaming.


Yeah, forgot to edit that to "for gaming the 965 is better in P/P".

Cheers!
a b à CPUs
October 21, 2011 8:13:08 PM

Yuka said:
Yeah, forgot to edit that to "for gaming the 965 is better in P/P".

Cheers!

But barely. Only by .4Ghz when all cores are active. But when you do anything that supports more cores, especially in the near future, the 1090t will blow away the X4.
a b à CPUs
October 21, 2011 8:50:30 PM

HostileDonut said:
But barely. Only by .4Ghz when all cores are active. But when you do anything that supports more cores, especially in the near future, the 1090t will blow away the X4.


I got mine running at 4.1Ghz with stock voltage, I really doubt a 1090T could reach that high with stock voltages. So I'm a little biased towards the 965 :p 

I wonder what's the price difference for the OP, now that we got down to it. I've seen price differences as high as 40USD. Got any counter examples for that?

Cheers!
October 21, 2011 10:07:02 PM

I ordered x4 955 be yesterday, going to try to oc it to 3.7 ghz with the stock cooler.
a b à CPUs
October 21, 2011 10:10:34 PM

cortex5x said:
I ordered x4 955 be yesterday, going to try to oc it to 3.7 ghz with the stock cooler.


3.7 Should be no problem at all.
a b à CPUs
October 21, 2011 10:37:36 PM

And what was the price difference between them?

Cheers!
a b à CPUs
October 21, 2011 10:48:38 PM

Yuka said:
And what was the price difference between them?

Cheers!


Depends on where your at, but $40 for me. Im assuming you mean the 955 vs the 1090.

Worth it though if you will still be using your system in some capacity 5 years from now. The extra core matters more as system loads increase. And they always do over time.

For example, Intel had quads and duals 4 years ago that had about the same performance, but today the quads have a clear advantage. Same will hold true with the X6 vs the X4 in 4 years.
a b à CPUs
October 21, 2011 11:07:32 PM

I really understand what you're saying, but I'm sure the 4 cores will run a long 4 years. Dual cores have been around since 2003 (or close) in x86, right? So we've had at least 6 or 7 years of "service" for dual cores at the top/middle.

I really think quads will last a solid 4 years from now even (making it another 6-7 years cycle). What worries me though, is the throughput of next gens. But that's another story.

Cheers!
a b à CPUs
October 22, 2011 3:24:01 AM

Yuka said:
I really understand what you're saying, but I'm sure the 4 cores will run a long 4 years. Dual cores have been around since 2003 (or close) in x86, right? So we've had at least 6 or 7 years of "service" for dual cores at the top/middle.

I really think quads will last a solid 4 years from now even (making it another 6-7 years cycle). What worries me though, is the throughput of next gens. But that's another story.

Cheers!

Phenom II X4 is already starting to show some age compared to it's Intel counterpart. I would grab the X6. An X4 will not hold four more years. It is already two years old. Give it another 2 or 3 if your lucky.
October 22, 2011 4:19:25 AM

HostileDonut said:
Phenom II X4 is already starting to show some age compared to it's Intel counterpart. I would grab the X6. An X4 will not hold four more years. It is already two years old. Give it another 2 or 3 if your lucky.


There are no video games here or in the near future that require 6 cores. You are advising people to deliberately waste money.

Why not just recommend a mac? You're under this assumption that CPUs have a big effect in video games, but they very much don't. Not only that, but you're recommending a CPU that's more expensive and hardly better. I wouldn't even call it better. And the things it's considered "better" for have absolutely nothing to do with video games.

Please don't recommend people X6 cores when 80% of the games today don't utilize more than 2. It makes you look stupid.

And the 965 is not "showing it's age". It's one of the best price-performance CPUs out there. I don't own one anymore since I switched to an i2500K, but you certainly don't need a better CPU than a 965 for video games. There will be no performance gain in doing so.
October 22, 2011 4:30:33 AM

Yuka said:
I got mine running at 4.1Ghz with stock voltage, I really doubt a 1090T could reach that high with stock voltages. So I'm a little biased towards the 965 :p 

I wonder what's the price difference for the OP, now that we got down to it. I've seen price differences as high as 40USD. Got any counter examples for that?

Cheers!


Just Help Me to Overclock my 955. How Far will it go on stock voltage ?
a b à CPUs
October 22, 2011 2:13:40 PM

Dave1990 said:
There are no video games here or in the near future that require 6 cores. You are advising people to deliberately waste money.

Why not just recommend a mac? You're under this assumption that CPUs have a big effect in video games, but they very much don't. Not only that, but you're recommending a CPU that's more expensive and hardly better. I wouldn't even call it better. And the things it's considered "better" for have absolutely nothing to do with video games.

Please don't recommend people X6 cores when 80% of the games today don't utilize more than 2. It makes you look stupid.

And the 965 is not "showing it's age". It's one of the best price-performance CPUs out there. I don't own one anymore since I switched to an i2500K, but you certainly don't need a better CPU than a 965 for video games. There will be no performance gain in doing so.

I can name some 6-threaded apps. BF3, BFBC2, Mafia2, and from what I can tell, games are heading that direction.
a b à CPUs
October 22, 2011 2:15:15 PM

The Mysterious Guy said:
Just Help Me to Overclock my 955. How Far will it go on stock voltage ?

I would bet you could hit 3.7 pretty easily on stock voltage. If you are lucky, somewhere in the 4Ghz area. Maybe up the voltage .1 if it isn't stable. P2s don't actually need the stock voltage they come with. You could down-volt.
a b à CPUs
October 23, 2011 1:01:54 AM

Dave1990 said:
There are no video games here or in the near future that require 6 cores. You are advising people to deliberately waste money.

Why not just recommend a mac? You're under this assumption that CPUs have a big effect in video games, but they very much don't. Not only that, but you're recommending a CPU that's more expensive and hardly better. I wouldn't even call it better. And the things it's considered "better" for have absolutely nothing to do with video games.

Please don't recommend people X6 cores when 80% of the games today don't utilize more than 2. It makes you look stupid.

And the 965 is not "showing it's age". It's one of the best price-performance CPUs out there. I don't own one anymore since I switched to an i2500K, but you certainly don't need a better CPU than a 965 for video games. There will be no performance gain in doing so.


I am just stunned at how many people think computer are just expensive gaming consoles. The vast majority of users do not use computers for gaming. At least not gaming as you would think of it.

Unless I missed something, and maybe I did, the OP said nothing about gaming.
a b à CPUs
October 23, 2011 1:42:27 AM

FALC0N said:
I am just stunned at how many people think computer are just expensive gaming consoles. The vast majority of users do not use computers for gaming. At least not gaming as you would think of it.

Unless I missed something, and maybe I did, the OP said nothing about gaming.

Yes, but if he is buying a CPU like this, he will probablt be gaming. Also, if he is building it, he probably be gaming. (builders normally game) He would have said he wasn't by now if he won't too. Most likely.
a b à CPUs
October 23, 2011 1:50:48 AM

HostileDonut said:
Yes, but if he is buying a CPU like this, he will probablt be gaming. Also, if he is building it, he probably be gaming. (builders normally game) He would have said he wasn't by now if he won't too. Most likely.


And you draw all these insightful conclusion from what evidence again? I don't know a single builder who games. Myself included. Just because you build to game doesn't mean everyone else does.

If he hasn't said he wont, he probably will?

He hasn't said he will do CAD either. Does that mean he will? Hasn't said he wont throw his system out the window. Does that mean he will? He hasn't said he wont marry it and feed it ice cream every day. Does that mean he will?

Your logic is mind numbing.
a b à CPUs
October 23, 2011 3:30:03 AM

FALC0N said:
And you draw all these insightful conclusion from what evidence again? I don't know a single builder who games. Myself included. Just because you build to game doesn't mean everyone else does.

If he hasn't said he wont, he probably will?

He hasn't said he will do CAD either. Does that mean he will? Hasn't said he wont throw it out the window. Does that mean he will? He hasn't said he wont marry it and feed it ice cream every day. Does that mean he will? Your logic mind numbing.


Hey, my keyboard has a very specific diet of spaghetti and some times he likes to have coffee! xD!

Anyway, just make a clear distinction on what you're suggesting and it's all good. Doesn't matter if the OP stated it or not if we "cover the blind spots", right?

Cheers!
a b à CPUs
October 23, 2011 1:13:07 PM

FALC0N said:
And you draw all these insightful conclusion from what evidence again? I don't know a single builder who games. Myself included. Just because you build to game doesn't mean everyone else does.

If he hasn't said he wont, he probably will?

He hasn't said he will do CAD either. Does that mean he will? Hasn't said he wont throw his system out the window. Does that mean he will? He hasn't said he wont marry it and feed it ice cream every day. Does that mean he will?

Your logic is mind numbing.

I am saying, we have been talking about it for gaming, and if hw doesn't game, he probably would have butted in and said something. OP, will you be gaming?
a b à CPUs
October 23, 2011 9:24:53 PM

HostileDonut said:
I am saying, we have been talking about it for gaming, and if hw doesn't game, he probably would have butted in and said something. OP, will you be gaming?


Maybe. But in my experience, it is unwise to make such an assumption.
a b à CPUs
October 23, 2011 9:29:41 PM

FALC0N said:
Maybe. But in my experience, it is unwise to make such an assumption.

Sounds right, but if he wants a heavy-duty CPU, he will probably be gaming or video-encoding, or using some kind of application that needs it. Myabe not, just an assuption still. OP, what will you use it for?
!