Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

1100T vs fx6100

Last response: in CPUs
Share
December 10, 2011 11:18:27 PM

Hello,
Any benchmark results for these two cpus

More about : 1100t fx6100

a b à CPUs
December 11, 2011 12:06:39 AM

Well the 1100 beats the new 8 core in allot of benchmarks so I guess thats the answer for you and no need to get the 1100 get the 1090T as the both top out in the 4 to 4.2 range anyway..

Thent
m
0
l
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
December 11, 2011 1:22:23 AM

If he is an overclocker I say get the fx6100. You can go a bit higher than 4.2ghz with that chip, and then it would be considerably faster than the 1100t.
m
0
l
December 11, 2011 1:38:54 AM

Whats the point in buying a chip in order to OC and still get results that a I5-2500 can get moderately OC? Seems like a waste of money on nearly all the FX line.
m
0
l
a c 853 à CPUs
December 11, 2011 1:51:57 AM

lemlo said:
If he is an overclocker I say get the fx6100. You can go a bit higher than 4.2ghz with that chip, and then it would be considerably faster than the 1100t.

What if he overclocks the 1100T to around 4GHz?
m
0
l
December 11, 2011 2:14:39 AM

1100t is way faster than fx, get phenom ii's while the stocks are still there
m
0
l
a c 185 à CPUs
December 11, 2011 3:40:26 AM

lemlo said:
If he is an overclocker I say get the fx6100. You can go a bit higher than 4.2ghz with that chip, and then it would be considerably faster than the 1100t.

*overclocks 1100t to 4ghz+* FX 6100 @4.2ghz: I am sad :( 
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
December 11, 2011 4:24:08 AM

delaro said:
Whats the point in buying a chip in order to OC and still get results that a I5-2500 can get moderately OC? Seems like a waste of money on nearly all the FX line.

Because some people buy AMD and some people buy Intel, its simple.
m
0
l
December 11, 2011 7:36:26 PM

All i run is amd for desktop and i can say get the 1100t before there gone. I have a amd fx 8120 overclocked to 4.5 and my amd 955 at 3.8 feels faster in games. Get 1100t overclock to 3.9 and forget it. piledriver is the only thing im still here for. If that goes bad im gone. Ivy is going to be one mean chip.
m
0
l
December 12, 2011 2:35:36 AM

What I meant, the 1100t can overclock maybe as high as 4.2 whereas the fx chip can overclock to as high as 4.5ghz or higher on air cooling. Clock for clock the fx is a bit slower but with that kind of freq difference you will dust the 1100twith the fx chip.
m
0
l
a c 185 à CPUs
December 12, 2011 2:52:48 AM

lemlo said:
What I meant, the 1100t can overclock maybe as high as 4.2 whereas the fx chip can overclock to as high as 4.5ghz or higher on air cooling. Clock for clock the fx is a bit slower but with that kind of freq difference you will dust the 1100twith the fx chip.

The 4.2ghz 1100t will outperform the fx 6100 at 4.5ghz
m
0
l
December 12, 2011 5:54:28 AM

Dosen't matter now 1100t is gone from newegg and probly every where soon.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
December 12, 2011 2:02:09 PM

quick compare here

cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html

and compare here by selecting those cpu that you want to compare (consider phenom 2 980 also)

cpu-world.com/benchmarks/?ind=1&c_part=AMD_HDZ955FBK4DGM&PROCESS=Select+CPU+or+family...


Also fx6xxx is not a hex core cpu
m
0
l
March 22, 2012 10:09:45 PM

You children are incredibly ignorant.

Buying an i5 is saying "I'm going to purchase a multicore cpu that only excels at single threaded tasks".

It's funny how uneducated EVERY SINGLE post has been.

Do you actually USE your cpu? Or are you worried about some world of warcraft, poorly-threaded shitfest type of application?

The i5 absolutely sucks at rendering (3ds, c4d, blender, ae etc), DAW loads and anything highly threaded, especially when compared to hexa-core AMDs. Yes, anatech is highly biased, as is cinebench. Real world results are in favor of physical cores 99% of the time. Hyper-threading is an outdated and largely useless feature for children that don't, once again, use their CPU!

So, i5 ~= i7, both are quad cores designed to execute single threads quickly (FOR GAMER CHILDREN)

The fx 6 series IS A HEXACORE. In no way does this chip or the marketing go against the definition of core. Arguing otherwise is completely false and a favorite pastime of you little fanboy children.

6 physical cores = superior multi-thread execution.

6 ferrite rings = hexacore, since I've explained this now I expect no more idiocy from you children (yeah right).


1100t tops out at 4.2 ghz? Are you mentally challenged or just incapable of overclocking? 4.2 is nothing, easily achievable with the stock heatsink.

fx series? 5 + incredibly easily, PLUS highly overclocked ram support (far above anything supported by Sandy Bridge).

So please, don't bring your bullshit in here, intel children. Some of us actually know how to configure a system.

Also, do some research on CMT vs. SMT!





BTW, Ivy Bridge is a DIE SHRINK, nothing more.






Seriously, if I see any more uneducated intel fanboy bullshit, imma start knocking heads.







m
0
l
a b à CPUs
March 23, 2012 4:27:42 PM

fu12 said:
You children are incredibly ignorant.

Buying an i5 is saying "I'm going to purchase a multicore cpu that only excels at single threaded tasks".

It's funny how uneducated EVERY SINGLE post has been.

Do you actually USE your cpu? Or are you worried about some world of warcraft, poorly-threaded shitfest type of application?

The i5 absolutely sucks at rendering (3ds, c4d, blender, ae etc), DAW loads and anything highly threaded, especially when compared to hexa-core AMDs. Yes, anatech is highly biased, as is cinebench. Real world results are in favor of physical cores 99% of the time. Hyper-threading is an outdated and largely useless feature for children that don't, once again, use their CPU!

So, i5 ~= i7, both are quad cores designed to execute single threads quickly (FOR GAMER CHILDREN)

The fx 6 series IS A HEXACORE. In no way does this chip or the marketing go against the definition of core. Arguing otherwise is completely false and a favorite pastime of you little fanboy children.

6 physical cores = superior multi-thread execution.

6 ferrite rings = hexacore, since I've explained this now I expect no more idiocy from you children (yeah right).


1100t tops out at 4.2 ghz? Are you mentally challenged or just incapable of overclocking? 4.2 is nothing, easily achievable with the stock heatsink.

fx series? 5 + incredibly easily, PLUS highly overclocked ram support (far above anything supported by Sandy Bridge).

So please, don't bring your bullshit in here, intel children. Some of us actually know how to configure a system.

Also, do some research on CMT vs. SMT!





BTW, Ivy Bridge is a DIE SHRINK, nothing more.






Seriously, if I see any more uneducated intel fanboy bullshit, imma start knocking heads.


+1 for the fanboy rant lol
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
March 25, 2012 6:14:14 AM

The X6 1100T is AMD's all round grunt, enough per core kick with enough pony up power to deliver pretty good multithreading results. I would not consider a 6100 in comparison with the Hammer, the X6 pretty much destroys the FX 6100 in everything. What is more reasonable to compare is the 8120/50 with the X6 1100T.

In per core grunt the X6 beats the FX 8XXX chips, and is about 10% slower in multithreading but all round its AMD's best chip right now for people wanting a balanced system. If you are not into gaming but want something that goes through the threads well and is inexpensive, grab yourself a $179 FX8120
m
0
l
March 25, 2012 9:34:35 AM

fu12 said:




BTW, Ivy Bridge is a DIE SHRINK, nothing more.






Seriously, if I see any more uneducated intel fanboy bullshit, imma start knocking heads.


Of course you won't admit to it, but I find it depressing how sad you are... Oh wait I'm over it, die shrink a comin' soon!!
m
0
l
March 25, 2012 3:54:50 PM

the 1045t is out and cheep. How does the 1045t stack up against 1100t?
m
0
l
April 10, 2012 11:30:54 PM

Q. 1100t or FX 6100?

A. Lets all shout at each other. hopefully by the time we have an answer there will be a newer, cheaper processor out there!

Lets all save some time and start arguing about ivy bridge vs bulldozer now before Moore's law makes everything we say exponentially irrelevant?

Fools. just choose one. oveclock it, and buy a new one in 2-5 years. you won't notice any difference in your day to day life I assure you.

I'm going with bulldozer. Because then i get to think the words Bulldoser, Sabertooth, and vengeance whenever i look through the perspex at my LED illuminated metal plastic horde as i shoot the bad guys and do fancy graphs in Excel. Phenom sabertooth vengeance just doesn't have the same ring. I can't make good graphs when it doesn't sound right.

m
0
l
a b à CPUs
April 10, 2012 11:43:03 PM

Yeah who gives a fizz about names, the 1100T is faster than the 6100 is basically every way shape and form. If you can find one "if" buy it.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
April 11, 2012 12:05:37 AM

1100T is a true 6 core cpu. The fx 6100 is a 3 module, 6 core cpu. Even according to amd a module is 80% of a dual core cpu. Put the concept into math, the FX-6100 is only 480% efficient where the 1100t is 600% in theory. Fully utilized its easy to see where the 1100t is the better choice.

The 6100 has a slight clock speed advantage and in light threaded programs will be close, but its not enough to offset the efficiency of the 1100t, you still lose that 20% for using 2 halves of a module 90% of the time.
m
0
l
April 11, 2012 7:44:22 PM

Given that we tend to find ways to abuse new tech as it's released It makes logical sense to go with the FX-6100. The 1100t has been OC'd to death and has had all the major driver updates it will get, and will at some point receive no more. The FX-6100 isn't far behind and probably hasn't been fully utilised yet. I work for a software company and know enough to know that NOTHING is ever released at it's best. The 1100t is at it's best. the FX-6100 isn't. there is more to utilising a cpu than just overclocking it.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
May 21, 2012 2:52:53 AM

I have the 1100T and a friend who has the FX-6100, They are so close in performance in every game that we play. I would say go for the cheaper FX-6100 if you don't have a 6 core yet. If you have a phenom II x4, save up for the 8 core 8120/50. The 1100T is still up there in price.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
April 17, 2013 3:47:10 AM

fu12 said:
You children are incredibly ignorant.

Buying an i5 is saying "I'm going to purchase a multicore cpu that only excels at single threaded tasks".

It's funny how uneducated EVERY SINGLE post has been.

Do you actually USE your cpu? Or are you worried about some world of warcraft, poorly-threaded shitfest type of application?

The i5 absolutely sucks at rendering (3ds, c4d, blender, ae etc), DAW loads and anything highly threaded, especially when compared to hexa-core AMDs. Yes, anatech is highly biased, as is cinebench. Real world results are in favor of physical cores 99% of the time. Hyper-threading is an outdated and largely useless feature for children that don't, once again, use their CPU!

So, i5 ~= i7, both are quad cores designed to execute single threads quickly (FOR GAMER CHILDREN)

The fx 6 series IS A HEXACORE. In no way does this chip or the marketing go against the definition of core. Arguing otherwise is completely false and a favorite pastime of you little fanboy children.

6 physical cores = superior multi-thread execution.

6 ferrite rings = hexacore, since I've explained this now I expect no more idiocy from you children (yeah right).


1100t tops out at 4.2 ghz? Are you mentally challenged or just incapable of overclocking? 4.2 is nothing, easily achievable with the stock heatsink.

fx series? 5 + incredibly easily, PLUS highly overclocked ram support (far above anything supported by Sandy Bridge).

So please, don't bring your bullshit in here, intel children. Some of us actually know how to configure a system.

Also, do some research on CMT vs. SMT!





BTW, Ivy Bridge is a DIE SHRINK, nothing more.






Seriously, if I see any more uneducated intel fanboy bullshit, imma start knocking heads.







K-O-0-L-S-T-O-R-Y-B-R-O



m
0
l
!