Stuck with FX-4100 -- help

[adrenaline435]

Hi,
I'm in the process of building a computer for my parents. The foundation of this machine was supposed to be an Intel core i5-2500k with a gigabyte z68 board. But when i went to Microcenter yesterday I found out that they don't offer the package discount with the i5 anymore. So I let the kid talk me into the AMD fx-4100.. which I immediately regretted. It did save some money but there's just so much that I don't like about these AMD chips. So now I don't know what to do. I spent $150 for the board and processor which is a pretty good deal I guess. Then another $20 for an hd6450 graphics card. Well here's what I have now:

Approximate Purchase Date: In process -- Now

Budget Range: (e.g.: 600-800) <$600 after rebates

System Usage from Most to Least Important: Internet, movies, office type work, possibly some video/music editing

Parts Not Required: Monitor

Preferred Website(s) for Parts: newegg.com but I'll order from any reputable company

Country: (e.g.: India) USA

Parts Preferences: Intel

Overclocking: No

SLI or Crossfire: No

Monitor Resolution: 1920x1080

Additional Comments: I want a quiet and efficient computer.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Parts I already have:

PSU: Antec 80+ Bronze 520w -- $40

Case: Legend Mid Tower -- $20

RAM: Kingston DDR3 (PC1333) -- $30

Windows 7 -- $90

HDD: Crucial M4 128GB SSD -- $150

DVD: Samsung -- $18


Parts in Question:

AMD fx-4100
+
ASRock 970 Extreme 3 AM3+ -- $150 together

Gigabyte HD6450 512MB -- $20



So I was originally planning on the i5-2500k with Z68 mobo (USB3, SATA6) and no graphics card for $230. Since that is now $280, I instead have the FX-4100 with an equivalent mobo plus an HD6450 for $170.

I don't like the higher power consumption of the FX chip plus the power consumption of the necessary video card. I don't like that the only people who seem to be happy with the FX chip are those who overclock it. I'm really disappointed that I couldn't get a good deal on an intel chip. So here are my options as I see them:

1. Keep the fx4100, ASRock 970 mobo, and hd 6450 for $170

2. Buy this instead for $100, it's more efficient and cheaper than what I have, then upgrade in a year or two:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboDealDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.831246&nm_mc=AFC-TechBargains&cm_mmc=AFC-TechBargains-_-NA-_-NA-_-NA

3. Exchange the ASRock 970 for the gigabyte board (no usb3 or sata6) that was free with the fx4100. Save $50 and upgrade in a year or two.

4. Preferred option: Find a good deal on an Intel Sandy bridge processor and nice mother board. Problem is, I can't find one right now.

5. Any other ideas? Maybe an A8 Llano set up??


Any advice?

 

[Proximon]

The CPU is fine for that purpose. I would say that's a decent office type system. I've built several office machines based on the older AMD CPUs and they arer still running great. The FX-4100 is comparable.

The feature you want is USB 3.0. SATA 6GB/s is debatable for that purpose, but you already have a 6GB/s SSD... so what are you thinking?

You are worried too much about power I think. A good 380W PSU will be more than enough.

 

[redeemer]

Well going from an i5 to a 4100fx an absolute downgrade in compute performance, however it looks to me that you are not a power user. The 4100FX will be more than enough for your needs. I think that a Llano based A8 system would have been a better choice in terms of efficiency. The parts you have selected are good however. There is absolutely no need for an i5 Z68 based system in your case.

 

[adrenaline435]

The CPU is fine for that purpose. I would say that's a decent office type system. I've built several office machines based on the older AMD CPUs and they arer still running great. The FX-4100 is comparable.

The feature you want is USB 3.0. SATA 6GB/s is debatable for that purpose, but you already have a 6GB/s SSD... so what are you thinking?

You are worried too much about power I think. A good 380W PSU will be more than enough.

I know its fine, but I want better than fine. And my biggest complaint about the AMD FX chip is the power consumption.

I want USB 3.0 and SATA 6 to keep the machine future proof. Since I dont like AMD chips in the first place Im not sure why I bother. I would like the SATA 6 for the SSD but I dont think its a must have. The M4 is fast but not much faster than the intel 320 which uses SATA 3.

I agree that a 380w PSU would be fine if I'd save any money going for one. As it is, I'm not going to find any quality 80+ Bronze PSU for much less than $40. And PSUs are more efficient when theyre in the mid range of they're power potential.

Well going from an i5 to a 4100fx an absolute downgrade in compute performance, however it looks to me that you are not a power user. The 4100FX will be more than enough for your needs. I think that a Llano based A8 system would have been a better choice in terms of efficiency. The parts you have selected are good however. There is absolutely no need for an i5 Z68 based system in your case.

OK, so I agree that the i5 is probably overkill. But it was a great deal and it wouldve lasted my parents a long time. I want the best bang for the buck. I saved $60 from what I originally planned but I feel like I gave up more than $60 worth of processing power. Do you guys see where I'm coming from on this? I want to build the absolute best machine I can for the money, not just something that is OK.

Another option would be for only $50 more I can get the FX-8120 with a free asus mobo just as good as the ASRock one I got with the 4100. I know, its overkill. But for only $50 more...

If I were to go the cheap way, would you rather have an a4-3300 for $100 or an fx-4100 w/hd6450 for $120?

My main concerns are bang for the buck and power efficiency. Any suggestions? Anyone know of any good package deals on anything in this range?

 

[Proximon]

I do understand your concerns, but I think you are reading too much into the benchmarks. I'm an overclocked i7-2600K user, and I can tell you the Phenom II x4 830 (basically Athlon X4s) machines that I built for the office are quite snappy. You really can't see much difference in the kind of usage you are talking about. If they were doing some CAD or rendering or playing strategy games then yes, that might not be enough CPU.

So you have an FX CPU on an AM3+ board, that sounds good to me. Not optimal maybe but not worth changing. There is much to be said for the chipset, that hasn't really changed much in many years, for good reason. It's rock solid. I would honestly rate the AMD chipsets over the Intel chipsets.

Yes, Bulldozer will have poorer idle and heavy load power draws, but it looks to me like light load power draws are similar. They will never use a heavy load and the system can sleep when not in use... in which case the loads would be identical.

The M4 does behave close to the Intel 320 in some stuff, but it's going to mop the floor in consecutive reads, so you want the SATA 6GB/s at least for boot ups.

You really seem pretty knowledgeable, so I'm just offering some arguments here I think if it had been my build, I would have gone with an i3 2130 on an H67 board. But, if I thought I had a good deal on the FX, I would have done that just as happily.

 

[tomhrxbfg]

Lol dude don't worry, Fx is fine. Both fx4100 and i5 2500k draw 95W power under full load. You won't notice a difference in basic usage (internet, word, movie, etc)... I am using a laptop now with dual core T6400 2.0Ghz and guess what, it served me well for almost 3 years without a lag while browsing and heavy research projects (ie. 20 tabs, 3 excel, 2 word, itune etc at the same time). The Fx will serve you well for as long as it last.

 

[adrenaline435]

I do understand your concerns, but I think you are reading too much into the benchmarks. I'm an overclocked i7-2600K user, and I can tell you the Phenom II x4 830 (basically Athlon X4s) machines that I built for the office are quite snappy. You really can't see much difference in the kind of usage you are talking about. If they were doing some CAD or rendering or playing strategy games then yes, that might not be enough CPU.

So you have an FX CPU on an AM3+ board, that sounds good to me. Not optimal maybe but not worth changing. There is much to be said for the chipset, that hasn't really changed much in many years, for good reason. It's rock solid. I would honestly rate the AMD chipsets over the Intel chipsets.

Yes, Bulldozer will have poorer idle and heavy load power draws, but it looks to me like light load power draws are similar. They will never use a heavy load and the system can sleep when not in use... in which case the loads would be identical.

The M4 does behave close to the Intel 320 in some stuff, but it's going to mop the floor in consecutive reads, so you want the SATA 6GB/s at least for boot ups.

You really seem pretty knowledgeable, so I'm just offering some arguments here I think if it had been my build, I would have gone with an i3 2130 on an H67 board. But, if I thought I had a good deal on the FX, I would have done that just as happily.

I appreciate the helpful response. Especially the part about me being knowledgeable, since this is only the second computer I've ever built and I have absolutely no training. You make some good points in support of AMD. Perhaps I am focusing a little too much on the power consumption, although it is still important to me.

I'm sure pretty much any option will be fine for now. In 3 years though, will the FX-4100 still be fine? I think other options might hold up better. But I really don't know. And I definitely don't fully understand the benchmarks etc. I do see that pretty much every review & benchmark on these FX chips is consistently unfavorable.

I should be clear that I have not put this computer together yet. All the parts are still in the box and returnable. Maybe I shouldn't have titled the thread "stuck with fx-4100" lol.


I'm just going to list the exact options available right now. Pretend I never bought the chip and board I have now. (This is also to anyone reading this) Tell me which one would you choose as the best value considering that I want it to still be fast and up to date in 3 years. They all have USB3 and SATA6 unless noted.

1. FX-4100 with ASRock board & hd6450 - $180.63

2. Intel i3-2125 (hd3000) with Gigabyte h61 - $187.50

3. A8-3850 with Gigabyte fm1 - $180

4. FX-8120 with Asus board & hd6450 - $233.75

5. FX-4100 with cheap Gigabyte board & hd6450 - no USB3 or SATA6 - upgrade proc & mobo in a year - $127.50

 

[Proximon]

Sure you push the CPUs and the FX comes out last place. No question about it. I just don't see that happening though. I like the stronger GPU with dedicated memory also.

Does the Gigabyte H61 board really have USB3 and Sata 6GB/s?
For me, that would put the first two options pretty much in a tie.

I would only do FM1 in a small form factor... it would be fine but I would want to make use of its main feature and use an ITX type case/PSU.

 

[de5_Roy]

may i suggest undervolting the fx 4100 if you're too worried about power consumption?
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/bulldozer-efficiency-overclock-undervolt,3083-14.html
it worked with the fx8150, might work with an fx4100 too (which is essentially an fx8150 with 2 modules lasered off).
in general use, you are less likely to notice any difference in performance or power consumption unless you frequently push your cpu to the limit.

 

[adrenaline435]

I do see the benefit of the discreet graphics card over the hd3000 so I'll give the AMD the edge on that.

Yeah I was surprised it had them both:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128539

The FM1 is probably better for a media or gaming pc and the small form factor should be exploited. I guess its not a good fit for this build.

You don't think it's worth the extra $50 for the fx-8120?? Granted its overkill for now, but that seems like a big upgrade for only $50.

 

[adrenaline435]

may i suggest undervolting the fx 4100 if you're too worried about power consumption?
http://www.tomshardware.com/review [...] 83-14.html
it worked with the fx8150, might work with an fx4100 too (which is essentially an fx8150 with 2 modules lasered off).
in general use, you are less likely to notice any difference in performance or power consumption unless you frequently push your cpu to the limit.

That is a very interesting option, I'm gonna look into that. It might be more worthwhile if I went with the 8120 too.

 

[Guest]

If your worried about power consumption returning it for the i3-2125 or the A8-3850 combo is your best option. Unless your parents become hardcore gamers overnight, the computer will be fine for a good number of years for what you stated they would use it for. The 8120 is overkill and power hungry.

 

[FinneousPJ]

Just go with what you got, anything's fine for basic internet use.

 

[adrenaline435]

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/amd-fx-8120-6100-4100_8.html#sect0

Shows the 8120 uses 0.1 watt more than the 4100 at idle. At load it uses 10 watts more. Interestingly the fx 8120 uses less power then an intel i3-2120 at idle. Although at load the i3 is much more efficient.



How much stock can I put in passmark benchmarks? The 8120 actually scores higher then the 2500k. The 8120 scores almost double (74% higher) the 4100. That would indicate it is worth the extra $50. Passmark also puts the fx-4100 and i3-2125 with almost identical scores.

Passmark benchmark scores:

fx-8120: 7113
core i5-2500k: 6747
fx-4100: 4038
core i3 2125:4086

Just go with what you got, anything's fine for basic internet use.

I know its fine, but I want better than fine.

 

[adrenaline435]

just read that passmark includes 2d and 3d rendering so chips with integrated graphics can have inflated scores. Mainly this applies to the amd a-series chips but also the intel chips with hd3000 a little bit. So i guess the 2500k and the 2125 scores are slightly inflated..

 

[najirion]

Since you mention i5 2500k as your first choice anyway, maybe you can consider getting a 1155 setup and start with a G620 processor.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819116399&Tpk=g620

Just upgrade to an i5-2500 later

 

[FinneousPJ]

You're not going to notice any difference :lol:

 

[killerchickens]

A five year old AMD Athlon 64 X2 6000+ is still fast enough to do all those things and will be for quite a bit longer.

 

[adrenaline435]

Decided to get a nice intel board and a $50 pentium g620. Upgrade the chip in to a sandy bridge or ivy bridge in a year or 2 if necessary. Heading down to microcenter to return the AMD crap now.

They made a mistake on the price match for the hd 6450 so after rebate it only cost me $15. Should I keep it or will the integrated hd2000 graphics be OK??

 

[Guest]

Decided to get a nice intel board and a $50 pentium g620. Upgrade the chip in to a sandy bridge or ivy bridge in a year or 2 if necessary. Heading down to microcenter to return the AMD crap now.

They made a mistake on the price match for the hd 6450 so after rebate it only cost me $15. Should I keep it or will the integrated hd2000 graphics be OK??

For $15 I would keep the 6450.

 

[de5_Roy]

the hd2000 gfx is okay for basic purposes. afaik it has problem playing 23.976 fps videos. the 6450 is a good htpc card. your decision.

 

[adrenaline435]

Awesome, the website became unresponsive when I submitted my reply so it deleted the whole thing. Not the first time its happened either... So I decided to stick witht the FX. Seems like a good deal. A nice mobo with an FX4100 for the same price as the Pentium, that has like half the power. Everyone hates on the FX but it cant be that bad. And the difference in power is like what? Half a light bulb? hd6450 I would used with the pentium anyway and its great for $15. If they want to upgrade later they can just get a package deal and use this one to build another comp or give it my bropther or something.. Thanks again. Lots of helpful responses.

 

[Proximon]

It's happened so many times to me over the years... I ought to find some software to backup typing in case of a browser crash or network outage.

I think it's a sound choice.

Everyone hates the FX because it failed to live up to the hype, and because it isn't as good a deal dollar/performance. BUT, it does not suck. It's a solid CPU that is still worth what you paid for it.

I realized this morning that this is exactly what happened to Intel 6 years ago. You know what? I see far more Pentium 4's in the wild these days than I do Athlon 64s, even though it was clear they were inferior at the time. That's because the Athlons were all on those hot Nvidia chipsets that had short lifespans.

Just some food for thought. I don't think it's time to write off AMD just yet

Oh, and something that will help with that problem... Firefox, Ad-blocker plus, and no-script

 

[Proximon]

Well you got me thinking, and sure enough there's an addon for that. It's called Lazarus.