Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

AMD FX 6100 or INTEL CORE i3 2120??

Last response: in CPUs
Share
August 23, 2012 11:38:33 AM

Guys,

which do u prefer for gaming, web browsing, movie watching and video chatting? (no ms office as i have my thinkpad) AMD FX 6100 or INTEL CORE i3 2120?

let me know.. still cant decide on which one to build :??:  i have a pending prodigy build, thinkin of bulding a mid tower instead for future expansions etc.

PS.. i might use hd7770 or 7850.. please no arguements :D  i just want ideas..


Thanks in advance.. :) 
August 23, 2012 12:31:23 PM

Personally, I think that the FX-4170 is a bit better than the FX-6100, at least in the gaming market. Most games and most tasks in general these days can't utilize all 6 cores of the 6100, and the 4170 is a lot stronger per core.

I'd say get the 6100 over the 2120 though. I just can't justify buying (or recommending, for that matter) a dual core processor in this day and age. Now more and more ga,es are starting to require a quad-core in the system requirements, and I think in a few years dual-cores will be obsolete, at least to the point that a single-core is today.

Have you looked at the AMD Phenom II965 Black Edition? That's another great processor, comparable to the FX4170. It is also $20 cheaper, and you could use that extra money to put towards your graphics card.
Score
0
August 23, 2012 1:51:09 PM

SniperNoSnipeee said:
Personally, I think that the FX-4170 is a bit better than the FX-6100, at least in the gaming market. Most games and most tasks in general these days can't utilize all 6 cores of the 6100, and the 4170 is a lot stronger per core.

I'd say get the 6100 over the 2120 though. I just can't justify buying (or recommending, for that matter) a dual core processor in this day and age. Now more and more ga,es are starting to require a quad-core in the system requirements, and I think in a few years dual-cores will be obsolete, at least to the point that a single-core is today.

Have you looked at the AMD Phenom II965 Black Edition? That's another great processor, comparable to the FX4170. It is also $20 cheaper, and you could use that extra money to put towards your graphics card.


Sniper,

Thanks! really appreciate what you've said. I was thinkin of the phenom as i saw a lot of positive feedback with regards to its performance. :D 
Score
0
Related resources
a c 105 à CPUs
August 23, 2012 1:54:29 PM

SniperNoSnipeee said:
Now more and more ga,es are starting to require a quad-core in the system requirements, and I think in a few years dual-cores will be obsolete, at least to the point that a single-core is today.

.

i think you need to learn a few thing about PC technology before giving opinions that make you look foolish. games require or recommend a quad core?? :pfff:  that is a false opinion, not a fact! very few games require a quad core and those that do require old ones. new dual cores can run circles around old quads and the i3-2100 actually outperforms the FX-6100 in most games benchmarks (with its under performing bulldozer tech).

as for dual cores becoming obsolete, that is another one of your fails. most laptops today are sold with dual cores since most laptop I5 processors are actually dual cores. laptops have been outselling desktop PCs for years so SW developers make SW for the common computer configuration

the FX-6100 stays with the older intel i5-661 benchmarks in guru's benchmarks
http://www.guru3d.com/article/amd-fx-8150--8120-6100-an...

against the i3-2100, its gaming loss after gaming loss



http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/amd-fx-812...

Score
0
August 23, 2012 1:57:43 PM

Yeah, I have the 965 right now. It is the best AMD quad core on the market right now IMO.

In regards to Piledriver, I don't know if I will upgrade quite yet, it really depends. I don't think it is worth waiting though. Piledriver is a crapshoot, could be bad, could be good. It has potential. I'd just pull the trigger now on the 965, while you still can. AMD has started to phase out the Phenoms, and they. Are quickly disappearing off of shelves.
Score
0
August 23, 2012 2:05:22 PM

ct1615 said:
i think you need to learn a few thing about PC technology before giving opinions that make you look foolish. games require or recommend a quad core?? :pfff:  that is a false opinion, not a fact! very few games require a quad core and those that do require old ones. new dual cores can run circles around old quads and the i3-2100 actually outperforms the FX-6100 in most games benchmarks (with its under performing bulldozer tech).

as for dual cores becoming obsolete, that is another one of your fails. most laptops today are sold with dual cores since most laptop I5 processors are actually dual cores. laptops have been outselling desktop PCs for years so SW developers make SW for the common computer configuration

the FX-6100 stays with the older intel i5-661 benchmarks in guru's benchmarks
http://www.guru3d.com/article/amd-fx-8150--8120-6100-an...

against the i3-2100, its gaming loss after gaming loss
http://www.xbitlabs.com/images/cpu/amd-fx-8120-6100-4100/farcry.png


http://www.xbitlabs.com/images/cpu/amd-fx-8120-6100-4100/metro.png
http://www.xbitlabs.com/images/cpu/amd-fx-8120-6100-4100/starcraft.png
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/amd-fx-812...


Okay. Let's look at something real quick.

Bf3 recommends an intel or AMD QUAD CORE processor. And I think you'd agree that BF3 is a very high-end game, correct? All I'm trying to point out is that games are STARTING to recommend a quad core, and I THINK that in a few years dual cores will be obsolete FOR GAMING. I think you are eit missing my point or I am present ing it to you in the wrong manner.
Score
0
August 23, 2012 2:18:19 PM

ct1615 said:
i think you need to learn a few thing about PC technology before giving opinions that make you look foolish. games require or recommend a quad core?? :pfff:  that is a false opinion, not a fact! very few games require a quad core and those that do require old ones. new dual cores can run circles around old quads and the i3-2100 actually outperforms the FX-6100 in most games benchmarks (with its under performing bulldozer tech).

as for dual cores becoming obsolete, that is another one of your fails. most laptops today are sold with dual cores since most laptop I5 processors are actually dual cores. laptops have been outselling desktop PCs for years so SW developers make SW for the common computer configuration

the FX-6100 stays with the older intel i5-661 benchmarks in guru's benchmarks
http://www.guru3d.com/article/amd-fx-8150--8120-6100-an...

against the i3-2100, its gaming loss after gaming loss
http://www.xbitlabs.com/images/cpu/amd-fx-8120-6100-4100/farcry.png
http://www.xbitlabs.com/images/cpu/amd-fx-8120-6100-4100/metro.png
http://www.xbitlabs.com/images/cpu/amd-fx-8120-6100-4100/starcraft.png
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/amd-fx-812...



Im in a twisted mode now :ouch: 

So which one now?? Core i3 or Phenom II X4 965??? :o 
Score
0
a c 105 à CPUs
August 23, 2012 2:19:31 PM

SniperNoSnipeee said:
Okay. Let's look at something real quick.

Bf3 recommends an intel or AMD QUAD CORE processor. And I think you'd agree that BF3 is a very high-end game, correct? All I'm trying to point out is that games are STARTING to recommend a quad core, and I THINK that in a few years dual cores will be obsolete FOR GAMING. I think you are eit missing my point or I am present ing it to you in the wrong manner.


recommends, not requires (as you stated above). those are two very different things. BF3 is very demanding on the CPU in large multi-player games. in a few years new dual cores will not be obsolete for gaming because developers need to make their games run on laptops and laptops are half the gaming market. old dual cores like athlon II, intel core 2, phenom II, etc will struggle but newer dual cores (i3-2100) will still manage. here is a list of new games coming out, not one recommends anything better then an intel Q6700 and for requirements they ask for old dual cores.

http://www.yougamers.com/games/

another issue is upgrade path. you can go from an i3 to a brand new ivy bridge chip on socket 1155, the AM3+ upgrade path? AMD has yet to put anything out there better for gaming then the phenom II x4/6 and you need to OC those chips.
Score
0
a c 105 à CPUs
August 23, 2012 2:21:07 PM

bubby030311 said:
Im in a twisted mode now :ouch: 

So which one now?? Core i3 or Phenom II X4 965??? :o 


i3 and phenom II x4 965 are on par with one another (the FX series is actually a small step back in gaming from phenom II x4). the big difference is the upgrade path, see above
Score
0
August 23, 2012 2:28:54 PM

ct1615 said:
recommends, not requires (as you stated above). those are two very different things. BF3 is very demanding on the CPU in large multi-player games. in a few years new dual cores will not be obsolete for gaming because developers need to make their games run on laptops and laptops are half the gaming market. old dual cores like athlon II, intel core 2, phenom II, etc will struggle but newer dual cores (i3-2100) will still manage. here is a list of new games coming out, not one recommends anything better then an intel Q6700 and for requirements they ask for old dual cores.

http://www.yougamers.com/games/

another issue is upgrade path. you can go from an i3 to a brand new ivy bridge chip on socket 1155, the AM3+ upgrade path? AMD has yet to put anything out there better for gaming then the phenom II x4/6 and you need to OC those chips.


My friend, I don't think you understand the demographic of the laptop market.id say a good 85 percent of laptop users will never game with their laptop, and will never need anything more than a dual core. And the laptops that are intended for gaming HAVE a quad core.

And the op wasn't even asking about laptops in the first place, so why bring them up? Please stay on topic.
Score
0
August 23, 2012 2:34:34 PM

Intel will always be better than AMD. I am a fanboy of facts and benchmarks, not manufacturers.
Score
0
a c 105 à CPUs
August 23, 2012 3:19:46 PM

SniperNoSnipeee said:
My friend, I don't think you understand the demographic of the laptop market.id say a good 85 percent of laptop users will never game with their laptop, and will never need anything more than a dual core.


and you can make the exact same argument for the desktop market, you fail to see PC gaming as a business model rather then a fan boy perspective of "developers make games for my PC" when in actuality developers make games that can run across the board to maximize revenue. fact is the intel i3-2100 has better benchmarks in more games then the FX-6. fact is even STEAM states half the gaming market is still one dual cores. those are facts and developers look at facts, not the whims of a few fan boys. will there come a day when dual cores like i3-2100 will not be viable? yes. will the FX-6 be viable then? absolutely not, its too slow. look at the phenom I series, old, slow and outdated when launched. the FX series is in the same boat. Can the i3-2100 run circles around a phenom I in gaming? yes but how is that possible when games are suppose to be multi core optimized and the i3 has two cores to the phenom's four yet the i3-2100 spanks it (badly) in every benchmark.
Score
0

Best solution

a b à CPUs
August 23, 2012 4:03:41 PM

OP
Buy whatever costs least your going to be GPU limited anyway. Let these fanbitches bash each other with verbal f@ggot clubs and be safe in the knowledge your 7850 or 7770 will mean in GPU limited (in this case almost all) games you wont notice any difference between any of those CPU's
Share
August 23, 2012 5:53:19 PM

ct1615 said:
i3 and phenom II x4 965 are on par with one another (the FX series is actually a small step back in gaming from phenom II x4). the big difference is the upgrade path, see above


hmmm.. u do have quite a point on that.. thanks.. :) 
Score
0
August 23, 2012 5:59:27 PM

wr6133 said:
OP
Buy whatever costs least your going to be GPU limited anyway. Let these fanbitches bash each other with verbal f@ggot clubs and be safe in the knowledge your 7850 or 7770 will mean in GPU limited (in this case almost all) games you wont notice any difference between any of those CPU's



lol :)  thanks!!

Score
0
a b à CPUs
August 23, 2012 6:01:30 PM

+1 fore core i3
Score
0
a b à CPUs
August 23, 2012 6:39:06 PM

wr6133 said:
OP
Buy whatever costs least your going to be GPU limited anyway. Let these fanbitches bash each other with verbal f@ggot clubs and be safe in the knowledge your 7850 or 7770 will mean in GPU limited (in this case almost all) games you wont notice any difference between any of those CPU's


This.
Score
0
August 24, 2012 2:30:10 AM

The i3 is faster. There is a reason AMD has announced that they are stopping production of performance CPU's after the next generation or two.

Look up benchmarks and see it for yourself.
Score
0
September 2, 2012 6:24:15 AM

Best answer selected by bubby030311.
Score
0
March 14, 2013 8:54:48 AM

hi all of you are dumbos who are telling that i3 can beat 6100.this idiot graphics can be used to show that i3 is faster than 6100 bt the face is that 6100 comes in fight with i5 because of its hyper threading technology. it cant compete with it i5 3750 but it is farr better than i3 and when it comes to gamming 6100 takes all the chances .those who purchase intel for its popularity be aware amd has came with that technology at a cheap rate.the only thing that amd does nt have is the threading technology that is the original face it is legging behind so i recommand u to buy 6100
Score
0
!