Athlon X3 450 vs AMD FX-4100

[pc 1]

Hello

Is there a big difference in gaming performance between these 2 cpus?

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103886
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103996

is the price difference worth it?

 

[mace200200]

For gaming espically go with the FX, the Athlon II's are much slower and will bottle neck any decent gpu to much. For more gaming performance go with the 4.2GHz clocked FX 4170, newegg doesn't carry it but tiger direct does.
http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=1963183&CatId=7341
And make sure you get an aftermarket heatsink for either one.

 

[zloginet]

965BE (or any other higher end Phenom II) = FTW..

100% agree if going the AMD route... 965 BE or higher....

However, if for some reason you can get your hand on a 1100t, snatch it. They are expensive though...

Otherwise, the best gaming cpu still is the 2500K for price etc.

 

[chase3567]

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819106009

 

[Anonymous_26]

If you have to go AMD I wouldn't get either of them. The Athlon is old, slow and pretty weak compared to newer CPU's. Also as someone already said the Athlon will bottle neck alot of the modern graphics cards today. The Bulldozer is just blah. It's not that great at gaming and the benchmarks show that. If you have to go AMD I would try to fine a Phenom II Black Edition and overclock it. The Phenom II will out perform the Athlon and Bulldozer.

 

[mace200200]

Are the phenom II's really better than the 4.2 Ghz bulldozer? The CPU hiearchy puts them 2 or 3 tiers higher than most phenom II's I thought.

 

[Anonymous_26]

Are the phenom II's really better than the 4.2 Ghz bulldozer? The CPU hiearchy puts them 2 or 3 tiers higher than most phenom II's I thought.

Yes you are putting to much concentration in speed. Speed and "moer corezz" doesn't mean much anymore beause it's all about the architecture and Bulldozers architecture is horrible. So yes a 3.4 GHz Phenom II can out perform a 4.2 GHz Bulldozer. Just as a dual core I3 will out perform a Bulldozer in most games.

 

[hijaxhfx]

Benchmarks don't mean everything. Yeah from them you see that the FX does not measure up. But not everyone cares about the bench marks, i am running a FX 6100 and my gf has a i5-2500K nether are over clocked at the moment just the turbo etc. and they both run great. i find no really difference in anything on ether PC . well speed on one might be 1 sec or 2 faster or slower in games and running programs. for the price the FX chips are well worth it.

and getting better as the price goes down.

 

[amuffin]

FX: Power usage on load
Me: nope.

 

[acerace]

FX 4100 any day. Newer and better arc then the 450.

Although BD arc are not living to the hype, it still can get the job done, and most importantly, better than the 450.

 

[Anonymous_26]

Benchmarks don't mean everything. Yeah from them you see that the FX does not measure up. But not everyone cares about the bench marks, i am running a FX 6100 and my gf has a i5-2500K nether are over clocked at the moment just the turbo etc. and they both run great. i find no really difference in anything on ether PC . well speed on one might be 1 sec or 2 faster or slower in games and running programs. for the price the FX chips are well worth it.

and getting better as the price goes down.

Lol spoken like a true fanboy trying to justify their buy. The only ones who say benchmarks down't matter are AMD fanboys.

 

[Anonymous_26]

FX 4100 any day. Newer and better arc then the 450.

Although BD arc are not living to the hype, it still can get the job done, and most importantly, better than the 450.

Better architecture in what universe? Maybe you haven't noticed but the Bulldozer performs on the same level as the Core 2 Duo. Thats why it gets beaten out by by pretty much all the Intel CPU's and AMD's own older Phenom II's.

 

[hijaxhfx]

No fan boy here, i have both well i can use the Intel when she lets me

 

[acerace]

Better architecture in what universe? Maybe you haven't noticed but the Bulldozer performs on the same level as the Core 2 Duo. Thats why it gets beaten out by by pretty much all the Intel CPU's and AMD's own older Phenom II's.

I must've got a typo there. I said "newer and better arc than 450"

Sorry for any inconvinience.

 

[pc 1]

i never knew fx-4100 is not a true quad core, thats sad
i found phenom ii x2 555 is it better than athlon ii x3 450?
p.s i don't like overclocking

 

[stant1rm]

I wouldn't touch an FX processor. Phenom II's still get the job done on the budget. Look into a 555BE for overclocking and possible core unlocking. I unlocked my old one to 4 cores and pushed to 3.9GHz with a Cooler Master 212.

 

[yummerzzz]

So much Fanboy's :'D.

Since Benchmarks are so important to you (and me) and I'm an AMD user, which is why I bought the FX in the first place - because of the benchmarks - here's one that shows the FX beating the Athlon 455 every time, and even the PHII in one, OC and the difference is even greater, the FX-4100 has around the same performance as a PHII 955 stock or OC'd. Period.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-fx-pentium-apu-benchmark,3120-9.html

 

[rds1220]

So much Fanboy's :'D.

Since Benchmarks are so important to you (and me) and I'm an AMD user, which is why I bought the FX in the first place - because of the benchmarks - here's one that shows the FX beating the Athlon 455 every time, and even the PHII in one, OC and the difference is even greater, the FX-4100 has around the same performance as a PHII 955 stock or OC'd. Period.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-fx-pentium-apu-benchmark,3120-9.html

Yea so the Bulldozer beats the Athlon, big deal. The Athlon II’s are much slower and will bottle neck any decent GPU. If you call a Bulldozer beating an Athlon a victory that’s sad. Wow the Bulldozer beat the Phenom II in ONE whole bench mark.

Bulldozer against real competition:

So as you can see the Bulldozer doesn't perform as good as your fanboy blinds would have you believe.

 

[lazyboy947]

the person who wrote the post, isnt asking for comparisions to intel and wants to know the difference in the amd processors, he has an amd motherboard and prob wont go intel so theres no reason to argue intel and amd difference. fx vs athlon vs phenom is basically all this post should be on. This guy wants an answer not people arguing back and fourth on his posting.

 

[acerace]

No, so much kids here.

Don't be a cry baby here, just reccommend what best for the OP to get.

 

[yummerzzz]

Yea so the Bulldozer beats the Athlon, big deal. The Athlon II’s are much slower and will bottle neck any decent GPU. If you call a Bulldozer beating an Athlon a victory that’s sad. Wow the Bulldozer beat the Phenom II in ONE whole bench mark.

Bulldozer against real competition:


http://i1130.photobucket.com/albums/m529/malmental/OC_Skyrim.png

http://i1130.photobucket.com/albums/m529/malmental/DiRT3.png

http://i1130.photobucket.com/albums/m529/malmental/DiRT3.png

http://i1130.photobucket.com/albums/m529/malmental/Battlefield3.png

http://i1130.photobucket.com/albums/m529/malmental/Averages.png

So as you can see the Bulldozer doesn't perform as good as your fanboy blinds would have you believe.

Don't you see that's what I'm saying?!
Did you not read the OP's question? Stay on topic and stop trying to start a war.

 

[pc 1]

1 Phenom II X4 (965-980)BE
2 Bulldozer FX-4100
3 Athlon II X3

so that means fx-4100 beats any phenom X4 below 965 on stock?

are you guys sure that fx-4100 is not a quad?why is it then sold as a quad and cpu-z sees it as a quad?

Edit - i've seen this explaination
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-bulldozer-zambezi-processor-am3,13272.html

it says that an eight core bulldozer has 4 modules consisting of 2 cores each, that means a fx-4100 has 2 modules consisting of 2 cores each, which makes it a quad core, am i right?

 

[pc 1]

how in the hell do you get that idea from what I said?
that makes no sense..

no, the 965BE is BETTER than the FX-4100..
technically the AMD module is two cores, but that's not the problem
it's how the software out there reads the module/core design.
and then you have a bigger issue called IPC..

seriously, drop the FX-4100 and/or the X3 450 and get the 965BE..

i never said fx-4100 is better than 965, i said below 965, please read what i wrote again

at my local stores the 965 costs more than fx-4100, in u.s dollars it's about $16 higher, i've also read that windows 8 will have better support for bulldozers and some say that bulldozer is future proof

 

[rds1220]

Don't you see that's what I'm saying?!
Did you not read the OP's question? Stay on topic and stop trying to start a war.

Clearly you miss the point. So it beats Athlon big deal, that's like a 20 year old bragging he beat up an old lady. The Bulldozer is junk when it comes to gaming and so is the Athlon. He would be better off with a Black Edition Phenom II.

 

[amuffin]

965BE. . .