Amd fx 4100 and gigabyte gtx 670

I have and amd fx 4100, and i bought a gtx 670, i bought that proceessor because a didnt know about how bad it was for gaming, so my question is that i dont know if it will bottleneck with my processor, and what can i do? I cant buy intel buuild cause i dont have more money
49 answers Last reply
More about 4100 gigabyte
  1. why are you putting much expenisive card with such a cheaper cpu, of course it will bottleneck, squeezing your cpu will eliminate a bottleneck a little.
  2. Squeez?
  3. squeeze mean overclock.
  4. Ok, thanks for the help man, but doed the bottleneck its a lot? Or just something little
  5. the most you can do if you ever run into a game where the cpu will bottle neck is:

    Costless wise: overclock cpu to some extent(limited by cpu cooler and ambient temperature), play while not pushing the 670 to its fullest

    Cost: upgrade to a higher up bulldozer/phenom cpu or wait patiently for piledriver fx and upgrade

    bottlenecks are determined by game and how far you are pushing it. it doesnt bottleneck in all games linearly.
  6. Will i be able to run bf3 multiplayer at the highest settings?
  7. probably not since BF3 is a cpu demanding game and the FX-4100 isnt truely a quad core but more like a 3ish core since its really 2 cores that have two physical pseudo cores that split the work together.
  8. I saw a review that says that battlefields need only one core
  9. eduardo96 said:
    Will i be able to run bf3 multiplayer at the highest settings?


    Sadly BF3 multiplayer is the one of the few games where more cores the better as far as your CPU is concerned, for example it really likes the AMD Phenom IIs 1100t and 1090t, i think the best you can do is get a coolermaster hyper 212 evo CPU cooler for about $30, overclock your FX to 4ghz or more and wait for piledriver to come out.

    But in the same breath, i wouldnt worry about it to much, BF3 will still be more than playable at 1080p high settings, you may have to mess around with the set up of the game a little but not too much.
  10. I have to find a way of selling the processor, will a phenom x4 965 wil lbe enought to no bottleneck? I dont want to change my mobo too, to go for intel, if i have to go for intel, with build (procesor and mobo) will u recommend to no bottleneck
  11. While the 965 would be a better CPU for gaming, i would still hang on to what you have for Piledriver.
  12. yes, there will be a big bottleneck and No, you can't play bf3 multiplayer on highest setting.
  13. well, it would be best option going with intel setup.
    Cpu: 2500k
    mobo: asus p8z68 vpro or asrock z68 extreme4 both are best.
  14. im a little bit obsolete about the upcoming processor, could you please let me know what piledriver means
  15. eduardo96 said:
    im a little bit obsolete about the upcoming processor, could you please let me know what piledriver means



    piledriver is just AMD's updated bulldozer(cpu you have right now) that is going to have an increase of performance(probably not i5 level, but you dont have to spend money buying a new motherboard as the Piledriver FX series is AM3+)
  16. xtreme5 said:
    yes, there will be a big bottleneck and No, you can't play bf3 multiplayer on highest setting.


    Im sorry but thats just rubbish, i say again the bottlekneck will not be massive, and yes you will be able to play the game at high settings, but anyway before this develops into an argument, you have the FX4100 already, the GTX670 is on the way, so just slot it in and try it for yourself, im sure you will be pleasently suprised, oh and let us know the results.
  17. Thanks man, i really appreciate all your help, i really didnt knew about how bad for gaming was my processor before i bought it, i really want to squeez the 100 hundred percent of the graphic card
  18. Thanks u too broo, ill just wait to go home and try.. :)
  19. @uther39, I'm not saying that fx-4100 coudn't run the game on high it will run but if you read my post clearly i was talking about multiplayer. And i think you better multiplayer takes high power of cpu.
  20. So the intel i5 2500k or i5 3570k will run the game without no bottlenecking?
  21. any "real" quad core or higher probably above the 150$ price point wouldnt have bottlenecks. the I5-2500k or the 3570k wont bottle neck it definitely, left the sugesstion to wait for Piledriver FX because buying a usable say 200$ cpu is cheaper then changing the entire platform from amd to intel spending close to 300$ at the least.
  22. Do you know any date for that?
  23. its more or less relatively october. if you want the cheapest paying route, the fx 8120 and 8150 (bulldozer cpu) choices are there as they are more or less quad cores with 2 partial cores each. the performance gain isnt as great vs the i5/i7 but I wouldn't think it should bottle neck unless you decided to SLI several cards. If you are really hard on performance, you can use your 4100 for a bit of time and jump onto an FX Piledriver on its release if you were looking to not jump platforms causing a new motherboard requirement(as well as if your OS is OEM, you will need to buy a new copy of windows as well)
  24. Can you send me s link where i can read about the piledriver? Those are going to have real cores?
  25. there isnt any real benchmarks on the FX versions of the piledriver yet(because its months until they are released) they will be like bulldozer but better.
  26. and Amd phenom ii x4 965 wont bottleneck the card right? cause it has 4 real cores, for me is cheaper to sell my fx 4100, and buy one of those, what do you thing?
  27. not ure how much of a bottle neck it will cause, since its performance is relatively i3 level but in quad core form
  28. Nowadays games are mostly gpu dependant, I don´t think you´ll notice much of a bottleneck at 1080p . Anyway you can check it out by making benchmarks and comparing them to other ppl´s benchmarks
  29. I would say get 2500k a very fastest quad core cpu that can handle even 4 way sli GTX 670. Beats almost all the current AMD cpu's.
  30. You will still be able to run everything on ultra in single player. The below links shows benchmarks of BF3 using a FX-4100 and i3 on single player. They did not test you card but the HD6950 ran very well on high settings and you gtx is miles better than that

    http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/fx-4100-core-i3-2100-gaming-benchmark,3136-3.html

    You will definitely struggle on multiplayer thought. I'm not sure how bad it will be but I would imagine 64 and 32 player games will be slow and probably unplayable. I would wait until you get the card and test it out. If it struggles on large multiplayer maps you will know it is the CPU, so will either have to go for a 8120/8150 or wait for piledriver. If it was me I would wait for piledriver but I guess it depends on how quickly your want to play 64 player BF3.
  31. Okey guys, so ill stick with the the processor and play games to see how it works, if it bottleneck is really significant, in dicember ill change to intel i5 2500k or i5 3570k, cause i buy the graphics card to play a lot of games maxed out, without knowing the processors capability for gaming
  32. Or see how does the pildrivers handle for gaming
  33. Ill wait them, if piledriver sucks ill go intel for sure
  34. And with the i5 ill be able to play bultiplayer of bf3 maxed out?
  35. Im really thanksfull man, ill change my hardware to intel in few months, and thats true, intel could be more expensive but its better
  36. Few bucks
  37. eduardo96 said:
    Im really thanksfull man, ill change my hardware to intel in few months, and thats true, intel could be more expensive but its better


    How's it running with the fx-4100?
  38. running just fine, i can play battlefield 3 at ultra settings, i even get 60 fps, but it drops to 40, i already bought intel i5 3570k, but the fx 4100, is running really fine, i hope that with the intel i can run at more fps, everytime at 60fps
  39. eduardo96 said:
    Will i be able to run bf3 multiplayer at the highest settings?

    This may be old now but you sure will I play at high near ultra on my fx-4100 with a HD 6870 and that card is better than mine.
  40. well from what ive been able to take from the information ive read/learned, just because its a bulldozer. Doesnt mean its terrible, everyone is off of preference. I have a 550 ti with a 4100 OC to about 4.15 Ghz from just the standard bios Performance setting. And still have the stock fan on it. Like i said earlier, from my understanding there isnt really any games that require more than 4 cores at the moment because games arent that extreme. Dumping more money into your GPU than your CPU would be my preference but thats probly not the way to go. I dont see why the system should bottleneck if your computer has a "low end" CPU (like all the intel users say and tell you to buy a i5 or a i7) and a newer graphics card. The only thing i can say to you is to have a motherboard that can carry all that weight. You should be fine. Play the system as is and if you find that you cant even play the game on Ultra. Take the other peoples suggestions. Only thing ive heard from a friend is that newer MOBOs are in some cases the only MOBOs that can support the 600 series but i think its a load of crap.
  41. no the FX 4100 will not bottleneck the GTX 670 and yes you can play BF3 Multiplayer on Ultra with minimum or no AA ?

    Edit: I also suggest overclocking your cpu to like 4.2GHz which can be done on stock ?
  42. FRAPS: FX 4170, HD 7970

    MIN: 33
    AVG: 65
    MAX: 111

    FX 8150 @ 3.6ghz

    MIN: 31
    AVG: 65
    MAX: 113

    FX 8150 @ 4.2ghz

    MIN: 37
    AVG: 72
    MAX: 117

    1100T

    MIN: 34
    AVG: 61
    MAX 107

    I really don't see what the fuss is about.

    All done on MSI Twin Frozr III HD7970.

    BF3 Ultra textures.
    MSAA 4X
    AF 8X
    Ambient Occlusions HBAO

    Operation Metro 64 Player anything goes Gladius server.
  43. sarinaide said:
    FRAPS: FX 4170, HD 7970

    MIN: 33
    AVG: 65
    MAX: 111

    FX 8150 @ 3.6ghz

    MIN: 31
    AVG: 65
    MAX: 113

    FX 8150 @ 4.2ghz

    MIN: 37
    AVG: 72
    MAX: 117

    1100T

    MIN: 34
    AVG: 61
    MAX 107

    I really don't see what the fuss is about.

    All done on MSI Twin Frozr III HD7970.

    BF3 Ultra textures.
    MSAA 4X
    AF 8X
    Ambient Occlusions HBAO

    Operation Metro 64 Player anything goes Gladius server.


    Nice. i only tested the GTX 670 and HD 7950
  44. I re-ran a 8150 OC test at 4.2ghz, left cool and quiet as well as other power saving featurs that seemed to make the game glide a bit. Managet to get better results.

    MIN 41~
    AVG 78~
    MAX 119~
  45. sarinaide said:
    I re-ran a 8150 OC test at 4.2ghz, left cool and quiet as well as other power saving featurs that seemed to make the game glide a bit. Managet to get better results.

    MIN 41~
    AVG 78~
    MAX 119~

    FRAPS

    MIN ~ 43
    AVG ~ 67
    MAX ~ 99

    AMD FX 4100 4.4GHz
    Saphhire HD 6950 2GB 880/1375

    BF3 Ultra
    AA Off
    AF x16
    Ambient Occlusions SSA0

    HT:HOSTILE TAKEOVER 2 24/7 CANALS,KHARG 1000 TICKETS 64/64
  46. I did have eye candies rather high so it does make it GPU orientated but I think the results are rather consistent, taking MSAA off and tessellations ramps FPS up by quite a margin.

    Thing is this, Intel does give better but usually around 5-7 FPS better, which depending on your needs can be good or bad. The minimum frames are very similar 1-2 FPS difference, its the average and max that Intel gives the very slight margin......so weigh it up as to whether it is worth it or not.

    I will re run a few again, for consistencies. Maybe without eye candies.
  47. sarinaide said:
    I did have eye candies rather high so it does make it GPU orientated but I think the results are rather consistent, taking MSAA off and tessellations ramps FPS up by quite a margin.

    Thing is this, Intel does give better but usually around 5-7 FPS better, which depending on your needs can be good or bad. The minimum frames are very similar 1-2 FPS difference, its the average and max that Intel gives the very slight margin......so weigh it up as to whether it is worth it or not.

    I will re run a few again, for consistencies. Maybe without eye candies.

    yea which isn't worth it to me. but will like to see those scores
  48. I read the OP bought a Intel chip and will later buy the rest of the platform, this after buying a AMD platform. Terrible waste of money.

    FX 4100 + 670

    Ultra textures
    Ambient Occlusion HBAO, if it stutters change to SSAO that will give you like 10-15FPS boost.
    MSAA - nothing or 2x if you don't stutter then push 4x...oh wait its Nvidia :P
    AF- doesnt' really hit FPS hard but is rather not noticable above 8x anyway.

    easy peasy.
  49. sarinaide said:
    I read the OP bought a Intel chip and will later buy the rest of the platform, this after buying a AMD platform. Terrible waste of money.

    FX 4100 + 670

    Ultra textures
    Ambient Occlusion HBAO, if it stutters change to SSAO that will give you like 10-15FPS boost.
    MSAA - nothing or 2x if you don't stutter then push 4x...oh wait its Nvidia :P
    AF- doesnt' really hit FPS hard but is rather not noticable above 8x anyway.

    easy peasy.

    i agree
Ask a new question

Read More

CPUs Gtx AMD Gigabyte