Leaving the phenom 2's and going for FX, is it worth it?

[emlarsen2]

So, as everyone knows, the beloved Phenoms are becoming a dying breed of processors, Newegg doesn't have any 1100/1090's in stock and probably never will. (Not to say they are gone from the Earth just because Neweeg doesn't have them) However, I'm looking to start a new build and don't want to build something with a CPU that's going to be history soon. So, of course I'm looking at the FX series, more specifically the fx-6100 just because I'm a poor college kid.

I realize the Fx-series is getting bashed by the "bad" benchmark ratings it's receiving and by the Phenom fanboys sad to see their top of line processor being replaced. But, from the people that actually use them for gaming and whatnot, they seem to be holding up to par. Im just wondering what you guys think, is it worth moving to the next gen of AMD CPU's when building a new build at this point in time, or stick with the "old" phenom's which clearly have a slight edge. I don't just want benchmark results spat at me and people saying the 1100T is better, because I know all that junk. I would like some input based on the future where FX will most likely rule AMD, and if it's worth the move to FX now when building a PC that will be used for the next 2 years.

(Any people using the Fx-6100, you could let me know how your experience has gone too )

 

[amuffin]

It would be a better option to get an i3-2100.

 

[emlarsen2]

It would be a better option to get an i3-2100.

This clearly was not a relevant comment nor did it answer any part of the question, I'm leaning toward AMD, and mainly the FX6100

 

[esrever]

I'd go intel going for a new build if you can't get a phenom 2 for cheap

 

[Slickrick214]

Either an I3 or I5 2500k and out of those two I would lean more towards the 2500k.

 

[amuffin]

This clearly was not a relevant comment nor did it answer any part of the question, I'm leaning toward AMD, and mainly the FX6100

No, but the i3-2100 is cheaper than the 6100 and outperforms it.

 

[emlarsen2]

Ok, so it looks like intel is really a good idea, but I was hoping to support AMD. It's quite sad AMD couldn't pull through here. So, all of you guys think the i-3 2100 is a solid processor enough to get me through the next 2 years? clearly the i-5 is better, but I don't know if I have the money.

EDIT: Also, will AMD radeon graphics cards work with an Intel motherboard?

 

[esrever]

yes the radeons will work with intel cpu.

if you want to support amd, the FX aren't that bad that you will feel like its crap once you get it. so An FX-4100 would be still an ok choice. the difference in gaming between it and an i3 would be minimal.

 

[BaronMatrix]

So, as everyone knows, the beloved Phenoms are becoming a dying breed of processors, Newegg doesn't have any 1100/1090's in stock and probably never will. (Not to say they are gone from the Earth just because Neweeg doesn't have them) However, I'm looking to start a new build and don't want to build something with a CPU that's going to be history soon. So, of course I'm looking at the FX series, more specifically the fx-6100 just because I'm a poor college kid.

I realize the Fx-series is getting bashed by the "bad" benchmark ratings it's receiving and by the Phenom fanboys sad to see their top of line processor being replaced. But, from the people that actually use them for gaming and whatnot, they seem to be holding up to par. Im just wondering what you guys think, is it worth moving to the next gen of AMD CPU's when building a new build at this point in time, or stick with the "old" phenom's which clearly have a slight edge. I don't just want benchmark results spat at me and people saying the 1100T is better, because I know all that junk. I would like some input based on the future where FX will most likely rule AMD, and if it's worth the move to FX now when building a PC that will be used for the next 2 years.

(Any people using the Fx-6100, you could let me know how your experience has gone too )

There will be a Win7 patch next month or so that will POSSIBLY increase perf by 15-20%. It's worth it.

 

[amuffin]

There will be a Win7 patch next month or so that will POSSIBLY increase perf by 15-20%. It's worth it.

Then it will be comparable to 1st gen intel core series of cpu's, when intel will be on their 3rd gen cpu's.

 

[rds1220]

It doesn't matter. Like you said it MIGHT make for a little bit better performance but by that point we'll be looking at Ivy Bridges and AMD will still be behind.

 

[emlarsen2]

So, as a result due to lack of funds I went for the $105 960T and will decide if AMD can pull off the FX later this year. If so, an upgrade will be in order, but I think the 960T will pull through for me. Hopefully the Windows 7 patch will make the bulldozer a better competitor. As for Ivy Bridge, we will see what happens when it comes out, so don't count your intel chickens before they hatch. Everyone had high hopes for bulldozer, but look where that went...

 

[sayantan]

One thing I would like to mention is that AMD motherboards are lot cheaper than the Intels.So if you are cash strapped then it would be quite logical to go for fx and then overclock it.But I would prefer fx 4110 over fx 6110 because 6 cores are mostly useless in gaming..Save the money and buy a better cooler.

 

[amuffin]

One thing I would like to mention is that AMD motherboards are lot cheaper than the Intels.So if you are cash strapped then it would be quite logical to go for fx and then overclock it.But I would prefer fx 4110 over fx 6110 because 6 cores are mostly useless in gaming..Save the money and buy a better cooler.

hehe fx 4100 isn't 4 cores its 2 cores and fx 6100 isn't 6 cores its 3 cores.

 

[sayantan]

hehe fx 4100 isn't 4 cores its 2 cores and fx 6100 isn't 6 cores its 3 cores.

I know that,they call it modules.4c=2module and 6c=3module.But under windows they are treated as individual cores.So a quad core optimized game would still not benefit from 3 modules because it behaves 6 individual cores under windows.

 

[esrever]

hehe fx 4100 isn't 4 cores its 2 cores and fx 6100 isn't 6 cores its 3 cores.

they are cores. just because a pentium 4 is slow doesn't make it a half core cpu just as the case with bulldozer.

 

[bawchicawawa]

Are people still saying "1 modular = 1 core" ...

Just because 2 cores share resources within that modular, it doesn't make it one core... That's like saying every cpu = 1 core.

Well, at any rate, good choice on the 960t. Hopefully the win 7 patch + the second gen bulldozers clear up AMDs rep.

 

[Chad Boga]

There will be a Win7 patch next month or so that will POSSIBLY increase perf by 15-20%. It's worth it.

:lol: 15 to 20%????

Where on Earth did you pull such crazy high percentages from?

It won't even be half of that on average, and probably not even on some weird corner case will it be that high.

 

[amuffin]

:lol: 15 to 20%????

Where on Earth did you pull such crazy high percentages from?

It won't even be half of that on average, and probably not even on some weird corner case will it be that high.

15-20%, bd is still slower :lol:

 

[Warrax22]

So, as a result due to lack of funds I went for the $105 960T and will decide if AMD can pull off the FX later this year. If so, an upgrade will be in order, but I think the 960T will pull through for me. Hopefully the Windows 7 patch will make the bulldozer a better competitor. As for Ivy Bridge, we will see what happens when it comes out, so don't count your intel chickens before they hatch. Everyone had high hopes for bulldozer, but look where that went...

Good call, I was about to recommend you the 960t as it's one of the few Phenom II models currently available on the market and also the best value CPU (imo) you can get atm not only for his performance per watt but also for the possibility of a 5th or 6th core and for his overclock potential. Make sure you get a good motherboard tho, I recommend the ASUS M5A97 if you're limited with money, it's on socket AM3+ so you'll be able to upgrade to the incoming FX Piledriver if you desire.

 

[emlarsen2]

Good call, I was about to recommend you the 960t as it's one of the few Phenom II models currently available on the market and also the best value CPU (imo) you can get atm not only for his performance per watt but also for the possibility of a 5th or 6th core and for his overclock potential. Make sure you get a good motherboard tho, I recommend the ASUS M5A97 if you're limited with money, it's on socket AM3+ so you'll be able to upgrade to the incoming FX Piledriver if you desire.

Ya, I planned ahead with that too. I got the Asrock Extreme4 970: (I had a link but it's not working..)

I think i'll be happy with that. Sadly, I can't update on how anything performs because stores that shall not be named, which are supposed to have the... BEST possible BUY... haven't shipped my case yet, where the EGG got all the other items to me days ago. Very frustrating . I'm thinking I'm either going to over clock the 960T or try to unlock the cores. I haven't decided which yet, who knows, maybe I'll do both

 

[Chad Boga]

There will be a Win7 patch next month or so that will POSSIBLY increase perf by 15-20%. It's worth it.

:lol: 15 to 20%????

Where on Earth did you pull such crazy high percentages from?

It won't even be half of that on average, and probably not even on some weird corner case will it be that high.

Well surprise surprise.

AMD: Windows 7 Scheduler Update Brings 1% - 2% Performance Improvement.

“Our testing shows that not every application realizes a performance boost. In fact, heavily threaded apps (those designed to use all 8 cores), get little or no uplift from this hotfix – they are already maxing out the processor. In other cases, the uplift averages out to a 1% - 2% uplift,” said Adam Kozak, a product marketing manager at AMD.

The advice you have been doling out to newbies in recent months has been absolutely diabolical.

From your 50% BD improvement over Thuban to your 1,000% exaggeration of the possible performance increase of the Win 7 patch.

Incredible, absolutely incredible.

 

[HEXiT]

if i was gonna make an amd gaming build i would still use the phenom 2 960 it is pretty much the best cpu amd have ever produced.. its efficient and over clocks well... gaming performance wise it will handle anything you throw at it... there is good reason to stay away from fx parts... 1 there server parts so are designed specifically to do multi threaded tasks in multi cpu builds and do it efficiently but at the cost of single threaded performance.
2 the cost of a new build doesnt warrant the money for the performance you will get, which in gaming will be 0% over the 960 which is a much cheaper part. meaning you will have more money for better gfx.

 

[dkm2]

I have been spending about 2 weeks trying to awnser this question. There is no way I am going back to intel. AMD is for me. I am going for the FX 8120, I dont care what people say about it. With the windows update it will be worth it instead of spending money on a sandy bridge that will be outdated in 2 months with the new ivy bridge. PLUS you will have to buy a new mobo with a chipset that supports ivy.

AMD is the way to go and the best for a "future proof" PC.

 

[HEXiT]

wow... did you get that quote from a cereal box... theres no such thing as future proof...
amd have changed sockets every year to 18 months, and have introduced some new 1s already this year...(f1 socket). buldozer will be replaced within 12 months buy a smaller faster version... then that could well be it from amd as they switch to liano. intel on the other hand will change there sockets every 3 years... my x58 was in production till last autumn/fall which made it 3 years old... so i dunno where you get the change sockets more often... just because they have a range of sockets doesnt mean they keep changing them...

but hey its up to you if you want to buy sub standard parts. i certainly wont stop you... your just gonna find out the hard and expencive way they aint all that...

oh and the hot fix will be lucky to give 1-2 percent increase, and thats from the amd top brass.