Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

My choices

Last response: in CPUs
Share
July 21, 2012 9:35:46 PM

I would like some advice on which CPU to upgrade to.

i have came up with 3 possible choices for my upgrade from an old core2duo build (that has sadly died a number of years later)

i already have an AM3+ motherboard that was given to me by a friend who bought 2 of the same board without meaning to and couldnt return the second board so he gave it me for an old H40 of mine (so my options are ofc AMD and im not buying an i3 2120 Dual core and a new motherboard because im not going to upgrade to an i5 or an i7)

i have £150 for a CPU and ive decided between 3 CPU's

AMD phenom II x4 960t (ive chosen this because of the possibility of it unlocking to 6 cores and is cheapest)
AMD Phenom II x6 1090t
AMD Bulldoser 8120 (no point buying a 8150 for £30 more when the 8120 is exactly the same but got a slightly lower stock speed)

i would like a 6 core preferably (due to me going to college soon and i need one to game and edit video's and such and must be futureproof for another number of years) but the 960t has that possibility and the motherboard supports the core unlocking but i know i have 50/50 chance of 6 cores unlocking and even then its not saying it will run stable.

so i would like your advice :) 

More about : choices

a b à CPUs
July 21, 2012 9:42:51 PM

hi would go with the amd phemon x6 because is good to do because ur cpu will be unstable and u wont be able to stable it
July 21, 2012 10:05:40 PM

in guessing you mean the 960t will be unstable, these 2 extra cores if not stable can be disabled again. but thanks for your reply
Related resources
a b à CPUs
July 21, 2012 11:36:45 PM

yea thts what i mean and thts ok
a b à CPUs
a b V Motherboard
July 22, 2012 12:03:10 AM

Personally, I would wait for the FX piledriver chips that will hit probably near the end of the year, as they are AM3+ chips(and amd assumes there is goig to be at least a 10-15% performance increase compared to the current gen fx chips)


it supposedly launches q3 2012, but it wont go into retail till a bit later probably.


if you need it now, i would think the 960t is a good choice
a b à CPUs
July 22, 2012 12:04:27 AM

yea i just built mine pc i might upgrade to the fx pd cpus
July 22, 2012 4:53:21 PM

i would go with the piledriver CPU's but due to their release not being very soon and the price of release then those will be out of my reach
a b à CPUs
a b V Motherboard
July 22, 2012 5:02:35 PM

If you go with AM3+, any cheap CPU will do if you want to upgrade to Piledriver. The 960 and the native 6 cores are both good. If you can get the native 6 core for a good deal, get that, because the resale value will be better once you upgrade.
July 22, 2012 5:25:21 PM

im planning on getting the 1090t, if it goes down in price over the next few months then its a done deal, i would buy a cheap cpu and upgrade to piledriver but due to me starting my course in october every spare penny i have after then will be spent on utilities and food so upgrading will not be much of an option, thats why i want a solid CPU for now and in 3 years i can start saving up again for whatever CPU's are around then.
a b à CPUs
a b V Motherboard
July 22, 2012 7:37:45 PM

Hmm, then what is the main purpose of the computer ? General purpose ? Gaming ? Scientific computing ? HTPC ? NAS ?

I suspect you are going general purpose since you are replacing your old dead computer. In that case, the 6 core would be fine for 3 years (I think). For gaming, 6 cores doesn't net in any tangible gains over a 4, and for CPU intensive games, you really want to go Intel (or Piledriver).

If it was me, I would wait until Piledriver, which should be very soon. If you buy anything now, and upgrade to Piledriver later, you'll eat the depreciation on the CPU, doubly so since a new generation is out for the same socket, so the market will be flooded with used AM3 CPUs.
July 22, 2012 7:49:44 PM

im replacing my old dead computer yes, was planning on doing a upgrade way before it died and my friends 1055t can play anygame you want but i want something thats easily overclocked (black edition), i want it for gaming, video editing and rendering. i said i wouldnt go intel, i still wouldnt if i didnt have the amd board, i would rather buy a good solid amd cpu for less then a overhyped i5 2500k (for example and i cant count how many times ive been told to get it even though i said im looking for AMD and not intel. Period), ive used one and i dont see what all the fuss is about, yes its a nice fast cpu but my friends 965 will do what the i5 does and yes it isnt as fast in multiple tasks but for half the price and only about 10-20% slower, i would go for 965, but because i want the extra 2 cores iwouldnt buy the 965. if i could wait for the piledriver i would, and i might if it comes out before christmas at a good enough price (£150ish mark) (might look into the 6 core version rahter then 8 core for money saving purposes).

but thanks for all the replies, helped me narrow it down more
a c 146 à CPUs
a b V Motherboard
July 22, 2012 7:51:14 PM

I would go with either one of the two Phenom II's. The main thing is that there is no guarantee that the 960 will be stable if you unlock the other two cores. It’s best to get the number of cores you need and take the extra cores as a bonus if it runs stable. The 1090T is a fully working true 6 core CPU the 960 has 4 known good cores with the possibilty of having 6 cores. The question is what are you doing with this computer and do you need 6 cores to be effective.
a b à CPUs
a b V Motherboard
July 22, 2012 7:56:33 PM

Based on what you said about what your computer will do, I would imagine that having 6 cores will benefit you in half of your activities. Having said that, you can OC without an unlocked CPU, it will be a little more tinkering around in the BIOS, but in exchange, because you usually up the Northbridge (memory controller) speed in the CPU by doing a 1:1 ratio increase of base clocks, you will receive much more performance gains compared to locked cpu OC, which is largely based on raising multipliers. Part of the weakness of the AMD Phenom II design lies in its memory controller, and this has been shown to increase CPU performance drastically per clock on the memory controller compared to per clock on the CPU cores.

Having said that, IF you can wait, Piledriver on the AM3+, no contest.
July 22, 2012 8:00:13 PM

rds1220 said:
I would go with either one of the two Phenom II's. The main thing is that there is no guarantee that the 960 will be stable if you unlock the other two cores. It’s best to get the number of cores you need and take the extra cores as a bonus if it runs stable. The 1090T is a fully working true 6 core CPU the 960 has 4 known good cores with the possibilty of having 6 cores. The question is what are you doing with this computer and do you need 6 cores to be effective.


i did narrow it down to the both phenoms and maybe the piledriver if it comes out before my final decision is made, the quad core would do me fine but the 6 cores will help with rendering speeds (as i will have very tight deadlines and these could be 2 day deadlines or 2 week deadlines) and i will be using 3D applications too on my second year which the 2 extra cores will help with.
a c 146 à CPUs
a b V Motherboard
July 22, 2012 8:01:51 PM

Maxx_Power said:
Based on what you said about what your computer will do, I would imagine that having 6 cores will benefit you in half of your activities. Having said that, you can OC without an unlocked CPU, it will be a little more tinkering around in the BIOS, but in exchange, because you usually up the Northbridge (memory controller) speed in the CPU by doing a 1:1 ratio increase of base clocks, you will receive much more performance gains compared to locked cpu OC, which is largely based on raising multipliers. Part of the weakness of the AMD Phenom II design lies in its memory controller, and this has been shown to increase CPU performance drastically per clock on the memory controller compared to per clock on the CPU cores.

Having said that, IF you can wait, Piledriver on the AM3+, no contest.


AM3+ no contest. It hasn't been released yet and we don't know how it is going to perform. It will probably only be a slight performance increase putting it in the range of first generation I core processors and that's if it actually sees the performance increase people are claiming. Of course we've seen where bogus claims have gotten us already. :wahoo: 
July 22, 2012 8:04:07 PM

Maxx_Power said:
Based on what you said about what your computer will do, I would imagine that having 6 cores will benefit you in half of your activities. Having said that, you can OC without an unlocked CPU, it will be a little more tinkering around in the BIOS, but in exchange, because you usually up the Northbridge (memory controller) speed in the CPU by doing a 1:1 ratio increase of base clocks, you will receive much more performance gains compared to locked cpu OC, which is largely based on raising multipliers. Part of the weakness of the AMD Phenom II design lies in its memory controller, and this has been shown to increase CPU performance drastically per clock on the memory controller compared to per clock on the CPU cores.

Having said that, IF you can wait, Piledriver on the AM3+, no contest.


If the timings of the retail on the piledriver are good on release then i will pick one up without a worry and i understand what you mean about the unlocked and locked overclocking but i might look into the 1055t and do a good old fashioned overclock if the 1090t doesnt drop in price a little or the piledriver doesnt release early enough
a c 146 à CPUs
a b V Motherboard
July 22, 2012 8:06:36 PM

Well get comfortable because you're going to be waiting awhile. Piledriver isn't going to be released until mid October if it's not delayed.
July 22, 2012 8:08:45 PM

i know its not going to be released until the fall, thats why i said if its not released by 2013 ima pick up the phenom
a c 146 à CPUs
a b V Motherboard
July 22, 2012 8:13:42 PM

O I thought you meant if it wasn't released early, which I would say I wouldn't count on that. It should be released before Jan of 2013 even the Bulldozer wasn't delayed that much and that was delayed forever.
July 22, 2012 8:21:20 PM

rds1220 said:
O I thought you meant if it wasn't released early, which I would say I wouldn't count on that. It should be released before Jan of 2013 even the Bulldozer wasn't delayed that much and that was delayed forever.


we will all see
!