AMD Phenom II x4 New Build, all round Multitasking w/t Gaming

Hi Guys and Girls, a big thanks up front to everybody who contributes, just in case I don't get the chance later on...

I've already done a fair bit of reading around and found mostly outdated posts and hijacked threads, making it a really hard to get my head around piecing together a robust, future proof and above all current system (Allowing for any new groundbreaking releases?!). So for me and any other beginners out there i'm looking to start again and grow the thread organically to try and get all of the pieces to fall in to place, also i'm looking to learn a thing or two at the feet of those in the know...

The system I'm aiming for is approx. < 4Ghz w/t minimal OC and system tweaks. And will be used for multiple phone application emulation as well as 2D and 3D graphics testing. I'm aiming on keeping this system for 3-5 years but don't want to break the bank building it, however, budget is somewhat flexible.



Starting at the beginning, with the CPU... You might have guessed but I've plumed for the Phenom II x4, but that's as far as I've got in that decision. There have been many people with their piece to say and no definitive answers to some very interesting points raised:

I'm aware of the potential of the 955 BE and the multiplier adjustment (x16 --> x18) to achieve the similar speeds as a 970, but I had come across a thread in regard AMD testing for stability resulting in classifications of 955 and 965/975 etc., with the 965BE offering slightly improved stability even though they're exactly the same core with different factory release multipliers.

Specifically I'm looking at the: AMD Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition Deneb 3.2GHz Socket AM3 125W Quad-Core Processor Model HDZ955FBGMBOX/125W C3 steeping




Does this have any merit at increased voltage with an increase to the multiplier? There is only a slight difference in price and that would be well worth the increased stability in my book, or is this simply falling prey to the marketing of AMD?

Or is this processor slightly short of the mark these days? It seems to be favored over the FX 4100 and I've proven that to myself through research, but is there anything to be said for Bulldozer atm?



Thanks again guys, and for people who are nice enough to post, can I please ask that it's kept within the realms of processors , for the time being I'd like to Grow the post, just so I can keep up if nothing else..

If you are interested in a discussion about OCing, you should probably post in the OCing section instead. That is probably why you aren't getting many responses in this section.

Some things I will comment on, though, if the processors are the exact same except for a different multiplier from the factory then they should perform the same when the multipliers are adjusted to be equal.

The Bulldozer FX processors were mostly a failure because most of the motherboards that can support FX processors can't do so right out of the box. If you buy a FX processor and a FX motherboard, you can't expect to just stick it in and have it work.

Time and time again people do this and they come to realize that they need yet another processor so they can update the motherboard BIOS using the old processor and then take it out and put the FX processor in. If you are going to have to buy a 2nd PSU just to get the motherboard to work there is no good reason not to just skip bulldozer entirely.

You might as well just get a high end Phenom 2 or an Intel processor instead, which is exactly what people do.

Bulldozer is dead and should stay dead. I really like AMD, but even I have to admit they failed massively with FX. Well, I guess most of the problems come from the motherboard makers not supporting the FX processors adequately, but AMD should have sorted that out before they released the chips.

If most of the motherboard makers' boards would have worked without BIOS updates, the FX line might not have been such a huge flop.

***Looks like I dropped the ball on this one***

Sorry, thank for the reply, I was responding to a completely different thread I had running.

Anyways, you've answered all of my points and thanks. OC'ing is a maybe in the future after an initial system set up to get a nice dose of power from the get go, it's not really my intention to go any further than that until the system starts to feel the strain down the line, and then I would be looking to the updated Architectures along the AM3+ socket.

I was just looking for a confirmation on what I'd picked out and it turns out it's good

From here I was hoping to move on to MoBo's to discuss and get a feel for how the system is coming together. Basic requirements were:

Socket - am3+
Memory - 4xDDR3 1600MHz - AMD doesn't require higher, not for the price anyway.
PCIe - 2/3 16x RUNNING (2x at 16)
GPUs - CrossFire/SLIe
sata 3.0 6Gb/s and usb3

I was looking at these two:

ASUS Sabertooth 990FX
http://www.aria.co.uk/Products/Com [...] 3&rqcType=

and, GIGABYTE 990FXA
http://www.aria.co.uk/Products/Com [...] ctId=46139

Any thoughts anybody

Awesome, that's way more help than I was getting on the other thread anyway Even if it was a step ahead of what I was hoping for, but I guess I need to figure it all out at some point anyway?!

If you have any further pearls of wisdom you would be happy to share I'm still in debate over MoBo and GPU + RAM combo's. But I think I'll try and take up some of these issues with the overclocker's as well.

Thanks for the pointers!!

These are both quality boards. Either choice will work. Personally I have always used Gigabyte boards and have had good luck without them.

Sweet, yeah there was nothing in it for the motherboard. Only minor concern was reports of a poor BIOS on the GIGABYTE occasionally being restrictive and possible warping issues on delivery with the ASUS. Lesser of two evils I guess..

The 960T is a great shout! With any luck i'll get one of the 40% that will actually allow for the extra cores to be unlocked, also it supports 1600MHz RAM, which the 965 doesn't. And if not, then it's still lower on power consumption, which is always nice.

As for RAM I had picked out Mushkin Blackline 9-9-9-24 @ 1.35V
https://www.aria.co.uk/Products/Com [...] ctId=43961

Simply because it works out a little cheaper for 16Gb and should have slightly improved stability over 1.5V. I'm imagining this system is going to get a little warm and power hungry with 6 cores and a big GPU, so I want to be a little nice on the RAM if I ever want to push some more power in to the system.

Speaking of GPU's, I didn't want to break the bank on a card. I'm not a heavy gamer and mostly want to work with multi-threaded/ multi-screens and 3D graphics (which I was planning on doing myself) so I don't see it being over strenuous.

A 6950 would be nice, but I was thinking something more like a GTX 560Ti...
I know it's skimping a little but it should do everything I ask of it for now, and then I can always xFire down the line when 2 or 3 screens gets a bit heavy to handle?!

Any other fantastic little tips would be greatly appreciated.

The 6950 is cheaper than the 560TI and performs pretty much the same.

Not sure why you would argue against a 6950 and towards a 560TI instead.

Also, 1600 RAM is no better in real world programs than 1333 is.

Additionally, 16 GBs is overkill for most applications. You would likely be fine with 2x 4GB like the one I mentioned.

Both Gigabyte and Asus motherboards are the best things out there, anything else has worse problems than those. I have never heard of anyone getting a warped Asus board or any problems from either of them other than that FX doesn't work right out of the box on them, which is the same as every other manufacturer.

Here's the build from the other thread. Some of the prices changed a little, but honestly I am really intrigued to see what it can do, so I am wanting to build it. As long as we have the funds after we go get our taxes done tomorrow, I will probably order it when we get the refund.

Just for giggles, I'd rock this if I didnt build my i5 recently. Went for a kind of Industrial/Ninja theme. I nicknamed it "The Dark Horse"

CPU = AMD Phenom II x4 980

MOBO = Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD3

RAM = Mushkin Enhanced Blackline 8gb DDR3-1600

CPU COOLER = Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO

CASE = Fractal Design Core 3000

PSU = SeaSonic S12II 620w 80+ Bronze Certified

GPU = Sapphire Radeon 6870

HDD = Seagate 500gb HD

OPTICAL = Samsung 22x DVD Burner

TOTAL = 807.91

Ah yes, I had indeed seen your thread. It had given me some good pointers.

Thanks for the heads up on the Hyper 212, which in this case I'm pretty much going to need. As well as the PSU.. Of all of the options it did seem the best.

For graphics though I'm still not convinced. I had originally been looking at the 6870, but from what I've read the 560 Ti is the card to have for £150. This was the price range I was hoping to stick to as it's all I really need in my everyday usage. However, a 6950 compared to a 560 Ti Twin FrozR II, well I think I would have to go with the 6950, it's just that little bit more expensive and I don't know if I really need Ultra settings the 3 times I play games each month..?!

But if I were to drop to 8Gb RAM it might just be feasible to up the graphics in return.. I know it's what people always want to hear when discussing new rigs. In fact...

I've just found the GIGABYTE GA-990FXA-D3 for £101,
all the same support for FX chipset, USB and SATA, as well as dual x16 SLI...

So with 8Gb RAM and the slightly cheaper MoBo I could actually afford the 6950. Happy Days!