Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

New FX Series, FX-4170

Last response: in CPUs
Share
March 29, 2012 2:09:58 PM

I am on newegg and a new CPU caught my eye.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Its 4.2GHz out of the box :o 

Its only about $30 extra from the 4100 which is only 3.6GHz out of the box.

Thumbs up for AMD :D 

More about : series 4170

a b à CPUs
March 29, 2012 2:18:30 PM

Its still FX so still cr@p. Heck if for some legitimate reason you MUST buy one (I mean a pressing reason like if you dont the taliban will behead your new kitten) buy the 4100 and OC it.

Personally I'd let the kitten go instead
March 29, 2012 2:31:31 PM

wr6133 said:
Its still FX so still cr@p. Heck if for some legitimate reason you MUST buy one (I mean a pressing reason like if you dont the taliban will behead your new kitten) buy the 4100 and OC it.

Personally I'd let the kitten go instead


Haha why does everyone hate the FX Series so much? Is everyone just Intel Fans? Because all i keep hearing is stay away from FX.
Related resources
a b à CPUs
March 29, 2012 3:13:07 PM

I own Phenom II (unlocked OC'd 960T) and a 4100. Now back when i got the 4100 it cost MORE than the Phenom yet even in basic tasks it feels clumsy. The phenom is better. The 4100 is palmed off to she who must be obeyed and soon as I can justify the cost its getting replaced and destroyed.

Honestly to make me think 4100 is value for money it would need to drop from £80 to £50 and even then I would struggle to recommend it.

At the top of the chain its even madder the 8150 Costs MORE than a 2500k

*edit to add* I still think Phenom II is a good budget choice
a b à CPUs
March 29, 2012 3:39:42 PM

Yup to go with all the posts above I have a P2 1090T and I love it but FX was a letdown Mid level Intel will own it look at the fps the intel cpus get over the AMD chips the intel chips are better at stock than most amd chip overclocked hevily...bad few years for AMD and now with the GPU top end 50$ more and performing at or below 680 I just wonder what they are thinking?? Oh well LOL

Thent
a c 83 à CPUs
a b À AMD
March 29, 2012 5:02:13 PM

emoney123 said:
Haha why does everyone hate the FX Series so much? Is everyone just Intel Fans? Because all i keep hearing is stay away from FX.


I've owned 1 Athlon Xp, 1 Athlon 64, 2 Sempron 64, 3 Athlon X2, 1 Athlon II X2, 2 Athlon II X4, 1 Phenom X4, 3 Phenom II X4, 1 Phenom II X6 and a single Core Duo. Clearly I'm an AMD fan and I say STAY AWAY FROM FX. :lol: 

The FX 4100 @ 3.6Ghz is slower than a 3.2Ghz Phenom II 955, actually it struggles to compete with the 3.0Ghz Llano A8 3870. That 4.2Ghz sounds impressive on the 4170, but it's slower than the faster Phenom II processors. AMD increased the length of the pipeline requiring higher clock speeds to achieve the same performance, the cache has horrible latency and is slower than Phenom II despite having more, and your getting 4 integer cores paired with 2 FPU cores instead of 4 of each like in a Phenom II. In a way it's not a complete quad core, just as the FX 8150 isn't a complete 8 core.
April 2, 2012 8:33:08 AM

the FX series will get better when the next gen comes out and keep getting better fast. The Phenom II x6 processors was the last in a very old and good series(also would not be getting any better) .

To think that AMD has totally replaced how the cpu works, a first step, its not that bad, very close or better some times then the Phenom II but it will get better as software uses more cores, and AMD will start to run.

Still if you are like me and waited for the fx series it was a let down, Due to the press hyping it up and fake benchmarks on-line. If you have a phenom II x6 and a gamer you have no need to upgrade.

Intel have the benchmarks with single core power, AMD have build a new multitasking cpu which if not for the hype and the cost would have been a good start to the series.
a b à CPUs
April 2, 2012 9:44:52 AM

emoney123 said:
Haha why does everyone hate the FX Series so much? Is everyone just Intel Fans? Because all i keep hearing is stay away from FX.

Because people listened to all the hype instead of paying attention to what AMD Engineers were saying.

A module does 80% of the work of a dual core cpu. http://techreport.com/articles.x/19514 <-- note this is 1 year before BD release

With that in mind, the 4XXX series is a dual module chip. Its called a quad core because its 80% compared to intel's 30% for HT.

4 cores *80% = 320% ... just over a tri-core phenom.
8 cores *80% = 640% ... barely faster than a phenom X6

People get stuck on the marketing end ... why doesn't my 8 core cpu perform like an 8 core cpu and my quad is slower than a quad....

Without reading anything and going out and buy 4100 to upgrade a phenom II x4 ... you just downgraded because you didn't read what the chip actually is.

The other issue is the Cache latency is horrid, and everyone thinks this is why its so slow. Its only part of the reason. Why do you think the 4100 is $99 cpu.

!